What can l take a photo of?

[FocusOn]

I am new to the wonderful world of taking photos.

I was just wondering what l can take a photo of.

Can l take a photo of people at a cafe?

People at the beach?

Someones home? etc, etc.

john

[ricktas]

You cannot take photos on private property (cafe's are private property), without the owner of the property giving permission. This is if you are on the private property. You can take photos if you are standing on public land (ie beaches), but be aware that photographing children on a public beach, whilst not illegal, will often result in you being confronted about your reasons for taking the photos.

Also be aware that some open spaces that the public can access are not public land. For instance the plaza outside some buildings is private land, not public land.

[old dog]

welcome John. It is a wonderful world indeed. You might have to be very careful/cautious in taking "strangers" photos. Unless you have a very long lens on, you may or should ask their permission first. The beach is a tricky one though.....I was recently on the promenade at Manly and I didn`t feel comfortable at all to even get the camera out. I guess it just depends where you are, how many people are around at the time, etc etc. I`m sure other more seasoned togs will give better advice than I. Anyway, enjoy and have a great time.

[Kym]

G'Day & Welcome - post some images and have fun!

Maybe have a look at the New to Photography (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=104) forum and the Learning Plan (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=24290).

Read this as well ;) http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=24730

[rwg717]

There are plenty of things to photograph outside of street scapes. If you keep away from beaches especially you should be just fine, the shooting of children's sports etc. is also contentious.
If you get permission from someone to photograph in their home that is quite OK....aside from that there are literally thousands of places to take landscapes, best times are early morning or late afternoon.
Family members for portrait shots can be good if you can get the light right, family pets are also good. Flowers and insects are also popular on AP if you are into macro photography, other than that architecture and adult amateur sports are also options....lots to think about:D
Richard

[FocusOn]

Thanks guys for all the advice.

I also feel uncomfortable bringing the camera out at the beach.

I never thought l would like to take shots of flowers but some of the colours are wonderful.

[bigbikes]

Hi John. I noticed that you live in Black Rock. Why not travel down around Aspendale beach, there are some great rocks down there. If you head down just before sunset I'm sure you will find a great coast line to shoot. Remember that some of these rocks can be used to add foreground into your shots.
Good luck.
:food04:

[FocusOn]

Hi Peter,

Sounds like a good idea.

Cheers john

[JohnAH]

I was at a social picnic in a large park in Sydney with people I knew. Everyone was happy for me to wander around taking shots of them relaxing and having a good time. When my group started a game of cricket I slipped on my long telephoto lens and shot away at people bowling, batting etc. It was all good until I was suddenly confronted by a very angry woman from another group picnicing nearby accusing me of photographing her group, in particular her children. In all honesty I had not noticed her group in the background, and in any case they were all out of focus.
This woman went right off demanding to see what photos I had taken of her group. I duly showed her my images pointing out the fact that any you could see of her group in the background were way out of focus. I politely explained to her that I was only taking shots of my friends and apologised if she thought I was focused on her group. She was not satisfied accusing me of being able to doctor the images to make them clearer and posting them on the internet. This woman was severely paranoid. She demanded that I erase all my images taken that day. I refused to do that but did delete all that had her group in the background.
Not satisfied with my deleting some of my images she took off back to her group then went to report me to the park rangers.
When the rangers arrived she again started this tirade of abuse at me demanding they order me to delete all of my images. I showed the rangers what I had taken, explained what I had deleted, and they were quite happy with what I had on the camera and were also quite happy for me to continue taking shots of my friends. One ranger pulled me aside and apologised and suggested that I not point the camera in her direction agreeing with me the woman was far too paranoid.
In the end her group moved, we stayed but the whole incident left a bad taste in my mouth and I do not take my gear, or any shots, in public places where kids maybe about.

[FocusOn]

Hello John,

Well after reading your picnic drama, l don't think l will be getting my camera out at a busy park.
She sounded like a very paranoid person that's for sure.

Maybe next time if you are going to take photos in a busy park it might be best to have your back
to other groups while taking photos of your group.....just a thought.

cheers john

[kiwi]

These sorts of incidents do happen, a bit like car crashes, but dont let it put you off driving, just be careful.

[ozwebfx]

You cannot take photos on private property, without the owner of the property giving permission.

Sure you can, they may ask you to stop though. My policy is always towards getting the shot :)

[ricktas]

Sure you can, they may ask you to stop though. My policy is always towards getting the shot :)

Umm. No you cannot. Legally you need the permission of the property owner to photograph whilst standing on their land. Not only could they demand you leave, but also have you charged with trespass, and possibly invasion of privacy, depending on what you photographed whilst on their property.

[ozwebfx]

Umm. No you cannot.


I'm positive you can!

see: http://www.4020.net/words/photorights.php#pland

"What if you take photos of a private space, publish them, and are then contacted (threatened?) by the property owner, claiming you have no right to display or sell images of their land? Frankly, ignore them. They may be able to restrict you while the photos are being taken, but they cannot do anything once the images have been captured"

Obviously it's not a great way to win friends & infuence people but if I really saw something that I wanted to capture my first reaction would be to shoot first & ask questions later.

[ricktas]

I'm positive you can!

see: http://www.4020.net/words/photorights.php#pland

"What if you take photos of a private space, publish them, and are then contacted (threatened?) by the property owner, claiming you have no right to display or sell images of their land? Frankly, ignore them. They may be able to restrict you while the photos are being taken, but they cannot do anything once the images have been captured"

Obviously it's not a great way to win friends & infuence people but if I really saw something that I wanted to capture my first reaction would be to shoot first & ask questions later.

There is a difference between taking photos OF a private space, than taking photos while ON private property. You are comparing two different issues, which my first post in this thread details.

[ozwebfx]

I think we need to clear this up, with the example you gave as a Cafe .. imagine sitting in a cafe .. you see a fabulous shot .. you take the shot ... you haven't asked permission .. where is it detailed in Law that you had no right to take that shot?

Surely the worst that can happen is that you may be asked to leave if the cafe owner is unhappy with the shot being taken?

[ricktas]

I think we need to clear this up, with the example you gave as a Cafe .. imagine sitting in a cafe .. you see a fabulous shot .. you take the shot ... you haven't asked permission .. where is it detailed in Law that you had no right to take that shot?

Surely the worst that can happen is that you may be asked to leave if the cafe owner is unhappy with the shot being taken?

No that is not the worst that can happen. Why do you think the Papparazzi never sneak onto Nicole Kidman's property to take photos, rather they stay on public land and use long lenses. Cause they can be taken to court if they do.

[ozwebfx]

I think you are confusing 2 different things, if I had sneaked into the cafe without permission I would be in trouble of course!

It's a good idea to discuss these various scenarios but it's no substitute for the Law and until I am shown where that Law is then I hold my current view.

[ricktas]

You are correct in most cases. Most Cafe's would not care if you took a photo on their premises, but if one did, they have a legal right to stop you using that photo or publishing it.

You are most welcome to test it in court, I have, and we won. We forced a publishing house to destroy over 10,000 copies of a book that had not been sold, and ensured any reprint did not contain the photo that was our concern and we got a nice little cheque from the photographer and publishing house as well. So if you want a legal example, I have one for you. All because a photographer entered private property and took a photo, and then published it without the permission of the property owner.

So go ahead and do your own thing, but I hope you have plenty of legal indemnity insurance.

[ozwebfx]

Yes, I would be interested in seeing your legal example. Was that a case of illegal entry in the first instance? Maybe the laws differ from State to State anyway?

[Kym]

Yes, I would be interested in seeing your legal example. Was that a case of illegal entry in the first instance? Maybe the laws differ from State to State anyway?

:lol: This was done to death last year. Rick published the gory details. No point resurrecting it.

[ricktas]

Yes, I would be interested in seeing your legal example. Was that a case of illegal entry in the first instance? Maybe the laws differ from State to State anyway?

You go ahead and do what you want, but don't come posting on AP if someone decided to take you to court. But most of the legal case revolved around him not having a signed release authorising access and use of the property. Basically the same as a model release, but over private property, rather than a person

[ozwebfx]

but don't come posting on AP if someone decided to take you to court
Wouldn't you like to say " I told you so"

Maybe I'll do a search for the case you discussed last year, any pointer to it would be welcome :)

I've been doing a bit of searching on teh interwebs & can't find any particular law relating to it so as Law is a lot about precedence would be good to see examples.

Now .. another one to think about .. What if you were in the same cafe & saw a cockroach in your meal .. you photographed it .. the owner said "you didn't ask permission to photograph that cockroach in your meal"

[arthurking83]

Yes, I would be interested in seeing your legal example. Was that a case of illegal entry in the first instance? Maybe the laws differ from State to State anyway?


There is another thread of some obnoxious weed of a photographer that capture an image of a girl(one of the cafe workers) and she objected to him doing so.
Instead of trying hard to mimic a human and comply with her wishes to remove the photos of her, this moron posted them to his flckr account.

He was taken to court and has an intervention order against him now, and cannot be within so many meters of any of the cafes owned by that chain. (this case was one in the USA).

I think it's easier to have some moral common sense in that if someone asks you to remove/delete any images that they find personally sensitive, then rather than try to prove that Andy Warhol was right by claiming that " in the future everyone will be famous for 15 mins".

With a policy that's geared towards "always towards getting the shot" .. and nice easy challenge is to try to profit from any images you capture of the Shrine of Remembrance. They allow you to take photos purely for personal use, but you're not allowed to publish them for profit. And as the security guard explained to me one night, that include from any vantage point, even from your own personal space. If the image contains enough detail of the shrine building they(whoever they is) will take action.

with respect to this comment/question:


with the example you gave as a Cafe .. imagine sitting in a cafe .. you see a fabulous shot .. you take the shot ... you haven't asked permission .. where is it detailed in Law that you had no right to take that shot?

It's very heavily dependent on the contents of the photo. if the image is of a fallen drinking glass as it's about to hit the ground and smash to tiny bits. no harm is going to come to anyone. If it's an image of a person, and that person doesn't want to be photographed and published they could argue in court that a model release was not sought and compensation may be sought(that's what I'd be aiming for, if the moron didn't comply with my wish not be photographed and published).

While in 99% of instances I'm the kind that tries to shoot first and ask questions later, others people's right to personal space is more important, and the images will be deleted if asked to do so.

[kiwi]

I do believe in taking photos anywhere as long as you show respect

[Kym]

Now .. another one to think about .. What if you were in the same cafe & saw a cockroach in your meal .. you photographed it .. the owner said "you didn't ask permission to photograph that cockroach in your meal"

Under .au copy law your would be in breach if you published that image and the restaurant owner would have the right to stop you.
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=20673

If you were standing on the street (and had a long lens) then you could take that photo.

[Kym]

BTW in Rick's case two factors are relevant
1) The conditions and intent expressed when first taking the photo
2) The subsequent unauthorised commercial use and misrepresentation of its location

[kiwi]

Heres a good point in case

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klCSyq0Ii14

[ricktas]

Just cause you can take a photo, doesn't mean you have the right (morally or legally) to do so.

You cannot photograph and publish shots of the Eiffel Tower at night (http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/fast-company-staff/fast-company-blog/eiffel-tower-repossessed), without permission.

There are lots of laws out there that cover a wide range of events in our lives. The fact you cannot find reference to them or a case about them on the internet does not mean that you the law doesn't exist.

My advice to all members reading this thread, If you want to enter private property to take photos, get permission from the owner of the property.

To counter your cockroach scenario ozwebfx, how about you take a video camera into the cinema next time you go, and start using it. Bet you find out soon enough where the law stands on taking photos (still or movie) on private property.

[ozwebfx]

Under .au copy law your would be in breach if you published that image and the restaurant owner would have the right to stop you.
If you were standing on the street (and had a long lens) then you could take that photo.

Fair Dinkum! Now this has really got me interested .. I'd definitely like some legal confirmation on that one!

Thanks for the link to the other Forum thread, I'll have a read through that useful info later.

Cheers.

[Kym]

Fair Dinkum! Now this has really got me interested .. I'd definitely like some legal confirmation on that one!

Try reading for a few hours - you might learn something from the links provided. We don't write stuff just coz we think it's so, its based in prior research. :confused013 :cool:

Private Land

In order to access a privately owned space you need permission from the landowner, and he or she has the right to impose restrictions on photography. Therefore, you may only be allowed to photograph certain objects or locations. This type or restriction is common in many museums, galleries and sporting grounds, and may occur on land owned by Councils. Even where the landowner allows you to photograph, keep in mind that he or she may not be the copyright owner in artistic works you might be photographing. In this case, you need the permission of the author of the artwork as well.

[Jeanette]

I do believe in taking photos anywhere as long as you show respect

great point Kiwi and such a hard area as i am finding out reading along the forums gradually . a few links show the law and the legal vs ethical issues of this

as a newish photographer learning of more rights than i thought i had .. i still am sooo respectful of what it would be like for me to be on the receiving end of a lens..

John you were so considerate deleting what they wanted you to.. even though you dont have to i think by not o nly makes the public more angry.. I am strongly for educating them in a peaceful way that keeps the barriers down..
i did not realise till i started reading forums here and somewhere else that photographers have more rights...

I was with my son and nephew on the weekend and they wanted to take some photos of vineyards... from the fence... and then asked can we pop over the fence and get a close one.. i wrongly said oh it wont hurt... well with in 5 mins the owners came out and approached the kids... I jumped in and full of apologies and straight off i acknowledge we were wrong and explained i was teaching them a little about photos etc... then they were sooooo lovely .. all good even offered us some grapes :) .. ( wish it were wine) hehe
they were protecting their lively hood but happy to share the look of the land :)

[FocusOn]

Gee l have opened up a can of worms!!!!!

[peterb666]

Gee l have opened up a can of worms!!!!!

There are no problems photographing worms if you are in a public space.

Please note that worm parents may become alarmed if you act oddly and may call the worm police.

[kiwi]

Unless those worms are subject of say a family court protection order


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk