I consider myself a "semi-pro" photographer. What's that mean? I sell photos and do paid shoots but it's not my full time income. However, because I do sell my work, I've done some research into topics like this.

Fees, rules and requirements for photo shoots on private property are pretty common. For example, many places restrict tripods and prohibit flash photos. It's also common to have rules about "commercial photography", which means work that you plan to sell.

The Portland Japanese Garden is a good example. You've probably see a photo like this one of the grounds:
http://portlandsfavorite.com/files/2009 ... ardens.jpg

Wonderful place, very beautiful. Also quite restrictive about photography.
http://www.japanesegarden.com/photography/

They prohibit potrait photography. (That may be going to extremes, but I think that in their case it's intended to prevent damage to the grounds during posing.)

Want to sell photos you took in the gardens? That will be $150 please...



You must also include a specific photo credit with any photo identifying the gardens.

I've run into similiar restrictions and requirements at other facilities.

I think it would be reasonable to have similiar rules at your facility, as long as they're logical. For example, paying to pose models on your equipment is one thing, but expecting photographers to pay a fee to take photos from public property is something different.

[quote="robertmacdowell"]
And with the other hand, we rabidly defend our Constitutional right to do railfan photography from [b]public places[/b]. Interesting.[/quote]


I think the term "public places" is the operative one in your statement. The issue here seems to be professional photographers using what are usually private properties for for-profit work, often without consideration to safety concerns or other patrons who may be around.

My biggest concern would be liability for you and safety issues for the persons being photographed. Going back to the original post, if your site specifically states, no climbing on the equipment, and the photographer asks them to climb, pose, or act stupid on it and they fall off, who is to blame? You can guarantee everyone would get brought into the lawsuit, but your museum is the only one with an insurance policy in place with any money.....the photographer would just walk away or claim the site is open to the public....

As others have suggested, if / since it has become an issue, its time to put a policy in place.

Speaking of professional photographers, and trains. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZmYrD5fqL8 don't watch if you if you have a weak hart, this video contains tons of dangerous behavior (if the bride moved just a few more inches her head would have been lobed off kind of stuff) and the photographer even jokes how a train driver called the cops on them. May I add this is not just a photografer but a whole team of people doing this.

I am not a member of any museum, but I’ve told people to get off museum equipment in various places I’ve been. The people at the PA RR museum actually thanked me as I left the last time I was there for getting into someone’s business for climbing on a locomotive for a “photographer”. The volunteer said I was saying what he always wanted to say but couldn’t. I was just glad to help! There’s nothing new there, trust me on that. I belong to a WW2 living history group and we display Jeeps, trucks, weapons, tents and rare gear of various kinds at large military events and air shows. You can’t imagine the things people have done with our stuff at events. I’ve had so-called “professional” photographers come up and move my stuff around, sit people in my Jeep, pick up weapons and generally act like all my stuff is their own personal props bin. We get the public doing this as well, too and often people get militant when you tell them to get their meat hooks off your stuff. I once had a lady yelling at me that she’d report me to the government because her tax dollars paid for it (her Grandparents tax dollars, maybe but all my stuff has been private property for a few generations). I told her to go for it. I’ve had Military Police and regular cops at various venues forcibly remove people from our vehicles and stuff on more than one occasion. I even once drove my Jeep past a local chapel near where I lived, prior to an oil change and testing a new fuel pump I’d put in. A wedding party was getting out and one of them saw me coming. Two tuxedo clad guys stood in the road and stopped me, saying they “needed” my Jeep for a few photos. The word “Please” never came into play. When I pointed this fact out, it didn’t faze them at all and one rudely asked why I wasn’t getting out of the Jeep. I told them that if they’d actually ASKED, I might have considered it, I muttered something about them choking themselves and then advised I was driving away and if they wanted to detain me further, they’d be explaining themselves to the police before I then drove off. To this day, I’m sure they think they were in the right.
This makes a good point. Almost anyone with a camera fancies themselves as a professional photographer. I’ve never understood why. Real photographers call people like that, “GWC’s” which stands for “Guy With Camera.” I know plenty of REAL pros and they don’t go around expecting things for free. Just like having a Hollywood movie filmed in your back yard, that’s a business and they know that they must compensate everyone accordingly as a part of doing business. Anyone who doesn’t get that, clearly isn’t a professional.

Bob H, thanks for posting. I think you and I are in a similar situation - take photos as a hobby but occasionally sell a few to cover expenses.

Let's say I go to a museum or tourist railroad, pay my admission or buy a ticket, and take some photos. Later, I sell some to TRAINS magazine or some other publication. Is this wrong? Should I make an additional donation to the organization above the admission price I already paid? BTW, you don't get rich selling to railfan magazines.

Advertising companies usually require a property release for any clearly identifiable objects in photos they purchase, same way they would have a model release for identifiable individuals. For instance, you will not likely find a photo of a BNSF locomotive as a background for an advertisement in People magazine. However, if the BNSF logo is not identifiable (such as removed in photoshop), the advertising company may use it without a release. Us railfans may recognize the paint scheme as from BNSF, but most others would probably look at it as just another locomotive.

Its been my experience that many people ignore signage until they are told to get off, out of the way,etc,etc.....
Having been to the boulder property in '08, it is actually quite nice, but very open. I'd be surprised if you didn't have more problems with trespassers, vandals and thieves. I agree with a number of the comments about signage.... I'd put up signs out in front, on the main historic society sign, probably with some sort of display of your policies on photography, climbing on equipment,etc. That way they are clearly posted, as well, I would put up signs at the entry "gate" area, stating that professional photographers must pay a given fee and obey the posted rules.
It might also be a good idea to make it clear that your site is/ is not a public area on any signs, maybe even give a contact number for "tours"? Paying the fee could allow them to have access, with an member escorting them, to perhaps have photos in loco cabs,etc.....
A little off topic.....Have you thought about doing tours for schools? you could charge a buck or two and have them show up at a scheduled time, That would give you some extra income and would help to establish the site as a "museum" complete with an entry fee. I don't know if that would open a new can of worms though- ADA access,facilities,etc.....
Between the location and some lack of fencing- the typical, uninformed, blind, average person can have a hard time telling the difference between a museum and some "abandoned" trains, So charging a modest fee and adding some signage can change that perception.....

A couple of incidents of a naughty nature with "professional" photographers come to mind. Unfortunately nothing I personally witnessed.

One weekend afternoon at a commuter station on the CSX Capital sub, there was a photographer with a model on the platform wearing high heels and a trench coat or raincoat. It wasn't raining or cold. Freight train comes along on the track next to the platform, photographer signals the young woman, who drops the coat to reveal - nothing (on that is)! Click.

A year or so later, this time on the Alexandria Extension at the bridge over a branch of the Anacostia River near the wye at CP JD, I was waiting my turn to head towards Richmond up by the Riverdale Park station and I hear a crew asking another train if they saw the girl in the bikini being photographed hanging from the "Tanglewood" CPL signal? Seems another "professional" photographer was taking a cue from the work of former Railroad Magazine contributor William T. Morgan from the late '60's, early '70's. (For those too young to remember, Mr. Morgan had quite a few photos in that magazine that featured very attractive young models in mini-skirts posing on coach steps, hanging off San Francisco cable cars, etc., always from a low-angle).

The crew from that train called for the CSX police, mostly because she was hanging off the signal, not because she lacked "personal protective equipment" <g>. In the mean time, the next train through reported that when they went by, the young lady was still there, but no longer wearing the bikini. Needless to say, by the time I went by everyone was gone.

Railroaders usually don't call-in stuff like that, they just talk about it in the crew room.

Here on the West Coast we had Virgil C. Staff, who was a photography instructor and railfan photographer. Readers of Railroad Magazine still remember his photos of attractive young women in railroad settings, often taken on the SP "Commute" line south of San Francisco. To this day some fans refer to the "Virgil C. Staff School" when a slide show includes a well-dressed young lady next to a train or railroad station.