Where is the Best Place you have been thrown out of or asked to desist Photographing (Page 5): Yes, the documents on display at the National Archives are under filtered glass. However...

jdub82 Loc: Northern California

StanMac wrote:

Not being conversant on the wavelength make-up of ... (show quote)

Yes, the documents on display at the National Archives are under filtered glass. However, in the past they had been already damaged by exposure to light, having been on display in the U.S. Capitol, where they were exposed to natural light for many years. The documents on display are at least presented as being the originals.

ELNikkor

Casino in Las Vegas. I was a bit offended they told me not to take pictures, as I would never use them for anything but personal life experience. I walked out, hiked my FM2 up to mid-chest, set and triggered the self-timer, then went back in with my hands on my hips. 10 seconds later, got the shot I wanted, then left.

jwn Loc: SOUTHEAST GEORGIA USA

I witnessed a vehicle run into a telephone pole and EMT were on site. Georgia State police came over and took my camera and said if I took another picture I would be taken in and never see the camera again. Also threatened those with phones taking picture. He told the black guy next to me to go to his car. We were standing in a parking lot across the street from the one car accident and not in the way. Sunny day on tourist Island just us gawkers. Southern hospitality.

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

donrosshill wrote:

Interesting, I believe that I once read that the Alamo that is visited by tourist is not the original. That the current one is or was built as a stage set for the movie. Does any on know for sure? I was there several years ago and took photos with no trouble.
Don

the Alamo was moved to its present site about 1985 because it was in a freeway rightway.
The original Alamo was destroyed by the Mexican Army after the battle to keep the US from using it again as a fort.

RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

Sunnely wrote:

Not been thrown out from a best place, yet. br ... (show quote)

The reason for this is that your flash attacks the pigments in the paintings. But its not yours, the the millions that it would have to endure. Because a flash going off is after the fact- ie idiots with a camera who don't realize the flash will go off- the only option they have... is to ban photography outright.

I took some of the ceiling in the Sistine by holding my camera down low no flash anyways... they came out pretty good too, and no harm to anything.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Shellback wrote:

Haven't yet

...

Me neither!
I find the responses to the posted question most interesting, but am not one to flout the rules where restrictions are placed on the use of flash or camera anywhere indoors or, if outdoors, on private property or certain public places, depending on whether I am in the U.S. or abroad.

Perhaps I have no cojones, but with the exception of fools in the U.S. who would forbid me from photographing (or video-recording,) people or structures while standing on public streets, sidewalks, and waterways (perhaps excepting certain police actions,) I just comply.

Who am I, just another friggin' tourist, to argue with something posted (unless it was to contradict some advertisement by the propietor(s))? Even if the posted sign prohibits photography or use of flash of something that I know could not be damaged by such actions, I just comply. It’s just not worth the fuss and sometimes, there is a valid reason, even if it were one that "it would offend the gods" of the grand poobah.

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

jwn wrote:

I witnessed a vehicle run into a telephone pole and EMT were on site. Georgia State police came over and took my camera and said if I took another picture I would be taken in and never see the camera again. Also threatened those with phones taking picture. He told the black guy next to me to go to his car. We were standing in a parking lot across the street from the one car accident and not in the way. Sunny day on tourist Island just us gawkers. Southern hospitality.

And this is yet another example of photographers thinking they can take photo's in public spaces. This site is full of folks who say you can take the photo's, and, they are right. BUT, you can still run into issues with the authorities if you do.
Again, it is just not worth it. If that was any of my children in that accident, I would not like to see any photo's of the accident. I would really bother me.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

limeybiker wrote:

Mine was the Alamo, I didn't read the signs, to busy clicking away.

None yet.
I do obey such restrictions without exception.
There are times I have asked for special permission and many times have gotten it but never without permission.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

For all of you who continued to shoot knowing it was prohibited, I would personally enjoy throwing you out.

Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

jwn wrote:

I witnessed a vehicle run into a telephone pole and EMT were on site. Georgia State police came over and took my camera and said if I took another picture I would be taken in and never see the camera again. Also threatened those with phones taking picture. He told the black guy next to me to go to his car. We were standing in a parking lot across the street from the one car accident and not in the way. Sunny day on tourist Island just us gawkers. Southern hospitality.

They may have been trying to protect the driver, who they were being paid off to stop any bad press from being exposed. A local politician or a Georgia State official in an embarrassing position?

KoniOmegaflex Loc: Central KY

I was at a small air show and got closer to the action along with a couple of other photographers who were from news papers. They were allowed. I had two 35mm cameras and a light meter around my neck so no one bothered me for most of the day. Finally one of the local police officers came over and asked me if I had a press pass. I didn't so they asked me to go find a safer location. Although I knew more about what was happening than the local press, I politely complied. Then I went over to the celebrity/official platform and shot from there. At venues like this, if you look and act like you belong, you can get away with it for awhile at least. I was at that airport another time when a B-17 was there for the weekend. Finally, an airport security guy came over to where I was and told me I had to move to a safer place. When I told him I couldn't get photos from there, he just shrugged and walked away.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

billnikon wrote:

And this is yet another example of photographers thinking they can take photo's in public spaces. This site is full of folks who say you can take the photo's, and, they are right. BUT, you can still run into issues with the authorities if you do.
Again, it is just not worth it. If that was any of my children in that accident, I would not like to see any photo's of the accident. I would really bother me.

You might want evidence in case you have a law suit. I don't know if any one has the right to prohibit you from shooting a public event, in an exterior location.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

lev29 wrote:

Me neither! br I find the responses to the posted... (show quote)

It's called RESPECT for the rule/request!
And yes, there are some to which the rule does not apply.

Streets Loc: Euless, TX.

47greyfox wrote:

For all of you who continued to shoot knowing it was prohibited, I would personally enjoy throwing you out.

Well Mr. meanie, you are a party pooper of the first order. A photo of you at a sex toy store would look good on my "prime photos wall". What will we do about stealthy shots taken with i phones?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Streets wrote:

Well Mr. meanie, you are a party pooper of the first order. A photo of you at a sex toy store would look good on my "prime photos wall".

Totally not necessary, but I suppose you enjoyed that.