Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
I have been lurking on this list for a while so I might as well introduce myself :) As many of us I used to enjoy photography in childhood, I had some pretty crappy off-brand Pentax screw mount cameras and lenses but I did enjoy it immensely. I took a 10 year break from photography in my teens but for the last 5 years I am back starting with many assorted C*non digicams and slowly migrating to 35mm Pentax stuff with occasional dips into MF and LF. I still own a decent 4x5 kit though I don't use it except when completely out of my mind and willing to lug along the monster monorail. I am currently using *istD with two of the venerable limiteds and assorted other glass and am in the process of building myself a light yet sturdy 6x12. Now on to the topic - I have never taken great interest in street photography but on the occasional streaks I get I sometimes carry around my digital voice recorder (most of the time even without the batteries). If somebody comes up to harass me I take the voice recorder out, ask them if they object to me recording our conversation and explain that they are harassing me at the moment and that I would like to have a recording of their conduct to support my pictures (none of which are of them) in court if it ever comes to that. Usually they go away. If they don't I push the button on the recorder and say that if they object to me recording our conversation we have nothing to talk about and they should go about their business and leave me alone. I usually drop something along the lines that they are taking my time which I could use for taking pictures and that I could even sue them for lost profit and that if they are so ignorant as to come and accuse me of something they probably don't even know the extent to which this could be taken in court. I am making a living here yada yada yada... where should I send invoice for my services... bla bla bla... I think there is absolutely no point in discussing any of the tough concepts like freedom or anything of the sort. That is usually a dead end. If they want this to be a paranoid society I just push the voice recorder in their face and make it a reality. Krisjanis
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
Hi Krisjanis, welcome to the list. You make a good point. I would take it one step further and not even ask if they minded being recorded. I'd simply take out the recorder - at a strategic point - and hold it (or the mic) in an obvious manner. In fact, while filming and at the point of being accosted, I always leave the camera running, even if someone says 'turn that off' or whatever. Stupidly they assume that once your eye isn't at the viewfinder then it must be 'off'. If anyone ever says 'no filming' and tries to put their hand over the lens, then I keep rolling - always makes great pictures on TV :-) On 16/8/05, Krisjanis Linkevics, discombobulated, unleashed: I have been lurking on this list for a while so I might as well introduce myself :) As many of us I used to enjoy photography in childhood, I had some pretty crappy off-brand Pentax screw mount cameras and lenses but I did enjoy it immensely. I took a 10 year break from photography in my teens but for the last 5 years I am back starting with many assorted C*non digicams and slowly migrating to 35mm Pentax stuff with occasional dips into MF and LF. I still own a decent 4x5 kit though I don't use it except when completely out of my mind and willing to lug along the monster monorail. I am currently using *istD with two of the venerable limiteds and assorted other glass and am in the process of building myself a light yet sturdy 6x12. Now on to the topic - I have never taken great interest in street photography but on the occasional streaks I get I sometimes carry around my digital voice recorder (most of the time even without the batteries). If somebody comes up to harass me I take the voice recorder out, ask them if they object to me recording our conversation and explain that they are harassing me at the moment and that I would like to have a recording of their conduct to support my pictures (none of which are of them) in court if it ever comes to that. Usually they go away. If they don't I push the button on the recorder and say that if they object to me recording our conversation we have nothing to talk about and they should go about their business and leave me alone. I usually drop something along the lines that they are taking my time which I could use for taking pictures and that I could even sue them for lost profit and that if they are so ignorant as to come and accuse me of something they probably don't even know the extent to which this could be taken in court. I am making a living here yada yada yada... where should I send invoice for my services... bla bla bla... I think there is absolutely no point in discussing any of the tough concepts like freedom or anything of the sort. That is usually a dead end. If they want this to be a paranoid society I just push the voice recorder in their face and make it a reality. Krisjanis Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
This one time, at band camp, Krisjanis Linkevics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If they want this to be a paranoid society Dont knock it, it worked fine for Hitler. kevin -- Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
- Original Message - From: Krisjanis Linkevics Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction) If somebody comes up to harass me I take the voice recorder out, ask them if they object to me recording our conversation and explain that they are harassing me at the moment and that I would like to have a recording of their conduct to support my pictures (none of which are of them) in court if it ever comes to that. Excellent idea. I think I would take it a step further and not ask their permission for recording though. Why set a precedent when none is needed? William Robb
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
At 09:44 AM 8/16/2005, William Robb wrote: Excellent idea. I think I would take it a step further and not ask their permission for recording though. Why set a precedent when none is needed? William Robb Depending on what part of the world you live in, there may be no legal requirement to ask permission for recording the conversation. I've been told that in West Virginia, as long as you are participating in the conversation, you have the right to record it. You don't have to get permission, and I don't think you even have to tell the other party they are being recorded. However, you wouldn't have the right to record any conversations you were not involved in, without the permission of all parties involved. This isn't mean to be proper legal advice, as I'm sure there might be more details involved. I'm just encouraging people to check out the local laws in their area. There is a definitely a chance that no permission is required under appropriate circumstances. In case you are wondering, a district attorney told my girlfriend about this a few years ago. She was being harassed by someone back then. They told her to record it, and explained that she didn't need to either get permission or notify the person about the recording. They also mentioned that this was a West Virginia law, and that some other states didn't permit such recordings. Personally, I like the West Virginia position on this issue. take care, Glen
