Taking Pictures

[Kerry]

Hopefully you photo guys/gals can answer this for me. My wife got me a new digital camera for Christmas and tried it out today by photographing the office building I work in. I took the pictures from the surrounding streets, but it is all encompassed in a large office park. As I was getting done I was approached by a security officer from the building and he told me it was illegal to photograph the building because it was on private property. What are my legal rights when it comes to this? I don't want to cause any problems at work or anything but I am just curious.

BTW - She bought me a Nikon D40X and it took some really nice phots before I was stopped.

[Architect2010]

Thats what I'm getting for my sixteen!!! Do you like it?

Oh and srry... I don't know anything about rights... =P.
Sorry to get off topic.

[Kerry]

Well, I am just getting started with it and I know very little about photography but to answer the question - yes I like it. The D40X is just like the D40 but has 10 megpixels instead of the D40s 6 megapixels It will take about 3 photos per second in rapid fire mode. To get any faster she would have had to spend atleast $500 more. Even though these were my first "real" photos ouside they came out better than I expected. Once I learn to compose the shots I will start trying some of the different settings.

After the incident today I am a little discouraged though. I really like office buildings and was looking forward to taking photos of buildings and contrasting them with the surrounding natural environment. However, if I am going to be hasseled by security officers every time I pull the camera out it will take a lot of fun out of it.

My wife bought it at Best Buy but I found it for $100 less at circuitcity.com. Best Buy wouldn't match the on-line price so I went to a Circuit City store and they did. The camera bag was more at Circuity City but they matched Best Buys price (actualy beat it by $1.00) so I was happy. Best Buy also sold my wife the wrong extra battery and memory card.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

I've been approached a couple of times about taking photos, and as long as I'm not ON private property I'll tell a rent-a-cop to piss up a rope. From what I understand when it comes to outdoor stuff, there's not a reasonable expectation of privacy, so click away. "Security" can't do squat unless you're on their employer's property either, they have zero authority...Unless you count a stern look or evil eye.

Of course, I'm not really one to shy away from confrontation either, so I don't have a problem taking pictures of them while they're trying to run me off. I will say this though...Security is just following what they're told to do as well...And they're just normal people while they're at it. So I try not to be too much of a prick to the individual until they show me their ass.



Government installations are a different matter all together. Don't even try it...Not worth it regardless of what the law says. Kinda like arguing with TSA...Just not a good idea, no matter how retarded (or unconstitutional) their approach is.

Congrats on the new camera, BTW....I'm pimpin' a Konica/Minolta 7D myself.

[metro]

Kerry After the incident today I am a little discouraged though. I really like office buildings and was looking forward to taking photos of buildings and contrasting them with the surrounding natural environment. However, if I am going to be hasseled by security officers every time I pull the camera out it will take a lot of fun out of it.

Or put a lot more fun into it. They can't really do anything for outdoor pictures. Heck, look what the paparazzi takes pics of on private property. Now zooming through someone's window or government property, that's a whole other issue as OGTS pointed out.

[Karried]

I am going to be hasseled by security officers every time I pull the camera out it will take a lot of fun out of it.

sheesh, I can't believe they have nothing better to do ... well, actually, I do believe it. You were probably the most excitement these rent a cops have had in a long time.

You can't take a photo because it's on Private property? I don't know if he knows what he's talking about. I wish I knew for sure but it doesn't sound like it is a law to me ...at least I've never heard of it. I know insurance agents, appraisers and inspectors, tax assessors, realtors etc take photos of private residences.

Don't let them sway you... buy them a doughnut and distract them. A warm Krispy Kreme does the trick every time.

Time for a papparazi like lens .... how do they get away with it? Some of the pics they take are unreal.

I'm sorry this guy had to take the fun out of it.. but don't let anyone steal your joy.. just find another office to photograph and post it here for us.

[solitude]

That's completely wrong. There is no expectation of privacy in a situation like that. If that were the case, nobody could take pictures of the downtown skyline because it's "private property." There's many good sites on the web that address this. Click away.

Here's some references:

The Photographers' Guide To Privacy

Excellent printable .pdf file about Photographers' Rights When Stopped or Confronted For Photography.

From USA TODAY:

If you can see it, you can shoot it.

Let's get the easy stuff out of the way. Aside from sensitive government buildings (e.g., military bases), if you're on public property you can photograph anything you like, including private property. There are some limits — using a zoom lens to shoot someone who has a reasonable expectation of privacy isn't covered — but no one can come charging out of a business and tell you not to take photos of the building, period.

Further, they cannot demand your camera or your digital media or film. Well, they can demand it, but you are under no obligation to give it to them. In fact, only an officer of the law or court can take it from you, and then only with a court order. And if they try or threaten you? They can be charged with theft or coercion, and you may even have civil recourse. Cool. (For details, see "The Photographer's Right.")

It gets better.

You can take photos any place that's open to the public, whether or not it's private property. A mall, for example, is open to the public. So are most office buildings (at least the lobbies). You don't need permission; if you have permission to enter, you have permission to shoot.

In fact, there are very few limits to what you're allowed to photograph. Separately, there are few limits to what you're allowed to publish. And the fact that they're separate issues — shooting and publishing — is important. We'll get to that in a moment.

You can take any photo that does not intrude upon or invade the privacy of a person, if that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Someone walking in a mall or on the street? Fair game. Someone standing in a corner, looking at his new Prozac prescription? No. Using a long lens to shoot someone in an apartment? No.

Note that the limits have nothing to do with where you are when you take the shots; it's all about the subject's expectation of privacy. You can be on private property (a mall or office-building lobby), or even be trespassing and still legally take pictures. Whether you can be someplace and whether you can take pictures are two completely separate issues.

Good luck!!

[Kerry]

Still trying to figure this out but here are my first ones. I like the way the reflection in the glass at the top gives the building a transparent effect.

[Karried]

Good find Solitude...

Kerry, print it out and take it with you. When they harass you, give them a copy and threaten them with legal action and bodily harm

or not .......... lol

All depending on what kind of mood you're in.

[jbrown84]

if you're on public property you can photograph anything you like, including private property.

If you were inside the office park, you were not on public property, so they have the right to get onto you. In this post-9/11 world, it's gonna happen a lot. Same goes for video.

The difference with photographing the skyline is that you are doing it from public property (the street or sidewalk).

[Kerry]

I was on the sidewalk across the street from the building. When I was approached by the security officer I was actually in the center median.

[jbrown84]

Within the office park or on a city street?

[Kerry]

Well, that is where I am stuck. It is in a 400 acre wooded office park. As far as I can tell the streets are not private. There are not any signs that say private property and there are 2 residential subdivisions and a few apartment complexes on-site. There are also several large office building like the one photographed and a few dining establishments on the fringe. There is a Credit Union, market, and cafe in the lobby of my building and parking permit for the building is not required. I don't know who owns the building I am in and if they are the same owners of the office park. I guess I can look on the County GIS system and see who owns them. Maybe I can just ask the property manager.

[mecarr]

Hopefully you photo guys/gals can answer this for me. My wife got me a new digital camera for Christmas and tried it out today by photographing the office building I work in. I took the pictures from the surrounding streets, but it is all encompassed in a large office park. As I was getting done I was approached by a security officer from the building and he told me it was illegal to photograph the building because it was on private property. What are my legal rights when it comes to this? I don't want to cause any problems at work or anything but I am just curious.

BTW - She bought me a Nikon D40X and it took some really nice phots before I was stopped.

Although I'm only a second year law student, I don't think the security guard knows what he is talking about. The building is there for all to see, and simply taking a picture violates nobody's privacy. Moreover, there is no indication that you are using these photographs in an inappropriate manner.

[Doug Loudenback]

I don't know the "legal" answer ... don't care! I did run across this problem once when taking pics of Leadership Square ... security guard came out, friendly enough, and said what the building's policy was ... asked if it was OK to back up my vantage point to the sidewalk and he said, "no problem." So, I did.

