I was asked to stop taking photos..

[ameerat42]

Anyway, at the end of the day, when it's all said and done, and it's all over bar the shouting...
and all things are equal, and you agreed to disagree...
and you went your separate ways...
and so on and so forth...
...
..
?

[Xenedis]

but most markets around australia have some nervous stall holders

For the anti-photography types, I have two suggestions:

1. If you're a market stall holder, don't work illegally or sell counterfeited or stolen goods.
2. If you don't want to be photographed in a public place, don't leave your home.

[Rattus79]

3 learn what the law considers "a reasonable expectation of privacy"

A girl in a bikini on a busy gold coast beach is fair game, but the same girl in the same bikini on a deserted beach is a no go as she has a "reasonable expectation of privacy"

[bladesp2]

For the anti-photography types, I have two suggestions:

1. If you're a market stall holder, don't work illegally or sell counterfeited or stolen goods.
2. If you don't want to be photographed in a public place, don't leave your home.

unfortunately if there wasnt a market for these items they wouldnt be selling them.

[Analog6]

Public land often does not include venues like showgrounds. For instance, in Tassie you could photograph the Salmanaca markets to your heart's content as they are definitely on public land.

However, a farmer's market held at a private ground is a different story and they can ask you to cease and desist. Nothing to do but wuck it up, and remember the next time.

Sorry you had this disappointing experience, people are paranoid these days.

[Bear Dale]

Isn't it ridiculous that a 'big camera' purports terror in some, yet an iPhone is innocuous.

[Xenedis]

unfortunately if there wasnt a market for these items they wouldnt be selling them.

That's not legitimate photographers' problem.

[Bear]

Also makes me wonder if some of the issue is related to the professional look of someone with a dslr and a decent lens vs someone with a small point and shoot or using their phone. Some people just find big cameras / lenses intimidating and no matter how much you try and blend in, the paranoia takes over.

I find I use my phone or point&shoot far more than my dslr these days, especially in places like open air markets, carnivals, etc.

[bladesp2]

That's not legitimate photographers' problem.

Never said it was . just stating the obvious as to one reason why they sell these items ,and why some market stall holders might not want to be identified . I will cease at once .

[Lance B]

It just seems to me that there is a propensity for many people these days for wanting to play the victim. Point a camera at me? Then many seem to think that thyey are a victim, regardless of your actual intentions.

[Bercy]

Back in days of Black and White - Henri Cartier-Bresson took his Leica and painted it black, so he would not be seen taking photographs, as this might spoil the spontaneity of the scene unfolding before him. So the SLR makes you look like you are taking close up's of tax cheats, faces, competitors brands and prices etc. Like others - I went to my own daughter's ballet (aged 5) with the kit and sought permission to photograph her and they said I could not do so on premises. So I sat there at the concert whilst every one else was taking shots with their iphones. With respect to them, they clamped down heavily on this as well, pretty understandable. Anyway, you can have a camera in the end of you pen if you like - so we are back to Henri - don't be noticed!

[alsocass]

Funny you mention that. On my way to the markets it occurred to me that an old fashioned camera (like the one that one the still life comp this week) would be good for street photography. There is something innocent about using a camera like that... As if the style of camera speaks volumes about the intentions of the photographer. I suppose that begs to wonder what sort of reaction would happen to a photographer with a big white telephoto lens attached.

[outstar79]

People are certainly paranoid....I'm glad where I live the farmer's market loves and lets you take photos, mind you it's run by all the locals, so there is no management - and those locals are more than happy to even pose for you - crazy buggers!

[Lance B]

People are certainly paranoid....I'm glad where I live the farmer's market loves and lets you take photos, mind you it's run by all the locals, so there is no management - and those locals are more than happy to even pose for you - crazy buggers!

What you say here about the fact that there is no management is a very important one and one that actually gives a little insight into our modern society, and to a point, where the new jobs are being created. The problem is, once you install "rules", then you have to have people to enforce the rules and once you have these people to enforce these rules, then you have people trying to justify their jobs top make sure that their jobs are always there. So, what you then have is an entire industry set up to firstly make you scared of what can happen if you do not have these "rules" and then another industry put in place to enforce them.

So, we have scare mongering - read current affairs programs and much of the mainstream media and the like - then we have security cameras and secutiy guards put around justifying their jobs at every turn to make sure nobody breaks the rules. Is it in any of these people's interest to stop the scare mongering? No way. Whole industries set up to scare us and then others to protect us. I guess it keeps them all employed as who knows what jobs they'd have if they didn't scare us all.

Reminds me of the time of the bombings in London in 2005. Before the bombings, the authorities were concerned about people taking photos in underground railway stations and other public places etc for fear that they may be terrorists "casing" the places, but after the bombings they were asking the public if they had taken photos in these stations at the time so as they could help identify the culprits!! Unbelievable!!

What gets me about all this is that terrorists, or anyone up to no good, is hardly going to be going around brandishing the latest DSLR with big lenses bringing attention to themselves, they do it all covertly and discretely.

[Doktaduck]

I recall using that example when explaining copyright to my web design high school students. If I recall (and it was a few years ago and a bit hazy), it would be a breech of copyright to take a photo of the big M of a McDonalds if that was the prominent part of the photo (ie filled the frame), but if it was just one tiny part of a streetscape (think about photos of Times Square) then it was okay. The interesting discussion with the kids was about how grey areas worked... when did the sign stop being a copyright infringement and start becoming just part of the background.

I would just like to pluck the whole "can't take photo's of copyright/trademark material" out of the conversation and look at some of the law around this so newbs like me don't have to troll the legal sites to get a good definition, though doing so has been an enlightening subject for me

A good blog on the issue http://www.galvanilegal.com/reproduc...arks-in-photos

Basically everything comes down to "what you do with the image" as opposed to, can I take that photo.

For example, we can take a photo of a Coke sign, for the purpose of art, or to show to friends, family, flikr etc... without any issue at all.

Where things get legal is if we then use that image for commercial purposes. For instance, if we put the image on a postcard and sold that, then it is a breach of copyright (or trademark) as the buyer could reasonably think that Coke took the image themselves and made it into a postcard.

Also have to be careful if the copyrighted image is significant in an photograph to be used to advertise a product or service, as it can be interpreted that the company owning the trademark "endorses" the product or service you are selling... this is also a no-no.

Sources for those that want to read up:

Photographers rights - http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheet...aphers-rights/
Another comprehensive overview - http://www.psq.org.au/Legalities.pdf
a good read, though not particular - http://www.privacy.vic.gov.au/privac...h_13_04_07.pdf

A breif overview of some "rule" I've learnt:

There is no "right to privacy" in Australia.
You can take photos in public places of people doing ordinary things, without their express permission
It is NOT illegal in any way to take photos of architecture in Australia (avoiding the whole on private land etc..)
You ARE allowed to take photos of any artwork that is on public display, without breaching any legal issues. (though if on private property you can be "evicted")

You can't take illicit or rude photos of people generally, this includes up-skirting and down topping (this gives me an interesting image in my mind of a pervie with a DSLR complete with large lens trying to be "inconspicuous") , or anytime that the subject could be expected to have a reasonable expectation of privacy. ie. photograph of a women in a bikini on a Gold coast street is fair game, one on a secluded beach all alone can be "suspect". If the subject can be readily recognised its best to use a "model waiver" so you don't limit any future possibility of using the image.
You must "obey" a proprietors request if on private land (or on some council lands)
You must "obey" a police officers request to "move along"
You must "obey" a rangers request to "move along" or leave a national park.
Don't photograph military or sensitive instillations

How you use an image is more important than taking it. i.e. commercial purposes means that I intend to use the photograph to sell or advertise a product or service. Rules and obligations differ greatly depending on if I am a hobbyist or "semi/professional".

Commercial purposes does not come into effect just because I sell an image, though the subsequent use of that can. (i.e. selling the image as a wall hanging is not commercial, turning it into a billboard advertising a good or service is.)

Anyway , that seems to be what I've gotten from my reading, happy to be corrected on anything I've misunderstood.

[outstar79]

What you say here about the fact that there is no management is a very important one and one that actually gives a little insight into our modern society, and to a point, where the new jobs are being created. The problem is, once you install "rules", then you have to have people to enforce the rules and once you have these people to enforce these rules, then you have people trying to justify their jobs top make sure that their jobs are always there. So, what you then have is an entire industry set up to firstly make you scared of what can happen if you do not have these "rules" and then another industry put in place to enforce them.

Very true, which is why I'm glad we still sort of run on a "bartering" system down there - we have a very medieval approach! I love the idea of the old "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." Our community lives by it and embrace it! Even to the point of, I'll rebuild my neighbours tractor engine because he's too old and short sighted and he'll cut my fire breaks in, and not manage to run through a fence!

[Lance B]

Very true, which is why I'm glad we still sort of run on a "bartering" system down there - we have a very medieval approach! I love the idea of the old "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." Our community lives by it and embrace it! Even to the point of, I'll rebuild my neighbours tractor engine because he's too old and short sighted and he'll cut my fire breaks in, and not manage to run through a fence!

Sigh, and a way of life we seem to be missing these days.

In my neighbourhood, I am always the first to offer a lending hand to anyone who requires it.

[Wayne]

A breif overview of some "rule" I've learnt:



You must "obey" a police officers request to "move along"





Anyway , that seems to be what I've gotten from my reading, happy to be corrected on anything I've misunderstood.

Not true. Police must only give a lawful "Move On" directive.
They cannot lawfully give one because they feel like it, and you do not have to obey an unlawful directive.

The power comes from the (LEPRA) Law Enforcement (Powers & Responsibilities) act 2002, and;

The officer must believe, on reasonable grounds, that the person's conduct -

(a) is obstructing another person or persons or traffic, or
(b) constitutes harassment or intimidation of another person or persons, or
(c) is causing or likely to cause fear to another person or persons, so long as the relevant conduct would be such as to cause fear to a person of reasonable firmness, or
(d) is for the purpose of unlawfully supplying, or intending to unlawfully supply, or soliciting another person or persons to unlawfully supply, any prohibited drug, or
(e) is for the purpose of obtaining, procuring or purchasing any prohibited drug that it would be unlawful for the person to possess.

The belief in relation to (c) does not require proof that "another person" be present or that "another person" actually is present.

Under section 201 of the same Act the officer must supply his/her identification (eg a name or identity number).


Just to clarify for you.
I have 10 years in the job as a NSW police officer

[Lance B]

You must "obey" a police officers request to "move along"
You must "obey" a rangers request to "move along" or leave a national park.

I see Wayne has replied about the police officer asking you to move along and what he says makes sense. However, are you sure about the (park) rangers as well? I would have thought that they need a good and valid reason as well, ie causing nuisance or doing something illegal as goes for the police officer's reasons for asking you to move on.

[alsocass]

Sigh, and a way of life we seem to be missing these days.

In my neighbourhood, I am always the first to offer a lending hand to anyone who requires it.

*sigh* That must be my problem. I live in a little suburban neighbourhood in which I know all my neighbours (both sides, behind me, three in front of me, and a couple more down the street). I often take my daughter for a walk to deliver excess veges, and they all know where we store our eggs and help themselves (and pay us for them when they get around to it).

I am not sufficiently hardened to the cold cruel world of the Farmer's Market