Reading mode: Light Dark

Did I open up a can of worms?

Go to last post
K

Ken Smith

Leading Member
Messages
554
Reaction score
16
Location
Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON, CA
Background: I live in a historic tourist town in Canada and I am semi-retired. I have decided to rent some retail space this summer and have a go at selling some of my photographs which I print, matte and frame up to 16 x 20 inches. Most of my work will be local landmarks depicting our town and my understanding is that any buildings I photograph should be fair game as they are all quite old. I will not be including any people in any of my shots.

In addition to this, I also like to do flowers, butterflies and greenery.

Now to my question. In preparation for a trip to a large greenhouse complex I was planning to go to tomorrow, I called and asked if the flowers and plants they have on display were accessable enough to take some macro shots. I was immediately passed on to a supervisor who wanted to know why I was taking these photos. I have to admit that his tone really surprised me and put me off. Rather than get into a debate over the phone which I know I would loose, I simply said for personal use. He specifically said, as long as these are not for commercial use, you can photograph them.

Could I be getting myself into hot water "if" I were to use one of my shots and turn it into an art piece without their consent? BTW, my typcial shot would be a single flower or maybe even just one leaf, not a shot of the building, facilities, gardens, people, etc. Do they have that much right over an image of a flower? (BTW: I have no idea what type of different flowers they have)

This also got me thinking. I have taken some photos of objects that I and others have been really pleased with. These include a wooden bench which sits on an openly accessable commercial establishment in town, and a unique stone wall that is at least 100 years old and sits in a laneway shared by 5 or 6 houses. Would I also be getting myself into deep do-do for turning these into fine art prints and selling them?

I have read through hundreds of posts today and I cannot seem to find anything that really relates to "permission required for objects" per se.

Can someone give me a basic guide to this sort of thing please?

Sincerely,

Ken Smith-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
if it is public building or property you are safe.

If it is personal property such as the flowers owned by the greenhouse you have to have in writing permision to do so.

If you buy the flower or several and then shoot them then you are better off and safe, as a matter of fact he would probably let you buy them and photograph them in the greenhouse since the light is probably nicely diffused.

Hope this helps
Ken Smith said:
Background: I live in a historic tourist town in Canada and I am
semi-retired. I have decided to rent some retail space this summer
and have a go at selling some of my photographs which I print,
matte and frame up to 16 x 20 inches. Most of my work will be local
landmarks depicting our town and my understanding is that any
buildings I photograph should be fair game as they are all quite
old. I will not be including any people in any of my shots.

In addition to this, I also like to do flowers, butterflies and
greenery.

Now to my question. In preparation for a trip to a large greenhouse
complex I was planning to go to tomorrow, I called and asked if the
flowers and plants they have on display were accessable enough to
take some macro shots. I was immediately passed on to a supervisor
who wanted to know why I was taking these photos. I have to admit
that his tone really surprised me and put me off. Rather than get
into a debate over the phone which I know I would loose, I simply
said for personal use. He specifically said, as long as these are
not for commercial use, you can photograph them.

Could I be getting myself into hot water "if" I were to use one of
my shots and turn it into an art piece without their consent? BTW,
my typcial shot would be a single flower or maybe even just one
leaf, not a shot of the building, facilities, gardens, people, etc.
Do they have that much right over an image of a flower? (BTW: I
have no idea what type of different flowers they have)

This also got me thinking. I have taken some photos of objects that
I and others have been really pleased with. These include a wooden
bench which sits on an openly accessable commercial establishment
in town, and a unique stone wall that is at least 100 years old and
sits in a laneway shared by 5 or 6 houses. Would I also be getting
myself into deep do-do for turning these into fine art prints and
selling them?

I have read through hundreds of posts today and I cannot seem to
find anything that really relates to "permission required for
objects" per se.

Can someone give me a basic guide to this sort of thing please?

Sincerely,

Ken Smith
--
http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
Click to expand...
 
another good aproach is to tell him exactly what you are doing and offer to give them a print. they will very likely go for it.
Ken Smith said:
Background: I live in a historic tourist town in Canada and I am
semi-retired. I have decided to rent some retail space this summer
and have a go at selling some of my photographs which I print,
matte and frame up to 16 x 20 inches. Most of my work will be local
landmarks depicting our town and my understanding is that any
buildings I photograph should be fair game as they are all quite
old. I will not be including any people in any of my shots.

In addition to this, I also like to do flowers, butterflies and
greenery.