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued. Regards, Bob... - The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing. - Jean-Baptiste Colbert, minister of finance to French King Louis XIV From: Glen [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 09:44 AM 8/16/2005, William Robb wrote: Excellent idea. I think I would take it a step further and not ask their permission for recording though. Why set a precedent when none is needed? William Robb Depending on what part of the world you live in, there may be no legal requirement to ask permission for recording the conversation. I've been told that in West Virginia, as long as you are participating in the conversation, you have the right to record it. You don't have to get permission, and I don't think you even have to tell the other party they are being recorded. However, you wouldn't have the right to record any conversations you were not involved in, without the permission of all parties involved. This isn't mean to be proper legal advice, as I'm sure there might be more details involved. I'm just encouraging people to check out the local laws in their area. There is a definitely a chance that no permission is required under appropriate circumstances. In case you are wondering, a district attorney told my girlfriend about this a few years ago. She was being harassed by someone back then. They told her to record it, and explained that she didn't need to either get permission or notify the person about the recording. They also mentioned that this was a West Virginia law, and that some other states didn't permit such recordings. Personally, I like the West Virginia position on this issue. take care, Glen
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued. In many places, law enforcement officials use the one party consent concept to record transactions between criminals and undercover agents wearing a wire. (Don't know if the term wearing a wire is for real or just a figment of TV writers' imaginations, but it seems to have passed into common usage.) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
Mark Roberts wrote: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued. In many places, law enforcement officials use the one party consent concept to record transactions between criminals and undercover agents wearing a wire. (Don't know if the term wearing a wire is for real or just a figment of TV writers' imaginations, but it seems to have passed into common usage.) I think that came from the VERY early days, when the recording media WAS actually a small spool of wire! Tape, and subsequent miniaturization came later... keith whaley
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
keithw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Roberts wrote: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued. In many places, law enforcement officials use the one party consent concept to record transactions between criminals and undercover agents wearing a wire. (Don't know if the term wearing a wire is for real or just a figment of TV writers' imaginations, but it seems to have passed into common usage.) I think that came from the VERY early days, when the recording media WAS actually a small spool of wire! Tape, and subsequent miniaturization came later... Well I think now they just wear a radio transmitter, so the miniaturization of the tape recorder is a moot point ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
Welcome Krisjanis Paranoid society or not, I do believe it's good to know your own rights as well as respecting and not violating the rights of other people. As photographers we are often confronted with other people questioning our rights to take pictueres. Sometimes they even manage to scare a photographer, who doesn't know his own rights, away. (Even the Police may make mistakes and illegally seize your film or camera, in which case you must remember to instist, that these subjects are sealed until a judge has examined if the Police have acted correctly). In order to deal with the approching individual, who are questioning your rights in a civilized, assertive manner, (without using bad language or making new enemies) it is crutial to know you own rights as well as being able to express your intensions of respecting the rights of the approaching person. That was my two cents - and one of the reasons for my interest in the matter. Annother reason is of course my own interest in (legally) making a profit. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. august 2005 11:24 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction) Hi Krisjanis, welcome to the list. You make a good point. I would take it one step further and not even ask if they minded being recorded. I'd simply take out the recorder - at a strategic point - and hold it (or the mic) in an obvious manner. In fact, while filming and at the point of being accosted, I always leave the camera running, even if someone says 'turn that off' or whatever. Stupidly they assume that once your eye isn't at the viewfinder then it must be 'off'. If anyone ever says 'no filming' and tries to put their hand over the lens, then I keep rolling - always makes great pictures on TV :-) On 16/8/05, Krisjanis Linkevics, discombobulated, unleashed: I have been lurking on this list for a while so I might as well introduce myself :) As many of us I used to enjoy photography in childhood, I had some pretty crappy off-brand Pentax screw mount cameras and lenses but I did enjoy it immensely. I took a 10 year break from photography in my teens but for the last 5 years I am back starting with many assorted C*non digicams and slowly migrating to 35mm Pentax stuff with occasional dips into MF and LF. I still own a decent 4x5 kit though I don't use it except when completely out of my mind and willing to lug along the monster monorail. I am currently using *istD with two of the venerable limiteds and assorted other glass and am in the process of building myself a light yet sturdy 6x12. Now on to the topic - I have never taken great interest in street photography but on the occasional streaks I get I sometimes carry around my digital voice recorder (most of the time even without the batteries). If somebody comes up to harass me I take the voice recorder out, ask them if they object to me recording our conversation and explain that they are harassing me at the moment and that I would like to have a recording of their conduct to support my pictures (none of which are of them) in court if it ever comes to that. Usually they go away. If they don't I push the button on the recorder and say that if they object to me recording our conversation we have nothing to talk about and they should go about their business and leave me alone. I usually drop something along the lines that they are taking my time which I could use for taking pictures and that I could even sue them for lost profit and that if they are so ignorant as to come and accuse me of something they probably don't even know the extent to which this could be taken in court. I am making a living here yada yada yada... where should I send invoice for my services... bla bla bla... I think there is absolutely no point in discussing any of the tough concepts like freedom or anything of the sort. That is usually a dead end. If they want this to be a paranoid society I just push the voice recorder in their face and make it a reality. Krisjanis Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
On 16/8/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Don't know if the term wearing a wire is for real or just a figment of TV writers' imaginations, but it seems to have passed into common usage.) It's actually wireless. A simple personal mic with a wire to a transmitter that is attached to a belt or in pocket. The receiver can plug into a tape recorder or a camera or whatever. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
