Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?

Started Oct 10, 2013 | Discussions
RedFox88 Forum Pro • Posts: 29,014
Re: Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Guys,

In my opinion the modern smartphones provide quality similar to DSLR's and there should not be much difference in the eyes of security.

You are crazy if you think smart phone pics provide quality similar to a dSLR.  And if you believe that, why are you using a dSLR?!  Pixel count is not the measure of quality of a camera/image and the tiny glass/plastic of a smartphone lens cannot compare to high quality SLR lens glass.  No how no way!

SomebodyFamous
SomebodyFamous Regular Member • Posts: 324
Re: Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?

DWMurf wrote:

I've done that myself, snap pictures of products and prices for major purchases that I was shopping around for, not necessarily for price comparison but for making the product selection. I used either a cellphone or pocket camera and never go stopped. It was easier than writing down all the information on paper.

The Amazon app takes the photo and identifies the product or scans the barcode for you

-- hide signature --

I take photos for my own pleasure. I write books for my own pleasure too. If people buy them then fine. If not then I don't really care. The fun was in writing them. Income is just icing on top of the cake.

stevo23 Forum Pro • Posts: 20,890
It's the money - or lack of it.

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Had really bad experience with trying to film a friend using my Canon 60D camera (with the lense without a red circle) at the Eaton Center in downtown Toronto. When I was trying to setup a tripod - got approached by the security guard. He told me that the use of professional camera equipment is not allowed inside the mall and in order to use it I need to get a permit from the mall office. Went to the office and was told that the permit cannot be issued on the spot - I need to fill some kind of form and it can take up to 2 weeks to get approval. WTF?

What is interesting - filming with smartphone is allowed as long as it is not attached to professional looking tripod. If I use small camera tripod - it is ok to film with smartphone.
So, my question - do you think it is fair? Is there much difference in Canon 60D quality vs iPhone 5s camera quality that makes my 60D camera banned from the usage in the mall? Or the mall guys are completely out of touch from reality?

Leo

They want your money. It's a private venue and they control the revenue stream - they make their living by optimizing the $$ per square foot. If you smell or sound like a pro, you need to pay the mall to set up shop and do your thing as it were.

 stevo23's gear list:stevo23's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +3 more
Rexgig0 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,978
Re: Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?
1

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Guys,

First, I agree with all of you that full size tripod should not be allowed in malls as it creates a hazard for pedestrians. I also agree that the special lighting/models/elephants should not be allowed on the same grounds. Thanks for your responses that clarified this point.
Second, my main point is that I don't agree that DSLR (without any attachments) is not allowed while smartphone is allowed. In my opinion the modern smartphones provide quality similar to DSLR's and there should not be much difference in the eyes of security.

Lines, when drawn, must be drawn somewhere.

Third, if I use DSLR - it does not automatically mean that I use it for commercial purpose.
I guess this assumption came from the past when DSLRs were very expensive and only professional photographers could afford it. But it is not true anymore.

True enough, but, again, the line must be drawn somewhere. Technology does out-pace legislation. Moreover, "professional" equipment is an indication of commercial intentions. This is why prior, written permission is required. The mall owner has a commercial interest in videos produced on mall property. Anything posted on-line could, potentially, make money for someone, at some point in time.

Fourth, I don't blindly agree with rules that do not make sense. 100 years ago stores had signs that people of certain race are not allowed inside.

Well, photographers and videographers, unlike people grouped by race, ethnicity, and such, are not a protected class.

-- hide signature --

I wear a badge and pistol, and, primarily with 7D cameras, with 10-22mm and 100mm Macro L lenses, shoot evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, PJ, and occasional action.

 Rexgig0's gear list:Rexgig0's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED +44 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 41,155
Re: Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?
1

The answer is simple. Don't use a tripod. They probably are worried about liability issues, tripping over the tripod. I shoot in Malls without using a tripod. No problems.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
Miss use of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography because it causes people to fret over inconsequential issues.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/63683676@N07/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +10 more
SomebodyFamous
SomebodyFamous Regular Member • Posts: 324
Re: of course, with the Nikon 1 you need a tripod

tko wrote:

The nice thing about shooting FF is you seldom need a tripod. Of course, indoors w/a smaller camera you may need the tripod. Eliminating the purpose of the tiny camera.

I don't have a problem with my small digital compacts or my cellphone. I don't see where there would be an issue.

How's the book sales going?--

Normal It's not a big seller but then it's aimed at a minority. If I make $1,000 a year from it then that's $1,000 that I didn't have before. I couldn't live off the earnings but it does make life easier.

I take photos for my own pleasure. I write books for my own pleasure too. If people buy them then fine. If not then I don't really care. The fun was in writing them. Income is just icing on top of the cake.

Dan Marchant Veteran Member • Posts: 3,052
Re: Exactly
2

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Guys,

sorry, but I don't agree with your logic. Property owner can impose any rules, but they need to make sense. We cannot just blindly accept whatever somebody with authority says to us.

