PDA

View Full Version : Beware of Millenium park nazis



Pages : 1 [2]

Chan Tran
05-25-2006, 12:22 PM
I live in Aurora, IL and have never been to the park. I plan to go to the park and take some pictures sometimes. This thread is very discouraging to me.

John Koehrer
05-26-2006, 12:00 AM
Chan,
Use a monopod & running shoes.
John

Mike A
05-26-2006, 12:08 AM
I live in Aurora, IL and have never been to the park. I plan to go to the park and take some pictures sometimes. This thread is very discouraging to me.
Sorry Chan, this was not my intent. Just go early on a day when there is little pedestrian traffic, being polite and non confrontational will help as well. Assure them you'll only be a minute, but be firm and remind them that it is a public domain you are in and you do have a right to be there as long as you are not breaking a specific law.

noseoil
05-26-2006, 08:33 AM
Mike, I guess I must be missing something here. Is the Patriot Act in effect here? Is this a matter of national security? Is the park public property? Is the "Bean" public property? Are there laws which say you cannot use a tripod, as in Mexico or some places in europe?

My understanding of public property is that photography is allowed in a public park at any time in which the park is open, day or night. A tripod does not make a professional (see my gallery, I use a tripod but am certainly not a professional). What is the real issue here about the use of a camera on public property. Is it the "bean"? If an artist has a work on display on public property, there are no laws about taking the picture. There are laws about the use of an image in which a copyright has been used wrongfully, but that is certainly not a police issue, it is a matter for the courts to decide.

I still suggest a large "shoot-in" by as many LF photographers as possible. tim

Claire Senft
05-26-2006, 09:06 AM
I find it annoying when anyone challenges me or even questions me about a photo I am taking. However, I do believe that I should NOT infringe on anyone's rights in any manner whatsover. I would rather pass up a great photo than to stop or to hamper anyone else from that which they are entitled to do. I Make a strong point of avoiding stepping upon private property without permission. I try not to litter even in a minor fashion.

As I see it a rent a cop has the right to ask civil and appropriate questions. I have no right to impede anyone else from using the sidewalk with the way I setup my tripod and I make a point of not doing so. Of course if no one else is around to use the sidewalk then I set my tripod up as I choose. People who presume that they are welcome to interrupt what I am doing, with questions for example, are not treated very civilly...I have my rights too. If a person is going to attempt to stop me from taking a photo that I am legally allowed to take they are in for a rather hostile debate at the very least.

Mike A
05-26-2006, 10:45 AM
Mike, I guess I must be missing something here. Is the Patriot Act in effect here? Is this a matter of national security? Is the park public property? Is the "Bean" public property? Are there laws which say you cannot use a tripod, as in Mexico or some places in europe?

My understanding of public property is that photography is allowed in a public park at any time in which the park is open, day or night. A tripod does not make a professional (see my gallery, I use a tripod but am certainly not a professional). What is the real issue here about the use of a camera on public property. Is it the "bean"? If an artist has a work on display on public property, there are no laws about taking the picture. There are laws about the use of an image in which a copyright has been used wrongfully, but that is certainly not a police issue, it is a matter for the courts to decide.

I still suggest a large "shoot-in" by as many LF photographers as possible. tim

Tim its crazy, when they first opened the park there were a number of instances that occured were these part time security people were taking bribes from photographers wanting to photograph in the park. This was writtn about in one of the local hipster artsy rags here in town, I believe it was "The Reader".

I think what happened is once these guys started dipp'n they couldn't stop and started harassing people. Plus Mayor Daley over payed alot of money for millenium park and in turn can justify the gaurds and expenditure. I see the city's point in that all that expensive metal structure is very accesible and all it takes is a 15 year old on the high school track team and a fat Sharpie to wreak havoc.

Most of the security people that work Chicago events and such here in town are off duty CHPD so I give the wide berth and due respect, (cuz yous might fall down and bust your head while im try'n to stuff you in da paddy wag'n over by there) but these clowns don't appear to be of duty Chicago police.

If your ever in town I can act as a guide for ya, my rates are Irish breakfest at the Irish Oak and a pint of guiness to wash her down, ah the chicago way ya gotta love it.