Now to my question. In preparation for a trip to a large greenhouse
complex I was planning to go to tomorrow, I called and asked if the
flowers and plants they have on display were accessable enough to
take some macro shots. I was immediately passed on to a supervisor
who wanted to know why I was taking these photos. I have to admit
that his tone really surprised me and put me off. Rather than get
into a debate over the phone which I know I would loose, I simply
said for personal use. He specifically said, as long as these are
not for commercial use, you can photograph them.

Could I be getting myself into hot water "if" I were to use one of
my shots and turn it into an art piece without their consent? BTW,
my typcial shot would be a single flower or maybe even just one
leaf, not a shot of the building, facilities, gardens, people, etc.
Do they have that much right over an image of a flower? (BTW: I
have no idea what type of different flowers they have)

This also got me thinking. I have taken some photos of objects that
I and others have been really pleased with. These include a wooden
bench which sits on an openly accessable commercial establishment
in town, and a unique stone wall that is at least 100 years old and
sits in a laneway shared by 5 or 6 houses. Would I also be getting
myself into deep do-do for turning these into fine art prints and
selling them?

I have read through hundreds of posts today and I cannot seem to
find anything that really relates to "permission required for
objects" per se.

Can someone give me a basic guide to this sort of thing please?

Sincerely,

Ken Smith
--
http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
Click to expand...
 
Department stores and shops, especially "designer" shops are very cautious because their designs do get ripped off, or their "brand" can be damaged. I guess the same could apply to some flowers, e.g. orchids where they "create" new hybrids. Could that be your situation? Anyway, I would say honesty is the best policy - better talk to the management and find out their concerns.
Ken Smith said:
Background: I live in a historic tourist town in Canada and I am
semi-retired. I have decided to rent some retail space this summer
and have a go at selling some of my photographs which I print,
matte and frame up to 16 x 20 inches. Most of my work will be local
landmarks depicting our town and my understanding is that any
buildings I photograph should be fair game as they are all quite
old. I will not be including any people in any of my shots.

In addition to this, I also like to do flowers, butterflies and
greenery.

Now to my question. In preparation for a trip to a large greenhouse
complex I was planning to go to tomorrow, I called and asked if the
flowers and plants they have on display were accessable enough to
take some macro shots. I was immediately passed on to a supervisor
who wanted to know why I was taking these photos. I have to admit
that his tone really surprised me and put me off. Rather than get
into a debate over the phone which I know I would loose, I simply
said for personal use. He specifically said, as long as these are
not for commercial use, you can photograph them.

Could I be getting myself into hot water "if" I were to use one of
my shots and turn it into an art piece without their consent? BTW,
my typcial shot would be a single flower or maybe even just one
leaf, not a shot of the building, facilities, gardens, people, etc.
Do they have that much right over an image of a flower? (BTW: I
have no idea what type of different flowers they have)

This also got me thinking. I have taken some photos of objects that
I and others have been really pleased with. These include a wooden
bench which sits on an openly accessable commercial establishment
in town, and a unique stone wall that is at least 100 years old and
sits in a laneway shared by 5 or 6 houses. Would I also be getting
myself into deep do-do for turning these into fine art prints and
selling them?

I have read through hundreds of posts today and I cannot seem to
find anything that really relates to "permission required for
objects" per se.

Can someone give me a basic guide to this sort of thing please?

Sincerely,

Ken Smith
--
http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
Click to expand...
--Ian S http://www.rainpalm.com/orch01.htm
 
Richard Brown said:
if it is public building or property you are safe.
If it is personal property such as the flowers owned by the
greenhouse you have to have in writing permision to do so.
If you buy the flower or several and then shoot them then you are
better off and safe, as a matter of fact he would probably let you
buy them and photograph them in the greenhouse since the light is
probably nicely diffused.

Hope this helps
Click to expand...
Richard:

Thank you. Yes that does help and it is an excellent idea.

Sincerely,

Ken Smith-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
Karl H. Timmerman M.A.J.D. said:
Ken ... just out of curiousity ... how would he know a macro shot
of a flower ... was one of his flowers?
Regards
Karl
Click to expand...
Karl:

You are correct. Unless the plant/flower/w.h.y, is especially unique, I really doubt they would know. It was his attitude on the phone was what really surprised me which made me curious as to whether there might be a basis for his stance and if this intellectual blanket was an issue for other "objects" such as I mentioned.

Thinking further on this, I wonder if maybe the thought of someone indicating they were going to do a "commercial shoot" made him think I might be blocking traffic flow with lights and tripods, etc.

