[Bactman]

Situation: While driving around the fields of Indiana, I see a quaint barn 50 yards from the edge of the road. The barn is fully in frame from the side of the road, and would make an excellent shot without walking onto private property. What is the etiquette for a situation like this? The pictures may be posted in an online forum (flickr, snapfish, etc.) and will not be used for any monetary gain.

I can:

a) find a safe spot to park, snap a few shots from the side of the road, leave, and keep on truckin'

b) knock on the door, and if no one answers, snap a few pictures

c) knock on the door, and if no one answers, drive away frustrated at what could be

d) knock on the door, and if given permission, fire away

There is a decent chance that no one would ever see me taking a picture of their barn; however, the last thing I really want to be is intrusive or be put into some legal predicament. I'd appreciate any thoughts or comments.

[Photo Tramp]

I would try (d) first. But in all legal aspects here in the states if it is viewable with out going on the Property it is considered public viewing and can be photographed. Now setting foot on the property to photograph you better have permission.
I chose (d) for the simple reason there may be a good chance to photograph from different angles and have them sign a standard release. that way they know the photograph was taken and you can then use the photograph for any reason you choose.

[foxglove]

I'd have no qualms about photographing the barn from the road, I'm pretty sure you're on solid legal ground there. As for general politeness, I'm sure that if someone came along and asked what the heck you were doing and you explained that you were an amateur and would they like a print, they'd be happy.

The scenario that has me baffled - although I'll admit I haven't really looked into this, so please excuse me if the answer is right there in another thread or otherwise accessible - is photographing private property that has some sort of restrictions, from a public space. For example, there's a candy store in Halifax, NS with "The Rules" painted on the wall right beside the entrance, including the stipulation "NO PHOTOGRAPHS". Okay, fine - anyone famous who comes to Halifax goes to the candy store (it's that kind of place...) so I can see that they wouldn't want people snapping away. Besides, it's really colourful and wacky, so I can imagine it'd be a fun place to shoot, and they don't want hordes of photographers in there not buying stuff. But - what if I were on the sidewalk, which is city property, shooting towards the store? I could be doing anything from taking a picture of the general architecture, which includes other stores, to attempting to shoot into the store and photograph Kiefer Sutherland buying pixie stix. At what point, if any, am I breaking their rules?

This is probably why I stick to photographing bugs and plants - they rarely sue!

Julie

[Photo Tramp]

I'd have no qualms about photographing the barn from the road, I'm pretty sure you're on solid legal ground there. As for general politeness, I'm sure that if someone came along and asked what the heck you were doing and you explained that you were an amateur and would they like a print, they'd be happy.

The scenario that has me baffled - although I'll admit I haven't really looked into this, so please excuse me if the answer is right there in another thread or otherwise accessible - is photographing private property that has some sort of restrictions, from a public space. For example, there's a candy store in Halifax, NS with "The Rules" painted on the wall right beside the entrance, including the stipulation "NO PHOTOGRAPHS". Okay, fine - anyone famous who comes to Halifax goes to the candy store (it's that kind of place...) so I can see that they wouldn't want people snapping away. Besides, it's really colourful and wacky, so I can imagine it'd be a fun place to shoot, and they don't want hordes of photographers in there not buying stuff. But - what if I were on the sidewalk, which is city property, shooting towards the store? I could be doing anything from taking a picture of the general architecture, which includes other stores, to attempting to shoot into the store and photograph Kiefer Sutherland buying pixie stix. At what point, if any, am I breaking their rules?

This is probably why I stick to photographing bugs and plants - they rarely sue!

Julie

Julie,
from the sounds of your post you say there is a sign on the building? It says "no photographs" In my opinion and this is my opinion I would have to ask the owner if that meant inside or the entire building outside. The sign is too general. Hell if I were to go to that town and see that sign I would wonder if it meant the whole town. In any case if you were on a public street and photographed the building I would say you were in good legal shape. but if you took the camera inside the store the owner could have you arrested if you snapped a shot that's for sure. In any case I would ask for clarification on the sign, and not just by the owner but by some one else in authority.

[little laker]

I usually try asking the owners and get permission to go through the property and fire away.
I always offer then a print, and have never been turned down.

However I do also photograph a couple of abandoned homesteads where no one knows how to locate the owner.
In one of the cases the owner died 5 or so years ago, and the estate still hasn't been straightened out.
This doesn't stop me from trespassing and snapping pictures.
I go through with full respect and I don't disturb anything while doing it.
A local rancher grazes his cattle on both of them as well, and has never been asked not to.

The one old homestead is one of British Columbia's most photographed houses

[JCSullivan]

I came i here to update an old thread and found this so, I'll update this thread as well. The following is specific to Windsor Ontario but I'm sure it would probably apply to other Canajian and US jurisdictions.

I am unaware of any laws that prohibit the taking of pictures of
anything that is viewable in a public venue. The only restriction that
I would see if a person was to take photographs of the interior of a
private dwelling or business while on the public right of way. There is
nothing to prohibit the taking of photos of buildings, public transit
vehicles or even accidents. Although some people may find it
distasteful in having their picture taken in public, I am unaware of
anything that would prohibit it. The exception would be of course if
someone is physically accosted or obstructed so that a picture can be
taken.

There may be restrictions on persons taking pictures where the public is
welcome but the property is private, such as a mall or a sporting
complex. Although the public is welcome, there may be restrictions on
the taking of pictures.... it is best to check with the administrative
staff that owns or controls the property.

