use silver colour digicam act blur act stupid look like silly tourist then no security will bother u.
use silver colour digicam act blur act stupid look like silly tourist then no security will bother u.
from what i have gathered, the key word here is 'commercial usage'. if u appear to be a tourist or casual photographer, most likely they will leave you alone. but if you appear to take photographs which are likely to be for commercial purposes, they will come after you.
e.g. i don't think anyone would stop you carrying a camera into the MRT station, but if you are shooting 'professionally', you have to pay something like...$500??
Sometime in middle of this year, I had just finished a shoot at Sentosa using my Panasonic DVX100. Me and a friend were at the Harbour Front Food Court having lunch.
I took out my camera to review some of the footage we shot and a young chap, around early 20s came over and told me to no shooting allowed. Just next to my table was an Ang Mo couple shooting with a consumer video cam.
I asked him who he was and he said he is the staff of the building. I told him to please stop picking on me as I am only doing tape playback. He said he saw me shooting. I told asked him if he dared to make a bet... If I were to play back the tape and there is no footage of the building, he would have to bring me to see his boss to complain. If there was footage, he can have my tape.
The fella just stood there for a whole minute and clenched both his fists.
I asked him to go talk to the Ang Mos first then get back to me as I'm eating now but he still stood there.
I asked him what he wants now and he said "no shooting". (I think he wanted me to keep the camera but can't be sure.)
I was getting wierd out already so I said, "Come, lets go see your boss now and we play back the tape in front of him."
He said "no"
I just blur and continue eating... bo chap...
about a minute later he walked off. When I finished eating, I packed my cam into the bag and saw him and a security gaurd sitting near the drink counter spying us.
We got up and walked over to them and said ,"keep up the good work... over there got tourist shooting... go get em!"
Conclusion: take pro cameras sure kanna disturb by security.
After seeing all the comments, i dun whether to be annoyed, amused or proud of nation's security interests.
Personal opinion, would be, if they are so afraid, why not they set up a 10 meter radius of barrier with guards to check bags. Ridiculous to stop people from taking photos or filming at a tourist attraction. Security risk u got to accept as part and parcel of everyday life. I don't see the smrt banning bags and packages the size of A4, coz any thing bigger than tat size would be deemed "DANGEROUS" or "security threat"......hopefully we won't be embarrasing ourselves again since the chewing gum incident...whole world knows Singapore as the nation which banned gum...not much else.
But still....it's not those security guards' fault that they have to check on people or chase people away...most of them are juz working to feed their families...and they are juz doing their job if not they will be fired at the whim of certain "brainless" upper management. (there are smart ones as there are dumb ones...and no...i do not work under Esplanade or watsoever). It's "these" people who dun see the whole picture, implement rules and silly regulations just probably to please their own superiors, act as if they doing the right thing without be considerate of a fellow citizen's feelings. Im sure everyone would have met at least of one of "these" people.
So...therefore...i think we could only conform to "these" regulations. So lets not fight among each other bout who's right or wrong. Just find some way to work around the problem. As long u dun do silly stuff...im sure the security who's human enuff will risk his neck to "close one eye".
that said, i'm still curious to know...what is the definition of "copyright to building image"? is there such a thing? and can we sell pictures of the Esplanade, Merlion, Sir Stamford Raffles statue as calender/postcard pix? if need permission, who and where to get the authorisation?
Imagine a postcard of the singapore sky line......... So many buildings.... so many owners.... so many logos...... DBS, Maybank, Etc.....Originally Posted by Stereobox
If all have to pay...... sooooo many money......
Sell a million postcards also cannot earn back
I think there shouldn't be any law to copyright a building... right?
for what i have known...i have been shooting both video and photo for Esplanade since Oct 2002, i havent been stopped b4 by any security with regards to shooting their place. sometimes wth my wedding couples request i oso bring them over.... my only problem with them is that the securities are more siao on with the parking issue.... for photography... still quite okie... maybe i`m just heng...
as for copyright, we have actually signed media release forms wth regards to our shoots with them... you can check with Ruey Loon and a few others in here.. they should know better... meaning we cant anyhow post up photos of the drama or play or musical on the web or any other form of media to public..
if you have gone for any shows in esp, u can hear the tupid annocements..b4 each play starts... no photography & videography....switch off ur hp or silence mode thingy..