Logic has nothing to do with it. It is their property and they are free to be as logical or illogical as they want.

For example, if the owner of the mall puts a sign that people of certain race are not allowed inside the property - would you say "Hey, this is private property and owner has a right to do whatever they want"? Actually, malls had such signs 100 years ago.

Of course not because that would be racial discrimination and against the law.

-- hide signature --

Dan
-
f/2.8 is a smaller number than f/22 in the same way that 100 is a smaller number than 20.
I am learning photo graphee - see the results at www.danmarchant.com

 Dan Marchant's gear list:Dan Marchant's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +1 more
mark power Forum Member • Posts: 59
Re: Not allowed to use flash makes perfect sense!

Flash prohibition is a holdover from the days when photographers used flash bulbs. Now and then a flash bulb would explode which of course might be harmful to artwork and bystanders. Modern sealed strobe flashes, particularly those on camera, don't have this problem. Most art restorers and archivists agree that modern strobe flashes don't adversely affect artwork.

 mark power's gear list:mark power's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Sony a7 II Google Pixel 3
Josh152 Senior Member • Posts: 2,045
Re: who's out of touch with reality?

tko wrote:

This is a standard rule that will be enforced in just about any mall or private space. It's their property. They don't want any commercial use, they don't want people blocking space with tripods and models and lighting for an excessive amount of time. They're in the business to get people to buy stuff, not provide backdrops for photographers for free.

Why was it a really bad experience? You know you need a permit to set up a tripod on NYC streets (or at least a few years ago.) Many parks and stuff. This shouldn't be a shock.

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Had really bad experience with trying to film a friend using my Canon 60D camera (with the lense without a red circle) at the Eaton Center in downtown Toronto. When I was trying to setup a tripod - got approached by the security guard. He told me that the use of professional camera equipment is not allowed inside the mall and in order to use it I need to get a permit from the mall office. Went to the office and was told that the permit cannot be issued on the spot - I need to fill some kind of form and it can take up to 2 weeks to get approval. WTF?

What is interesting - filming with smartphone is allowed as long as it is not attached to professional looking tripod. If I use small camera tripod - it is ok to film with smartphone.
So, my question - do you think it is fair? Is there much difference in Canon 60D quality vs iPhone 5s camera quality that makes my 60D camera banned from the usage in the mall? Or the mall guys are completely out of touch from reality?

Leo

Exactly!

I thought pretty much every serious photographer knew this. I mean it's photo shoot 101 stuff.  There are virtually no public accessible privet properties and/or business that will let you just show up out of the blue and create not only an inconvenience for their customers but a tripping hazard and all the legal liabilities that come with it by setting up a tripod.  You should always call a place you want to shoot in beforehand to find out the rules, especially if you are going to be using a tripod.

David Hull
David Hull Veteran Member • Posts: 6,333
Just do it somewhere else -nt
-- hide signature --
 David Hull's gear list:David Hull's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS R
JTC111 Contributing Member • Posts: 505
Re: Not allowed to use flash makes perfect sense!
1

mark power wrote:

Most art restorers and archivists agree that modern strobe flashes don't adversely affect artwork.

Do they adversely affect the viewing experience of those nearby when flashes are going off all over the museum?

-- hide signature --

Jim Caputo
"Red hair and black leather, my favorite color scheme" - Richard Thompson

 JTC111's gear list:JTC111's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +9 more
007peter
007peter Forum Pro • Posts: 12,190
its worst in USA. Mall Cops are vicious, so dump DSLR and bought a mirrorless

It much worst here in the USA.  I get stopped by mall cops all the time just carrying my tiny canon rebel dslr with a kit lens.  I think people equate DSLR = PAPARAZZI, I was asked to either stop shooting or they'll escort me out of the outdoor mall.

So I bought myself a red Panasonic GF2, went back to the same mall and never got bother again.  They think small + cute + red camera = point/shoot.

Sad by there is hardly any placed you can shoot with a DSLR in a city without making you feel like a criminal.

Doug J Forum Pro • Posts: 10,103
Re: Not allowed to use flash makes perfect sense!

mark power wrote:

Flash prohibition is a holdover from the days when photographers used flash bulbs. Now and then a flash bulb would explode which of course might be harmful to artwork and bystanders. Modern sealed strobe flashes, particularly those on camera, don't have this problem. Most art restorers and archivists agree that modern strobe flashes don't adversely affect artwork.

Curators are a very conservative bunch, as they probably should be.