--Ken

-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
Looking at the two shots you have in your link, I'd say two things; Good eye, and go for it! I also agree that asking and offering a print or two may be the answer to the flower dilema, although, I also like the other post about it being just a flower, and, well they do all look the same. I quess that would be a decision that you have to make. Good luck, if they are all like the two you have shown, I'd say you have something going there!
Mike D
 
I would suggest that you contact a Professional Photographic Association in Canada and ask if they can direct you to the pertinent copyright laws. THese can vary provience to provience and so this would set the record straight.

Cheers

PS, where in Canada do you live? I am an Expat Canuck living in Australia!
 
I can certainly understand how someone running a business that is paying electricity, gas, telephone, rent, insurance, employees, taxes, and etc. does not want you to use his business for commercial purposes without some sort of compensation.

Flowers are inexpensive. Why not just purchase the ones that interst you and photograph them? That way they become your property and there is no problem. The greeenhouse will also have been compensated for their efforts in producing the flowers in the manner to which they are accustomed. Once you have prints, you could show them to the owners of the greenhouse and maybe develop a working relationship. But it really isn't fair to expect them to bare the cost of producing your subjects and not get any compensation. After all, if you were photographing a professional model you would have to pay a modeling fee.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Randy McMillan
 
OK.

Personal use is just that. As an artist you are using the images for personal use - you are offering these images for sale - but as a direct sales, point of sale - IE the money is going to you from the customer on the street.

Well this still qualifies for personal usage.

Commercial usage is if you package the goods and give them to the third party to sell on your behalf or if you package them for other commercial activates like the various printing media – books, magazines etc, etc or photo agencies.

It can be a fine line – but if I take a photo and set up my stall and someone buys a copy that’s still my own personal use – there would be no question if you sat in the greenhouse for an hour painting the insects and flowers – would there(?). However, even for my own article in my local paper, if I used an image here, even if I did not receive any “further” or any income from the use of the image – its use would still be considered “commercial”. In these last exact circumstances – which I’ve been through a mention of the place of origin was enough to satisfy the managers.
 
Mike Delaney said:
Looking at the two shots you have in your link, I'd say two things;
Good eye, and go for it!
Click to expand...
Mike Delaney said:
Good luck, if they are all like the two you have
shown, I'd say you have something going there!
Click to expand...
Mike:

Thank you very much. I take that as a real compliment!

I just started taking photographs in September of 2001 after my first grand daughter was born and I began with a Canon A-20. After a few months of that, I fell in love with photography and I have recently purchased a DiMAGE 7 which I am really pleased with.

I haven't posted any of the D7 images yet.

Very sincerely,

Ken Smith-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
Randolph McMillan said:
Flowers are inexpensive. Why not just purchase the ones that
interst you and photograph them? That way they become your
property and there is no problem.
Click to expand...
Randy:

Absolutely. I have no problem with that at all.

I suppose that because I am so new to all this, I was taken back with his attitude towards photography.

Hey, live and learn:-)

Thanks,

--Ken-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
Ger Bee said:
Personal use is just that. As an artist you are using the images
for personal use - you are offering these images for sale - but as
a direct sales, point of sale - IE the money is going to you from
the customer on the street.
Click to expand...
Ger Bee:

Excellent information. Thank you very much!

Sincerely,

--Ken-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
Craig Stewart said:
I would suggest that you contact a Professional Photographic
Association in Canada and ask if they can direct you to the
pertinent copyright laws. THese can vary provience to provience
and so this would set the record straight.

Cheers

PS, where in Canada do you live? I am an Expat Canuck living in
Australia!
Click to expand...
Craig:

Thanks for the advice. I will look into that right now and see what I can find through Google.com.

I live Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario. If you're not familiar with it, we are ten minutes downriver from Niagara Falls.

--Ken
-- http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
 
Ken,

I would not take Ger's comments as holy writ. There is an implication in "personal use" that the average person would interpret (the standard used in many civil complaints) as meaning you don't intend to sell the images.

Play it safe and buy the flowers, then take your pictures.
  • Woody -
(I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. These comments are strictly from the point of view of an educated layman's understanding of US law - your mileage may vary.)
Ken Smith said:
Ger Bee said:
Personal use is just that. As an artist you are using the images
for personal use - you are offering these images for sale - but as
a direct sales, point of sale - IE the money is going to you from
the customer on the street.
Click to expand...
Ger Bee:

Excellent information. Thank you very much!

Sincerely,

--Ken
--
http://www.pbase.com/ksmith
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top