If you have a good camera, it's going to take images of lots higher resolution than you'll likely want in your "final" versions, such as those you'd put on the internet, and it's easy enough to crop and/or resize to get the same view.

Easy is good.

By the way, VERY nice editing/blending on those pics, Kerry! Well done!

[OKCCrime]

Related question:

Anyone know the OKC regulations regarding sidewalks and setbacks?

If you're on the sidewalk, you are on city property correct?

What about when the sidewalk is set back from the street by as much as15 feet, as it is in some neighborhoods.

Furthermore, isn't any land between the sidewalk and the street also city property?

Am I way off with the sidewalk biz, or it is all property that is a fixed distance from the street city property?


Thx,
OKCcrime

[solitude]

Just read the links I provided. They actually clear this all up!

[OKCCrime]

Solitude,

Thanks for the links. I read them. However I didn't see any place where it discussed where city property ends and private property begins with respect to sidewalks and set backs. If I just missed it, could you point it out to me?

Thanks
Okccrime

[solitude]

Solitude,

Thanks for the links. I read them. However I didn't see any place where it discussed where city property ends and private property begins with respect to sidewalks and set backs. If I just missed it, could you point it out to me?

Thanks
Okccrime

Okccrime,

I'm sorry. I wasn't responding to your post. There was a lot of discussion on the buildings and private property after I posted those links and I was responding to all that. I should have read all through the thread before posting. Sorry.

[soonerfever]

I just got back from NYC and I didn't have any problems taking pictures of buildings and I am not talking about the Empire State Building either. There were several times where I was walking around at two in the morning and walking up to a buildings front door and taking pictures. There were several times where security guards were looking right at me. None of them said anything. I have done the same thing in Chicago. I am not aware of any laws that prohibit phtography of buildings. However I would suspect that if there were, Chicago and New York City would probably be the first to have them to try and prevent terrorism. If you run into more trouble just simply step out into the city owned street and take your photo.

[JLCinOKC]

I have had problems in the past myself at Leadership Square. I was taking pics in the plaza when I was approached by a security guard telling me I couldn't take pictures as it was private property. I simply stepped off on to the street and kept snapping. The Federal Building is off limits too. You can register with the GSA if you want. I never have and have no idea what the process would entail.

[Kerry]

I have taken several trips to photograph mid-town Atlanta from Atlantic station and have never had an issue. There are usually several people taking photos in the same area. If you work at leadership Square I would casue problems but if someone asks me to leave Atlantic Staion they better get policeman to ask me to leave.

[okctvnewsguy]

All of the answers Solitude provided are correct, being a media photographer I get told to leave so many times I can't count. But I usually have a smart ass answer of "You know the document that lets you carry a gun lets me shoot this" Technically if you are in a public building and you are allowed to be there as a member of the public, you are allowed to take pictures of it. Just like solitude posted If you can see it, you can shoot it. Dateline got sued for undercover video inside a wal-mart, and a judge cited the See it Shoot it. I've had a few problems in downtown around leadership square, and they tell me "Homeland security doesn't allow you to shoot buildings" I usually quip back with "Well the constitution does, and until a cop with a gun tells me otherwise, I'm not leaving, but Ill get off your property" I then usually step onto a sidewalk or other known public venue. And if someone gets angry at you taking their picture, if they are in a public place then they are fair game.

here are some of my recent building exploits, nice job on yours Kerry,

Picasa Web Albums - Robert - 2008 Downtown...

[kmf563]

okctvnewsguy - you have a great eye! i guess media equipment doesn't hurt either. great pics. thanks for sharing.

[FritterGirl]

Interesting how Leadership Square keeps coming up in this.

My husband's second-job/hobby is photography. Whenever he's brought people downtown for shoots, the ONLY place he's had hassles is Leadership. The rent-a-cop comes out and gives him the same tired old story.

My husband lets the guard know what the photographer's rights are, and like others have done, stepped off the curb and kept shooting away.

Basically, only the FEDs really have the right to do anything, and only if they have a "search and seize."