Re: Anyone asking you guys for a shooting permit?

[keylight]

Try and take your bare camera, af100, fs100, hvx200, hell even a DV cam and put it on some sticks at a park, beach, sidewalk, all sorts of places just to shoot some "hobby" footage. Chances are you are going to be stopped by cops or security.

I've done this with smaller cameras (like the size of an hvx200) without any problems. Done this with my GH2 as well. On a tripod (Gitzo carbon fiber with a small fluid head). Would I do this with a larger ENG style camera and tripod? Maybe. But I wouldn't complain if I was stopped and told I needed a permit.

I was hassled with a Gh2 on my travel carbon fiber sticks with a small fluid head on a state park filming a pond and a tree. Imagine had I had my AF100 and such. The officer even threatened to take my camera if I refused to "leave", not stop filming, but leave as in I'm not welcome to enjoy the park anymore because I have a camera.

What state park was that in?

So yes, POLICE STATE! It exists. Especially if on tripod. And it's getting harder to "video" tape/record in all sorts of public arenas. Did you not watch that video? Exact treatment I got at a PUBLIC PARK taking images for fun.
Of course get a permit if in production. But we're talking about footage with your Prosumer device in public domain.

And, in fact, Starbucks is publicly owned.

LOL. Nope. It's privately owned. Don't confuse thousands (millions?) of stockholders with it being a publicly owned company. It's shares are publicly traded on the stock exchange, but it is most certainly a privately owned company - owned by all of the stockholders.

 

[olindacat]

welcome to the new police state. It's not just big cameras. Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_imr76atjua
but s. Mick is right. Big tripods, sliders, external mics, and matte boxes tend to draw the attention. Go and get the permit, then when approached by an officer who probably can't really give you the citation order, pull out your permit and ask him to move because he's in your shot.

lol

 

[dustylense]

lol

OK, enjoy getting a permit most times you take out that fs100 just to shoot for "fun" or for yourself.

 

[keylight]

OK, enjoy getting a permit most times you take out that fs100 just to shoot for "fun" or for yourself.

FYI....

Commercial Filming and Still Photography Permits Lands of the United States were set aside by Congress, Executive or otherwise acquired in order to conserve and protect areas of untold beauty and grandeur, historical importance, and uniqueness for future generations. This tradition started with explorers who traveled with paint and canvas or primitive photo apparatus before the areas were designated as a national park. The National Park Service permits commercial filming and still photography when it is consistent with the park’s mission and will not harm the resource or interfere with the visitor experience.

When is a permit needed?

All commercial filming activities taking place within a unit of the National Park system require a permit. Commercial filming includes capturing a moving image on film and video as well as sound recordings.

Still photographers require a permit when

1. the activity takes place at location(s) where or when members of the public are generally not allowed; or
2. the activity uses model(s), sets(s), or prop(s) that are not a part of the location’s natural or cultural resources or administrative facilities; or
3. Park would incur additional administrative costs to monitor the activity.

Note that this is about "Commercial Filming" not non-commercial, private use filming. And note that commerical photography is okay WITHOUT a permit, unless one of those 3 things applies (doing those things could impinge on other people's right to enjoy and use the park).

Like I said before, the main purpose of requiring a permit is so that you and your family can enjoy a place without a bunch of people coming along to shoot something and get in the way of your enjoyment. Sure it's an inconvenience when you've got a job to shoot. But it's a bigger inconvenience for everyone else.....

If it's just you, and you're shooting for fun, then it isn't commercial and you don't need a permit. Someone comes up and asks you what you're doing - tell them the truth: "I just got a new camera and I'm testing it out. This isn't anything commercial." Or "I'm on vacation. Just shooting the beautiful scenery."

 

[jetswing]

Whether you're shooting for fun or profit is a moot point. It's the perception of the person who has the power to kick you out or stop you from filming that counts. If he/she thinks you're a pro, that's what counts. IF you're shooting in a place where you think you might get harassed, don't be shooting with a big ol fancy rig.

