rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

My wife and I went to Plimouth Plantation when we lived in western Mass. I had no troubles with them ... but I don't use a tripod.

Off hand, I can think of three times I had issues.

(1) The local art museum had a display of works by local artists, including a wall hanging by my mother, who did what is known as rug-hooking. She asked me to take a snapshot of her with her hanging there .... but a docent on duty tried to enforce a no-photography rule to "protect the artist" {remember who asked me to bring my camera} .... but eventually I found a local manager who showed some sanity.

(2) I was taking pictures at the Norfolk Southern yard in Fort Wayne when some railroad cops made me move to the street

(3) I was taking pictures at an MBTA station when some railroad cops made me leave their parking lot.

BebuLamar

Not only that but they are angry when I took pictures of them.

David in Dallas Loc: Dallas, Texas, USA

I've never been thrown out, but I've been told to stop photographing a couple of times. (Didn't see the sign, or wouldn't have tried.) I do not use a flash or a tripod, BTW.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Two photographers, a tripod (or two) flash, a model. That sounds like more than a casual photographer shooting some pictures. Tripods are often forbidden, and they are often considered professional - and a nuisance.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

All on private property, where the owners set the rules. As photographers we have to play nicely in the sandbox when we are on someone else's turf.

rmm0605 Loc: Atlanta GA

I was kicked off the US Capitol grounds for having a camera mounted on a tripod. "No can do," the Capitol police said. "Need permission from Architect of the Capitol."

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Let's see. One of you had a model and you had a tripod and strobe stand. I think, without prior approval, you would have been asked to leave MOST places. You may have been viewed as an annoyance by most visitors, including myself. If I was doing what you were planning I would have always called ahead. Your actions were not professional, you were infringing on the rights of others. I am glad they booted you. I hope you learned your lesson.

Jaackil Loc: Massachusetts

Everyone is jumping to the conclusion the tripod was the offender. I have never heard of a museum that allows Flash Photography. I bet if you go back to the entrance there is a sign that says no flash photography. Yes the tripod is offensive too. But the bigger offender is Flash.

Ramm Francis

The worst is DC. It is a law that cameras may not be on a tripod. Hand-held only.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Just last week I was visiting two granddaughters in Pittsburg, PA. A few blocks from their house is an old (1880) Catholic Church. One afternoon my daughter in law and I took a stroll to the church, with the one year old in a stroller. I enjoy taking photos of the inside of churches from front to back. I do not use flash and never a tripod. As soon as we walked through the door one of the church volunteers asked if I had permission to take pictures. I said I did not. He said I would need to get permission from the rectory. I walked next door to the rectory and found it closed. When I went back another volunteer was there. He asked if I had permission. I explained the whole thing to him (and three other volunteers who were sitting there). All then told me the person who approves photography is seldom on the premises. One asked what I wanted to photograph. I said I only wanted to sit at the back of the church, Rest my camera (D800) on the back of the pew in front of me and take a couple of pictures. There would be no tripod and no flash. All were sympathetic but not one offered to just let me do it. Let me point out the only people in the church were those volunteers, and my family. I was pleasant and told them to have a great day. But I was not a happy camper.

I understand no tripods or flashes in tourist areas especially inside smaller areas. But there seems to be an increased animosity toward photographers or at least photographers who use professional looking cameras.

Dennis

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Go with the flow. 911 created a brave new world

haasrw1031 Loc: Gainesville - Originally Miami Florida

Do you vote Republican?

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

They can consider it anything they want, But if is outdoors, and on public display, and not a security risk, as long as you are not blocking access by others. photography is a public right. But even so, it's not worth fighting stupid or even illegal regulations. And If it's a security risk, why is it on public display?

ctsteps5

Ok, I researched Mystic and Sturbridge Village. Both does not allow mono or tripods. only handheld. It states that on their site and in their Brochure as well. makes sense with the amount of people there at any one time. Tripods block the paths. I was born and raised in Newport R.I. They have no specific restrictions. But, in and around downtown would be difficult. And Newporters have zero patience.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Yes, I have been kicked out from places where I wanted to take pictures and not only one time but several times. Yes, when you bring a tripod into one of those places you are assumed to be a professional. In the best of the scenarios they ask you to pay a photographer's fee.