Do You Need A Licence To Photograph An Accident?

snoop69

snoop69

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,451
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Just had an Air Ambulance fly over the area so i grabbed the kids
& my camera to try & find it to get some snaps.

The copter had landed in a nearby school so i grabbed a couple of pics.

Word soon got round from the crowd that an accident had happened
just around the corner so i went & took a look.

As soon as a few 'mature' ladies saw my camera they started hurling
abuse in my direction saying things like 'your sick' ' how would like it'

They asked where my press badge was!

When i said to the kids 'lets go & see a helicopter take off' they hurled
more insults.

One even approached a Wpc but she seemed un-interested.

Do i need a licence or am i free to snap away & sell the pics to the
highest bidder?

Thanks in advance.
 
No you don't need a license and yes you're free to sell them.
 
Yes you can take pictures of who and what you like in public...although there are a few security exceptions, accidents isn't one!!
 
If you took the pictures on school grounds or some other private property then even a press pass doesn't allow you to take pictures without permission. However if you were on public property and shooting pics of the helicopter in the school grounds then you should be ok.
 
were they rubber necking?

my response would of been well your here taking a peek ladies. so i am only as sick as you!!

no licence needed snap em local paper more than happy to take them off yer hands.
 
I photographed a bike crash the other week where the rider died a few hours later in hospital. I did send a few into my local evening paper as they were going to run a front page story on it. I thought the pictures conveyed the scene rather well (no sign of the injured rider as he'd been taken by ambulance before I got there).

The newsdesk of the paper sent me an email back saying thanks for the photos but they had their own 'tog there. They never did use any of my photos or indeed any other photo that set the scene as well as I thought mine did.
 
hotchef23 said:
were they rubber necking?
my response would of been well your here taking a peek ladies. so i am only as sick as you!!

no licence needed snap em local paper more than happy to take them off yer hands.
Click to expand...

I did ask them if the read newspapers & the reply was 'yeah but' :|

JPS said:
I photographed a bike crash the other week where the rider died a few hours later in hospital. I did send a few into my local evening paper as they were going to run a front page story on it. I thought the pictures conveyed the scene rather well (no sign of the injured rider as he'd been taken by ambulance before I got there).

The newsdesk of the paper sent me an email back saying thanks for the photos but they had their own 'tog there. They never did use any of my photos or indeed any other photo that set the scene as well as I thought mine did.
Click to expand...

Pretty much the same - young lad was run over & the copter was in a local
school playground (i was on the pavement with about 100 others).

At the crash scene round the corner the police had taped off the area so
you couldnt see much other than the car & a couple of ambulances.Also,
the young lad was already in one of the ambulances by the time id arrived.

Thanks for the advice guys :thumbs:
 
Make yourself a simple "press" pass laminate it and next time some numpty asks show them that (or pin it on your bag) they wouldn't know a real one anyway so anything that shuts them up is ok. Wayne
 
As far as the legalities go, it's black and white, perfectly legal.

The dilemma is more a moral one. I think that as long as the injured parties aren't in the shot, and you're not obstructing the emergency services, it's perfectly acceptable!

There are plenty of images of terrorism, war and accidents in the papers on a daily basis, I think it's important that these photographs are taken and shown, it's part of life, albeit not very nice, but it happens!

Dave
 
Not a problem. I had shots published of an accident on the M4, taken from a bridge overlooking the scene. No injuries visible, just crumpled cars/lorries.
 
This is definitely a question of moral values and choices as opposed to legalities.

Personally (as in my personal opinion) I wouldn't start shooting the scene of an accident regardless of what my intentions were for the picture.

Yes there are pictures of terrorism, accidents and blood shed all over the papers but for one they are "mostly" taken by press photographers who's job it is to get these pictures into the papers that we decide to buy and read.
And secondly, just because pictures like this are in the papers it doesn't mean that its morally right. Not everybody reads those articles or looks at the pictures !
The papers, sky tv etc will print and show whatever they think will sell papers and get viewers regardless of how moral it is.

I was stuck on the motorway for an hour an a half last Wednesday night on my way to Bristol due to a multiple pile up. 6 fire engines, at least 5 ambulances and many police cars shot up the hard shoulder past me.
I was probably 20 cars back from the scene (could see the firemen working) and noticed at least half a dozen people come past me walking up to the scene for a nose.
I stayed put and would have done so even if I had my camera with me.

Please note again that this is my personal opinion. Feel free to debate but don't start shooting me down for making a choice that is my right to make.:thumbs:
 
Agree with the above - its completely legal to photograph it so long as you are on public property.

On the moral front, I don't have a problem with photographing accidents. The same people who had a go at you were probably gawking at the accident themselves and are sure to buy a paper with images and text the next day.

You don't need a press pass but sometimes they can be useful, another tip that works is to put on a high visibility vest. The more you stand out - the less your trying to hide.

With that all said, had you not had your kids with you, they may well have taken you to be a pro-tog and left you alone... I have to admit if I saw a guy with his kids taking photos well thats a bit odd, almost like getting holiday snaps of a crash.... I appreciate that this wasn't the case but I'm sure you can see how it may have come accross like that :thinking:
 
Should I have taken this shot then?


2777747832_2157c8499e.jpg
 
swanseamale47 said:
Make yourself a simple "press" pass laminate it and next time some numpty asks show them that (or pin it on your bag) they wouldn't know a real one anyway so anything that shuts them up is ok. Wayne
Click to expand...



A Press pass has a police phone number on the back.. the press card holder has a password. Anyone can phone that number and check that the card holder has the same password held by the police. This makes it impossible for a press pass to be properly reproduced. A couple of people who dont know any better in the street you might get away with. But you would always run the risk of someone knowing and you getting caught

I would say having no press pass is better than being caught with a fake one :) I have had one for about a year now and have never been asked to produce it yet. Before I got one I was asked a couple of times.... sods law eh :)
 
The AOP also provide a press pass - it is part of membership, but membership is actually very expensive for what you get. I resigned my membership years ago, and my Association of Sports Photographers, and the BIPP, and the Yachting Journalists....they are all just mutual back-slapping societies.

In all the years I was a member of various Associations/societies, NUj etc. They were never any use, I didn't get any extra business or benefits from membership......since leaving the lot I haven't seen a downturn in business, quite the opposite in fact!
 
I am not a member of any of these or ANY organisation. as far as I know the criteria for a UK press pass is that you are earning money as a "news gatherer" and can prove it..
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Should I have taken this shot then?


2777747832_2157c8499e.jpg
Click to expand...

I don't mind what pictures you take, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that you posted it on this thread. Im also not going to try and tell you whether its right or wrong, I simply gave my opinion based on my choices.

Im in no way directly associated with that picture or any picture that I cast my eyes over in the paper and the reason why I choose not to photograph public accidents is because I don't want to be associated with others suffering unless of course its in a truly helpful way such as offering first aid or assistance.

I also think that motorsport events are "slightly" different.
There are safety measures in place to limit the effects of an accident because its almost expected. The riders and drivers know the risk and willingly accept that as part of the sport. I can understand why motor sport enthusiasts would take photo's of crashes and have no real problem with that, I simply wouldn't take photo's myself of a publc accident if I were close by at the point it happened especially if I thought there were injured parties.
 
to be honest i think that if you saw an air ambulance fly over and purposely chased it just to take pics of an accident then maybe you need to find a different hobby.
i'm not even that keen on the idea of witnesses taking photos at the scene, but if half the public in the area start ambulance chasing then we really do have a problem.
leave it to the professionals and only ever go to the scene of an accident if you can actually help. The paramedics need to keep the patient calm and they cant do that if the patient can see 50 members of the public shooting them like princess diana's paparazzi entourage.
 
bully74uk said:
I also think that motorsport events are "slightly" different.
There are safety measures in place to limit the effects of an accident because its almost expected. The riders and drivers no the risk and willingly accept that as part of the sport. I can understand why motor sport enthusiasts would take photo's of crashes and have no real problem with that, I simply wouldn't take photo's myself of a publc accident if I were close by at the point it happened especially if I thought there were injured parties.
Click to expand...

