Posted February 5, 200916 yr be very carefull if you want to make pictures in the Aronoff Center .. I brought my camera into the Aronoff Center to take some pictures of the beautifully lit lobby at the Aronoff Center, but unfortunately was categorically told by an old stupid lady “staff” that “no cameras are allowed”. I disputed this statement because there were no prominent signs that said “no cameras allowed into the lobby”, nor did this old Lady “staff” systemically check all patrons for cameras – because cell-phone cameras are “cameras” as well and I didn’t see anybody asking patrons to not bring in those. Finally, I brought my camera to previous performances that I attended at the Aronoff Center and I took pictures of the lobby and even the inside of the Procter & Gamble Hall prior to the start of the performance in full view of the staff without being told “no cameras allowed” in the building. Unfortunately the insistence of this old stupid Lady “staff” that “no cameras are allowed” even in the lobby. Then suddenly Police Officer Jones and his female colleague showed up next to us and asked us to leave. The staff of the Aronoff Center had called them and wanted my to removed from the premises.
February 5, 200916 yr Sorry to hear that. Sounds like selective enforcement. I agree the lobby is awesome. There's usually a lot of eye candy to see before and after a show. Sometimes that's better than the shows themselves.
February 5, 200916 yr A lot depends on who owns/operates the facility. If it's privately owned and funded, including private foundations, then they have a right to impose whatever rules they want. If it's taxpayer owned/funded, then management's right to restrict photography is more limited. Performers may impose restrictions on photographing or recording their performances.
February 5, 200916 yr http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm Carry this with you at all times. That can't apply to the inside of a private business. Show some respect and ask people before you go up in a building taking pictures of stuff in a small building where people are working close by anyway. It can't be that hard in the Aronoff. They don't know who you are or what you're doing. If you're in a large space where you look really anonymous and don't see anyone working nearby then go ahead. You can always say "I didn't see anyone nearby, to ask". If someone says something to you, smile and say you're just taking pictures for your flickr. Don't look like a typical shady looking introvert photographer. Be friendly! Friendly people who smile, aren't terrorists. Clearly you weren't ''arrested'', you were just told told to leave. You make it sound like it was some huge injustice.
February 5, 200916 yr The Aronoff is privately owned, by the Arts Association, right? I know it gets a heck of a lot of public funding though, so I'm not sure how it qualifies. I also am pretty sure that you have a right to photograph any public space within a business, unless a rule is posted, or you are specifically told not to.
February 5, 200916 yr Correct. Even if it is private property, if it is taken from a publically-used space, or if there are no signs that explicitly make clear that photography is not allowed, then it is lawful to photograph. The Aronoff received a lot of public funding -- money that was diverted from the restoration of the Emery Theatre, and because of that, it is not a true private venue. I am not for sure if it was clearly stated in your post (assumed in the title), but if you were jailed, I'd find a lawyer.
February 5, 200916 yr If you were standing on private property....... You probably should have asked before hand. You don't have the right to walk into a privately owned building and take photographs, unless you know for fact the owner permits them. With the exception of banks, I've noticed most large office buildings in any downtown permit photography inside. Some don't require permission, and others want you to let a security officer know that you will be taking pictures. Asking can be very helpful. Sometimes security officers share your interest and may unlock doors to areas typically not accessible to the public. I've been granted roof access to places, just because I asked permission and was nice. There was a historic building in downtown Pittsburgh (don't remember the name) that I went into. The security guard said the owners didn't permit photography, but to make it up, he gave us a very extensive tour of the building, with lots of interesting facts. Very memorable. I enjoyed it far more than getting a crappy underexposed shot of the lobby. ................... - Laws and restrictions are different for abandoned structures, and can vary by state or city - ................... BTW, I just wanted to mention something somewhat relevant to this. But I hear from a lot of people who get bent out of shape when people are approached by security, cops, common citizens, whatever... asking them what they are photographing and why. The photographer seems to get somewhat defensive, and quick to unleash their rights, or simply scoff at the question. People have the right to ask, like we have the right to photograph. I'm actually happier people ask the question. I want them to know about my work. Now if they approach you right away while you stand on a city sidewalk and demand you stop shooting, that's a whole other issue. To be honest, I usually say "okay" and walk away. I know I have my rights, but I like to avoid confrontations. I'll just come back later.
