Are photoghraphers really a threat?

Aurum · Jul 1, 2008

More on the subject

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/23/police_photographer_stops/

gr82bart · Jul 2, 2008

Now US Border Services is seizing cameras and equipment too: Dead Link Removed

Regards, Art.

gr82bart · Jul 22, 2008

It continues: http://www.tricities.com/tri/news/local/article/man_arrested_for_unlawful_photography/11576/ Though, I do have to question what would compel anyone to take a pic of a random arrest with an iPhone. Still, it isn't illegal.

Regards, Art.

Gatsby1923 · Jul 22, 2008

What shows me how much more common these issues are is the fact that a few years ago a thread like this would be filled with just as many people saying "That never REALLY Happens." Now it seems like something that happens to every one to some extent or another. I haven't had any bad experiences but questions from police who see me with a camera have changed from "Hey what kind of camera is that?" to "Why are you taking photos here" and "Who do you work for?"

Leon · Jul 22, 2008

all troubling stuff. I wonder what my response would be if two police officers (and they are always in pairs these days arent they - more intimidating that way) stopped me in a public place and demanded I hand over my film? I'd like to think I'd politely say "no, I'm not breaking the law and you can not require me to do so without a warrant from the court" but I know that in the heat of the moment, I doubt i could be so calm. In my professional life, having to collaborate with police officers in area of the law that they are not expert (eg anything outside of PACE) always resulted, without fail, in them arguing their way, in a bullish and non-compromising manner, to whatever they want to do rather than what they should do. Any question of that from a non-police person resulted in increased stubbornness. We'd hope our police force would be populated with intelligent and expert personnel, but sadly this just isnt the case - in the UK at least.

dbonamo · Jul 22, 2008

I find it so funny that the "government" at all levels, feel a professional looking camera, by this I mean large and black, must mean the person is a terrorist. If, and stress the word IF, I was a terrorist and taking pictures of my next target, I would not bring attention to myself by using any thing so conspicuous, I would be using the smallest camera I could find. Heck you can by glasses with camera built into the nose bridges. OPPS I should not have mention, now the government will be suspicious of all eye glass wearing people.

The worst thing that ever happen to me however was I was scolded by a Barnes and Nobel manager, I was sitting in the parking lot waiting for there store (cafe) to open, I just got a new camera and planing a day of shooting and was looking it over in the car. Apparently there "contracted" cleaning crew felt I was a threat and complained. After I was in the cafe and drinking my coffee the manager came over and started questioning me. I was a little annoyed in fact a little shocked.
I got into a mild argument with him, he told me I could not have a camera on Barnes and Noble property, I said excuse me it is in the car. I cannot remember the whole conversation, but as I think back I remember one person from the cleaning company had a neck collar, like those used on patients after and injury. I now wonder if he had an claim or something and was not supposed to work.

David Brown · Jul 22, 2008

dbonamo said:
... he told me I could not have a camera on Barnes and Noble property, ...

I may just stop at Barnes and Noble on the way home today and take some pictures ...

jeroldharter · Jul 22, 2008

I don't doubt the truth of the stories mentioned, but I think these are somewhat isolated cases. I took my 4x5 camera into the Wisconsin Capitol building. A security office asked me what I was doing and watched for awhile before moving on. I set up in the center of the rotunda, camera aimed to the ceiling, and crawled on my back under the tripod. Quite the spectacle and no hassle. Also, I forgot my Palm Pilot (which I use for BTZS data) in the car so I walked into an open door of a state assemblyman and asked if I could leave my tripod and Tundra case in his office while I ran to the store. (Perhaps they should have peaked in the Tundra case). Everyone was very friendly.

Just yesterday I went to the local water treatment plant to take some photos with the 4x5. Eventually one of the managers came out to ask what I was doing and if I had permission. I told him that I just came to took pictures and had no permission. He hung around for awhile and then left. Later, his boss came out and asked me about my equipment, said he was a former photographer at the local university, and told me where I could get a good deal on the university's used darkroom equipment.

