A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Featured Equipment Deals

Standing Out in a Sea of Competition Read More

Standing Out in a Sea of Competition

In a seemingly saturated industry such as wedding photography, how do you set your business apart and offer something truly unique? The talented Kristen Booth offers her insight to help you define...

Latest Equipment Articles

From Light to Ink: An Exhibit Using Canon's imagePROGRAF printers Read More

From Light to Ink: An Exhibit Using Canon's imagePROGRAF printers

"From Light to Ink" featured the work of Canon Inspirers and contest winners, all printed using Canon's imagePROGRAF printers. The gallery show revolved around the discussion of printing photographs...

Latest Learning Articles

Getting It Right in the Camera: The Imagination Game, Part 3 Read More

Getting It Right in the Camera: The Imagination Game, Part 3

Getting photographs right in the camera is a combination of using your imagination, creativity, art, and technique. In Part 3 of this three part series, we focus on shooting strategy and the role of...


People in public places require a release?

Bob Myers , Jul 18, 2003; 12:53 a.m.

If one visits a mall and shoots areas that include people, do you need to get releases from any of them? How about when doing "street shooting?" Or in public buildings/places? I'm talking about the random people who happen to be in the photo *and* can be easily recognized, not people who are positioned there by the photographer.

Responses

Tom Menegatos , Jul 18, 2003; 04:37 a.m.

YOu don't need a release to take a photo in a public place but your intended usage determines if you need a release or not. If you want to use it in an editorial or fine art way you don't need a release. If you are using it in an advertisement or on a commercial product you need a release. These are the general rules.

Jerry Stillwell , Jul 18, 2003; 05:51 a.m.

If you're shooting in a mall, you will almost surely need a property release from the management as well (if you intend to use the images for commercial applications)

peter nelson , Jul 18, 2003; 11:13 a.m.

Good grief - WHY does this confusion come up again and AGAIN?!

A model release is never required to TAKE a photo of someone (although that doesn't mean you don't need permission, since photogs themselves may be banned in some places).

Model releases are about the

USE

of a photo, i.e., where or how it is to be published. Certain uses (e.g., PJ) don't require a release; other ones, (e.g., commercial) do.

As far as a mall goes, a mall is not a public place. Whether you can take pictures there at all is at the pleasure of the mall owners. Ditto with the use of any such images.

Bert Krages , Jul 18, 2003; 11:26 a.m.

Even more confusion. From the legal perspective releases are not required for images of property (except those protected by copyright). Although various property owners such as the Pebble Beach Country Club, New York Stock Exchange, and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame have filed or threatened lawsuit, none of them prevailed in court (some cases were settled). While a mall owner is generally within its rights to prohibit photography while on its property, you are not required to get a release to either photograph or publish images of the property.

Lee Shively , Jul 26, 2003; 08:29 p.m.

No.

Back to top

Notify me of Responses