Good point, I also wouldn't have posted that pic if the driver had been injured.

I'm amazed he wasn't though,given the way the car flew through the air, rolled and then hit the airbarrier and sent that down on top of one of the pro 'togs who was in the wrong right place (he wasn't injured either, just a bit "shaken") at the wrong right time (he got great shots of the car heading right for him)
 
snoop69 said:
i grabbed the kids & my camera
Click to expand...

Personally I have a moral issue with ambulance chasing. I also find the idea of taking your children to see what you know is going to be a serious accident rather distasteful.
 
badgerbaiter said:
to be honest i think that if you saw an air ambulance fly over and purposely chased it just to take pics of an accident then maybe you need to find a different hobby.
Click to expand...

who? said:
Personally I have a moral issue with ambulance chasing. I also find the idea of taking your children to see what you know is going to be a serious accident rather distasteful.
Click to expand...

I took the kids and chased a helicopter.

It was only after we arrived that i found it to be an Air Ambulance that had
landed in their school playground.

Also,i didnt know a serious accident had occured and the kids were kept
well away from any 'gore' as we were too far away from the scene to make
anything out with the naked eye.
 
snoop69 said:
Just had an Air Ambulance fly over the area so i grabbed the kids
& my camera to try & find it to get some snaps.
Click to expand...

I think the confusion then is because you said you saw "an air ambulance fly over" and not just "a helicopter"
 
bully74uk said:
I think the confusion then is because you said you saw "an air ambulance fly over" and not just "a helicopter"
Click to expand...

Mmm possibly & apologies if my first post was misleading but it was just
a 'Helicopter' when it flew over.The engine noise getting slower gave us
an indication that it was landing nearby hence the 'Chase'.

Here are 3 pics that i took (un-edited but resized).

HeliCrowdMedium.jpg


HeliMedium.jpg


SceneMedium.jpg
 
It does annoy me when someone who's clearly being nosey whinges as you take a few pictures. These sorts of pictures are valuable both from a news point of view but sometimes different angles can prove useful in the investigation too. Though it's tempting to sound off I'd just have kept quiet I think. If we couldn't take pictures of events like this it would robb us of some highly significant images. Classic and historically important images such as the Pan-Am plane blown up in Lockerbie, Aftermath of Concorde's crash, various war images and terrorist attacks like 9/11.
 
I see one post saying you shouldn't take the photo... argument is well put and I think yeagh.. thats right.

Then I see another post saying the picture should be taken and its a well put argument for.. and I think yeagh thats right.


Will you people stop confusing me :)
 
As soon as a few 'mature' ladies saw my camera they started hurling
abuse in my direction saying things like 'your sick' ' how would like it'

But its ok for them to all stand around with there kids and look? , f'ng hypocritical british public as usual!
 
Its the age old photographers dilemma, you see a person drowning in the local lake, and your the only person around, do you?
A. use 1000/sec at 2.8 to freeze the splashes or
B. use 250/sec at 5.6 for depth of field????? Wayne
 
swanseamale47 said:
Its the age old photographers dilemma, you see a person drowning in the local lake, and your the only person around, do you?
A. use 1000/sec at 2.8 to freeze the splashes or
B. use 250/sec at 5.6 for depth of field????? Wayne
Click to expand...

Personally I'd use a tripod and a 2 second exposure at F16 for that silky water effect!! :lol::D
 
I think it is OK to take photos of anything................it's what you do afterwards with the images that counts.
 
You left out
C. use the time delay to get yourself as the hero in the picture swimming to the rescue.

Unless it is GWB of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top