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.
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.
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
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.
__________________
Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
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.
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!
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?
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.
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.
Linear Mode
