I read this
What about the street ? Its a 'public space' ! How does that effect street photographers ?
But sure you've said it yourself. The difference is between private and public spaces. He didn't say you can't take photos on the street.
??!? This is, afaik, completely untrue. Not only can I upload them to flickr, I can do off a bunch of prints, hold an exhibition, and even SELL the things without once even INFORMING the people involved that they're involved, let alone granting them rights with regard to the work. Or is my understanding completely skewed in this regard ????!?
But what how is the street different from a shopping centre? What about taking photographs from the street of a 'public space' ?
They're (perhaps deliberately) confusing the terms here. There's a lot of private property thats currently being sort of re-branded as 'public space' by gentle and caring developers and corporations. The 'Square' in the new 'Dundrum town centre' for example is a case in point. Its been given all the trappings of a 'town centre', and some effort has been made to appropriate the terminology (I actually cringe when I hear it refered to as 'dundrum town centre' on the Luas) in order to try and grab all those warm homely associations that we all have. Most decidedly a private space though, try demonstrating there, or taking pictures after someone in authority tells you to stop.
Feics sake, that's all kinds of wrong. It's arse-ery like that that gives do-gooders and power tripping security guards the idea that they can stop you taking a photo. A public space is a space such as a street, park, etc. Private property is indeed a shopping centre, cafe, and so on. Secondly, take photos until you're told to stop. Deliberate sensationalism tbh.
You can upload whatever you want to Flickr - As Daire said, you can do what you want, hell, call it art and you don't even have to tell those involved - As long as you've got an argument between art and commercial usage. Permission my arse. If you can see them from a public space, go for it. Just don't sell the images to Vodafone for their next advertisment campaign.
Afaik if your doing it for documenting proposes and/or artist purposes it's ok, but if your using the image in a commercial sense i.e. to sell something. then you need your model release forms to be signed
Not completely correct. If you are commissioned to take a portrait or wedding shoot then the copyright belongs to you as the photographer or the photographic studio you work for if you are employed by one. If that studio then decides to use a shot to advertise their work they are completely within their rights to do so.
earleir i nthe year I lived in the IFSc and was walking home from a shoot one evening (not taking photos) and a security guard advised me not to take any photos. Even though I was in the open air(near georges dock).and to be fair the guard was nice about it but I hadnt realised open public places were not fair game. Ive been told not to take photos in the illac shopping centre because of"security issues"....
The IFCS is all private property as far as I know, and the Illac centre would be too.
He can stop you taking pics of the building he guards but he cannot stop you taking other pics. I would have asked him what authority he had to stop you in a public place and then carried on.
As far as I know, yep. They bought the whole area - That said, feel free to stand on the footpath outside and shoot away, just don't be suprised if the Gardai are called. A friend of mine was moved from there for sketching. Something to do with terrorism. I lol'd.
It all comes down to the difference between "open public space" and "space open to the public" and knowing exactly where you are before you stand up for your rights.
IIRC there was a thread a while ago about Lough Dan which teased out this subject quite well.
jeepers.....that is insane.there are more interesting places to tak photos anyway...the amount of places off limits though did surprise me though.