Reminder Secure

hotel shoots-lie or not to lie???

This thread is being watched by 3 people
Paul Hodson is off-line
21 January 2013 05:59
mph
Photographer
mph
Location
United Kingdom
Cheshire
Crewe

Quote from onebadpuppy
..........if you step onto their property without permissiion and take a photo their is plenty they can do about it.



Not really!  They can ask you to leave and eject you using reasonable force if you refuse - but that's about it.  And you still have the photo - not that I am advocating this behaviour in any way.

Amateur - happy to do TF with models with potential and enthusiasm. Website: www.mphodson.co.uk


Peter Hague is off-line
21 January 2013 06:14
PeterH
Photographer
PeterH
Location
United Kingdom
South Yorkshire


Quote from mph
not that I am advocating this behaviour in any way.




Seems a lot are though, not just in this thread, but there is an overtone of 'just do it, damn the consequences, in fact don't even consider them'. For many of these 'dubious behaviour' threads.

And if it comes back and bites your arse, well you can always start a thread on how unfiar it is you should be held accountable for your actions.
"I am the one who knocks" - Walter White


Jenna Lou is off-line
21 January 2013 07:57
DamagedRoses1987
Model
DamagedRoses1987
Location
United Kingdom
Rhondda Cynon Taf
Aberdare

I contacted a local boutique hotel last year, was honest with them from the beginning saying I wanted to use one of their rooms for a boudoir photoshoot that would be used as part of my portfolio.

They were totally fine with that and instead of me having to pay £100+ for a nights stay, they charged me £10 per hour.

After reading above comments though, I can see why it's confusing as some hotels are fine with having people take photos in their rooms, and others aren't.

Good luck with it though x


Steve Guy is off-line
21 January 2013 08:28
Sdeve
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Derbyshire
Derby

Quote from mph
Not really!  They can ask you to leave and eject you using reasonable force if you refuse - but that's about it.  And you still have the photo - not that I am advocating this behaviour in any way.



Even then, there's not that much they can do. The force used to eject someone has to be reasonable in reference to the harm they are doing, not just to any resistance to ejection. If you were photographing other visitors in an annoying manner, then more force could be used than if you were just happy snapping away from other visitors, when force could rarely be justified. Similar to if you are trespassing across, say, a farm. If you were likely to damage crops, or alarm livestock then you can be forcibly removed. If you are meandering across a meadow with no livestock and an easy exit ahead of you, then no real force could be used. In theory, the landowner can insist you leave, and leave by a route decided by him. In practice that is going to be very difficult to enforce. Furthermore, if force is unwisely used then you not only have a trespass against the person, but a very probable charge of assault. Slightly difference if you have a trespasser in your home, as you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, which is of considerable value. Unless they are squatters, in which case you have problems.

So, others have said there are 'consequences' for using a hotel room for a shoot without permission. While gaining permission for a shoot may sometimes be wise, if you do not and are discovered, and how often will that be, what is the worst of any possible consequences? You could be asked to leave. But you have paid for the room, and the hotel exists for the purpose of letting out rooms. So what harm has been done, and harm there generally must be for any civil action. None so far. Of course, if the hotel, or chain, could be readily identified, and these days damned few are, in most you could be anywhere in the world, then there may be a come back if the images are published, and that in itself might be grounds for asking you nicely to leave, but that's about all.

Of course, if you are shooting an S&M set, with screams and blood, then the hotel might be able to say that you are disturbing other guests, so good reason there. Or if you are shooting a gang bang with 20 male volunteers, and the chambermaids will have to use hammers to get the sheets off the bed next morning, then there may be laws on prostitution to consider.

But, for an ordinary shoot, even if nude, unless the model is hanging out of the window, is not going to disturb anyone. And what is the difference between a shoot, and a couple taking self porn happy snaps for their own amusement? And would the management risk offending the couple? I doubt it.

To say that 'there could be problems' means little, as much as 'beyond this point there be dragons' of the old time cartographers. And I would suggest that you are as likely to get your bum bitten as any traveller finding a dragon.

Of course, if the naysayers would care to give more precise examples of what legal consequences might follow such a shoot, perhaps while quoting either the 'law' it's against, or case law of relevance then I might be more convinced. But for now, I'd say 'shoot away' and if you want to stay schtum, feel free. Best, though, to ensure that the model isn't a screamer.


