Photography Rights

[John A]

Isn';t it strange? I have recently spent about 5 months in the Philippines and carried my DSLR everywhere I went. In very stark contrast to the folk here, the Pinoy never hassled me when taking shots in the street. On one occasion outside the Immigration Department in Manila I had one of the guards insisting on being in the photograph! (A very well dressed and proud man, ramrod straight with a wonderful smile). On the island of Boracay the passer-by would look towards the camera and smile at me. On a trip to Taal volcano everyone we met wanted to be in the photographs and the guide was insistent that I took photos of all the "interesting" bits. I can only conjecture a cultural difference between the Pinoy and the British, one that shows the British to be suspicious and quite frankly, unfriendly towards people with cameras. Having left my second DSLR body and a selection of lenses with my soon-to-be stepson, I note with some amusement that he is covering weddings, parties and other events and is being paid for it without all the bull carp we have to endure here. The question is, I think, where did we loose our sense of fun? When did we loose our sense of belonging to a community and being proud of it?

As for the argument about security and "the anti-terrorism laws", is using a DSLR on a tripod, in broad daylight with dozens of witnesses the best way to collect COVERT intel or would you rather use a smartphone camera? I note no one gives a damn if you take a shot with an iPhone.

People of Britain, lighten up! have fun! and if you see a guy or gal with a camera strike a pose and smile!!! (after all, it';s a camera, not an assault rifle)

sorry to rant.... :embarrassed

[simon]

Just watched it brilliant. Impressed with London police too I wonder if the same level of policing is country wide though?....

[Mslater]

Sorry this is not accurate

Which bit do you find inaccurate - you seem to appear to agree with what I said.

[richardg6paj]

The question is, I think, where did we loose our sense of fun? When did we loose our sense of belonging to a community and being proud of it?

As for the argument about security and "the anti-terrorism laws", is using a DSLR on a tripod, in broad daylight with dozens of witnesses the best way to collect COVERT intel or would you rather use a smartphone camera? I note no one gives a damn if you take a shot with an iPhone.

People of Britain, lighten up! have fun! and if you see a guy or gal with a camera strike a pose and smile!!! (after all, it';s a camera, not an assault rifle)

sorry to rant.... :embarrassed

I';m with you on the above above John. It';s only the DSLR that attracts attention. No one bothers about phone cameras. Terrorists don';t need to take pictures in the street, what is the point. Google Maps have made an excellent tool for that very job. I don';t think it';s the people of Britain who have an issue with cameras in the street, just the jobsworths. When I';ve taken pictures in a public place (with a DSLR) most people will wait for me to take the picture instead of walking in front of the camera. I do think the Police are now more understanding in this respect. We had an incident down our street a few years ago. We had installed CCTV, a camera was looking at our car and drive, it also saw most of the road, so we could see who was coming and going, neighbours weren';t too keen on this, until one day a £10,000 caravan was stolen in broad daylight. They owners were soon round to see if our CCTV
had picked it up. A quick look through the footage showed the van being towed away. We got all the evidence the police required including reg number of the car. It was found 30 miles away on a gipsy camp. I got a bottle of whisky for that!!!!

Richard

[fingerpuk]

I';ve been shooting on the streets for a long time, both for fun, and paid.  I was first stopped about three years ago, have been stopped 5 times since, and each and every time it';s been because of ';anti-terrorism'; or ';religious'; laws.  Each time I was shooting for fun (if it';s a paid gig you need to get permission and pay to film in London and are awarded with paperwork) so I simply told them to kindly go away.  The last one however refused to go away, attempted to grab my camera and me (assault) - then he told the Police who';d turned up to f-off and then threatened to kill me because I was assaulting his religious beliefs.

It turned out the three police officers and two support officers knew less about these laws than I did, so I had to show them the relevant sections which I always carry with me when shooting.  They asked to see my camera, I said no.  They asked for my address etc, I said no.  They asked why, I explained I had been assaulted and they had just let that man go, who had threatened in front of two of them to kill me.  So if he can go, I';m off.

They then attempted to stop me, so I took pictures of them all explaining very calmly that these images will be e-mailed to the MET along with my nice big complaint letter from my solicitor.

The support officers walked off, the rest asked me to calm down.  I explained I was incredibly calm and in no way angry but could they please stop attempting to grab me and my camera because it was making it difficult to take clear pictures of them.  I then switched to video.

I got a formal apology.

Sadly this happens still a lot, even after all the marches and protests and press coverage.  I know several people who auto backup compressed images to the cloud as they shoot as in the past they';ve had the Police remove and destroy the cards in them (both press photographers, good guys not ambulance chasers).

[John A]

hmmm.....maybe I should wear my body-harness and Gopro when I am out with the DSLR 

[richardg6paj]

Yes, body-cams are the way to go, the police have started wearing them. What';s good for the Goose .......!

Richard

[shaktar]

So where and what parts say we can do this ?

Just thinking about something I could print off and show saying, this is ok here is the section that says it ok. And then I can carry it around whenever I take photos. 

[teslahed]

This might help;

[teslahed]

[richardg6paj]

http://nottingham.indymedia.org.uk/articles/2189
A lot of information on this website, pdf';s can be downloaded at the bottom of the page.

Richard

[nub]

check this nugget

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2535198/Well-nick-I-make-day-living-hell-cause-youll-cell-day-Police-officer-threatened-lock-man-make-life-living-hell-photographing-scene-accident.html#video

[teslahed]

More info on the same story in this newspaper article;

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/investigation-launched-after-photographer-secretly-films-police-officer-threatening-to-arrest-him-and-make-his-day-living-hell-9044719.html

A spokesman for Gloucestershire Police said: "All police officers in Gloucestershire take an oath to serve the public with respect to all people.

"Any officer found to breach this oath or any allegations or complaints made about officers are thoroughly and robustly investigated.

"Regarding this particular incident, there is currently a misconduct investigation ongoing and it would not be appropriate to comment further at this time."

Definitely sounds like a rogue police officer rather than policy though, which is slightly reassuring at least.

[shaktar]

So even though its was an incident and the road closed, was he still allowed to by law to take the pictures ?

Is there something that say';s your not allowed to take pictures involving injured people ? apart from a moral aspect.

[Biffa]

So even though its was an incident and the road closed, was he still allowed to by law to take the pictures ?

Is there something that say';s your not allowed to take pictures involving injured people ? apart from a moral aspect.

My understanding of that video, even though the po po didn';t handle it all too well, is that it was classed as a crime scene. Therefore until given the all clear only those with permission can photograph.