 

[NVentive]

Several years ago, a friend of mine agreed to do a bit part in a little film school project. One of his shots required him to walk out of a store with a (plastic) gun. During one of his takes, they ran out of film and the loader had trouble changing the mag on the camera across the street. My friend just waited, leaned up against a light pole, with the toy gun in his hand. The students hadn't told the cops they were shooting, and even though the camera was in plain site, someone driving by didn't see it and called 911. The Police pulled up in force, and were not amused at what they found. From their perspective, it would have been very easy for one of their guys to shoot an innocent kid.
As for store owners, they are just plain scared. For all they know, an undocumented shooter is doing something that could come back to haunt them in a bad way someday. People shooting video with iPhones....yeah, there's not much they can do about that, and most people don't care. People with 'real' cameras can make store patrons uncomfortable, or they can accidentally shoot something that could get a franchise owner in trouble with their district managers. There have been so many video bushwhackings lately, everyone is a bit jumpy. I would be interested to learn how the 'Supper-Size Me' guy did it.
When we needed to shoot in a coffee shop recently, we just bit the bullet and rented the place for the morning. Ours is an experimental project, with no revenue stream in sight, but we needed that location so we just swallowed hard and wrote the check.

 

[Mark Williams]

"But they approached you didn't they? How would it have been for ya if you had a model, like a wife or girlfriend? Even for fun that would have possibly changed the outcome. "

They didn't approach me. I approached them.

 

[AGMedia]

Essentially, keylight is correct in everything he/she wrote.

 

[FelixGER]

I also had this problem when filming in a mall with my small "dslr" (GH2). A mall security guy went completely berserk....we laughed at him and his blood pressure seemed to cause even more brain damage^^

 

[artlukm]

If read all the laws, you probably wouldn't want to buy a video camera. You can't use it legally anywhere without written permission or a permit. Its against the law to take a video of anything that is recognizable, unless you have permission of the owner. It's almost as controlled as carrying a gun. The only place I feel safe is doing something on my own property, or doing a wedding for someone.

The hysteria and fear mongering in this thread is really over the top. Some of you guys talk like you're experts yet seem to have a very sophomoric understanding of the legal issues at play here. This could be really misleading to novices who might randomly come across this thread.

The first thing anyone responding to this thread should ask is where does ectobuilder live? How can you respond to the question without knowing this? Laws vary from country to country, and even state to state (to some extent). So, ectobuilder, where do you live?

The second question that needs to be answered is what type of material are you shooting? It makes a HUGE difference. Is it fiction/staged (a film or a commercial)? Are you photographing news or documenting real events or places?

My knowledge is primarily limited to U.S. and Canadian law. Here are some thoughts:

Your Property
> You can shoot anything on your property - fiction, a commercial, news, documentary.
> You can shoot things plainly visible from your property.
> If your neighbors house (or some other building) is visible, that's generally ok, if those things would normally be visible to a person standing there.
> Sticking your camera over a fence and into your neighbor's property is NOT ok, unless you are documenting a serious crime (someone getting beaten) or a news event (such as a fire).
> Using a long lens to see someone else's private property in a manner that wouldn't normally be visible could be an invasion of their privacy (i.e. using a long lens to see into someone's window).

Public Property
> If you're shooting fiction (a film or a commercial), there is often a need for permits to shoot on public property.
> You can shoot news or documentary footage on public property generally without issue. This includes simply "documenting" your surroundings. I haven't heard of a state or province that restricts this.
> If you're interfering with the flow of pedestrians or traffic, the police can probably ask you to change what you're doing.
> It's ok for private property to appear in the background of what you're shooting.
> It's also generally ok to take pictures of other people's property FROM public property, with some limitations. Similar to the example a few lines up, standing on public property and sticking your camera over a fence to see into someone's private property is generally NOT ok.
> Furthermore, standing on public property and taking a picture of something on private property that wouldn't normally be visible could also be a violation of the property owner's rights. Example: using a long lens to peer into private property while standing on public property. Not a good idea.

Parks
> It depends if the park has controlled access or is fully accessible to anyone.
> If the park has security and you need permission to enter, then there might also be rules about the type of photos or video you can shoot.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Please check your local laws and consult a lawyer when in doubt. There are some people on this forum whose advice you should definitely NOT take.

 

[keylight]

I also had this problem when filming in a mall with my small "dslr" (GH2). A mall security guy went completely berserk....we laughed at him and his blood pressure seemed to cause even more brain damage^^

Well, a mall is private property. Lots of free speech court cases about how malls have essentially replaced very public town squares and how malls should be considered de facto public places. Most end up being decided against free speech and in favor of the "malls as private property" view. Although the tide could be turning slightly on this.... For those interested, here's a useful link: http://informant.kalwnews.org/2010/11/how-shopping-malls-became-the-front-lines-of-free-speech/

 

[keylight]

The hysteria and fear mongering in this thread is really over the top.

Good stuff in your post.

And as my signature now says, I am a lawyer, but my agreement with your post is NOT legal advice.

 

[Crafters of Light]

I go by the belief that just because a mall, store, coffee-shop, gas station, etc. are open to the public does not make these private establishments public property.
So you fall and hurt yourself in one of these places. Being a litigious society do you sue the public? No, you go after the private property owner.

 

[cheezweezl]

I was shooting on the sidewalk a few days ago. It was in a tourist area in front of a mall. I was shooting with the fs100 on a monopod. A security guard from the mall came over and told me I couldnt use my monopod and that I could only shoot handheld. I asked why and he said that it was a trip hazard for pedestrians. I said "so as long as I don't have any gear on the ground, I'm all good?" he replied, yes. So I said thanks, picked up the monopod off the sidewalk and rested it on my foot. I kept shooting. He walked away. I had a chuckle.

 

[ectobuilder]

I was shooting on the sidewalk a few days ago. It was in a tourist area in front of a mall. I was shooting with the fs100 on a monopod. A security guard from the mall came over and told me I couldnt use my monopod and that I could only shoot handheld. I asked why and he said that it was a trip hazard for pedestrians. I said "so as long as I don't have any gear on the ground, I'm all good?" he replied, yes. So I said thanks, picked up the monopod off the sidewalk and rested it on my foot. I kept shooting. He walked away. I had a chuckle.

Do what do, Steadicam! LOL

 

[ectobuilder]

The hysteria and fear mongering in this thread is really over the top. Some of you guys talk like you're experts yet seem to have a very sophomoric understanding of the legal issues at play here. This could be really misleading to novices who might randomly come across this thread.

The first thing anyone responding to this thread should ask is where does ectobuilder live? How can you respond to the question without knowing this? Laws vary from country to country, and even state to state (to some extent). So, ectobuilder, where do you live?

The second question that needs to be answered is what type of material are you shooting? It makes a HUGE difference. Is it fiction/staged (a film or a commercial)? Are you photographing news or documenting real events or places?

My knowledge is primarily limited to U.S. and Canadian law. Here are some thoughts:

Your Property
> You can shoot anything on your property - fiction, a commercial, news, documentary.
> You can shoot things plainly visible from your property.
> If your neighbors house (or some other building) is visible, that's generally ok, if those things would normally be visible to a person standing there.
> Sticking your camera over a fence and into your neighbor's property is NOT ok, unless you are documenting a serious crime (someone getting beaten) or a news event (such as a fire).
> Using a long lens to see someone else's private property in a manner that wouldn't normally be visible could be an invasion of their privacy (i.e. using a long lens to see into someone's window).

Public Property
> If you're shooting fiction (a film or a commercial), there is often a need for permits to shoot on public property.
> You can shoot news or documentary footage on public property generally without issue. This includes simply "documenting" your surroundings. I haven't heard of a state or province that restricts this.
> If you're interfering with the flow of pedestrians or traffic, the police can probably ask you to change what you're doing.
> It's ok for private property to appear in the background of what you're shooting.
> It's also generally ok to take pictures of other people's property FROM public property, with some limitations. Similar to the example a few lines up, standing on public property and sticking your camera over a fence to see into someone's private property is generally NOT ok.
> Furthermore, standing on public property and taking a picture of something on private property that wouldn't normally be visible could also be a violation of the property owner's rights. Example: using a long lens to peer into private property while standing on public property. Not a good idea.

Parks
> It depends if the park has controlled access or is fully accessible to anyone.
> If the park has security and you need permission to enter, then there might also be rules about the type of photos or video you can shoot.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Please check your local laws and consult a lawyer when in doubt. There are some people on this forum whose advice you should definitely NOT take.

Canada. I was shooting for personal use, just testing out the dynamic range of the FS100.

I'm heading to City Hall this Wednesday to clarify the bylaws here. Will update soon.

 

[ectobuilder]

The hysteria and fear mongering in this thread is really over the top. Some of you guys talk like you're experts yet seem to have a very sophomoric understanding of the legal issues at play here. This could be really misleading to novices who might randomly come across this thread.

The first thing anyone responding to this thread should ask is where does ectobuilder live? How can you respond to the question without knowing this? Laws vary from country to country, and even state to state (to some extent). So, ectobuilder, where do you live?

The second question that needs to be answered is what type of material are you shooting? It makes a HUGE difference. Is it fiction/staged (a film or a commercial)? Are you photographing news or documenting real events or places?

