View Full Version : NYC "tripod law"
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 00:26
Twice today I was approached by city park officials (in an outer borough, not Manhattan) for using my 8x10 field camera on a tripod. Never mind that people were using DSLRs on a tripod within 50 feet of me and were not hassled.
One of the officers just asked about my camera and left me alone after he satisfied his curiosity. The other one asked for my permit sternly and told me to immediately stop what I was doing. After I showed him, as I was disassembling the camera by his order, that there was nothing but air inside the actual camera and that it was not some high tech device, he took pity on my crazy hobby and allowed me to continue.
Months ago, I called the New York City film commission and asked if I need a permit to use a view camera and they said no, that I did not need a permit to use a view camera under any circumstances and that the law was meant to regulate commercial film crews and photographers. Yet it seems city officers do not understand the intent of the law.
We live in a very sad age, where drug dealers in Washington Square Park are never arrested after years of dealing on the same street corner (I know their faces well by now), but people using an 8x10 view camera are called into question twice in two hours.
dsphotog
7-Mar-2010, 01:12
Yeah, the cops most likely stepped over three dead hookers, and drove by a few meth labs, on the way to hassle you.
They stopped at the second (meth lab) to score.
What are you complaining about? Both of the officers let you to continue with your hobby. They asked questions - that's their job too. The more cops know what a view camera is the better for the rest of us.
Twice today I was approached by city park officials ...
Months ago, I called the New York City film commission and asked if I need a permit to use a view camera and they said no, that I did not need a permit to use a view camera under any circumstances ...
I don't know what park you were in, but in New York there are additional rules that apply to them and some of these rules are park specific.
Walter Calahan
7-Mar-2010, 07:25
Don't even attempt to set up your tripod at the US Capitol or Mall without a permit. The rule applies to commercial as well as non-commercial shooters.
That said, no police officer can remember all the laws exactly, so they apply a broad interpretation by assuming everyone with a camera they do not recognize as being commercial. An 8x10 isn't something they see everyday.
Best approach is to be polite and try to educate, while telling them that you called the Permitting Office and they told you it wasn't necessary.
It is a pain in the f/stop to have to go through what happened to you, but ever since 911 photography has become an unwritten crime unfortunately.
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 08:56
Of course, I was polite. How do you think they let me keep going if not? ;-)
I found this document from the Mayor's office that defines the rules pretty clearly. See the "Use of Tripods" section on page 5. I'm going to start carrying this document with me, but I wish it had some official letterhead on it and wasn't just a bare pdf.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/downloads/pdf/moftb_permit_rules_QA_final.pdf
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 08:59
I don't know what park you were in, but in New York there are additional rules that apply to them and some of these rules are park specific.
Yes, I know about those places (the Great Lawn at Central Park, for instance). I wasn't in a place like that. I was in a neighborhood park in Long Island City.
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 09:03
What are you complaining about? Both of the officers let you to continue with your hobby. They asked questions - that's their job too. The more cops know what a view camera is the better for the rest of us.
I'm complaining because they don't know their own laws (see my post just above) and it is ridiculous to hassle someone engaged in such a peaceful activity, who is following the rules, in a free country.
Also, he didn't let me continue. He forced me to take my entire setup down before he relented. In the meantime, the light had completely changed (sunset) and I didn't get to take the original shot I had set up for.
Greg Blank
7-Mar-2010, 09:36
It was before 911. Back during the Clinton admin, I was hassled in Rock Creek park, by a park ranger. He specifically told me I was violating Federal Law. I went to the ranger office after taking my camera off the tripod. I told them I wanted them to show me in writing where the law existed. & They couldn't. Later that day I saw the same ranger speeding through a red light without his flashing lights on....I emailed the NPS Executive for DC and informed him of my observations concerning the events that took place.
That said its sort of obvious if your in a busy location not to set your gear up where you will be an easy mark to hassle. Unfortunately for John that occured in a less trafficed area. Police are always going to be curious most have my respect for doing a difficult job. Having a business card, being polite and having an easily understood purpose for your being there, should resolve most issues.
I still carry the part of the NPS Federal law that states that I do not require a permit for my specific type of photography-in my knapsack.
It is a pain in the f/stop to have to go through what happened to you, but ever since 911 photography has become an unwritten crime unfortunately.
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 09:50
Having a business card...
There is a funny aside to this.
When I told the second officer I was just a hobbyist. He paused and said, "How do I *KNOW* you are just a hobbyist?"