Peter Hague is off-line
21 January 2013 09:05
PeterH
Photographer
PeterH
Location
United Kingdom
South Yorkshire


Quote from Sdeve
And what is the difference between a shoot, and a couple taking self porn happy snaps for their own amusement? .



One is a commercial transaction, the other is 'life'. The hotel may have a media rate, which as someone pointed out earlier (or maybe another thread) can be considerably more than the room rate.

There may not be any legal comeback, but there can be civil proceedings, and you really don't want to be going toe to toe with Trusthouse Forte's (if they still exist) legal team. Take it from someone who did a 'no-one will ever know' shoot, the fallout can be far and wide. I made the national papers!

I've used hotel rooms often, I've always got a location released signed so I've had to tell them. The secret is to use an independent hotel, where the bloke who can give persmission is usually on the premises or a phone call away (which isn't the case with chain hotels, there are several layers of management the request needs to go through, it's just easier for the manager to say no) convince them that what your doing isn't going to affect other guests either visually or by noise, and that the room isn't going to be left in a state, and they're usually happy to get the income the room will generate.

I became friendly with one such hotelier who ended up letting me have a day rate for the room, as he got to know what time i'd be finished, and he could late-let the room for the night, and make more money that way.
"I am the one who knocks" - Walter White


Simon Cooke is off-line
21 January 2013 09:23
FreelanceBadger
Photographer
FreelanceBadger
Location
United Kingdom
Gloucestershire
Gloucester



I've used hotel rooms often, I've always got a location released signed so I've had to tell them. The secret is to use an independent hotel, where the bloke who can give persmission is usually on the premises or a phone call away (which isn't the case with chain hotels, there are several layers of management the request needs to go through, it's just easier for the manager to say no) convince them that what your doing isn't going to affect other guests either visually or by noise, and that the room isn't going to be left in a state, and they're usually happy to get the income the room will generate.

I became friendly with one such hotelier who ended up letting me have a day rate for the room, as he got to know what time i'd be finished, and he could late-let the room for the night, and make more money that way.





Too true. I did a shoot at a Cinema complex - the bloke in the cinema (In Scotland) put me through on his phone to head office in London. They couldn't give me permission so put me through to their parent company in the USA - who put me through to their Marking Director (on his mobile) who was playing golf !!!!  He said Yes  :-)


Steve Guy is off-line
21 January 2013 15:45
Sdeve
Photographer

Location
United Kingdom
Derbyshire
Derby

Quote from PeterH
There may not be any legal comeback, but there can be civil proceedings, and you really don't want to be going toe to toe with Trusthouse Forte's (if they still exist) legal team. Take it from someone who did a 'no-one will ever know' shoot, the fallout can be far and wide. I made the national papers!



And here you illustrate a lack of understanding of the law. No, I'm not having a go, but civil proceedings are indeed a legal comeback. If not, then what? Fall out in regards to national papers is not a legal issue. Indeed, many would argue that there is no such thing as bad publicity, so you got a bit of free advertising.

The advice you give is sound and practical for many projects, but the people here that are talking of legal consequences have so far failed to give any indication of what these are, and I think there are so few, and they are so slight, that they are not really worth troubling yourself about, unless you are producing a project with a multi million pound budget, in which case you are worth legal action, mainly because you'll pay up rather than risk losing time.


Peter Hague is off-line
21 January 2013 17:59
PeterH
Photographer
PeterH
Location
United Kingdom
South Yorkshire


Quote from Sdeve
And here you illustrate a lack of understanding of the law.



Yes, I should have said criminal, rather than legal. I was trying to distinguish between breaking the law, and breaking the rules.


"I am the one who knocks" - Walter White



23 Users currently online   Blue=Models Orange=Photographers Red=Agencies Purple=MUA/Stylists Grey=Studios Green=Moderators
danixhale Tashaholz
alexcrawford ansonphotography bbphotos Brian2008 Cheshunt83 claypaws cptkoi Don_Dark freddie iestyn lify nemesis Oberonfoto rkpix Rumple Spiritofwales TinDolls TonyNutley vicpics Willjamieson
harbourstudio