Mike

jhavard
05-26-2006, 02:15 PM
My main problem when shooting in parks is, "Ooh! Neat camera!" Most people are rather accomodating and will go out of their way to make sure they don't mess up the shot. Sometimes that's a problem if you want people walking on pathway!

Petzi
05-26-2006, 03:21 PM
I have no problem at all with ordinary and reasonable access fees, nor with any of the other ordinary "tourist trap" activities that go on there. I'd prefer not to have to have a guide to go to the interesting places, but as you said - it's their land. I have a real problem with what they do to one who might actually try to SELL a photo taken there. Those fees are NOT reasonable and, in my opinion, are extortion. It appears that, contrary to all common sense, terrain features can be copyrighted.

I know nothing about fees for taking photos in Monument Valley. Where can I find information about that?

dmr
05-26-2006, 06:29 PM
Here's a thread over on Rangefinder Forum, with photos, when I definitely attracted the attention of a security guard last fall when shooting a few of them doing the work on The Bean.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12729

Ishotharold
06-01-2006, 10:55 AM
whilst on the topic of chicago... Has anyone else had problems on the trains?

Recently I had two friends who were pulled off the trains by under cover cops at the platform. The reason: "Taking pictures of a federal building is illegal" they were searched and given court dates. Aperrently two college students with p&s digicams are a "terroristic threat" two problems with this...

a) CTA is PRIVITELY owned
b) CTA is not a building

I really wonder what people are thinking these days. Oh to be inside those minds.

TheFlyingCamera
06-01-2006, 12:40 PM
I read the thread on Rangefinder Forum - one thing I think everyone is missing about copyright is that the sculptor's copyright begins and ends at the object itself. The sculptor has a right to the sculpture itself - if I were to start making 1/100th scale models of "the bean" without paying a licensing fee, then Mr. Kapoor would have the right to pursue me in court. Copyright for a work of art covers the commercial use of an image/object itself, and the intellectual content thereof. If I take a photograph that majorly and substantively uses and/or copies the elements of someone else's image in such a way that it is reasonable to confuse the one work for the other, then I have violated their copyright. Taking a photograph of an object like the bean is a new work of art, regardless of commercial or personal intent, because in taking my photograph of the bean, I have chosen a particular way to interpret the sculpture - the time of day, the angle of the light, the presence or lack thereof of people in and around it, etc. I would think that photographing the bean would in some ways be analogous to making a parody of an existing artwork - Marcel Duchamp's LHOOQ, for example, or Andy Warhol's Campbells Soup Can.

David A. Goldfarb
06-01-2006, 12:54 PM
When I've been in Millenium Park, there have always been many cameras pointed at The Bean, but I think the photographers were mostly photographing themselves reflected in The Bean's surface, or perhaps their relatives and acquaintances standing in front of it.

jstraw
09-20-2006, 03:17 PM
Hey Mike !! Yeah, I remember the feeling(s) quite well starting with the democratic convention in August 1968. The cops pulled off their name tags and rioted against the students and media. I was at ground zero in front of the Hilton at Balboa and Michigan shooting for the Sun Times. Later, when hizzonor was asked about the level of disorder and the roles the police played, Mayor Daley in true Daleyspeak responded with " Da police aren't here to create disorder. Da police are here to preserve disorder." His press secretary at the time, later begged the press to "print what he means, not what he says." Aaahhhhhhhhh, dose were da days. <sigh> I miss my hometown.

Man, I'd install a rearview mirror under that blanket and watch your back. Take care.
Mark

In September of 1968 I was eight years old and had just moved to Chicago. My next door neighbor was Declan Haun (then, of Life magazine). In his basement, his son Erich (my age) was delighted to show me the helmet Declan wore to cover the convention. It was a motorcycle helmet, completely covered with black photographer's tape and with a "LIFE" logo cut from a magazine cover centered above the brow. I didn't really understand the need for the helmet at first. Not long after that comes my earlies memory of television news and the courtroom drawings of Bobby Seal bound and gagged.

Ahhh...Chicago.