Last edited by kerpalz; 6th December 2004 at 08:13 PM.
Have shot at all the above locations before, using a prosumer camera and tripod.Never been turned away before though.
Originally Posted by arampan
i dun think its an issue of copyright....i believe the management people juz wanna earn more $$$...the copyright call probably juz to smoke everybody. They spend a bomb building those durians and "graciously" allow people to wander around for free for a year or two, then start charging?? Wat next? Charge for the air inside or water from a flush perhaps? I dun see such thing going on so rampant in other countries with monuments much more beautiful than the espla-nut. It's our national pride for goodness sake, for the $$, i think they are willing to go low and blame someone/something else for it.
i would be peeved if i had to pay juz to visit the open rooftop above the library area, when i bring my frens there to enjoy the breeze and city skyline.
For free performance (ie dont need to buy ticket to watch), only announce "no sound & video recording allow", Nothing on still photography. But pls do not use flash as it will temp blind the performer on the stage.Originally Posted by kerpalz
photography makes one sees things from all angles.
although there is copyright in a building, photography of the building is not infringement of that right. those security guards (as usual i might add - see my other posts on this issue) are again making up their own laws as they go along :P
Originally Posted by Stereobox
thats for outdoor performace..... indoor ones..... both oso cannot..~Originally Posted by denniskee
not them lah...haha...see my first post here.Originally Posted by vince123123
security business is half real half fake one la
I'm sure many of us have had some brushes with security guards, like when we stop our cars temporarily to wait for someone, bag searches, taking photos, etc.
Security guards weren't like that in the past (I'm sure you can paint the picture in your heads). Nowadays, security guards are no-nonsense and often non-negotiable. But hey, they are just doing their jobs. Aren't you glad that the security guards at MRT stations actually ask people questions or search some bags rather than walking around thinking of what numbers to buy for 4D/TOTO?
Here's how to go around them: Ask to talk to their supervisors (Those sitting in the office). The security guards on the field can't decide a thing, so although they feel that its perfectly fine with what u r doing, they can't make decisions. Tell them politely that u wish to speak to their supervisor, not with the intend to complain but to reason (If the security guards don't like your face / attitude, then LL). Talk to the supervisors to negotiate something (like give your name, IC no, meet him at his office, whatever), then the supervisors will instruct/give orders to the security guards.
This method has been tried and tested by yours truly.
From what I have read, in the USA, what you can see with your eyes, you can shoot video or photo, but only from public area. Hence, if you shoot a 'sensitive' building from a public road, you are fine. In any private buildings/land (shopping malls included) permission by owner is needed. Nothing against carrying camera, just that shooting needs permission. Guards can be over zealous.
There is no copyright infringement in photographing a building's design, else, all the architecture students cannot sketch/shoot buildings for reference, and what society wants the next generation of architects who has no pass reference. If you think about it, there are so many buildings that look so similar in design, yet done by different people, shouldn't the copyright police go to the copycat architects first, rather than photographers?
Performances are all copyrighted, you cannot shoot stage plays as the lighting, sets, costumes, script and even where the actors are standing are all artistically protected. It's like computer games, why buy original, it is just a game, I only want to have fun, but the trick is that you have to pay for fun. Similarly, you have to pay to watch a show.
And if the property owner doesn't want you to photograph from public roads into his private land, he should build a shield. That's why military installations in the US has many underground areas.
Many security guards are just bored, they need to talk to someone, do something, as a matter of fact, exercise their duties else they fall into the mundane. We should try to understand them and 'play along'.
A little OT but something I've wanted to ask for a while: I want to shoot some shop windows at this time of year - will management get annoyed at me for this? Are shop window displays copyrighted?
in terms of getting the management annoyed, it depends on their threshold I guess! as the postings show there's no hard and fixed rule.
you probably will have no problem if you look touristy (or benign), but i suppose if anybody suspects that you are a competitor trying to copycat or study designs maybe somebody will take it up with you.
what i read in photo.net was some photographers experiencing trouble from the authorities when photographing near US. state properties (and private ones). higher tensions and over-zealous reaction due to 9/11.