Forums >
General Industry >
Shooting in cemeteries
So once again we are in that Halloween season, and shooting the theme will take some to shoot on cemeteries. So, the question is, shooting in cemeteries, disrespectful or fair use? DISCUSS. Oct 07 20 11:47 am Link Fair use. They're taking up space, they might as well be useful for something. Oct 07 20 11:59 am Link Oct 07 20 12:09 pm Link It should also be noted that most cemeteries are on private property and a property release would technically be required for use of the images. Oct 07 20 12:11 pm Link At the age I am now (older than dirt), I kinda feel at home there . . . ![]() ![]() . . . course if THIS happens . . . ![]() . . . there may be hell ta pay! SOS Oct 07 20 12:20 pm Link SayCheeZ! wrote: Most cemeteries are private land, but since the public uses it, it is legally a public space. The exceptions are private cemeteries with access limited to specific people. Also, a mosoleum is private since the owners tend to put locks on the doors. Oct 07 20 01:10 pm Link Kayla_Ann wrote:
Francisco Castro wrote: Their use could come back to haunt You. Oct 07 20 01:29 pm Link Francisco Castro wrote: I beg to differ. Oct 07 20 02:22 pm Link Francisco Castro wrote: I think it depends. I definitely would not shoot in the vicinity of/during a funeral or near any visitors that may feel that I'm intruding on their privacy. Also, being sensitive to not disturb grave sites, headstones, monuments, etc. goes without question. Oct 07 20 03:28 pm Link I was working in Michigan a few years ago with a photographer that lived in an area where they had the test tracks for some of the car companies.Across from one of the facilities was an old cemetery.When I pointed it out to him he said what?He had lived in that area for years and had no clue it existed.We turned the car around and drove through it. He was on the fence but the model and I convivence him what did he have to lose? What made our idea more convincing was it was late fall and the weather was dank. A couple of days later we returned to shoot.The images turned out better they we could have hoped. We did however keep our time there short still wanting to be respectful but judging by the dates on the grave stones, all from the 1800s we were sure no one would have cared. Oct 07 20 04:54 pm Link Francisco Castro wrote: it can make for some cool images, but i think its disrespectful most the time. Oct 07 20 05:55 pm Link There’s also a difference between using a cemetery as a mood-setting backdrop and, say, staging a zombie apocalypse phot shoot there. I agree with sospix; Pere-Lechaise is a gorgeous cemetery to photograph in if you are ever in that part of Paris. I stayed in a hotel overlooking it, so I had to go wander (and pay my respects to Jim Morrison). Oct 07 20 10:15 pm Link I have done impromptu landscape where I found an early 1900s stone with my name on it, but If I found some cow spreading out on my sisters stone I would cause a scene. So I guess I dont know. https://www.flickr.com/photos/131066814 … ed-public/ Oct 10 20 12:11 pm Link Get a permit . . . ! Oct 10 20 01:56 pm Link Shoot in a cemetery? No. And I say that with the appreciation that a lot of the architecture and structures in cemeteries can offer the most striking and unique set pieces for amazing photography compositions outside of the everyday norms; however, these were erected and put in place for the loss, love and remembrance of other peoples' loved ones, family members, and friends, not for creating artsy-assed images and "out of the box" photo sessions. Using a cemetery for a photo shoot feels like a disrespectful, cosmic, kick in the gut to humanity's soul and spirit for the sake of a self-indulgent and vain desire. Admittedly, it's very hard to walk away from some of those structures and locations - from a photography perspective - cause they're just so visually and texturally beautiful, haunting, majestic... Oct 11 20 08:17 am Link I am more concerned about for the impact on living relatives rather than those who have died. So "the devil is in the details", so to speak. The dead themselves don't care (at least as far as I know!), but I wouldn't want to cause distress to their living family members (with either the shots or the process), or to any funeral that may be going on in the area, etc. But that still leaves possibilities. Many of the very old and photographically striking cemeteries around the world are publicly owned, and often don't require permits. Although you want to respect their rules and definitely avoid anything that might possibly cause damage. While I've researched it a couple of times (when I've been in a place with a VERY old and particularly dramatic cemetery), I just haven't had the time in that country (or wherever) to actually do something with it. Although I have taken photos with the skull "designs" in the walls of stacked bones (of literally, millions of the dead) in the Paris Catacombs. And yes, it was closed to the public at the time. I'd suggest that's a similar situation. It's very old and the dead are effectively "anonymous". So it's not going to cause distress to any living relatives, etc. Oct 11 20 08:24 pm Link SayCheeZ! wrote: In the US, property does not enjoy a right of privacy or a right of publicity. Therefore you normally don't need a release for commercial use of a photo of someone else's property (either personal property or private property). Oct 13 20 06:02 am Link Google https://www.legalgenealogist.com/2012/1 … -required/ Short answer on photography in cemeteries, it depends. Oct 13 20 11:11 am Link I shot a wedding in a cemetery in Savannah a few years ago. The only restriction was that no one was allowed to stand on a tombstone or marker. I thought that was very fair. I enjoy shooting in cemeteries, but that was the only time I've shot anything other than the markers. My only advice would be to remember each marker represents someone's loved one. Just use common sense and respect. Oct 23 20 01:01 pm Link Michael Fryd wrote: I must be reading this wrong, but it seems that the first paragraph is contradicted in the third one. I would have to ask if you were correct then why do property releases exist and are required for commercial publications? Or am I way off base? Oct 23 20 03:06 pm Link In the twentieth century Clarence John Laughlin produced interesting work with cemeteries and in the twenty-first century the same can be said for Kaupo Kikkas. Among my photography books is one by Patrick Magaud entitled “Exhibition in Paris” (1985). In this book Mr. Magaud photographs a female model around the city of Paris, including a series at Père Lachaise cemetery in which she appears mostly nude. Thirty-five years after acquiring this book I still can recall that series. When I began photography in the early 1970s I frequently photographed in an old cemetery in my native city. Bonaventure Cemetery is located on a bluff above a peaceful river. I would photograph the monuments and the moss-strewn oaks. Later I photographed a clothed model or two there. When I began work on a solo art gallery exhibition in the late 1980s I followed through on something I’d wanted to do for some time but had been fearful to attempt. I photographed a female model nude in Bonaventure Cemetery. I then used one of those images on the invitation to that exhibition “The Last Savannah Nudes”. The following year that same image was published in Popular Photography magazine (anyone remember print magazines?). I went on to photograph other nudes in other cemeteries around Savannah, and an old cemetery in Athens, GA named Oconee Hill. My original prints have sold to collectors since the 1970s and some of my cemetery images are among the most popular. In 1993 my late friend and contemporary Jack Leigh photographed the cover of the best selling novel, “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil”. It was of a sculpture that faced the river in Bonaventure Cemetery. It made his career and became his best known image. So I’ll have to cast a vote for creating photographs with or without human subjects in cemeteries. Nov 14 20 11:30 am Link |