My knowledge is primarily limited to U.S. and Canadian law. Here are some thoughts:

Your Property
> You can shoot anything on your property - fiction, a commercial, news, documentary.
> You can shoot things plainly visible from your property.
> If your neighbors house (or some other building) is visible, that's generally ok, if those things would normally be visible to a person standing there.
> Sticking your camera over a fence and into your neighbor's property is NOT ok, unless you are documenting a serious crime (someone getting beaten) or a news event (such as a fire).
> Using a long lens to see someone else's private property in a manner that wouldn't normally be visible could be an invasion of their privacy (i.e. using a long lens to see into someone's window).

Public Property
> If you're shooting fiction (a film or a commercial), there is often a need for permits to shoot on public property.
> You can shoot news or documentary footage on public property generally without issue. This includes simply "documenting" your surroundings. I haven't heard of a state or province that restricts this.
> If you're interfering with the flow of pedestrians or traffic, the police can probably ask you to change what you're doing.
> It's ok for private property to appear in the background of what you're shooting.
> It's also generally ok to take pictures of other people's property FROM public property, with some limitations. Similar to the example a few lines up, standing on public property and sticking your camera over a fence to see into someone's private property is generally NOT ok.
> Furthermore, standing on public property and taking a picture of something on private property that wouldn't normally be visible could also be a violation of the property owner's rights. Example: using a long lens to peer into private property while standing on public property. Not a good idea.

Parks
> It depends if the park has controlled access or is fully accessible to anyone.
> If the park has security and you need permission to enter, then there might also be rules about the type of photos or video you can shoot.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Please check your local laws and consult a lawyer when in doubt. There are some people on this forum whose advice you should definitely NOT take.

As soon as I find out what laws I am up against here in Canada, I will develop a way to avoid any resistance. Such as perhaps wearing uniforms with the words "NEWS" on it so as to portray that we are a news organization (i.e. not for commercial fictional use).

Anyways will update this week when I talk to my City Hall...

 

[artlukm]

As soon as I find out what laws I am up against here in Canada, I will develop a way to avoid any resistance. Such as perhaps wearing uniforms with the words "NEWS" on it so as to portray that we are a news organization (i.e. not for commercial fictional use).

Anyways will update this week when I talk to my City Hall...

I work in the U.S. and Canada regularly. I actually live in Ontario. If anything, the laws here are simpler than in the U.S. If you're on public property doing any type of news/documentary work, I am 99.9% sure you do not need any kind of permit in any province or city. If you're blocking a sidewalk or bothering people, the police might ask you to move along at some point. Obviously don't interfere with traffic or stand anywhere that you can't legally stand to begin with.

Even when it comes to filming police, it's legal. (This is also the case in most states, but some states place restrictions on recording police.) Again, use common sense. I've taped and photographed police before without issue. One time I recorded footage of dozens of police and bystanders outside of a murder scene (the footage aired on local tv). Another time I snapped some stills of an Emergency Task Force dude carrying an assault rifle walking down the sidewalk. He didn't so much as flinch (phew! :grin.

If you're doing fiction or shooting a commercial, pretty much any city will require you to have a permit. Like many city bylaws, there is likely some degree of leniency. Looking into the bylaws sounds like a good idea.

 

[Kevin Marshall]

[...] they clearly have a problem in Baltimore with harassing people who are not interfering with anyone. Thanks for that link.

Yeah. Maryland - especially Baltimore City - has been passing stricter photo/video laws lately, and courts have sided with law enforcement in many of these cases. The precedent being set in the state is that it is illegal to record a police officer without their expressed consent, even in public places where there is normally no expectation of privacy.

Luckily, out in the more rural areas, no one really cares.

 

[keylight]

Yeah. Maryland - especially Baltimore City - has been passing stricter photo/video laws lately, and courts have sided with law enforcement in many of these cases. The precedent being set in the state is that it is illegal to record a police officer without their expressed consent, even in public places where there is normally no expectation of privacy.

Luckily, out in the more rural areas, no one really cares.

The laws they tend to cite in these instances are two party consent laws. In about 1/5th of U.S. states, the law requires a party being recorded to give permission. Maryland appears to be one of those states. In most U.S. states the law is for single party consent. These laws were enacted originally to prevent the unknown recording of another person. Standing on the street out in the open and filming a cop is hardly a case where the other party doesn't know they are being recorded. But the letter of the law may require that they actually give permission.

There's an effort underway (in several places) to do away with this kind of reading/use of the law.