With that said, there is nothing to prohibit a person from taking civil
action against a person for taking a picture especially if the picture
is subsequently published in a less than favourable light. Whether or
not the person succeeds is dependant on the courts.

Bottom line......... if it is viewable to the public, I see nothing
wrong with taking a picture of it.

Check this site: Ambient Light - Photography Laws

[alinla]

Bactman,

What is your intent regarding the output of the photo? Hang on the wall in your living room? Sell to national publication for big bucks? Stock photo?

The output is going to drive the answer to your question.

[Arpe]

It woulf be good if people would fill in their location in their profile (with more than just 2 letters) so we didn't have to guess where they are from.

I would shoot and move on and be perfectly law abiding in doing so.

[carpents]

Situation: While driving around the fields of Indiana, I see a quaint barn 50 yards from the edge of the road. The barn is fully in frame from the side of the road, and would make an excellent shot without walking onto private property. What is the etiquette for a situation like this? The pictures may be posted in an online forum (flickr, snapfish, etc.) and will not be used for any monetary gain.

A story - on my way to work one day I stopped at a very rural intersection. There was a fence in various states of disrepair at which I had intended to stop for weeks, and I had the lens I wanted for the shot in the car. So I park the car, walk across the street, and with my 20mm lens start taking a couple shots of a fencepost on the side of the road.

A lady pulling through the intersection stops her truck and screeches 'what are you doing'? I half ignore her, keep snapping and say 'who wants to know'? Yeah I wasn't incredibly cordial but neither was her introduction.

It turns out it was her fence that I was photographing (bad timing, eh?) and once I found it out I was much more polite and very happily told her the truth - that I was just snapping some shots of the fence post. She was very angry, asked me for a business card (which I didn't have) and then said she was going to call the police.

I told her to go ahead and call them.

Then she skidded off and I never heard from her again.


From public property, I wouldn't see any restriction on taking a typical landscape. As long it wasn't of a person, and it didn't contain any personal sensitive information, you're not even restricted from selling it for profit. (At least in the USA.)

[carpents]

It woulf be good if people would fill in their location in their profile (with more than just 2 letters) so we didn't have to guess where they are from.

Bactman is from Indiana, USA.
Photo_Tramp is from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, USA.
foxglove is from the Atlantic Canadian coast.
little_laker is from the Beautiful Okanagan, British Columbia, Canada.
JC_Sullivan is from Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
Alinla is from Los Angeles, California, USA.
I am from West Chester, Pennsylvania, USA.

You are from somewhere in New Zealand.

[Arpe]

Bactman is from Indiana, USA. Not necessarily
Photo_Tramp is from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, USA. Not everyone knows what PA stands for. I didn't, and will proabably forget.
foxglove is from the Atlantic Canadian coast. Here I was thinking "Atlantic" was a province
little_laker is from the Beautiful Okanagan, British Columbia, Canada. At last, one I could understand!
JC_Sullivan is from Windsor, Ontario, Canada. I see a theme here, the Canadians are nice enough to spell it out in full.
Alinla is from Los Angeles, California, USA. How do you know it's not the Los Anglels in Mexico or Chile or Argentina or The Philippines or Puerto Rico or Venezuela or elsewhere?
I am from West Chester, Pennsylvania, USA. Again with the PA

You are from somewhere in New Zealand well done, it's smaller than most of your states!

[little laker]

I filled mine out completely because of a post I read several months ago.
The poster mentioned the same thing that you did Arpe, so I thought that it was the right thing to do.

[SpecialK]

I would try (d) first. But in all legal aspects here in the states if it is viewable with out going on the Property it is considered public viewing and can be photographed. Now setting foot on the property to photograph you better have permission.
I chose (d) for the simple reason there may be a good chance to photograph from different angles and have them sign a standard release. that way they know the photograph was taken and you can then use the photograph for any reason you choose.

Not quite. It's any reason in the release that they agree to. And, they will likely expect money.

I would go A)

If a really good opportunity presents itself, don't drive away after that. Try B) or D) depending on the surroundings.

A little southeast of Los Angeles, California, United States of America, third stone from the Sun.

[PDL]

For those of us in the USA look here:
ASMP: Property and Model Release Tutorial Pay attention to the property owner's rights.

The link on that paragraph goes here:
ASMP: Property and Model Release Tutorial
I quote: "ASMP has never seen a statute or a legal case that requires a release for property."

However, there can be copyright issues with buildings:
ASMP: Copyright Application Tutorial

For information on photographers rights in the US check this out
Bert P. Krages Attorney at Law Photographer's Rights Page

In the US - if you are in a public place, such as a road, you can take an image of anything you can see. If the were not true, then every street scene taken would be forbidden - not a good thing to have happen.

This pages is very good for looking up state by state rules. Photographers' Guide to Privacy
It is very interesting when looking up rules for shooting from public spaces in my state:
Guide to Privacy: Washington
quote "Filming a pharmacy interior from outside, through a window, was protected because the film was shot from a place open to the public. Mark v. KING Broadcasting Co., 618 P.2d 512 (Wash. App. 1980), affd, 635 P.2d 1081 (Wash. 1981), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1124 (1982)."

Shooting a barn from a public road is easy, now if you go onto the land - then the owner could have grounds to complain. When in doubt ask.

The Elitist - formerly known as PDL

[aaalegre]

I would say A
In general if property is visible and can be photographed from public place, you dont nee a property release to use the image the depicts the property and you may use the photo in any manner..a quote from the Photographers Legal Guide...PhotoAttorney