Taos Pueblo

[Robert Hall]

The mission just south before you come in to town is far better. I had lot's of keepers there.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

... you have to pay someone to take pictures? A tax?

A tripod or camera fee is pretty standard for many places of historical or cultural interest, museums or archaeological sites. It seems reasonable to me that the Pueblo would or could charge.

[Mark Sampson]

It's their country. I was there in May, paid the fee, left the 4x5 in the car, got some nice snapshots w/the hand camera. The Pueblo has restrictions on commercial use of the photos too. Plenty else to photograph around Taos.

[Dan Henderson]

Is there not also a fee for photographing certain places in Paris? Or am I misinformed, or just confused.

I guess that the Taos Pueblo is privately owned, and therefore the owner can do what they like with their site.

[Robert Hall]

I've yet to be asked for money in Paris to photograph.

[David Lobato]

Taos Pueblo is within the sovereign land of the local Native American nation. It's their rules, and outsiders must respect the tribe's laws. Most NA lands have restrictions on photography and video. Count yourself lucky if photography is permissible at all. I was researching Laguna Pueblo this week and no photography is allowed there. But as some have remarked, there are plenty of other places to photograph.

[goamules]

The New Mexico pueblos rank among the longest continuously occupied towns in North America. They are one of the very, very few tribes that were left alone, mostly, when the Europeans came. When Colombus came in 1492 these pueblos had been there for centuries. Once, they did get fed up with the white interlopers, so they had a revolt and kicked them out of Northern NM for several years. That was in 1680.

As such, they are treasures and the people that live there (calling them "...the owners..." as above is just wrong) should do whatever it takes to make an income. Most live in abject poverty, except for artists, potters, weavers. A small fee of less than $20 is nothing to balk at. I paid more than that to get into sights in Europe, just to walk in. And photography was not allowed in some.

[Kirk Gittings]

Taos Pueblo is within the sovereign land of the local Native American nation. It's their rules, and outsiders must respect the tribe's laws. Most NA lands have restrictions on photography and video. Count yourself lucky if photography is permissible at all. I was researching Laguna Pueblo this week and no photography is allowed there. But as some have remarked, there are plenty of other places to photograph.

Exactly. I have been fortunate to photograph on many of the Pueblos having been given special permission as I was working for the Pueblo. In some cases I have had to give them total rights even giving up my use even of the image.. That is something I am never happy about but it was stated clearly up front and non-negotiable. Its their property. These are not state or national parks. In those cases either the money was too good to pass up or more often I valued the experience more than finances or keeper images.

[photobymike]

This country is big very big with plenty of other places to photograph. I am not paying nor giving rights to any of my work to anybody. It is a matter of principal and freedom for me.

[goamules]

This country is big very big with plenty of other places to photograph... It is a matter of principal and freedom for me.

I'm sure the Indians feel the same way.