Why can't we take photos of Charlotte?

[monsoon]

There has been another forumer, this time a visitor from Michigan, who was told by some kind of security officer that he could not take photos of Charlotte. You guys might remember that we have had other forumers, including our own Neo, report this before, but this time this was someone who specifically came to town to see Charlotte. (maybe because of UrbanPlanet). Who exactly is doing this? The Police?, Bank Rent a Cops?, Somebody else?

It seems to me there are definite constitutional issues here if this is happening on public property not to mention that it puts forth a very negative image of the city.

[dubone]

Bank rentacops. It is all from that Pakistani guy a couple years, and the security people have probably been told to avoid racial profiling, and disallow it universally.

However, note that these people are not omnipresent. You just may have to move to public right of way. Taking photographs is not illegal, they just like to intimidate by saying 'you are on camera, too'. I usually just reply by waving at the camera and smiling.

Note that these security people usually get nothing else to do in this town, so photographers finally give them something to do, so they do it. (Can you imagine the torture of being a security guard for a parking deck?).

[rockhilljames]

Yeah, I had never really had a problem with them before, but around Thanksgiving I was taking photos downtown in the Wachovia plaza and a security guard came out and hassled us. He mentioned the Pakistani thing explicitly. I asked him, honestly, people are allowed to take pictures in Washington DC and it's WAY more of a target than Charlotte. He agreed but said he had to follow orders. He said that the buildings were Wachovia property, and as such we couldn't take their photos without the banks permission. I laughed at that.

So we stepped onto the sidewalk and resumed shooting.

No cops were called.

I honestly think it might be a good idea to mobilize with other forumers and send petitions to both Wachovia and BofA. We should be respectful of their position, but point out how negatively this reflects on Charlotte to visitors. With all the projects in the works, we are about to get a lot more tourists in town, and it would suck if they are all told that they're not welcome. Perhaps we should get the Chamber involved as well. They sponsor a skyline photo contest every year, after all.

[uptownliving]

I have found that as long as you stay on public right of way such as sidewalks then the security guards will not hassle you. When I have been hassled it was while I was on private property, mostly parking decks.

I agree that it is rather silly the policy they have.

[mademan305]

I worked security for Three Wachovia about 2 1/2 years ago while finishing my degree. One of our security policies was to advise anyone taking pictures of the buildings that it was not allowed while on our property. Of course we couldn't control anyone taking pictures while not on our property (or do anything regarding security period if someone was not on our property). However, in Wachovia land, all of the buildings are managed by Childress Kline and the policy was in affect in all three buildings. I am not sure what event(s) (possibly 9/11 or what Dubone alluded to) triggered this policy.

[nmcheese]

Gateway Village rent-a-cops put up the same resistance to photography when I took a few skyline pics from the top of their parking deck. 'why are you here, what are you taking pictures of, you can't do that... blah blah'

Also, oddly enough, I took a couple pics of the hanging lights in Founder's Hall over the holidays (facing away from the BoA tower even) and was told I wasn't allowed to do that either. (Rent-a-cops again)

Granted, I just waited until they walked away and finished with any pics I wanted... still annoying for how ineffectual the 'security' is.

[mademan305]

I worked security for Three Wachovia about 2 1/2 years ago while finishing my degree. One of our security policies was to advise anyone taking pictures of the buildings that it was not allowed while on our property. Of course we couldn't control anyone taking pictures while not on our property (or do anything regarding security period if someone was not on our property). However, in Wachovia land, all of the buildings are managed by Childress Kline and the policy was in affect in all three buildings. I am not sure what event(s) (possibly 9/11 or what Dubone alluded to) triggered this policy.

[cyrusuncc]

I was in a surface parking lot a few weeks back taking some skyline pics, and i was told by a rent-a-cop that it was private property, and if i wanted to take pictures, just move to the sidewalk.

[mcheiss]

There has been another forumer, this time a visitor from Michigan, who was told by some kind of security officer that he could not take photos of Charlotte. You guys might remember that we have had other forumers, including our own Neo, report this before, but this time this was someone who specifically came to town to see Charlotte. (maybe because of UrbanPlanet). Who exactly is doing this? The Police?, Bank Rent a Cops?, Somebody else?

It seems to me there are definite constitutional issues here if this is happening on public property not to mention that it puts forth a very negative image of the city.

[Justadude]

I was taking pictures of Hearst a couple of years ago and the security guard for the parking deck crossed the street to tell me to stop. I was definitely not on private property at the time, and he was pretty explicit about saying that I couldn't take pictures period. I'm not the type to get riled about that kind of thing, but if it were to happen again today I'd (politely) decline to stop. At the time I didn't know whether I was actually within my rights or not.

[GRDadof3]

The Photographers Bill of Rights

I keep a copy of it in my camera bag. I haven't had to yet, but I'm always ready to pull it out and start reading it out loud to the rent-a-cop. He'd probably walk away after the first couple of paragraphs.

Generally speaking, I stay on public property to take photos. If I happen to be in a privately owned parking garage, I know I could be stopped and would certainly abide by their rules.

[Lexy]

The Photographers Bill of Rights

I keep a copy of it in my camera bag. I haven't had to yet, but I'm always ready to pull it out and start reading it out loud to the rent-a-cop. He'd probably walk away after the first couple of paragraphs.

Generally speaking, I stay on public property to take photos. If I happen to be in a privately owned parking garage, I know I could be stopped and would certainly abide by their rules.

[cityboi]

Yeah, I had never really had a problem with them before, but around Thanksgiving I was taking photos downtown in the Wachovia plaza and a security guard came out and hassled us. He mentioned the Pakistani thing explicitly. I asked him, honestly, people are allowed to take pictures in Washington DC and it's WAY more of a target than Charlotte. He agreed but said he had to follow orders. He said that the buildings were Wachovia property, and as such we couldn't take their photos without the banks permission. I laughed at that.

So we stepped onto the sidewalk and resumed shooting.

No cops were called.

I honestly think it might be a good idea to mobilize with other forumers and send petitions to both Wachovia and BofA. We should be respectful of their position, but point out how negatively this reflects on Charlotte to visitors. With all the projects in the works, we are about to get a lot more tourists in town, and it would suck if they are all told that they're not welcome. Perhaps we should get the Chamber involved as well. They sponsor a skyline photo contest every year, after all.

[Delta_USAir]

there are worse things then not taking pictures of a building.

IG: a building collapsing,a building getting blown up,ETC.

oh no ,es el extremo del mundo. No podemos tomar cuadros de torres.

~Just my opinion~

[cltheel.sdl]

there are worse things then not taking pictures of a building.

IG: a building collapsing,a building getting blown up,ETC.

oh no ,es el extremo del mundo. No podemos tomar cuadros de torres.

~Just my opinion~

[dubone]

Apparently, all one has to do is being muslim and take pictures of a building to terrorize. That event scared a lot of people in Charlotte, without any violence whatsoever. Likewise, the rentacops (and esteemed Security professionals like Mr. Made Man) feel like they have substantially protected everyone by preventing a photograph from being taken.

In some places in the world, the locals believe that having a photo taken steals their soul relegating them to hell.

[rockhilljames]

Well...to be fair, the guy just wasn't Muslim and taking photos, he was found with tapes from strategic targets all over the country, not just tourist spots, and had ties to radical elements inside of Pakistan. In the end, all that happened to him was that he was deported.

Still, the photo nazis need to chill out.

[mademan305]

Not that this matters, but for the record, I was once a security officer but am now proudly employeed in the Information Technology field. You guys are pretty hard on so called "Rent-a-Cops". While there may be some security personnel that may be overzealous to enforce stupid rules, many others are just doing there jobs. I am sure all of you have stupid rules at your jobs that you have to follow. The same cameras that see people taking pictures of buildings are the same ones that capture these security officers either doing or not doing there jobs. May I also remind you that a supervisor sits in a control center and will radio down a command to an officer like "Tell those individuals that they can't take photos while on our property". Basically, I wouldn't direct my anger towards the security personnel, I would direct it towards the property management if you have a beef with this subject (i.e. Childress Kline properties or whoever it may be). Just call me "captain save a rent-a-cop!"

[Justadude]

What seems truly bizarre about these policies is that a simple photograph of a building is of virtually no use to a terror group. Like the WTC, most large buildings would require some kind of internal instability to collapse. I'd understand security not wanting pictures taken from near the elevator shafts or underground garages.

For what it's worth, I've taken pics of the BoA murals several times without being hassled, and those are in a much more (theoretically) vulnerable area. To some extent the security management simply needs to be realistic about evaluating threats to their property.

[reverbandwhiskey]

I was harassed last night by a Charmeck police officer while I was taking photos at the transit center. He was incredibly rude. I also had another police officer threaten me when I took a photo of him and his partner detaining someone.

[frey]

I'm an architecture student. I was using gateway center as a precendent. Just so happens my gf lives there. So, I left early friday morning with my camera to take pictures. Of course the retals didn't like this one bit. I was halfway into it when I noticed a fat woman in a pseudo-cop uniform on her radio staring at me. I knew what she was up to. I went about my business making eyecontact every now and then. After 15 minutes, she approached me and drilled me with questions, and telling me I can't take pictures. I asked her why and she condescendingly asked, "HAVEN'T YOU BEEN WATCHING THE NEWS?". I said, "No, I read it online or listen to npr." She became annoyed. I snapped more pictures. She said I need to talk to her supervisor. I was fine with that.

I go to the "office." Her supervisor starts the same mess. I stop him. I then pull my gf's father's business card out. I tell them to call it and tell him my name and their fears. (He's an executive vp for bofa.) Suddenly they become appologetic and ask me if I need any help.

The looks on their faces just made it sweeter.