Filming in public in Los Angeles legality
Posted 09 October 2010 - 04:58 PM
Also, let's say you're filming outside an apartment complex, is that legal?
Posted 09 October 2010 - 05:39 PM
It's high irony that the best place in the world to shoot professionally is probably the worst place in the world to shoot on a shoestring. Anyone who controls a decent location is very savvy, government agencies have seen it all before, police know and enforce the rules, and expectations are high. In general, I get the impression that filmmaking is so prevalent in LA that the gloss has - quite understandably - worn off it for almost everyone in town. As such the usual level of blind-eye turning, favor giving and excitement at being involved that may exist elsewhere is in extremely short supply and people generally want proper paperwork and proper payment for everything.
Not a complaint, just an observation, this is all entirely understandable.
Posted 10 October 2010 - 02:04 PM
Let's face it, tons of small scale indie stuff is shot in cities all over the world every day with no permits. Did the guy that shot Monsters get a permit for every place he shot? I'm guessing he got zero.
Posted 10 October 2010 - 02:52 PM
"Hey it's the cops."
"We don't have a permit! RUN!" (And they did it with a heavy Mitchell on a tripod :-)
Posted 10 October 2010 - 06:43 PM
If you're a student, a letter from your department head stating you are working on a student film may be helpful too.
Posted 10 October 2010 - 11:31 PM
I could tell you a story, a long one, about a really pain in the ______ neighbor banging the wall everytime we said "speed," and the remedy to that solution was to walk her over and let her look through the camera for a shot. She hung 'round most of the day at the craft table talking about "when i was young," to a very cordial PA who I bought a 6 pack for later on.
Ok anecdote over.
Posted 11 October 2010 - 11:23 PM
Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:00 AM
Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:12 AM
I am not sure whether this contribution to the discussion will be helpful, but here in the UK we have had a major issue with the police when taking photographs or film in public places. The police were causing difficulties by trying to use anti terrorism legislation. They were stopping both amateur and professional photographers and saying things like it was illegal to take pictures without permission. Some photographers who were involved took the matter to the European Court of Human Rights, because our own Courts were not prepared to protect the individuals concerned and the European Court of Human Rights found in favour of the photographers. Eventually it was acknowleged by the Police that we in this Country have the right to take pictures in a public place of anything which one can see from that public place (with some exceptions such as places of particular significance from a security point of view). The Labour Government, recently put out of office, tried to appeal the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, but went out of office before the question of an appeal could be decided. The present Coalition Government then found that they faced a refusal by the European Court of Human Rights to consider an appeal, and this led to the Government accepting that the legislation under which the Police had been purporting to act was contrary to our human rights. Now, if the Police stop any photographer they have got be able to show that they had reasonable grounds for believing that the person they had stopped had been doing to so to aid a terrorist or terrorist organistion. This is, of course a simplified statement, but it shows how now it has been established in general terms (a) that we have a right in the UK to take photographs in or from a public place, and whilst the police do have power to stop and question a photographer, that power is greatly constrained.
Now, my limited understanding is that the Constitution of USA provides for the protection of the rights of citizens. I was wondering whether, therefore, the issue outlined in the earlier messages had been considered from the angle of the Constitutional rights you have. Of course it is possible that a balance has to be struck between competing rights.
Posted 12 October 2010 - 09:25 AM
Posted 12 October 2010 - 10:13 AM
No I completely get the idea of film first, beg forgiveness. I think my question more has to do with, if I make my film and it goes to the festival, then some guy sees his property in there, can he sue me or make me get shots of my footage out of my movie.
Bit of a grey area when it comes to private property. If some guys house appears in a street BG with other houses and is not the sole focus of the shot, that's not a problem. If you use a private home as a sole establishing shot, then yes, a property release would be required.
However the odds that your movie will be seen by the masses world wide and therefore trigger legal action is near zero.
Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:05 PM
Other way is...
Do your research. Federal land is easier to get permits for, and cheaper, compared to state land or private. Talk with the LA Film Commission, they are very helpful. And yes, if you are in public and shoot background, no one can dispute, thus paparazzi.
Posted 08 December 2010 - 12:57 PM
If you are low budg, take the risk, act like you are supposed to be there, but don't be arrogant. If you can afford being shutdown compared to paying for permits, then that's what you do.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking; just act like you have a permit and make it seem like you ARE allowed to be there. Maybe if you're on a lower budget, bring some props you can use to make it seem like you're allowed there?
Posted 10 December 2010 - 04:09 PM
To be honest, in Croatia I have no problems with this, except when I'm taking photos of railway stations, on street I never had problems to this date ( that could change, but I hope not ).
Also, believe it or not, least problems I had in Iran - yes Iran. I took photos there with no problems, what was forbidden to take pictures police or military would just show me "no-no" with finger and that was all.
Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:51 PM
Always respond, "A mayonnaise commercial."
Posted 15 January 2011 - 07:09 PM
Posted 16 January 2011 - 12:19 PM
Haha, Glen, that's true here on the East Coast too. Never fails!
Same in the midwest...
Posted 16 January 2011 - 12:29 PM
Always respond, "A mayonnaise commercial."
However, in London you will be hassled regardless of whether you have, or need, a permit or not. Maybe the mayonnaise line will help.