Here's an interesting article from Imaging Resource on this, FWIW.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/07/19/does-flash-photography-really-damage-art-the-persistence-of-a-myth

Best regards,
Doug

kixigvaq
kixigvaq Senior Member • Posts: 1,108
Weirdos bothering 13 year old girls

That's the problem, not the gear

-- hide signature --

Abyssus abyssum invocat

Pontoneer Senior Member • Posts: 2,990
Re: Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Had really bad experience with trying to film a friend using my Canon 60D camera (with the lense without a red circle) at the Eaton Center in downtown Toronto. When I was trying to setup a tripod - got approached by the security guard. He told me that the use of professional camera equipment is not allowed inside the mall and in order to use it I need to get a permit from the mall office. Went to the office and was told that the permit cannot be issued on the spot - I need to fill some kind of form and it can take up to 2 weeks to get approval. WTF?

What is interesting - filming with smartphone is allowed as long as it is not attached to professional looking tripod. If I use small camera tripod - it is ok to film with smartphone. 
So, my question - do you think it is fair? Is there much difference in Canon 60D quality vs iPhone 5s camera quality that makes my 60D camera banned from the usage in the mall? Or the mall guys are completely out of touch from reality?

Leo

A bit like the gentleman who famously took a photo of his daughter in Braehead Shopping Centre here in Glasgow and became a minor internet celebrity , bringing a wave of public opinion behind him to the extent that the owners of the shopping centre were forced to change their policy and had to apologise for the actions of their security person .

It was widely reported in the media , spawned a protest campaign on the AP website and even generated a thread or two on here !

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15236758

-- hide signature --

With kind regards
Derek.

 Pontoneer's gear list:Pontoneer's gear list
Pentax *ist D Pentax K-01 Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +38 more
Jonn Quest Regular Member • Posts: 442
Re: Not allowed to use flash makes perfect sense!

That was my first thought when the subject of flashes came up.  If I'm trying to view artwork in a museum or anywhere else for that matter, I don't wan't flashes going off around me.

Of course, I also don't like close-up magicians bugging me to do a show while I'm eating dinner at a restaurant, so take my comment with a grain of salt.

Michael Benveniste
Michael Benveniste Veteran Member • Posts: 4,460
Re: Exactly

wchutt wrote:

By the way, many large US cities require buying a license just to use a tripod on public property. You have to show proof of insurance. Tripods are considered to be tripping hazards for pedestrians. While this may just be a way to increase revenues, it is lawful.

Out of curiousity, which cities still require this?  I know New York City relaxed its tripod rules for non-commercial photography a while back, and even before that the permit was free.  Similarly, in D.C. on National Park Service property, a permit is required for commercial shoots, and security staff will sometimes demand the permit from anyone who looks like they know what they are doing.  But that permit is also free for 1-2 people.

-- hide signature --

I miss the days when I used to be nostalgic.

 Michael Benveniste's gear list:Michael Benveniste's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D200 Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 +40 more
(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 1,321
Simple Facts
1

You are not entitled to do anything you want on private property, specifically at a shopping mall.

The property owner is required to follow local, state and federal law.

You have no inherent right to photograph on private property. You have no legal protection or remedy.

You can complain and question all you want but this can not alter reality.

What you need to do is try and get the laws changed so that you can do whatever you wish, wherever you wish and however you wish.

puttin
puttin Veteran Member • Posts: 7,526
Re: Professional equipment is not allowed in malls?

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Had really bad experience with trying to film a friend using my Canon 60D camera (with the lense without a red circle) at the Eaton Center in downtown Toronto. When I was trying to setup a tripod - got approached by the security guard. He told me that the use of professional camera equipment is not allowed inside the mall and in order to use it I need to get a permit from the mall office. Went to the office and was told that the permit cannot be issued on the spot - I need to fill some kind of form and it can take up to 2 weeks to get approval. WTF?

What is interesting - filming with smartphone is allowed as long as it is not attached to professional looking tripod. If I use small camera tripod - it is ok to film with smartphone.
So, my question - do you think it is fair? Is there much difference in Canon 60D quality vs iPhone 5s camera quality that makes my 60D camera banned from the usage in the mall? Or the mall guys are completely out of touch from reality?

Leo

They are afraid you are a spy from another mall checking the displays. One time my employer sent me to a store to take pics of the exposed duct work that we had supplied and they would not let me. I would have to send the photos to their hq to be approved first. It was not worth the time and trouble so I declined.

 puttin's gear list:puttin's gear list
Fujifilm XF1 Nikon Coolpix A Canon G3 X Canon G9 X II Fujifilm X-E2 +18 more
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 18,309
Re: Exactly

pavi1 wrote:

LeoGotCamera wrote:

Guys,

sorry, but I don't agree with your logic. Property owner can impose any rules, but they need to make sense. We cannot just blindly accept whatever somebody with authority says to us.

You could not be more wrong if you tried. I can make any rules I wish on my property as long as the rules do not require you to break a law.

Exactly. It is easy to rationalize why something we want should be OK to do but the fact is that private property is just that. Discrimination based on color or race etc. can be prohibited but nobody has civil rights based on camera size. Sometimes we do have to just 'blindly accept' what we are told to do because the person HAS the authority to make the rules.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads