By Carlos Miller
I never understood certain people who like to draw attention to themselves either through their art or their music, but then get upset when somebody tries to take a photo or shoot a video.
It happened to me that time when I was shooting a full moon drum circle on Miami Beach that was open to the public.
And it happened to Providence Journal videographer Andrew Dickerman who was filming inside the Scituate Art Festival in Rhode Island on Monday.
Dickerman was filming the art display created by Connecticut artist Susan M. Peifer for his news report, but Peifer ordered him to stop.
Dickerman refused and continued filming. Peifer then shoved his camera into eye, causing it to become bloodshot and watery.
He showed the videotape to the officers who then arrested her for assault. She has pleaded not guilty.
“A lot of the artists get upset when people take pictures of their artwork,” the deputy chief said, adding that some use digital photography techniques to reproduce the artwork for free.
“It’s like kids downloading songs from the Internet,” he said.
Which just goes to show how clueless cops are about these things.
Popularity: 1% [?]
6 responses so far ↓
1 Rob Molecule // Oct 16, 2009 at 8:14 AM
I videotape live bands and post videos on youtube. Mostly these are small bands that are just thankful to have a video recorded. But occasionally I have run into people who don’t want to be recorded, or don’t want it put online. As a courtesy, I always ask touring bands if I can record them first, or at least ask if I can put it online, if I am unable to ask them before recording. A few have said no, and I go along with those wishes. I probably can legally upload them anyway, but I just don’t know why anyone would care. Generally, I only put up a few songs.
2 KDP // Oct 16, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Don’t point the camera at the artist. You will steal her soul!
3 browne // Oct 18, 2009 at 6:28 PM
Visual artists really don’t appreciate people filming or photographing their art. I’m amazed at the people who don’t know this. People can make prints out of good pictures and I know to writers and journalist this doesn’t seem like anything, but before art became a party thing this was kind of a known thing by people who covered art. If you notice most visual artists unless they are EXTREMELY success don’t even have websites and if they do they don’t have their art work on it. It’s a visual arts thing.
In many museums and galleries there are signs that say “no photography” this is why.
4 Charles U. Farley // Oct 19, 2009 at 2:37 AM
@Browne
The artist may not appreciate it, but if they are in a public place such as this outside art festival there is not much they can do. If the artist needs to control access to their art that closely it should be displayed only at a privately owned gallery where they have the right to prohibit photography. Again, there is no such right in a public location.
5 Kylie // Oct 19, 2009 at 7:33 AM
As both a photographer and a visual artist, I understand where both sides are coming from. To the average visual artist, what you are doing when you take photographs of their art is potentially stealing their work. And considering how hard the average visual artist has to work to make a living, well, I can understand them being upset. That being said:
Charles is absolutely right. If you are set up in a show that is set up in a public place (such as in a park, on a public sidewalk, etc), you not only cannot prohibit photography, it would be impossible to prevent photography if it *was* prohibited. And visual artists need to understand that. There are plenty of galleries that prohibit photography, and there are plenty of art shows set up indoors on private property where photography is prohibited.
And for the record, I don’t agree with the attitude of the average visual artist concerning photography of my artwork, largely because I know (first hand) how difficult it is to get a photo good enough to make decent prints!
6 Jon Quimbly // Oct 19, 2009 at 11:06 PM
@Kylie is right. A friend o’mine made a living for over a decade photographing fine art in NYC for galleries and museums. It was almost always on-site work.
His standard gear included 4×5 and 8×10 cameras with expensive lenses, battery powered fixed-color temperature lighting, and ladders. And lots and lots of sheet film.
Reproducing art is not the thing of casual photography, definitely not camcorders, or even nice DSLRs. Lens distortion alone will scotch reproduction.
The most an artist has to fear is that someone will “steal” their idea, in my opinion, and well that’s a risk you take exhibiting your work in public.
Leave a Comment