February 5, 200916 yr be very carefull if you want to make pictures in the Aronoff Center .. ... was categorically told by an old stupid lady staff....no cameras allowed into the lobby... nor did this old Lady staff...Unfortunately the insistence of this old stupid Lady staff that no cameras are allowed even in the lobby. at least we know you were rude! When someone asks you nicely to stop taking pictures, you stop until you get more details! You don't hit them with some stupid "rights" document! Be polite, ask nicely, and maybe next time you won't get thrown out. PS: change your name, that is rude also to pass yourself off as someone else.
February 6, 200916 yr How would different degrees of public funding change anything? It's pretty much impossible for any new development to occur without the city helping one way or another. We subsidize EVERY new building. That would be dumb if the law went according to public funding - it's still ran privately. The Aronoff isn't really much of a landmark. I could see if it were Union Terminal or something. I think in cases like this, you just have to use your own judgement based on how iconic the place is, how busy/large the space is (how much you stand out) and how easily you can approach someone first. I tried taking a picture of the Urban Outfitters in Clifton and asked first since there were workers nearby - they said no, so I lost out on a good picture. Come to find out some douchebag has a pic of the interior on his flickr. That makes me mad. At least I asked. You guys are cheating and getting all the good shots. Boo.
February 6, 200916 yr ... Also, you'd be amazed what you can get away with when using amateur cameras. People have a different reaction to unprofessional-looking cameras than they do to professional ones. :| That's sure the truth. Ironically, I've been treated like a potential terrorist when photographing in rail and transit facilities with a DSLR. If I were intent on taking photos for nefarious purposes, would I be standing in the middle of an open area with a conspicuous camera and lens, taking time to compose and focus carefully? Or would I be more likely to go completely unnoticed with a small point-and-shoot or cell-phone camera, standing in a crowded area or an inconspicuous location, unobtrusively snapping away? For purposes of site surveillance, the quality of the photos isn't all that important. Often when I ask permission to take photos, the person asks to see my camera. They might have been friendly and relaxed at first, probably expecting to see a pocket-sized point-and-shoot. When they see a DSLR, all of a sudden they get all hesitant and then ask a lot more questions. Usually they give permission eventually, but a serious camera is often a stumbling block.
February 6, 200916 yr Heh. I've been hassled by cops a few times. Once was for photographing a bridge in Greenup County, Kentucky -- the sheriff thought that I was a 'terrorist', since there was a major gas pipeline bridge nearby (the red/white gas pipeline suspension bridge). Whatever. Couldn't do jack shit, told that to him, and continued on my merry way. Another was for taking a photograph of a skyscraper from the ground in NYC, and a bridge in Philadelphia. Sorry, I don't care if you can blame it on 9/11 hysteria or Bin Laden madness, but when you forgo liberty for security, then the country is heading down the wrong path.
February 6, 200916 yr You probably should have asked before hand. You don't have the right to walk into a privately owned building and take photographs, unless you know for fact the owner permits them. This is incorrect. It's the other way around, actually. You DO have the right to walk into a public area of a private building and take photographs, unless you are explicitly notified that you cannot. This applies to any privately owned area that the public is allowed to enter, for example, the lobby, a shopping mall, etc... you get the gist of it. In fact, there are very, very few laws restricting photography. Basically, you are only forbidden to photograph people who have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Anyone can restrict your right on their property, because they own it, and property rights rightfully allow them to do so. They can't restrict you from standing at the window, and taking a picture in though. Anything you can see from the street or any other public property you are allowed to photograph.
February 6, 200916 yr ^ Okay, maybe if the laws for photography are the same as trespassing....you aren't a trespasser until the owner declares you as one. So yes, you can walk into a private building and start shooting photos, and it's true that they may NOT confiscate your photos or camera. But they have all the rights to ask that you stop shooting or leave immediately. In the GM Renaissance Center in Detroit, they specifically ask that you not photograph the upper Rotunda because of all the exposed structural elements. The atrium, lower rotunda, lobby, and food court area are all open to photography, but here you see an example of where owners/security have the right to tell you what elements you may or may not photograph. Of course you can shoot through windows. Someone can take photos of my home if they are standing on the sidewalk. However, the moment they step on my lawn, I can come out and tell them to stop photographing on my lawn, and continue their activities back on the sidewalk.
February 6, 200916 yr ^Yeah, once asked there is no reason to argue. You could ask nicely, but they have the right to tell you to get lost. Photography and trespassing, my two favorite law topics ;-)
February 6, 200916 yr Photography and trespassing, my two favorite law topics ;-) The two seemingly go well together :)
February 7, 200916 yr When someone asks you nicely to stop taking pictures, you stop until you get more details! .. NO .. why .. this old lady only know`s 9/11 and all photographers are terrorist .. this is the biggest problem in the US .. old ladies are stupid .. they can not think .. .. do you remember .. an old lady asked J. Mc Cain : "..is Barack Obama a terrorist ?"
February 7, 200916 yr ^Yeah, post-9/11, every photographer or videographer is viewed as a potential terrorist. .. that`s the problem of the USA .. why so many peoples are stupid in this country ..
February 7, 200916 yr It's stupid yes. I think we can all agree with that. Photography is definitely a scapegoat when it comes to these types of accusations. But why bother to put up a fight. You don't own the building. You are there on their conditions. The only debate here is private vs public, whether your rights were indeed violated. If this facility is privately owned (regardless of public subsidies) you should have stopped when asked. BTW, I'm not an enemy to photographers. Forumers come visit me up in Detroit to get the grand tour of our abandoned structures...all fenced and posted.
February 7, 200916 yr problem of the USA .. why so many peoples are stupid in this country .. especially those who can't spell
February 7, 200916 yr problem of the USA .. why so many peoples are stupid in this country .. especially those who can't spell I'm pretty sure cinncinnatus isn't a native english speaker. Hopefully he/she is learning to properly read/write/speak english. In addition, I hope he/she understands that things run differently in the States than his/her native country.
February 7, 200916 yr May you wake up one morning to find C-Dawg on one side, and David on the other.....both of them lecturing you....
February 7, 200916 yr May you wake up one morning to find C-Dawg on one side, and David on the other.....both of them lecturing you.... I pray all they are doing is lecturing.
February 7, 200916 yr May you wake up one morning to find C-Dawg on one side, and David on the other.....both of them lecturing you.... I pray all they are doing is lecturing. MTS has standards!!!!
February 7, 200916 yr I pray all they are doing is lecturing. MTS has standards!!!! Yes. David and C-Dawg can't handle this. I know that david has jungle/tropical fever, but I don't get down like that. I need to see some Harry Winston jewels on my finger before you get this good stuff! David has strange fantasies! David has a foot fetish.....hummm :|
February 7, 200916 yr I pray all they are doing is lecturing. MTS has standards!!!! Yes. David and C-Dawg can't handle this. I know that david has jungle/tropical fever, but I don't get down like that. For Cuban women, hell yes. Too bad there's none in Ohio. Tropical fever, lol!
February 7, 200916 yr I think it's a valid one. The question comes up quite often. Experiences make the discussion more dramatic I suppose.
February 7, 200916 yr I pray all they are doing is lecturing. MTS has standards!!!! Yes. David and C-Dawg can't handle this. I know that david has jungle/tropical fever, but I don't get down like that. For Cuban women, hell yes. Too bad there's none in Ohio. Tropical fever, lol! Honey, you've got to get out of Southern Ohio!
February 7, 200916 yr "I don't know why this thread went careening off course into lectures, Cuban women, foot fetishes, tropical fever, and Harry Winston..."
Create an account or sign in to comment