| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/22/2007 02:34:08 AM · #1 |
| Does anybody know how shooting in malls works? I know a friend of mine was accosted by security once, and I know that you can't shoot in stores without permission, but can I shoot just in the regular mall area? |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 04:16:18 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by JBHale:
Does anybody know how shooting in malls works? I know a friend of mine was accosted by security once, and I know that you can't shoot in stores without permission, but can I shoot just in the regular mall area? |
Ask the Mall manager... he/she/it is the only one that can answer that question for you.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2007 04:31:39 AM · #3 |
| I shoot first, ask questions later. :-) I get stopped by security alot, too, but I'm a small, non-descript, rapidly approaching older-aged female, so they don't usually bother me too much. If you want to shoot a model in a setting, then you may want to try to get permission. If you're just shooting, you could always try my method. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 04:32:15 AM · #4 |
It's a no no in Scotland.
but i agree, talk to the manager, he may allow it
Kev |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 06:07:35 AM · #5 |
This was taken from a recent NWPA newsletter.
A Close Encounter of the Paranoid Kind by Terry Mills
It was a sunny day in Colwyn Bay on Thursday 8th September and while waiting for some pictures to be printed up at
Cambrian Photography I decided to pass the time and give my camera an outing.
I started at the seafront and took anything that caught my eye - general beach scenes, the decaying pier, a boat being
pulled out of the water. People were friendly and chatty and some even invited me to take their pictures. As time moved
on I made my way into the town and went to get a few items from shops in the Mall. There was a little girl in front of an
auto photo print machine, on her knees peering up into the delivery slot waiting for a photo to come out so already in
pic taking mode I just snapped off a shot and wandered on.
Next thing is that I’m confronted by an angry man, young girl in tow, wanting to know if I’d taken a picture of her and
then demanding me to delete it. Well, I was somewhat taken aback but ready to stand my ground and point out I’m
entitled by law to take pictures in a public place but then realised I was in a Mall (private property). As he got more aggressive
and threatening I deleted the picture and left it at that.
Imagine my surprise then, when Special Constable Williams and Police Community Support Officer Bennion
approached me in the town and asked what had happened in the Mall. Apparently the irate father had phoned the police
who had then gone to the Mall to check CCTV footage to get my description to issue a search for me.
Needless to say they wanted to look at the pictures on my camera. As SC Williams was perusing them on the LCD
screen she remarked how good they were. Having checked my identity using my driving licence and given me back my
camera, I thought they were satisfied but then I was asked to go back to the station so a senior officer could check my
camera as she didn’t know enough about cameras. I asked - what did she need to know? - No answer. I asked - What
was I being accused of? – No answer. So I asked – Have I done anything wrong? – No. Am I under arrest? – No. So I
refused to go to the station as by now I was getting concerned about picking up my pictures before closing time. So just
as she was calling for back-up a police car pulled up on to the pavement and another 3 officers emerged to question me
making 5 all together. Again my camera was checked along with my bag being searched. I was then subjected to some
inane questions by WPC 694 and a tall male PC
PC: Why was I in Colwyn Bay? – Me: To get some photos processed. WPC: Don’t they have photographic shops in
Pwllheli? – Me: Can’t I get pictures processed in Colwyn Bay?
WPC: Yes I didn’t mean that! - Me: What did you mean then? WPC: No answer.
Then came the psychological profiling - PC: Do you live alone or have you got family? How did you get to Colwyn
Bay? Do you have a car? Have you been in trouble with the police before? I said no while wondering if I was in trouble
with them now. Are you sure? Well you’re checking on me now so you’ll soon find out. Not necessarily – he said.
And all the time they’re looking and discussing my pictures. Oh that’s interesting. That looks like a radiator. Etc.
Then WPC 694 came to a picture of a mother walking her toddler children down to the water. What’s this?
Some kids going down to the seafront. Where’s the delete button? You can’t delete my pictures, I said.
I can .She said. Taking pictures of other people’s children is an offence! No its not, I replied (thinking at the same time
– if it is why did she want to destroy the evidence?). Give me back my camera, I demand. I can confiscate your camera!
No you can’t if I haven’t committed an offence.
Eventually after about half an hour I was given the all clear and my belongings and allowed on my way with a warning
to be careful of taking pictures of kids without parental permission in the future. I shook my head in frustration. As I
remarked to them - I bet that the father won’t be warned about his threatening behaviour or told that people can take
pictures of anyone in public places.
The ironical thing is that 2 days later, at the NWPA exhibition launch at Bodelwyddan, I was receiving a commendation
award for a picture of 2 underage girls having a conversation in a doorway. Mind you. It was taken in the police state of
Cuba not in Liberal Britain.
I take pictures of kids all the time with and without permission of parents. I do a lot of work for community groups and
my pictures are used for newspapers, posters, programmes, postcards, competitions and exhibitions.
The UK is a strange place to be at the moment. We are inundated with images of children in all media. We see children
on TV adverts sitting on loos, in baths and all sorts of varying compromising positions. We see pathetic children with
large eyes pleading for charity or cowering in corners for the NSPCC.
Parents dress them in saucy clothes with sexy logos or raunchy phrases or quips emblazoned across their bodies. They
allow them to wear make-up and jewellery and behave (usually badly) in a way that attracts notice. Yet if an individual
points a camera in their direction (CCTV excepted) there’s a major outcry. This includes school events and sports activities
thus depriving kids of recognition in positive activity. This only applies in the UK! It’s ok to bring pictures back
from foreign lands.
I was asked to provide some pictures promoting Criccieth in Bloom for the North Wales BBC website. I included
2 pictures of kids – 1) a half a dozen children with their teacher holding pots of daffodils they’d grown for
Mother’s Day & 2) a large group of kids holding a cheque for £500 which they’d raised through sponsorship for a
garden project. The first was rejected because, apparently, the children were recognisable so it was against policy
but the second was accepted even though the children were just as recognisable. Where’s the logic?
But it’s not just kids. Try taking pictures in London or other major city and you could have a whole host of
authority figures trying to stop you, confiscate your camera or delete your pictures under so called security or
terrorist restrictions
However, I think it is only the serious amateur photographer that is under threat. If you have an SLR or bigger it
is likely that you’ll be singled out even when there are others blatantly shooting with their compacts or telephones
– in theatres, public and private buildings and various events.
It seems to me that serious photographers should be fighting back to protect their rights and their hobby. Rather
than shrug our shoulders and accept that this is the way life is nowadays or accept the RPS proposition that we
should all carry ID cards to identify “proper photographers” we should be setting up lobbying groups – through
our clubs, regional associations and representative bodies. We should get ourselves legal backing and perhaps
even set up a fighting fund to counteract the negative publicity that stigmatises serious photographers as perverts,
paedophiles or terrorists. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 06:45:01 AM · #6 |
| I agree with your sentiments Rory, England isn't as photo-friendly as other places when it comes to children. Not that I've ever been acosted by the police, but when I'm out in manchester taking candids for example, I don't even entertain the idea of taking photos of children for fear of a backlash from people questioning my intent. And if a kid comes into my view whilst I'm trying to take a picture, I'll just turn right around! It's a real shame that it's gotten like this! And, I can't see it getting any better! |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 09:18:39 AM · #7 |
Mango,
I agree. I like many other photographers "see" a photo of situations involving children, and the way things are going adults, and ignore the opportunity for fear of backlash.
As a result I have very few street candids. It was my favourite form of photography. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 09:48:59 AM · #8 |
In US you MAY NOT photograph on private property without permission and a mall is private property.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2007 10:04:51 AM · #9 |
It's always you and me that are innocent and the other guys that aren't. People (not you and me) take photographs of children on spec for paedophiles. It's a fact. It happens.
Maybe there should be another paragraph here but, if you can accept the above, work it out. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 10:15:07 AM · #10 |
| I just avoid taking pictures of children, period. I think it's a lot easier when you're...well... not a man. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 10:17:58 AM · #11 |
I got in trouble taking this shot in the Cherry Hill Mall (NJ) parking lot.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2007 10:19:07 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
......I got in trouble taking this shot in the Cherry Hill Mall (NJ) parking lot. |
The parking lot is private property also. :/
|
|
|
|
12/22/2007 10:35:06 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by idnic:
Originally posted by Kelli:
......I got in trouble taking this shot in the Cherry Hill Mall (NJ) parking lot. |
The parking lot is private property also. :/ |
LOL! I know, but I could have taken the same shot, just not as close, from the street. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 10:53:13 AM · #14 |
| Lauri_black, Crabapple and I got in trouble in Dallas for shooting in a mall. haha..was funny..I felt like a rebel. Although I did get some shots before they shut us down. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 11:09:17 AM · #15 |
I try to be careful with my use of other's kids. Once in a while a shot is just too good for me to not share, but I will try to get permission if the child's face is identifiable. In these two cases, it was A)public and B) the faces are not visible
 
This one was during a parade and public photography is to be expected. I had to sign a release for for my own daughter to be in this parade.
Message edited by author 2007-12-22 11:10:30. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 11:14:58 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by JBHale:
I just avoid taking pictures of children, period. I think it's a lot easier when you're...well... not a man. |
I agree. It's patently unfair, but I can get away with taking pictures of children a whole lot easier than a guy can. Sad state of affairs, really. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 12:42:49 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
I agree. It's patently unfair, but I can get away with taking pictures of children a whole lot easier than a guy can. Sad state of affairs, really. |
Yup... Pathetic really. I even get the odd quiz and MY KIDS events :-/ What, a father is not allowed to take pics (I don't see anyone quizing the couple of mothers - I assume - with the dRebal's)?
The worse thing is that then when they ask did I get any of their kid doing x, the answer is nope sorry - I only include my kid in pics (apart from friends). For the most part that is true now... I could not be bothered wasting card space.
I haven't been hassled by police (yet) but get the odd power mad james bond type "security" blob.
As for Malls been private property in the US... that stinks if you ask me... they allow free public access. Same as this shite on the trains that they charge you with "trespassing" if you refuse to a search. :shrug: |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 01:35:27 PM · #18 |
Two pieces worth reading on the subject re: the US.
the photographer rights that has be cited here several time before.
And a two year old USA Today piece on the same subject.
The short of is it mall and forbid taking pictures and you must stop - sometimes it is best to get permission, but there is no public law that makes taking those pictures illegal.
That said there is a line between what is legal and what is wise. In the society of today I don't think it is generally wise for a guy to take pictures of someone else's kids without the parents knowledge/permission.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2007 01:42:48 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by idnic:
In US you MAY NOT photograph on private property without permission and a mall is private property. |
Most malls in the area actually have signs that tell people that they can't take pictures within the malls.
Of course with it being so crowded during the holidays I don't think anyone can see the signs because they are are posted by the entrances at below eye level.
I've seen people use dslrs to take pictures of their kids without anyone bothering them. Security is mainly patrolling the parking lots during the holidays. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 02:59:50 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by fixedintime:
Two pieces worth reading on the subject re: the US.
the photographer rights that has be cited here several time before.
|
This is wonderful! I think it's something everybody ought to be familiar with. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 03:41:55 PM · #21 |
The security guards might try to argue that it's private property, but it's not really. Since it's open to the public, it's not really private property.
Unless it's posted, photography is usually permitted. They might try to tell you, "It's against the rules," but just ask them to show you the rules. If anything, they can ask you to stop shooting and ask you to leave the property. They can't ask to see any pictures or ask for your camera or detain you. If they do, well, you can always call the police if you feel yourself in danger, but it's up to you (if you want to go that far).
Good Luck. The few times I've taken pictures (of my kids in the kids area), I had no problems. Once (after the Christmas season), we snuck our kids into the Santa Picture taking area and took pictures of them. No one said anything. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 04:03:56 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
The security guards might try to argue that it's private property, but it's not really. Since it's open to the public, it's not really private property. |
That's absolutely not true. Just the act of opening my restaurant or my bar or my candle shop or my...whatever... to the public does not mean the public may do whatever they want on my property. It's no different for a mall.
R.
Message edited by author 2007-12-22 16:04:12.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2007 07:34:53 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Nullix:
The security guards might try to argue that it's private property, but it's not really. Since it's open to the public, it's not really private property. |
That's absolutely not true. Just the act of opening my restaurant or my bar or my candle shop or my...whatever... to the public does not mean the public may do whatever they want on my property. It's no different for a mall.
R. |
Okay, it might not be true. I was looking around for something on it and I can't find anything. But basically, the only thing they can do is ask you to leave. If you don't, its trespassing.
I do remember seeing (online) something about public/private spaces. Maybe it was airports or something to that effect. Of course, legal knowledge you get online is worth what you pay for it (nothing).
On another not, I found //www.photopermit.org/ which "...is about keeping photographers out of trouble, and supporting them when trouble looms."
You might check it out. |
|
|
|
12/22/2007 07:39:11 PM · #24 |
Found it (I think); from //www.photopermit.org/?page_id=67:
"The Pruneyard Center is the home of the Silicon Valley Flickr Meetup group. The Pruneyard also important in that it played host in 1970 to an important freedom of speech case in California, where public malls were declared as public spaces with full protection of free speech." |
|
|
|
12/23/2007 01:00:01 PM · #25 |
| Regardless, I'd rather not face mall security if I don't have to. Not because they're necessarily intimidating, just kind of annoying... maybe I'll think up some other scheme for the challenge. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/10/2025 04:52:29 PM EDT.
