Where not to take pictures...?
Apr 30th, 2006, 06:58 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where not to take pictures...?
I saw a thread on Pet peeves that said that there are a lot of places that you CAN'T take pics...
Please tell me where in Paris NOT to take pictures. I don't want to do anything that would be considered wrong.
I also assume that since you can't take photos, that there will be postcards available of these places for purchase that I can put into my photo album but correct me if I am wrong.
Please tell me where in Paris NOT to take pictures. I don't want to do anything that would be considered wrong.
I also assume that since you can't take photos, that there will be postcards available of these places for purchase that I can put into my photo album but correct me if I am wrong.
Apr 30th, 2006, 07:01 AM
#2
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 25,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello, photobear.
It's very good of you to want to obey the rules. The places where photography is not allowed have signs that will make it quite clear. This is why it's so maddening when people do take pics, because there's no way they didn't know the rules.
Anytime you are in doubt about the rules, just ask.
It's very good of you to want to obey the rules. The places where photography is not allowed have signs that will make it quite clear. This is why it's so maddening when people do take pics, because there's no way they didn't know the rules.
Anytime you are in doubt about the rules, just ask.
Apr 30th, 2006, 07:14 AM
#5
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The signs are not always clearly posted. While most museums don't mind your taking pictures - without flash - they are not allowed in the Jacquemart-André.
As for churches, just use common sense and respect others. I am amazed at the number of people taking pictures in churches during a mass.
As for churches, just use common sense and respect others. I am amazed at the number of people taking pictures in churches during a mass.
Apr 30th, 2006, 07:14 AM
#6
I think you'll be surprised how many place you CAN take photos. The Louvre, Musee d'Orsay, Notre Dame, Ste Chapelle and on and on. Just be aware of signs - sometimes photography is allowed but flash is not. In some museums - there is no photography in just certain galleries.
Apr 30th, 2006, 07:26 AM
#8
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Photography restrictions are usually marked by signs, particularly when the restrictions exist on private property open to the public (the owners of private property decide for themselves whether or not to permit photography).
There are no restrictions on photography on public streets (as long you don't have a large crew working on the shoot), nor are there any restrictions on photographing things that are visible from public streets. However, the US embassy is very paranoid about photography (although I'm not sure that they have a legal basis for objecting to it from public right-of-way).
Some areas accessible to the public may impose restirctions (usually minor). In theory, a permit from the Senate is required to photograph anything in the Luxembourg gardens, and the guards are especially touchy about photographs of the Senate palace itself. A permit is easy to get if you speak French, and I was told that the Senate is sensitive about this because apparently some photos of the palace in particular have been used in unsavory ways in the past.
You may photograph anyone in public (on the streets, for example), despite what some French people incorrectly believe. However, you need a person's permission before you can publish his photograph in France (for publication in the US, you only need permission if it is something commercial like advertising or a work of fiction). You don't need a release for editorial use if the person's image is incidental to the photo.
Some street artists object to photography. Their objections are baseless unless their copyrighted work is the principle subject of a photo, in which case you need their permission.
Museums may or may not allow photography; restrictions are usually posted. The Orsay museum doesn't care as long as you don't use flash in areas where it is prohibited. The Louvre now prohibits photography in some areas, including the area around the Mona Lisa. The private Musée Marmottan (Monet and others) prohibits all photography and won't even let you in with a camera.
There are generally no restrictions on photography of police officers or military personnel, although they don't always seem to know this.
There are no restrictions on photography of buildings except if they are copyrighted (which they usually are, if recent), in which case you need permission if the building is the main subject of the photo (but this is almost never enforced unless you publish a photo commerically in France).
The company that runs the Eiffel Tower claims a copyright on the <i>lights,</i> even though the tower itself is in the public domain.
In general, French law is extremely hostile to photography, but enforcement is much more tolerant, although this allows for selective enforcement that sometimes brings out the worst of the French (attempts to copyright mountains, the aforementioned claim to the <i>lights</i> on the Eiffel Tower, and so on). You're not likely to encounter this dark side of the French unless you commercially publish photos for a living, however.
There are no restrictions on photography on public streets (as long you don't have a large crew working on the shoot), nor are there any restrictions on photographing things that are visible from public streets. However, the US embassy is very paranoid about photography (although I'm not sure that they have a legal basis for objecting to it from public right-of-way).
Some areas accessible to the public may impose restirctions (usually minor). In theory, a permit from the Senate is required to photograph anything in the Luxembourg gardens, and the guards are especially touchy about photographs of the Senate palace itself. A permit is easy to get if you speak French, and I was told that the Senate is sensitive about this because apparently some photos of the palace in particular have been used in unsavory ways in the past.
You may photograph anyone in public (on the streets, for example), despite what some French people incorrectly believe. However, you need a person's permission before you can publish his photograph in France (for publication in the US, you only need permission if it is something commercial like advertising or a work of fiction). You don't need a release for editorial use if the person's image is incidental to the photo.
Some street artists object to photography. Their objections are baseless unless their copyrighted work is the principle subject of a photo, in which case you need their permission.
Museums may or may not allow photography; restrictions are usually posted. The Orsay museum doesn't care as long as you don't use flash in areas where it is prohibited. The Louvre now prohibits photography in some areas, including the area around the Mona Lisa. The private Musée Marmottan (Monet and others) prohibits all photography and won't even let you in with a camera.
There are generally no restrictions on photography of police officers or military personnel, although they don't always seem to know this.
There are no restrictions on photography of buildings except if they are copyrighted (which they usually are, if recent), in which case you need permission if the building is the main subject of the photo (but this is almost never enforced unless you publish a photo commerically in France).
The company that runs the Eiffel Tower claims a copyright on the <i>lights,</i> even though the tower itself is in the public domain.
In general, French law is extremely hostile to photography, but enforcement is much more tolerant, although this allows for selective enforcement that sometimes brings out the worst of the French (attempts to copyright mountains, the aforementioned claim to the <i>lights</i> on the Eiffel Tower, and so on). You're not likely to encounter this dark side of the French unless you commercially publish photos for a living, however.
Apr 30th, 2006, 07:32 AM
#9
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi P,
It is impolite to:
photograph a person without permission
use a flash during services in a place of worship
Places that don't allow photography will usually have a sign showing a crossed camera
Some places permit photography without flash and without a tripod.
When in doubt, ask.
It is impolite to:
photograph a person without permission
use a flash during services in a place of worship
Places that don't allow photography will usually have a sign showing a crossed camera
Some places permit photography without flash and without a tripod.
When in doubt, ask.
Apr 30th, 2006, 07:44 AM
#10
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rules about politeness are highly subjective and cannot simply be stated categorically. What you consider rude may be considered acceptable by others, and vice versa.
It's important to observe the real rules and the law. Beyond that, you must use your conscience as your guide.
It's important to observe the real rules and the law. Beyond that, you must use your conscience as your guide.
Apr 30th, 2006, 08:23 AM
#12
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it legal to photograph in the metro?
I know in NYC we just went through am almost comical exchange between the police and the mayor.
As part of the paranoia that has grown in the US since 9/11, the police said they should make it illegal to photograph in the subway; after all terrorists could do that to figure out the best place to put devices and the MTA, the organization running the subway passed rules to that effect and the gendarmes in NY were all prepared to start enforcing that rule, but the mayor basically laughed and said this was the most absurd thing he ever heard and the MTA sort of backed down.
But then again, the paranoids among us, for example have tried to ban the use of mobile phones in the tunnels joining various parts of the city because terrorists might use them to detonate bombs a la Madrid.....so far this has not happened even though the NYC subway is having a long argument as to allowing cell phone companies to put towers in the subway.
Paradoxly, my mobile phones seem to work very well in the Paris metro but not in the RER.
I know in NYC we just went through am almost comical exchange between the police and the mayor.
As part of the paranoia that has grown in the US since 9/11, the police said they should make it illegal to photograph in the subway; after all terrorists could do that to figure out the best place to put devices and the MTA, the organization running the subway passed rules to that effect and the gendarmes in NY were all prepared to start enforcing that rule, but the mayor basically laughed and said this was the most absurd thing he ever heard and the MTA sort of backed down.
But then again, the paranoids among us, for example have tried to ban the use of mobile phones in the tunnels joining various parts of the city because terrorists might use them to detonate bombs a la Madrid.....so far this has not happened even though the NYC subway is having a long argument as to allowing cell phone companies to put towers in the subway.
Paradoxly, my mobile phones seem to work very well in the Paris metro but not in the RER.
Apr 30th, 2006, 08:27 AM
#13
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Rules about politeness are highly subjective ....
It's important to observe the real rules and the law. <
It is not illegal to photograph a private person in most countries of the world. However, if they threaten you with a large stick, it is wise to accede to their subjective beliefs.
It never hurts to ask permission.
It's important to observe the real rules and the law. <
It is not illegal to photograph a private person in most countries of the world. However, if they threaten you with a large stick, it is wise to accede to their subjective beliefs.
It never hurts to ask permission.
Apr 30th, 2006, 08:47 AM
#14
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I were in charge of the subways and tunnels, I'd install cell phone <i>jamming</i> equipment in them.
(And make the same available to the owners of stores and restaurants, but that's another rant.)
(And make the same available to the owners of stores and restaurants, but that's another rant.)
Apr 30th, 2006, 09:21 AM
#15
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taking photos in a museum is subjective sometimes, I was in the Hermitage ready to take a picture of one of the apartments when a guard stopped me. Since he looked like a real character I asked him if I could then take his picture. He smoothed his hair, straightened his jacket and struck a regal pose and I snapped away.
It is one of my favorite photos of the trip.
It is one of my favorite photos of the trip.
Apr 30th, 2006, 10:09 AM
#17
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who works in the world of art and antiques, I have to agree with Suze. Why would anyone want to take a photo of a painting? You can't, unless you are a Richard Avedon, do justice to a Matisse, Klimt, or Miro. Buy a poster in the gift shop, sweetie.
Apr 30th, 2006, 10:33 AM
#18
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is extremely inconsiderate to take flash photos in museums when other people have traveled thousands of miles and scrimped and saved to see these things. Flash cameras are blinding and distracting.
Thanks for asking!
Thanks for asking!
Apr 30th, 2006, 12:02 PM
#19
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re previous comment about photos in churches and weddings. When I was married, the photographer was not allowed to take pictures during the ceremony. The minister said he could take them as we processed out of the church but he had to remain in the narthex (?sp). We could then "pose" after in front of the altar. I had no objection and didn't think much of it. Recently I have been to a few weddings during which the photographer was intrusive....so I am glad photos were verboten at my church wedding.
