There's been a few stories in the press just lately about police stopping innocent people (mainly tourists or amataur photographers) taking photos - not just in London but throughout the UK... This artcle on the BBC's website is interesting.
Problem seems to be as soon as you challenge the police about your rights etc...they get 'shirty'...
This is also happening in the United States too. 2 weeks ago I took my daugther to the Metrolink (a commuter train to Los Angeles). When I started taking pictures I was asked by a Metrolink employee why I was taking pictures. Even though I stated that I had no evil intentions that I thought the train and surroundings would make interesting pictures and I was learning about photography I was asked to stop and put my camera away. It is very sad that we are slowly lossing all of our freedoms because of the terrorism here in the United States and around the world.
I haven't had any experience with "authority figures" but back when I started my 365 project I took a photo of a traveling Mexican circus that came to my town. They had camels a clydesdale horse some zebras and etc. as well as all the cool looking circus tents. Naturally I was drawn to take pictures there because of the sights to see. As I left my boyfriend and I were confronted by one of the guys from the circus asking why we were taking so many pictures. I think this was fueled from their fear that I was out to sue them for some random reason or even worse trying to turn them over to the immigration authority. It seems to me that whether it is for political reasons or personal vendettas there are a few people taking advantage of society as a whole and ruining it for everyone. When the circus guy asked me about taking pictures I was really caught off gaurd my only reply was "But the pretty horses..." He could see that I was not out to get them and he just stepped aside and let us go without further discussion. I suppose the only thing is just to be honest about your intentions and hope everything works out.
This is partly why i left the UK in the first place - life is getting ridiculous! What with terrorism pedophiles health & safety and political correctness - Life never used to be this complicated.
Neither the general public or the police have any right to stop you taking photographs. As the article says "You do not own the light rays that bounce off your face".
I'd rather have a world with terrorism than a world without freedom.
Same goes for public speech; breastfeeding; even smoking (although i detest it).
Yes I'm afraid to take photos now in lots of places. I recently was stopped in the mall here (NY USA) because I was taking shots of the Christmas Tree there..not even people or anything just a part of the huge Christmas Tree. I was so surprised and they said it was the rule for the whole mall...no cameras. I couldn't believe it! I take my camera everywhere almost and now...I can't??
CCTV is one of those things that over time people are just accepting at least they are unobtrusive. Speaking of shopping malls - in Australia I absolutely hate that whenever you try and walk out of a shop with a carrier bag or rucksack you are accused of stealing something. A lot of the shops have staff at the door to check bags on the way out. It sends out a very negative message of what they think of their customers - it's got to the point where I purposefully don't take out a rucksack because of this.
P.C. rubbish, if something has the tiniest chance of being dangerous it becomes banned.
The playgrounds over here are proof of that, they are all 1/2 a foot off the ground, the slides are nearly horizontal!
I wonder what the police would say as a Goggle Streetview car go past? [/sarcasm]
If you keep polite and overt there is little they can really do. After all, if you were a terrorist you would want to keep a low a profile as possible rather than having loads of expensive photography kit. There have been examples of police confiscating or telling photographers to format their cards, something which is technically illegal as you need to be arrested for property to be confiscated.
It is a shame, but if you look like you know what you're doing, and smile at people it normally takes out their natural protective urges.
The first time that happened to me was in Heathrow where I was an enthusiastic American tourist. I never thought of the larger ramifications til the security guard stopped me. The next time was on the same trip when an employee of Harrod's interrupted my picture taking. (I did get 1 shot.) As we left I saw on the doors that picture taking was forbidden. I just hadn't noticed the sign going in. In that case I think they wanted to get tourists to buy their souvenir postcards.
I just thought of another time I was unable to take a photo--Charleston, S.C. Some artisans wove beautiful baskets for sale on the street. When I attempted to take a photo, the artist turned her back. She was, however, willing to pose if I bought a basket from her. I can certainly understand her thinking.
At the National Book Festival on the Mall in Washington D.C., all the authors were perfectly happy to pose for pictures except for for John Irving. As soon as his publicist saw me raise my camera, she stepped forward to prevent me getting a shot.
You know, it's funny that if you are carrying a camera, you get stopped, but how many people are taking pictures and movies with their cell phones? I doubt they are ever stopped. Makes you wonder....
In the U.S. retail establishments, including malls, have taken exception to photographs for decades, for several reasons, including copyright of displays, merchandizing materials, pricing and sales, locations of security cameras, identification of plains clothes security, etc. I've witnessed them usually polite enough to to ask you to stop. I've also seen many metro train terminals and subways ban cameras, perhaps for some of the same reasons.
In Thailand also. Department stores and many commercial places don't like people taking photos in their places, but they are not so serious. Only in movie theaters that they can (and possibly will do) take drastic action...even for taking pictures with mobile phones.
Its a shame that the UK is going that way, I spent a week in London recently and found that people were quite accepting and polite when they clocked me with a camera.
But i also regret that while I was there I saw some great potential images but found myself shying away incase it caused a scene, like on the Underground. I think the PC brigade have a lot to answer for.
@nealxs@allie912@singer@motorsport@mrangryuk@viranod i thought it strange that comments suddenly started on a post I made back in 2009, but met up with Ross on Saturday who told me about the new search option... Interestingly, the new Govt have promised to overturn this crazy "law".. After all, it's not a law but petty people in uniforms exercising a little perseved power...
Also, info obtained under the freedom of information act, over 10,000 people were stopped under the Prevention of Terrorism Act with cameras and the total numer of arrest........ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!
I find this very disturbing, not because of any fear that I might one day be stopped but because of the behaviour and attitude of some of those 'innocent tourists' reported to have been stopped. I have been taking photographs openly in the streets of London and elsewhere for more than 50 years and have never been stopped. Could it be because I do it OPENLY and always ask permission if a recognizable face might appear in the picture? The behaviour of paparazzi and the arrogance of those who claim their 'rights' when behaving badly is sure to worry the police and security services. Me, too; they could actually create the situation so graphically described.
I saw these a while ago, photographer's rights cards plus they also have a text file you can use for free to print your own. Unfortunately they seem aimed at the US, not sure if the same apply to the UK (where I'm from) or Spain (where I live)
I carried a press card issued by the National Union of Journalists and re4cognized by police and other official bodies for most of my working life and found it useful as proof of identity, but rarely needed to show it to anyone. It was not something to be waved at a police officer to teach him about my 'rights', and I would be very suspicious of the motives of anyone carrying a card not issued by a reputable authority and properly verified - and especially not one printed at home!
Last year during the Alphabet challenge, I took my camera to a local restaurant for my "N" picture. (Nachos) mmmm
When I got done eating and went out to my car, a customer followed me to my car and made it a point to write my license plate down. When I asked him what he was doing and why he responded "in case anything comes of the photos you were taking". Really? I wanted to give him the 365 website but decided to shut my mouth and just shook my head.
How very sensible of him, and very polite, too. It has been my lasting impression over the last 50+ years, and increasinly so in the current age of insecurity, that some people feel nervous when they see a camera pointing in their approximate direction but are too polite to ask why, because they fear a hostile response. I salute that man for taking the precaution of making a written note which might prove helpful to the police or security services later, if necessary.
Wow, I actually never thought about this being an issue (other than the obvious, like theaters, and copyright issues and the like...) Good to know to be wary of it.
@andycoleborn This is an interesting discussion! I remember a few years back at a Birthday party at Taco Bell (a friend was going through a taco bell craving), being told not to take pictures as it was against Taco Bell law! Hmmmm.... Taco Bell law? What is the world coming to?
I am a big fan of Street Photography, the main thing I avoid is taking in places which could be classed as private property like named shopping malls , railway stations although I appreciate the interestingness of such places. I predominately take pictures in Lincoln High Street and up in the historical bailgate area and never had any problems
I recently read about the relaxing of the UK public space restrictions and was pleased to see a return to common sense. I work in the communications room for Brisbane North & South Metro areas for the Queensland Police Service, and I can provide some advice on this subject. We do get quite a few calls (including some on the emergency only line >:-[ no, it's not a life-threatening emergency or a crime in progress) about people taking photographs or filming with video cameras in public spaces.
Here at least, there is nothing illegal about taking photographs in public spaces. This includes beaches, streets, parks, riverbanks, waterways, bridges, roads, footpaths and anywhere else you can consider a public space. This includes many privately owned/managed/classified areas that are open to public use and/or thoroughfares such as railway stations, bus terminals, privately managed parks such as Southbank Parklands, Museums, etcetera. It has absolutely nothing to do with the subject or composition of the photograph, either...but there can be some exceptions to this which I will touch on in a moment.
You can stand in a public space (footpath, road, etc) and photograph private structures and facilities. If it's viewable to the average citizen, it is okay to photograph and/or film it.
On the other side of the coin, however, your neighbour is allowed to put a video surveillance camera up on the side of his house that points directly at your house under the guise of home security (although this is a grey area that is open to civil arbitration). The media can stand on the footpath at your front gate and harass you whenever they see you and, as long as they keep talking constantly restricting your ability to tell them clearly to leave your property, they can follow you right up to your front door. If someone is photographing a bird in flight that crosses in front of your window while you are leaping about nakedly pretending to be Errol Flynn, that is perfectly legal (and you really should at least put some undies on...really).
