I've read several lengthy discussions of whether or not releases are needed to photograph architecture. But I'm still unclear about the risks I might run in the kind of architectural photography I do.
I am retired and pursue photography largely for my own enjoyment, although on occasion I've been asked to photograph events sponsored by schools or other not for profit entities. Most of my photographs are purely for personal use, but on occasion I may display them in a public context or on a website. For example, I have agreed to give copies to our local Historical Society which tries to keep a record of the architectural history of the city. Some of these photographs may be displayed at their headquarters and eventually in other contexts. When I photograph local buildings, if an owner or resident is present , which is usually not the case, I explain my purpose and in only one case was there an objection. Since that particular house is one of several designed by one architect whose work I am trying to document I would like to go back and photograph it anyway, perhaps from further away to avoid directly confronting the owner.
Seeking releases would be cumbersome. Is it at all likely that I will encounter legal problems somewhere down the line if I don't generally seek releases? What about a specific case where someone objects?
Bookmarks