A friend was along with me keeping me company and later at dinner we started laughing about the fact that you can't prove you are an amateur at something. You can't take out documentation that shows you have no professional associations or make no income from your hobby. By definition, you have nothing to show.
I guess I could show the business card that I have for my real job (I didn't have any on me), which would at least prove I do have another line of work, but that still doesn't prove I'm not a professional photographer also.
At any rate, professional still photography (as long as it follows the rules in the doc I linked to above) is not regulated any differently in NYC.
brian mcweeney
7-Mar-2010, 10:34
[QUOTE=John NYC;566720]There is a funny aside to this.
When I told the second officer I was just a hobbyist. He paused and said, "How do I *KNOW* you are just a hobbyist?"
Next time hand them a card that "proves" you are a hobbyist ...;)
Sanjay Sen
7-Mar-2010, 10:38
I have been shooting in Riverside Park / Fort Washington Park (uptown Manhattan) recently, using a tripod, mostly MF but I've used the 8x10 once. I have been lucky so far that no one has approached to disturb or hassle me. It could also be because there is hardly anyone in the park this time of the year. I have also shot the George Washington Bridge, and from below the bridge, without issues (so far).
A couple of weekends ago, I had setup the tripod on the side of the road, but I was partly on it. Then a pickup truck with a plow came along, so I lifted the tripod and stepped aside (there was not much room because of all the snow piled on the side). The pickup slowed down, and one of the occupants (both were park officials) commented on my camera, saying that he "really liked it". It was my Bronica SQ-A, and I had a square hood attached to the lens, which I guess makes it look "professional".
I have been lucky so far, but then I have not shot anywhere else in the city with a tripod.
I'm complaining because they don't know their own laws (see my post just above) and it is ridiculous to hassle someone engaged in such a peaceful activity, who is following the rules, in a free country.
Also, he didn't let me continue. He forced me to take my entire setup down before he relented. In the meantime, the light had completely changed (sunset) and I didn't get to take the original shot I had set up for.
In the end, he let you continue. He knew that as a commercial photographer you would need a permission. He was just human in his daily job - wanted to know. Perhaps if you showed him the inside of your camera first and explained kindly, he would let you continue right away?
I'm complaining because they don't know their own laws (see my post just above) and it is ridiculous to hassle someone engaged in such a peaceful activity, who is following the rules, in a free country.
Also, he didn't let me continue. He forced me to take my entire setup down before he relented. In the meantime, the light had completely changed (sunset) and I didn't get to take the original shot I had set up for.
He did know his laws, he was simply having a little power trip and counting on you to not know your laws enough to stand your ground.
Being nice to such people brings you no benefit whatsoever. What you need to do is be civil but firm and keep insisting on your rights, one of which is to get his name and badge number and write a bunch of complaints - to his superiors (not much use, just for the sake of generating paper trail), to the local Congressman, to the media and to the local ACLU chapter.
There was a string of lawsuits and settlements recently about just this kind of harassment, most of them in NYC. The figures, at least those that made the news, were in the 20-30K range, depending on the incident.
Once their budget gets chipped significantly enough, they'll start paying attention.
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 10:52
In the end, he let you continue. He knew that as a commercial photographer you would need a permission. He was just human in his daily job - wanted to know. Perhaps if you showed him the inside of your camera first and explained kindly, he would let you continue right away?
GPS, if you are a professional still photographer and not doing anything differently than an amateur, you don't need a permit in NYC. The permits are meant to regulate film crews, not still photography. Read the linked doc a few posts back.
I don't have any idea why you are taking up for this person. You weren't there, so you don't know how he was acting towards me. It was not pleasant at first. He wasn't "just wanting to know." I was only able to convince him to let me start again WHILE I was taking down my camera. He didn't give me the option to explain beforehand.
Maybe we should go out shooting together in NYC and then you might understand that there are much larger problems in NYC on every corner than a man taking a photograph by himself with no one within 100 meters.
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 10:54
[QUOTE=John NYC;566720]There is a funny aside to this.
When I told the second officer I was just a hobbyist. He paused and said, "How do I *KNOW* you are just a hobbyist?"
Next time hand them a card that "proves" you are a hobbyist ...;)
This is great!!!
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 10:55
He did know his laws, he was simply having a little power trip and counting on you to not know your laws enough to stand your ground.
Being nice to such people brings you no benefit whatsoever. What you need to do is be civil but firm and keep insisting on your rights, one of which is to get his name and badge number and write a bunch of complaints - to his superiors (not much use, just for the sake of generating paper trail), to the local Congressman, to the media and to the local ACLU chapter.
There was a string of lawsuits and settlements recently about just this kind of harassment, most of them in NYC. The figures, at least those that made the news, were in the 20-30K range, depending on the incident.
Once their budget gets chipped significantly enough, they'll start paying attention.
You are right. This is what I will do next time.
Sanjay Sen
7-Mar-2010, 10:57
In the end, he let you continue.
But John missed the shot, because the light had already changed. John was not breaking any laws, so he shouldn't have been hassled in the first place.
You are right. This is what I will do next time.
You need to be very certain about your rights and local regulations. This (http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm) might help with photographers' rights in general.
GPS, if you are a professional still photographer and not doing anything differently than an amateur, you don't need a permit in NYC. The permits are meant to regulate film crews, not still photography. Read the linked doc a few posts back.
I don't have any idea why you are taking up for this person. You weren't there, so you don't know how he was acting towards me. It was not pleasant at first. He wasn't "just wanting to know." I was only able to convince him to let me start again WHILE I was taking down my camera. He didn't give me the option to explain beforehand.
Maybe we should go out shooting together in NYC and then you might understand that there are much larger problems in NYC on every corner than a man taking a photograph by himself with no one within 100 meters.
I was kicked out of the Bronx botanical garden not only once (and I was a member of it, haha), I was left in peace in the Brooklyn bot. garden etc. etc. Com'on, get over it.
You can become a member of the Association of police friends (or something like that, it's been long time since I lost my membership card) - always appreciated when shown to a cop...:) ;)
John NYC
7-Mar-2010, 11:26
I was kicked out of the Bronx botanical garden not only once (and I was a member of it, haha), I was left in peace in the Brooklyn bot. garden etc. etc. Com'on, get over it.
You can become a member of the Association of police friends (or something like that, it's been long time since I lost my membership card) - always appreciated when shown to a cop...:) ;)
I'm certainly not going to resort to bribery or "payola" to be able to enjoy my rights. Not sure what you think this country should be.
I really don't have anything more to say to you.
kev curry
7-Mar-2010, 12:15
I'm not sure who pisses me off more, the asshole or the assholes apologist!
Greg Blank
7-Mar-2010, 21:21
Hehe-it's a bit like saying officer, my 357 does not work because I am all out of bullets....meanwhile smoke is coming from the barrel. ;)
Guess you could always carry a Holga :D
There is a funny aside to this.
When I told the second officer I was just a hobbyist. He paused and said, "How do I *KNOW* you are just a hobbyist?"
A friend was along with me keeping me company and later at dinner we started laughing about the fact that you can't prove you are an amateur at something. You can't take out documentation that shows you have no professional associations or make no income from your hobby. By definition, you have nothing to show.
I guess I could show the business card that I have for my real job (I didn't have any on me), which would at least prove I do have another line of work, but that still doesn't prove I'm not a professional photographer also.
At any rate, professional still photography (as long as it follows the rules in the doc I linked to above) is not regulated any differently in NYC.
walter23
7-Mar-2010, 21:57
I propose a photographic challenge: Photograph something suspicious.
Come back in a couple of months and let's compare stories and post results.
Patrick Dixon
8-Mar-2010, 03:46
Sadly 'freedom' is rife right across the 'civilised' world these days:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/21/photographer-films-anti-terror-arrest
There is a funny aside to this.
When I told the second officer I was just a hobbyist. He paused and said, "How do I *KNOW* you are just a hobbyist?"
I think that would have raised my hackles, and I think my response could have been, "Well, you could arrest me and then you'd have to prove, in court and in front of a judge, that I'm NOT a hobbyist. And given that using a view camera does not require a permit in New York parks, you would also have to explain why you arrested me."
It's easy to say on this side of the keyboard, of course.
I was once approached by an NPS ranger at the San Antonio Mission NHP, as a buddy and I were rolling a cartful of my large-format stuff into San Jose mission. She asked if I was a commercial photographer, and I told her that I was not. She just looked at us and all the equipment for a few seconds until my friend remarked, "It's an expensive hobby." We all laughed. She explained that when people roll equipment in, it's usually a bad sign--commercial photography shoots usually draw a crowd and require management. That's why a permit is required. Fair enough.
I find as I get older that my patience with cops who look for excuses to expand and enforce their own authority has diminished.
Rick "who has made photos in Central Park using a big tripod, completely ignorant of risk" Denney
jeroldharter
8-Mar-2010, 07:01
Can't have too much government. Just wait...
While most laws seem sensible to most, and some even so blatantly obvious that no law in itself is really necessary, there are always those few people to whom common sense is elusive.
While most of us have enough common sense to not set up a tripod in such a way as to block pedestrians on a street, there are those few that think that they can do what ever they want regardless of it's affect on others. The purpose of laws is to make it clear to those who lack consideration for others that there is a clear behavior that is expected from them so as not to infringe on the safety or rights of others.
When I would shoot out of studio commercial assignments in NYC, I got a film permit. It was easy to get and if it's something you require with some frequency it's very easy to arrange for an efficient system if obtaining it. The permit in itself had a great many advantages as I was allowed to drive/park in locations ordinarily unavailable. If needed I could have the cooperation of the police regarding traffic/pedestrian control and safety. The permit itself was free and the insurance requirement was just a form from my insurance company stating that I had liability insurance and that if I did any damage the city would be a beneficiary. They really make it easy.
If I were a tourist/hobbyist coming to NYC with the intention of seriously shooting in the city, I'd apply for a permit in advance. It's so easy to get and so advantageous to have.
Diane Maher
8-Mar-2010, 11:23
Sadly 'freedom' is rife right across the 'civilised' world these days:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/21/photographer-films-anti-terror-arrest
I hate to think what they'd do if it was a view camera on a tripod involved. :eek:
How is photography anti-social behavior?
Not that it's particularly relevant but I get away with all kinds of things by being nice to the cops. Almost no one is and it sort of sets them into a different mode if you can set them at ease and make them laugh.
You see if you are on their side, as opposed to them, the whole thing changes ... a lot.
There is maybe no one on this board that looks more like a criminal than me.;)
bobwysiwyg
8-Mar-2010, 15:00
Yup,
You catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar. ;) Now you could take the position, "I shouldn't have to.." but, how would you prefer to spend your time?
Brian Ellis
8-Mar-2010, 15:43
There is a funny aside to this.
When I told the second officer I was just a hobbyist. He paused and said, "How do I *KNOW* you are just a hobbyist?"
A friend was along with me keeping me company and later at dinner we started laughing about the fact that you can't prove you are an amateur at something. You can't take out documentation that shows you have no professional associations or make no income from your hobby. By definition, you have nothing to show. . . .
You could always show him your photographs. : - )
John NYC
8-Mar-2010, 19:07
You could always show him your photographs. : - )
Now THAT'S funny! :-)
John NYC
8-Mar-2010, 19:15
If I were a tourist/hobbyist coming to NYC with the intention of seriously shooting in the city, I'd apply for a permit in advance. It's so easy to get and so advantageous to have.
Not really. Try clicking on the link on this page to download the form. It doesn't work.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/html/permits/still_prcedure.shtml
The whole point is that you don't need a permit, as per my earlier linked document, so no one should be getting hassled in the first place unless they are violating those two rules that were stated on page 5.
EDIT: I actually found it...
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/pdf/optionperm10.14.pdf
But guess what, you have to name times and locations... and it doesn't look like there is much room to put 20 places in Manhattan.
Not really. Try clicking on the link on this page to download the form. It doesn't work.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/html/permits/still_prcedure.shtml
The whole point is that you don't need a permit, as per my earlier linked document, so no one should be getting hassled in the first place unless they are violating those two rules that were stated on page 5.
EDIT: I actually found it...
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/pdf/optionperm10.14.pdf
But guess what, you have to name times and locations... and it doesn't look like there is much room to put 20 places in Manhattan.
I haven't had to get a permit in over a decade but I can recall a certain amount of flexibility that they had relating to times and locations depending on how disruptive (to the location) the photography shoot would be. If I were planning a shoot in NYC I'd know in advance the areas of interest for me and get them listed on a permit, or get multiple permits. And as a permit fir tis type of photography isn't really required, I'm sure the Mayor's office on film would be quite accommodating.
I am not saying that someone has to have a permit, but given the climate we live in and the ease and lack of cost for a permit, that having one would be very advantageous and would make it far less likely that a police officer would tell you to leave a scene.
