I have been photographing my local stretch of the Grand Union canal for close to a decade. I'm careful and believe considerate of others and never take images of interiors of the narrow boats or individuals without permission. Unfortunately today I was confronted by an irate owner and felt threatened by by their large snarling dog when asked why I was taking photographs. Apparently I had been acting suspiciously. Now to me acting suspiciously is not taking scenic shots of a foggy canal and plumes of wood smoke on a cold winter's day that happen to also contain a couple of moored narrow boats with an old film camera. More suspicious is using a phone camera. I would have discussed this with the owner but I'm not keen on large dogs and preferred on this occasion to keep my distance to avoid confrontation. I believe the section of canal is owned by the Canal and River trust who don't have problems with considerate photography. Any advice would be appreciated as I would like to continue my work of documenting the canal in the future.
I have been photographing my local stretch of the Grand Union canal for close to a decade. I'm careful and believe considerate of others and never take images of interiors of the narrow boats or individuals without permission. Unfortunately today I was confronted by an irate owner and felt threatened by by their large snarling dog when asked why I was taking photographs. Apparently I had been acting suspiciously. Now to me acting suspiciously is not taking scenic shots of a foggy canal and plumes of wood smoke on a cold winter's day that happen to also contain a couple of moored narrow boats with an old film camera. More suspicious is using a phone camera. I would have discussed this with the owner but I'm not keen on large dogs and preferred on this occasion to keep my distance to avoid confrontation. I believe the section of canal is owned by the Canal and River trust who don't have problems with considerate photography. Any advice would be appreciated as I would like to continue my work of documenting the canal in the future.
If you are frequent in this area why not to contact Canal and River trust and ask if it is OK to take pictures. Have their answer in written and show it to next moron you would have to deal with.
Legally they hardly would be able to make a statement that could not be rejected by the people on boats.If you are frequent in this area why not to contact Canal and River trust and ask if it is OK to take pictures. Have their answer in written and show it to next moron you would have to deal with.
I think it may be a good idea to contact the owners. I've reviewed the website and it appears that they have a formal procedures for large productions. I'm sure a lone photographer keeping a history of there local patch won't present a problem. I'll certainly approach them. The more I think about it perhaps I'm the one who should be suspicious after such an aggressive response from the boat/dog owner.If you are frequent in this area why not to contact Canal and River trust and ask if it is OK to take pictures. Have their answer in written and show it to next moron you would have to deal with.
ABSOLUTELYThe more I think about it perhaps I'm the one who should be suspicious after such an aggressive response from the owner.
Legally they hardly would be able to make a statement that could not be rejected by the people on boats.
And therein may lie the problem. The Canal and River Trust has a major problem with boat owners not paying their licences. Equally there may have been some other activity going on that was not apparent to the OP but which the owner is worried about in terms of what might be revealed. He may even be under a warning from the Canal and River Trust for some reason
That’s the absurdity... baseless fear and assumption of “suspicious behavior”.I fear that a camera may register simply as a camera these days and be used not for the pleasure of photography as we on Photrio understand its purpose.
Carry a small portfolio of work you've done at that location previously. Being able to show you're not doing anything nefarious should help.
Legally they hardly would be able to make a statement that could not be rejected by the people on boats.
.
Tricky one,
First question to OP. What are you doing tramping a narrow canal towpath when the whole of england is in lockdown and you are suppse to be at home and only going out for essential journies. To me, your activities today appear suspicious at least.
The canal is a few hundred metres from my home and I use it for my daily and limited socially distanced exercise. Few people use the tow path in such cold, gloomy conditions. I live in a rural location on the limits of a small town. Boat owners tend to Moor close to the town for amenities.Tricky one,
First question to OP. What are you doing tramping a narrow canal towpath when the whole of england is in lockdown and you are suppse to be at home and only going out for essential journies. To me, your activities today appear suspicious at least.
I agree that those using the canal do not have the obligation to be photographed. However, nor do those living in a town centres or my own street for that matter. I make efforts to ensure that I photograph boats as part of a scene. And only if it's really worth the use of the film. I shall continue to do this and see it as "street photography". For me the same rules apply with discretion. In this case the boat was not named yet was advertising goods for sale on the towpath . In a way it was a shop. It had little expectation of privacy.But that licence hardly can contain the obligation to let one be photographed. And that like was the fear of those boat-people.
Meanwhile often there is such at closed locations, but it is hard for me to believe such could be extended onto a wateray/nature, be it a restricted area.
I think this was probably the case. Certainly the snarling dog was.You may have just run into someone who was having a bad day...
I agree that those using the canal do not have the obligation to be photographed. However, nor do those living in a town centres or my own street for that matter. I make efforts to ensure that I photograph boats as part of a scene. And only if it's really worth the use of the film. I shall continue to do this and see it as "street photography". For me the same rules apply with discretion. In this case the boat was not named yet was advertising goods for sale on the towpath . In a way it was a shop. It had little expectation of privacy.
I will contact the waterways owners for their definitive view.
Thanks for your responses and views
Black market? That could explain things...In this case the boat was not named yet was advertising goods for sale on the towpath .
I think it may be a good idea to contact the owners. I've reviewed the website and it appears that they have a formal procedures for large productions. I'm sure a lone photographer keeping a history of there local patch won't present a problem. I'll certainly approach them. The more I think about it perhaps I'm the one who should be suspicious after such an aggressive response from the boat/dog owner.
I'm thinking of getting a few business cards as well so that at least I can be as transparent as possible.
Thanks for your suggestions to date
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?