In Paris streets the difference is technically a tripod. If you obstruct the free circulation of people, you need a permit. Of course if it is only a tripod that you set up for a couple of minutes nobody will come to you, but if you start setting up lighting or asking folks to go around your wedding shooting you have better be in order.
1 Like
San Ramon… they should know better: amateurs have 1st Amendment rights there.
I would have escalated immediately to a supervisor or a municipal police officer.
Then, if I wasn’t satisfied with the outcome, I would escalate to the city council and news media.
I am not a lawyer, but I think that only applies in public spaces.
1 Like
In California, it is protected expression to take photographs at will in locations that are in either public or substantially public-like places. Walk into a shop and expect to be thrown out. Outside in the sun… they can’t take that away from you.
Again, I am not a lawyer, but the website linked above by @tankist02 claims that they are private property and they enforce their rules.
Generally, I find that being respectful and cooperative gives me more immediate results than escalating situations. This has served me well when taking photos. YMMV.
1 Like
I think we should have a weekly amateur photographer meetup at that plaza.
2 Likes
I was challenged that way a few years ago when I was taking engagement shots of my daughter and her now-husband at a public park. The signs clearly stated that a permit is required for professional photography and it took a while to explain that I was just the proud dad with an expensive camera.
Some of our other local parks have gone a step further to prohibit formal photography, which puts the amateur vs professional question to rest.
3 Likes
All of this is just further confirmation that landscape photography is the way to go… 
4 Likes
What does the term mean?
3 Likes
Tuxedo and gown stuff. Engagements, weddings, senior portraits.
1 Like
That’s a good question. One botanical garden in Montgomery County, Maryland asks:
- Is the primary purpose of your visit to capture photos or video of your family or group?
- Are you wearing formal attire/costume/wedding attire or coordinating casual wear?
- Will a photographer (professional, hobbyist, or family/friend) be accompanying you to take the photos/video?
If yes, then they say you need a permit. I’m not defending or questioning the policy, that’s just the rules they put in place.
1 Like
Here in Germany, closed areas (shopping malls, department stores, etc. ) should have written house rules. In case, the security prohibits you from taking pictures, you can ask for those rules. Better, you can inform about the rules in Internet before going there.
2 Likes
Yes, never underestimate the ability of people in uniform to make up their own weird rules. I have been chased around by the security guard of a construction work because I was taking pictures from the street. I told the guy that if he thought I was breaking any law he could call the police.
2 Likes
If you are photographing near the U.S. consulate, well…
3 Likes
Beat me to it…I was going to post the same thing.
[They] said, ‘You can’t be standing outside for 30 minutes,’" he said.
Years ago - quite a while before 9/11. I was driving back home from a work trip and passed a local (international) airport. The airport had just relocated a historic aircraft after which the airport was initially named to a specially designed building onsite.
It was late at night - the building and aircraft were well lit. I used a tripod to take photos of the historic aircraft. During the activity - I had a few cars of armed airport police turn-up and (politely) bundled me into a car and I spent the next few hours in an office answering questions. In the end they let me go - and I had to walk back (some distance) to my car.
I was younger then - and the only police I had ever engaged with were the local police in the very small country town I grew-up in. They were family friends. I don’t know I’d be quite so accommodating now - if the same thing happened.
2 Likes
I do have a question about street photography in Germany… I was visiting Rothenburg ob der Tauber taking photos when (who I suspect was a local) started yelling at me for taking his photo. He demanded that I ask permission first. He was walking through the shot just as many other locals/tourists were doing. It was what I would consider a public street.
I’ve tried to find a street photography list of rights/wrongs for Germany - but so far have not found anything.
In the UK many of the historic sites if they see a “large” camera they get you to sign a restrictive contact (of sorts) that prohibit the publishing of any photos taken to any medium including private online photo galleries prior to entry. Phones seem exempt - but my and my father’s DSLRs were not. I signed the contract as Mickey Mouse.
Many of the castles in the UK are owned by the Crown and therefore, fall under Crown copyright. So unless you are on land that is not part of the Crown estate (sometimes very difficult as often all the land around the castle - including parts of the town is crown land). In theory permission is required for any filming projects prior to them taking place. However, I doubt that the million or so tourists do this. Therefore, it then depends on the (over-zealous) guards/police at the time.
About twenty years ago - I was taking photos with a DSLR around the Tower of London and was accosted by both a Yeoman Warder and joined by a police officer who demanded that I stop taking photos and leave the area. Crown copyright was part of that discussion. However, I’ve been back many times since and taken photos in exactly the same places without issue.
I’m not a lawyer and I know that this is quite a complicated situation. As far as I know, you need to have consent of everyone in the photo, unless in some specific situations. As far as I remember, it is okay to take pictures when the persons are not recognizable or not the main part of the photo - but I guess that can be debatable…
1 Like
… loitering …
Here in the UK, the rule used to be (and probably still is) that a “public right of way” which includes roads, footpaths and so on, means we have the right to move back and forth, but not the right to stand still (and take photos). Standing still obstructs the highway, even if it’s just a tiny part of the highway, and that is an offence.
Back in the day, that is what the police used to threaten demonstrators or anyone else they didn’t like.
In most of England (dunno about Scotland etc) it is legal to park a car on the footpath alongside a road, even if that blocks wheelchairs etc from using the footpath. So I could park my car on the footpath, sit in comfort, and take as many photos as I wanted.
1 Like