The entire point is that a police officer does not and should not have the discretionary right to tell you to "leave the scene" (scene of what exactly?) as long as you are engaging in legal activity in public space.
We (still) live in the country where innocence is presumed and guilt has to be proven and we (still) don't need to "show the papers" when stopped by police (or any other uniform).
If we want to keep it that way, we'd better start challenging the self-appointed law-makers. Nobody ever said it was easy, but it's peanuts compared to what could and what will happen if we let that slip too far.
Frank Petronio
8-Mar-2010, 21:38
I imagine that there probably is a statue in effect that a cop can get someone to move along if in their judgement their apparatus (tripod) is a safety hazard.
Now of course they can abuse that power, or be stupid, but at the same time, I think we need a law so that our cops can move vagrants and crazies along...
Greg Blank
8-Mar-2010, 22:01
But, then how would you manage to post to the group Frank :D
I think we need a law so that our cops can move vagrants and crazies along...
Not that it's particularly relevant but I get away with all kinds of things by being nice to the cops. Almost no one is and it sort of sets them into a different mode if you can set them at ease and make them laugh.
I am as nice to cops as I am to everyone, and I try to be both polite and cheerful to everyone I meet. That is a moral obligation. But if I am further obligated to be particularly obsequious with cops in order to deflect impending harrassment, that false friendliness becomes a kind of bribe. No longer do we believe in the rule of law, but now we have to be fake buddies with cops to get treated the way we should be treated in any case.
Yes, cops should be able to move loiterers along, when legally authorized to do so. And owners of private property should be able to expect cops to move along loiterers on their premises. Cops should be able to break up situations where a confrontation is occurring or about to occur. None of that seems to apply to making photographs in a public park.
I respect cops for what they do, but I expect the same in return and I see no reason to tolerating being afraid of them when engaging in lawful activities.
Rick "who works in the public sector and understands the extra obligation to be polite and lawful to the citizenry" Denney
BrianShaw
9-Mar-2010, 07:30
I am ...
Rick "who works in the public sector and understands the extra obligation to be polite and lawful to the citizenry" Denney
AMEN!
Pete Roody
9-Mar-2010, 07:49
Of course, I was polite. How do you think they let me keep going if not? ;-)
I found this document from the Mayor's office that defines the rules pretty clearly. See the "Use of Tripods" section on page 5. I'm going to start carrying this document with me, but I wish it had some official letterhead on it and wasn't just a bare pdf.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/downloads/pdf/moftb_permit_rules_QA_final.pdf
The problem is various Parks Departments do not recognize this ruling and they still equate a "tripod" to professional/commercial" and therefore require a permit when using a tripod. The Police were just doing what they were told. No interpretation is required by the police or the Parks Dept. employees. Initially nyc was going to require a permit for all tripod use, but they got strong opposition and changed it to a more sensible policy.
Jeffrey Sipress
9-Mar-2010, 10:25
Marko,
As usual, you have the correct take on all this. Thanks for speaking up!
Mike Anderson
9-Mar-2010, 11:49
All my film holders have written on them in big letters: "NOT DRUGS", just be safe.:)
...Mike
I am as nice to cops as I am to everyone, and I try to be both polite and cheerful to everyone I meet. That is a moral obligation. But if I am further obligated to be particularly obsequious with cops in order to deflect impending harrassment, that false friendliness becomes a kind of bribe. No longer do we believe in the rule of law, but now we have to be fake buddies with cops to get treated the way we should be treated in any case.
Yes, cops should be able to move loiterers along, when legally authorized to do so. And owners of private property should be able to expect cops to move along loiterers on their premises. Cops should be able to break up situations where a confrontation is occurring or about to occur. None of that seems to apply to making photographs in a public park.
I respect cops for what they do, but I expect the same in return and I see no reason to tolerating being afraid of them when engaging in lawful activities.
Rick "who works in the public sector and understands the extra obligation to be polite and lawful to the citizenry" Denney
The thing about cops that people hate is the power thing. Most people have very little personal power these days. I think it's to do with all the taming of humanity. People live together and amazingly very seldom hurt or screw each other. They get along and as a result need little personal power.
The police are to some extent the herders of this peaceful majority and have power and guns.
I think this is mildly amusing and as I am a backwoods half wild hippie I have oodles of personal power. Cops amuse me and I generally like them so I don't begrudge the tiny bit of personal power I surrender when acknowledging their status as gun carrying peace officers.
I think this is what upsets people about the police.
John NYC
9-Mar-2010, 16:28
I haven't had to get a permit in over a decade but I can recall a certain amount of flexibility that they had relating to times and locations depending on how disruptive (to the location) the photography shoot would be. If I were planning a shoot in NYC I'd know in advance the areas of interest for me and get them listed on a permit, or get multiple permits. And as a permit fir tis type of photography isn't really required, I'm sure the Mayor's office on film would be quite accommodating.
I am not saying that someone has to have a permit, but given the climate we live in and the ease and lack of cost for a permit, that having one would be very advantageous and would make it far less likely that a police officer would tell you to leave a scene.
I think you are missing my point though. I live here. I want to be able to walk around every single weekend, wander aimlessly, and set up my camera to take things I see. And I have the right to be able to do that without being hassled, sans-permit, according to the current laws.
John NYC
9-Mar-2010, 16:30
I imagine that there probably is a statue in effect that a cop can get someone to move along if in their judgement their apparatus (tripod) is a safety hazard.
See page 5 in the doc I linked... only if you are making it so that there is less than 8 feet of space available for others. Unless or course you are breaking other laws.
John NYC
9-Mar-2010, 16:39
The Police were just doing what they were told. No interpretation is required by the police or the Parks Dept. employees.
Their job is to know the laws they are enforcing. Plain and simple. There is no excuse.
On a general note... It is truly frightening to me how many people are apologizing for this guy for impinging on my rights to photograph. I'm posting this to a photography forum, for goodness sakes.
John NYC
9-Mar-2010, 16:41
"but I wish it had some official letterhead on it and wasn't just a bare pdf."
So get a copy of the Mayors office stationery, scan it and make it "official".
Why anyone would want to live in New York City is beyond me. A sewer with tall buildings, crowded, noisy and the place smells bad. Crime everywhere and ever negative criminal show that isn't in Miami is in New York City... ;-)
To each his own. I love my life here.
fuegocito
9-Mar-2010, 16:47
I totally agree with John but unfortunately it's a no win situation...if a law officer happen to be on a power trip, the last thing he/she needs is to be made looking foolish by being out-talked/outsmarted...what do you think someone in that position will do. Yes, one can and should stand up to that kind of "bullying" but how many of us at the end of the day willing suffer through what ever the consequence at the sense and what ever legal proceeding that is sure to follow?
Rob
I think you are missing my point though. I live here. I want to be able to walk around every single weekend, wander aimlessly, and set up my camera to take things I see. And I have the right to be able to do that without being hassled, sans-permit, according to the current laws.
BetterSense
10-Mar-2010, 10:26
The situation is enabled and worsened by the plea bargaining system.
Since there are not adequate checks in place, police officers are encouraged to arrest and book suspects anyway, without even charging them with something they think will stand trial. There is no penalty on individual officers for harassing or arresting someone who is later released, so they will often trump up some charge and take them in out of lack of anything better to do.
Since prosecutors also have no proper checks placed on them, they will throw the book at the suspect in an attempt to scare them into plea bargaining to a lesser, though completely unjust charge, which bolsters their conviction rating without having to stand trial. There is no penalty for them charging someone with a crime that does not stand trial. They could charge you with manslaughter for littering, and they would have suffered no penalty except that it doesn't pass trial. You, on the otherhand, have to defend yourself against this charge that could put you in jail. The subject at this point faces going to expensive trial to defend himself against a pile of outrageous charges, so he plea bargains. Now he has an arrest record, a criminal record, may be completely innocent, and has not stood trial, simply by acting in his best interest. There has been no "justice" in any non-perverse sense.
And this is the basis of our "criminal justice" and penal systems, which are basically just self-perpetuating bureaucratic institutions that destroy lives and real justice far out of proportion to any positive benefit. Jails are always full because the prison system can't demand more funding for a half-full jail. As the effectors of this system, it's no wonder the police are so often reviled. If one's luck is low, one encounter with the wrong officer could end up literally ruining one's life, while police officers themselves seem to be above the law.
Interesting bit of news regarding this subject for our UK brothers was mentioned over at DP review. At least the video's and blogs are having a positive affect on this there.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031003ukgovstatement.asp
John NYC
1-Apr-2010, 16:21
Definitive answer from the NYC Mayor's Office of Film, Theatre and Broadcasting below. There was more email before this, but this was the final exchange. So, print that document I linked to earlier (the woman from the MOFTB recommended this also) and go forth and use your tripods and LF cameras New Yorkers and NYC visitors!!!
EDIT: I should add that some parks and other semi-public spaces do have add'l rules... Central Park, for instance.
Me: "I want to confirm that I can use my large format cameras (the 4x5 and the 8x10 ) on a tripod without a permit."
MOFTB: "You are correct! Your cameras, as long as:
1) they are either handheld or on a tripod
2) you have no other equipment staged on the ground
3) you are not stopping pedestrians from walking around you or “exerting exlusive use of space”
You do not require a permit from our office. Thank you!"
Michael_4514
5-May-2010, 03:48
I realize that this thread has pretty much run its course, but I couldn't resist putting in my two cents worth. I'm a lawyer in NYC, principally in the field of civil rights, and I have sued the City and its police department countless times.
First, the law itself reads:
a. The following activities require that a permit be obtained pursuant to this chapter:
(i) Filming, photography, production, television or radio remotes occurring on City property, as described in subdivision (a) of this section, that uses vehicles or equipment.
(ii) Filming, photography, production, television or radio remotes occurring on City property, as described in subdivision (a) of this section, (A) if such activity involves the assertion by any means, including physical or verbal, of exclusive use of one or more lanes of a street or walkway of a bridge or (B) if such activity involves the assertion by any means, including physical or verbal, of exclusive use of more than one-half of a sidewalk or other pedestrian passageway or, in a situation in which the sidewalk or pedestrian passageway is narrower than sixteen feet, if such activity involves the assertion by any means, including physical or verbal, of exclusive use of the sidewalk or pedestrian passageway such that less than eight feet is otherwise available for pedestrian use.
What this means basically is that you have to make sure there are at least 8 feet of sidewalk for use by pedestrians if you are using a tripod.
In terms of dealing with the police, here is my advice. Be friendly and relaxed. Do not show annoyance or irritation at being interrupted in your work. Do not lecture the officer about your rights or what his job is. Explain what you're doing, show him how the camera works, etc. If he suggests that you can't do what you're doing, say, in a friendly tone, something along the lines of "I think I'm ok because there's more than 8 feet of sidewalk, which is what the ordinance requires." If he insists, ask him, in a friendly voice, to do you a favor and call his Sergeant to check on the 8 foot rule. Keep the dialogue about "us" figuring out what the law is. Always be friendly and relaxed.
Remember that the cops on this type of beat are usually the less experienced or less capable. This can work in your favor, in that they are likely to be less confident in their own decisions. But it can also work against you if the cop senses that you are on a superiority trip.
If all fails and he (or she) is absolutely insistent, then your options are to take your lumps and move along (and take some more pictures, somewhere else) or stand your ground and risk getting arrested. If the latter, you are likely to be out of commission for at least 6 hours if you're lucky and 24 if you're not. Where is your camera and equipment going to be in the meantime? If arrested, it's likely to be dismissed down the road, but there's no guarantee of that.
Can you sue the police? If you're merely hassled, no. If arrested, probably, in which case it might be worth 10-30k, depending on factors, of which about half will go to the lawyer and expenses.
You can always get an optional permit, which pretty much gives you the ability to do whatever and wherever. I've never gotten one, but perhaps I will just to see what the process involves.
Steve M Hostetter
5-May-2010, 08:01
Next time you get hasseled remember the cops badge number and report him.
Don't blow it off as paranoid cops after 9-11 and they are just doing their job ... Police do not make laws they only enforce them so If they question you about something that is not against the law they are NOT doing their job.
My guess is that every cop in NYC has seen a large format camera and knows what they are!
John NYC
10-May-2010, 16:38
I realize that this thread has pretty much run its course, but I couldn't resist putting in my two cents worth. I'm a lawyer in NYC, principally in the field of civil rights, and I have sued the City and its police department countless times.
<snip>
You can always get an optional permit, which pretty much gives you the ability to do whatever and wherever. I've never gotten one, but perhaps I will just to see what the process involves.
Nice post.
One thing to add about the permit though, you have to name all your locations, dates, etc. So, it really doesn't work for someone like me who wants to wake up on a Saturday, decide that the weather is nice and that I feel like making pictures, put on my backpack and wander around the city. That is why it was important to me to get the clarification that using a LF camera on a tripod was itself not against the rules, as that is what the park officer I had the run in with maintained. (He was not bothering the DSLR user with his tripod.)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.