Photographer banned for creeping out folks

[Phil]

This week in Seven Days

"F-Stop That!" More Fallout From Church Street Photography

http://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2010/03/fstop-that-more-fallout-from-church-street-photography.html

 

[nolanr66]

"F-Stop That!" More Fallout From Church Street Photography

Reminds me of skateboarding. They have bumper stickers that say "Skateboarding is not a Crime". There is a community in my area where the skateboarders call each other "Daryl" short for "Derelick". Skateboards are forbidden everywhere except private property. I suppose photography is headed that way also. There are a lot of places I would go to if photography were not banned. Not that I particularly want to shoot there, but if they are against photography then I am against spending money there. It just struck me as kind of funny as last week I shot a concert that was held in a large coffee shop. Nobody cared that I was taking pictures of the band. I did know all of the musicians (my son is the basest) but I did not ask permission to shoot. I also bought coffee.

 

[Leighgion]

"F-Stop That!" More Fallout From Church Street Photography

http://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2010/03/fstop-that-more-fallout-from-church-street-photography.html

While maintaining the caveat that I have no first-hand knowledge of how things went down, I can't help but feel there's some justice at work here.

A lot has been made of how Dan Scott had a perfect legal right to take photographs, but had perhaps overstepped some social boundaries and thus made people uncomfortable who were not shy about expressing displeasure.

Well, Uncommon Grounds' management may have technically had the right to ask for the ban, but by actually calling for it they've made a lot of people uncomfortable, many not even local, and a certain percentage are not shy about expressing their displeasure.

I don't live anywhere near Vermont, but I know I'd sure be uncomfortable going the cafe in question now. I generally have a couple cameras at me at all times. Would I be rudely and suddenly interrupted by somebody yelling at me because they think I'm taking their picture? Would the barrista give me the evil eye just for having a camera on my shoulder?

I've no doubt that Mr. Scott could've done things to come off less intrusive, but the management and employees of the coffee shop also could have chosen to be a lot less self-righteous and the mess might've been worked out diplomatically. Way things stand, the management of Uncommon Grounds has probably done more damage to their business by calling for the ban than Dan Scott ever could have by being around taking pictures.

 

[clayne]

This is how it works in the USA and how it should work. An issue happens, people bring it up if they feel it's unfair, and if enough people agree with that, the issue becomes a larger one until something either changes or the issue dies off. I too agree with Leighgion in that this is to be expected and it is justice at work.

For the squad who disagree, try spending time in a place with little way of repercussion or retribution for wrong-doings and see how you feel.

 

[Rudeofus]

I too agree with Leighgion in that this is to be expected and it is justice at work.

For the squad who disagree, try spending time in a place with little way of repercussion or retribution for wrong-doings and see how you feel.

This has nothing to do with justice in any conceivable way.

First, look at the market place. One out of over 60 shop owners is unhappy with you and you are banned from all stores? A cop comes to your work place to tell you that? WTF ????? If a 2/3 or unanimous vote among the shop owners was required for such a ban I would understand such a measure much better. But just pi55ing of one shop owner, or having a dispute about your pay check and you're banned for one year? Give me a break.

Second, look at the reactions of some photography zealots! Making threatening or insulting phone calls is not what I consider justice, it sounds more like mafia practise to me. We happen to share a hobby where a good share of us is online, so such news spread very quickly. We frequently hear only one side and barely make an effort to research the whole story. I have to applaud to the affected photographer that he never called for such vigilante actions and we, too, as a forum comunity should condemn such actions with furor. We're not the mob after all!