July 24. 9:24 am. Paul Goldfinger photographing at the OG beach front. All these photos can be enlarged with one click.
By Paul Goldfinger, MD Editor Blogfinger.net. Ocean Grove, NJ, USA. This post has attracted a great deal of interest on Blogfinger.
I was near the boardwalk where I was able to park. I am a “street photographer” so I walked around looking for interesting subjects. On the boardwalk I spotted Grace, an OG yoga instructor who was walking by the Pavilion and a jogger who breezed by without a sideway glance.
Paul Goldfinger image.
Grace, OG yoga instructor. Click once and say grace.
And in the Pavilion I noticed a religious lecture/sermon. There was a group of people there who were silhouetted against the sunshine (below) , so I took that photo from outside the Pavilion. My tele lens provided this photo—I was standing perhaps 15 yards away.
Paviilion. 7/24/25. About 9:20 am. Paul Goldfinger image, one of a few obtained on 7/24 around 9:20 am.
Just then a man aggresively ran out of the Pavilion to ask me to stop taking photos. He said that this was a” private event”and so I couldn’t photograph. The CMA owns the Pavilion, but it is one of those spaces which are available to the public, as is the boardwalk, Would the CMA ban photographing on their boards or their beach? Are those also “private” spaces? Ask the Green Acres tax people about that.
As you know, the CMA also forbids going on the beach on Sunday mornings. There are, as many of you know, many places in the Grove which are owned by the CMA but are treated as “public thoroughfares.” Is this really different?
I guess it could be, but where are the signs that say that photography is forbidden?
There are many photographs taken all over town on CMA “private” property, so who will tell us where double standards kick in? And why is the CMA harassing me? A badge checker told me that the CMA asked her to take photos to use for publicity.
Today we learned that the CMA will be allowed to ban the public from the beach on Sunday mornings. Why are their rights the only ones that seem to be valid in the Grove? How about my freedom of photographic speech? Double standards must be banned in our town.
Were any of you citizen reporters there this Sunday morning, July 27 2025? Please let us know. Blogfinger@verizon.net
HANK WILLIAMS JR:
You were photographing “rides not children,” and I was photographing the Pavilion not the silhouetted people inside. But in both cases, our intentions were photographic, and unless you are a landscape photographer like Ansel, you can’t avoid people in a photo.
In fact my images are often about life styles, and people in one of my photos are usually inevitable. But since such captures are often accomplished in public places, there would appear to be no problems.
I have been photographing for much of my life, without any issues. However I do not emphasize children without a parent’s consent.
I like to attend Illumination Night in OG, and my shots are often about kids, but I don’t get consents, and no one complains.
I knew a Grover who was taking pictures at the Water Park on the A. Park boards. The police were called, and he had to defend himself. I found that to be a worrisome incident, but, as I said, better to avoid photos of kids, especially small ones without permission, which is too bad because kids are marvelous subjects..
As a photographer myself this subject is quite interesting. So I did a simple Google search ( Photography Children Public ) . First Amendment interpretation says it is ok. Most comments say that it is ok to photograph persons (including children) in public . Perhaps a lawyer reading this would please write in about legality of the matter.
A few years ago after photographing rides (not children) at a public carnival in Asbury on my drive home to Ocean Grove I was stopped by 3x police cars on Cookman Ave.
A parent anonymously called the police on me. Police treated me as a creep . After being detained 1/2 hour I showed them photos I took. (Thank G-d for my digital camera playback feature.) I complained about the matter to AP police dept. They did nothing about it.
As I pointed out, Asbury Park Press sent a photographer to photograph lifestyles at the OG beach last summer. He took about fifty pictures, and many of those in the photos were kids.
He did not seek permission to do so, and those images were available for APP readers to look at. I know that photographer, and he verified what I said. I know of no resistance from the CMA or from anyone whose kids appeared in such images.
I did not pay attention to what the ages of my silhouettes were. Can you look at my one image and find children to be exploited? The answer is no.
I am sorry that happened to you. In your photo, I see what looks to be young people. Perhaps the person was trying to protect the digital images of the children while they were worshiping but did not know how to articulate the concern. I believe we live in a time when one should seek a guardian’s permission to photograph children even in public.
I have never heard of such a policy, but if it exists, the CMA should post it at public thoroughfare locations such as the Boardwalk Pavilion.
My assumption is that I can go photograph in public spaces.
If the CMA thinks otherwise, then they should make that policy public.
It’s not my job to publicize their rules. A good place would be in their summer program guide.
I think maybe its time you requested from ogcma their policy regarding photography. From what I understand you are allowed to photograph in public spaces – events. The response may help in figuring out between private & public. Is the pavilion private or public or only sometimes ??
No they did not. Read today’s piece on this subject.
I thought CMA lost the Sunday morning embargo case?