Commercial business premises are a different kettle of fish, however. Due to the nature of the locale, you must abide by their rules re photography and digital image collection or you can be asked to leave by staff or security representing the management. This is wholly a civil matter and police will not become involved unless there is a disturbance or fracas which falls under the purview of a criminal offence.
NB: Recently, a photographer was apprehended, property siezed on the spot, processed through the watch house and issued a notice to appear in court for taking photographs of young children in various states of undress at the beach pool at the Southbank Parklands. In that instance the attending police exercised their discretionary powers to stop the practice due to the photographer's offence history for child-sex related matters.
Police do have, and regularly exercise, discretionary powers. If they believe you to be no more than a polite enthusiast photographer you will be left alone. If you come on like a douche, act like you have something to hide, or prove that you should not be doing what you're doing, you will be afforded extra attention. That's something that is called "failing the attitude test" ;o)
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Neither the general public or the police have any right to stop you taking photographs. As the article says "You do not own the light rays that bounce off your face".
I'd rather have a world with terrorism than a world without freedom.
Same goes for public speech; breastfeeding; even smoking (although i detest it).
The playgrounds over here are proof of that, they are all 1/2 a foot off the ground, the slides are nearly horizontal!
If you keep polite and overt there is little they can really do. After all, if you were a terrorist you would want to keep a low a profile as possible rather than having loads of expensive photography kit. There have been examples of police confiscating or telling photographers to format their cards, something which is technically illegal as you need to be arrested for property to be confiscated.
It is a shame, but if you look like you know what you're doing, and smile at people it normally takes out their natural protective urges.
At the National Book Festival on the Mall in Washington D.C., all the authors were perfectly happy to pose for pictures except for for John Irving. As soon as his publicist saw me raise my camera, she stepped forward to prevent me getting a shot.
Serveral companies that are in the Motorsports sector have a strict no camera policy and phones have to be booked in with security.
But i also regret that while I was there I saw some great potential images but found myself shying away incase it caused a scene, like on the Underground. I think the PC brigade have a lot to answer for.
Also, info obtained under the freedom of information act, over 10,000 people were stopped under the Prevention of Terrorism Act with cameras and the total numer of arrest........ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Photographer's Rights Cards
When I got done eating and went out to my car, a customer followed me to my car and made it a point to write my license plate down. When I asked him what he was doing and why he responded "in case anything comes of the photos you were taking". Really? I wanted to give him the 365 website but decided to shut my mouth and just shook my head.
Also, w/in the Article is another article, which I found very interesting. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2005-12-29-camera-laws_x.htm
Here at least, there is nothing illegal about taking photographs in public spaces. This includes beaches, streets, parks, riverbanks, waterways, bridges, roads, footpaths and anywhere else you can consider a public space. This includes many privately owned/managed/classified areas that are open to public use and/or thoroughfares such as railway stations, bus terminals, privately managed parks such as Southbank Parklands, Museums, etcetera. It has absolutely nothing to do with the subject or composition of the photograph, either...but there can be some exceptions to this which I will touch on in a moment.
You can stand in a public space (footpath, road, etc) and photograph private structures and facilities. If it's viewable to the average citizen, it is okay to photograph and/or film it.
On the other side of the coin, however, your neighbour is allowed to put a video surveillance camera up on the side of his house that points directly at your house under the guise of home security (although this is a grey area that is open to civil arbitration). The media can stand on the footpath at your front gate and harass you whenever they see you and, as long as they keep talking constantly restricting your ability to tell them clearly to leave your property, they can follow you right up to your front door. If someone is photographing a bird in flight that crosses in front of your window while you are leaping about nakedly pretending to be Errol Flynn, that is perfectly legal (and you really should at least put some undies on...really).
Commercial business premises are a different kettle of fish, however. Due to the nature of the locale, you must abide by their rules re photography and digital image collection or you can be asked to leave by staff or security representing the management. This is wholly a civil matter and police will not become involved unless there is a disturbance or fracas which falls under the purview of a criminal offence.
NB: Recently, a photographer was apprehended, property siezed on the spot, processed through the watch house and issued a notice to appear in court for taking photographs of young children in various states of undress at the beach pool at the Southbank Parklands. In that instance the attending police exercised their discretionary powers to stop the practice due to the photographer's offence history for child-sex related matters.
Police do have, and regularly exercise, discretionary powers. If they believe you to be no more than a polite enthusiast photographer you will be left alone. If you come on like a douche, act like you have something to hide, or prove that you should not be doing what you're doing, you will be afforded extra attention. That's something that is called "failing the attitude test" ;o)
@andycoleborn @Scrivna