I know that Wisconsin might not reflect the greater world, but I just wanted to make the point that some people use reasonable judgment.

gr82bart · Jul 24, 2008

These isolated cases are getting more airplay. Here's another one where the photographer was told taking a photograph is equivalent to "assualt": http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...der-snapping-proof-anti-social-behaviour.html

Regards, Art.

nc5p · Jul 24, 2008

he told me I could not have a camera on Barnes and Noble property, I said excuse me it is in the car.

They obviously think it is a firearm. There's a big stink down in Florida about whether people can keep guns locked in the trunk of their cars if parked on company property.

You could have informed him that most cell phones now have cameras. They should put a huge sign that cell phones are not only forbidden in their store, but also inside cars in the parking lot. It would be funny to see what kind of drop in business they would experience then.

I would question whether the parking lot is B&N property at all. Most of these stores are in shopping centers. The parking area is common property under control of the leasing company. Now many of them have a thing about photography but usually it's taking the photo, not possessing a camera in your vehicle.

bdial · Jul 25, 2008

he told me I could not have a camera on Barnes and Noble property, I said excuse me it is in the car

For me, at that point, I'd ask if he'd like me to leave, and not ever come back. ...Sure, no problem, I will be very happy to remove my camera from your property, if that's what you really want... Have a nice day!

David A. Goldfarb · Jul 25, 2008

I often have a camera with me on Barnes and Noble property, and I'm likely to be browsing books in the photography section. No one has every said anything to me about this.

I don't usually make photographs in bookstores, but maybe I should, since I spend a fair amount of time in them, and they may not be around much longer. They seem to be doing business, but I've bought five books in the last week, and I couldn't find any of them at B&N, so I went to an independent academic bookstore that I usually prefer anyway, and only found one, so three came from Amazon and one from Alibris.com--which means they all came from independent booksellers in other locations, but they could just as well be warehouses with internet connections as bookstores.

Akki14 · Jul 25, 2008

gr82bart said:
These isolated cases are getting more airplay. Here's another one where the photographer was told taking a photograph is equivalent to "assualt": http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...der-snapping-proof-anti-social-behaviour.html

Regards, Art.

The problems with this is:
Community Support Officers are not police and have no powers besides to call for the police. They are woefully undertrained.
Walking down the street getting in people's faces taking photos can be considered harassment not assault.
The kids in question lied to the police and ACCUSED the man of assault, not the photographing was assault.
and that's the Daily Mail...

Andy K · Jul 25, 2008

... also known as The Daily Heil.

Frank Szabo · Jul 25, 2008

Ian Grant said:
You're a bit late that link's been posted here before. So it's old news.

I'm more worried by the subversives who post on APUG

Ian

Agreed - any group that advocates using dark rooms and chemistry for photographs must be up to no good.

gr82bart · Aug 21, 2008

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/08/17/sv_photographers.xml

It's only going to get worse.

Regards, Art.

Larry Bullis · Aug 21, 2008

I was photographing in a mall in Seattle on assignment for Sunset Magazine - quite a long time ago. Inclusion in a story was worth at least $25k, should the photographs be included, in FREE advertising value. It was a tremendously popular magazine that people read to figure out where to go, what to live in, how to grow things in the garden, what to eat.... I mean, whole businesses, even towns, could prosper with an opportunity like that. I could cite examples that could be easily verified.

I was in a fabric store. They asked me to leave. I explained what I was doing. Too bad, they said, it was against company policy.

I wonder how the administration thought about it after I left and they found out. Their loss. Too bad...

TheDreadPirateRobins · Aug 21, 2008

There is some paranoia here in my town (Portland, Oregon, USA) among some of the chemical plant and petroleum distribution site owners about people with cameras. I have heard more than one account of a photographer being hassled while taking pictures of some of the industrial landscapes available. I had a guy at a public meeting who said he owned "a chemical plant" that he was opposing bicycle lanes on the streets because that would bring more photographers, and photographers had been seen around his plant, some of them were "Middle Eastern looking" and were driving SUV's.

I suggested that he ban SUV's from streets near his plant, since that seemed to be the vehicle of choice for this sinister element. He barked at me loudly about how I wasn't taking threats seriously and I asked him if he'd like to come over to my house and tell that to my half-Lebanese wife who is damn tired of getting the "random security check" at airports nearly every time she flies.

Are photoghraphers really a threat?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency