London Eye Clamps Down on Photographers ... !!!

V

Venomator

Suspended / Banned
Messages
12,599
Edit My Images
No
Well ... just reviewing Pete's London Eye V.2 HERE ...

... and as Pete was unaware of this story I thought others may also have missed it ... :shrug: ...

AP Article ... :rules:

What do you think Guys 'n Gals ... :thinking:

Looks like we are getting hammered every which way ... :thumbsdown:


:p
 
i think the idea that semi-pro or pro equipment makes for a better picture than a PS is a bit daft now, yes, a pro camera will give you a damn fine image, but a top spec PS will be damn close to it!
 
I like this quote for stupidity:

The strict rules apply to compact cameras mounted on tripods, as well as camera models that are professional in appearance.
Click to expand...

Very specific rule there:thinking:

So me with my 350D could be stopped while someone with a £2k Leica would be ignored :lol:

Good to see nothing is getting in the way of this country's decline into nonesense:shrug:
 
:agree: ...

It really is so damn pathetic ... what right have they or any operators of any 'public' facility got to be so bleedin' pompous and arrogant ... :shrug: ... :razz:

Another nail in the coffin of reason and freedom ... :sulk:





:p
 
So i will get more in the way than those using their camera phones?

Crock of crap!!! What is wrong with these muppets these days?? :shake:
 
If you are on public land ie/ the street then there's nothing they can do. I'd challenge anyone who threatened to take my camera who wasn't a police officer.
 
I think we need to stage a protest. All amateur photographers with SLRs (or professional looking kit) descend onto the London eye and just stand around for a few hours. I would like to see the security guards try to move everyone off individually.
 
BBW said:
If you are on public land ie/ the street then there's nothing they can do. I'd challenge anyone who threatened to take my camera who wasn't a police officer.
Click to expand...

Even a police officer is not allowed to confiscate anything!
 
Thats the point I would be cautious of, perhaps impersonation to steal tourists equipment - I would leave, but they would not get my gear, and I would suggest that nobody would surrender their equipment.
 
Another thing that makes me chuckle is..
People who tend to use tripods tend to be doing something of a semi-professional or professional nature
Click to expand...
Oh that must be because only professionals use tripods right? people who take photos for the enjoyment of it aren't aware of this triple legged mechanical image stabilisation contraption :cuckoo: :p
 
What a load of b******s! This is similar to what I came across with Chris (Catdaddy) when we went to the Oracle shopping centre in Reading - whilst there were plenty of people around taking photos with thier P&S's, Chris and I were escorted out of the shopping centre as we were not allowed to use "professional" cameras without first obtaining a pass :annoyed:
 
kamion said:
I think we need to stage a protest. All amateur photographers with SLRs (or professional looking kit) descend onto the London eye and just stand around for a few hours. I would like to see the security guards try to move everyone off individually.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a plan - for the next TPF meet :naughty:
 
I think it's an excellent idea Ven :thumbs: How do the admins feel about the TPF name being used though?
 
What a crock of crap (excuse the language).

If we're not being branded paedophiles, we're being branded terrorist, theives, robbers, and burglars....'casing' a joint.
Its absolutely pathetic, and ironically I blame the media for whipping the public into a paranoid frenzy, and more importantly, the stupid public (as a whole) for letting them.

As a result, it's getting harder for a photography enthusiast to innocently go out and take pictures.
We can't take photos of children playing, because if we did, then we might take those images home and use them for sexual gratification. (Although I'm sure the parents who kick up a stink wouldn't object to them being paid to model underwear for a clothes catalogue would they?).
We can't take photos on private property, because we're a health and safety hazard. We can't set up tripods, because they get in the way. We can't take photos of passers by and use them commercially due to data protection reasons. We can't take photos of buildings due to copyright.
We can't take photos of scenes that have a noticable trademark or logo in them (even if incidental) due to copyright.

FFS. It won't be long before we will be asking the question...just what *can* we take photos of?

What intrigues me about this particular story, is that, the land around the London Eye (including the infamous spot where everyone take 'THE shot' from), is it public land or not?

If so..no security guard is going to move me on. They have no right to.
The police only have limited powers to move the public on too. (Although they do have powers to, if necessary, with the right reasons).

No one gets my camera, or cards...full stop.

Trespass isn't a criminal offense. It's a civil offense (as CT has also mentioned in another thread). Break something or cause damage on someones property, and it's a whole different ball game.

All they can do, if you're on private land is ask you to leave, which they have a right to do.

What also tickled me about this...they claim its for health and safety, they claim to fit them in at quiet times...
I bet you any money, if I rang them up and explained I was a commisioned photographer and needed a shot of the London Eye at its busiest, and had a budget to pay.....they would bite my hand off.

Its a crock of crap.
 
Agree with all your points mate, but IMO there are some cracking places to take the more unusual shot of the eye rather than the the familar one of the line of lit trees. Just my opinion.
I can see you feel passionately about this, but I do love your last comment 'crock of crap' tickled me :)

Can you take a Tripod if you are a paying customer into one of the capsules ?
 
chewyuk said:
Can you take a Tripod if you are a paying customer into one of the capsules ?
Click to expand...

NOPE ... :shake:

According to the article 'pods are being banned from the pods ... :rules:

Gets worse dunnit ... :shrug:






:p
 
If I were to take a photo of the Eye and a security guard asked me to move on I would refuse. I'd call the police myself if neccessary but I wouldn't move out of general principle.
 
We need to have a day out there and have one of us as the 'designated decoy' with fancy looking camera and huge lens on a tripod (made of papier mache') who's job it is to gain and keep the attention of the security personel by arguing the toss with them while the rest of us snap away! :)


/breathes in deeply
 
Anyone got a Hassleblad? I dare them to setup with a laptop running Capture 1 Pro and do some tethered shooting. I would be up for a giant meet there just to really scare them. Get some guys with hassleblads and Leica's just to take the **** out of the "pro" look.
 
The land around the Eye IS private. I checked this out after we had our run-in with the tripod-police on the London meet. There are signs to say so once you are walking along the area in front of the Aquarium, but nothing as you leave the bridge and walk down the steps into that area.

To be fair, I've taken shots in that area many a time with no problems - on that occasion it was simply because we were setting up tripods. As for the confiscation of gear thing - for goodness sake don't ANYONE get duped by this. Ask you to move on they can, ban you from returning they also can, but take any item from you they may NOT! This would be theft - if it happens, dial 999 and inform the police that you are being mugged!
 
let's face it guy's this could only happen in good old england, any other country there would be no problem whatsoever as long as it was'ent a government building, the way thing's are going i think i will give up photography and take up knitting (and no sarcky comments about getting better results :D ) the place just beggars belief, but if you mug someone for the camera gear thats ok, you would more than likely get left alone, anyway a great idea about everyone descending on the place for a meet, the more the merrier.
 
Brindley Place in B'ham City Centre, is a similar situation it seems... much to my surprise... no longer a 'public place' as it's maintained and run privately. :shrug:

Trespass is a Common Law infringement of your rights, which basically means that since the earliest times it's been mutually agreed by people that you can't have people waltzing across each others properties willy nilly and it's never been necessary to write down (legislate)that particular law. That's all it is though, an infringement of one's Common Law rights. There's no offence committed by trespass which will see you arraigned before the beaks, and no mechanism for getting you there. Probably just as well really.... can you imagine the backlog of cases waiting to go to court of the " That ******* next door walked across the front corner of my lawn AGAIN this morning" type. :D

The only way trespass will land you in criminal trouble is if that trespass is for an unlawful purpose - with intent to commit criminal damage is one. There are also offences of trespassing on land in possession of Firearms, aimed primarily at poachers.

Things are a bit different in Scotland where there are offences of Trespass so be a bit careful north of the border.

Security Guards have no powers to seize your kit, but be a bit careful, if they call the cops and you then don't leave on request, you could find yourself on the wrong end of a Conduct Likely To Cause A Breach Of The Peace charge, and the cops have power at Common Law and other legislation to seize any item for evidential purposes.

Always stand up for your rights, I certainly do, but know when to beat a tactical retreat too. :D
 
I quite like the idea of a 'mass photo-shoot'! I'm a non-smoker who hates smoking, but believes vehemently in people's right to smoke... same principle here. I only work across the road at Waterloo... easy for me! :D
 
well, I'm up for a huge mass-meet in london to shove it to these guys, perhaps get AP and every other forum out there to meet all at once and make a point of snapping away. how many hundreds of people can they bang up at once?
 
Nice idea SS ... sounds like that would be a real challenge for the nazi state we are turning into ... :D






:p
 
Same thread up an running on POTN and the idea of a meet floated there too - perhaps a UK photogs rebellion in the making!
 
By coincidence I was there on Tuesday night, around 11:30pm, with my tripod and 30D and there were several yellow coated security people guarding the area. I spent about 45 minutes messing around and not one of them said anything to me. Unlike last Friday when a security guard at Canary Wharf told me off for using a tripod.

thailand tel said:
let's face it guy's this could only happen in good old england, any other country there would be no problem whatsoever
Click to expand...

If you are on privately owned land then the owners can impose any restrictions they wish, whatever country you are in.

One thing to be aware of though is that a tenant on a site may not be the landowner and so neither they nor their their agents (aka security guards) have any authority beyond their sites on that land unless acting under the authority of the landowner. So assuming the owner of the embankment does not prohibit photography then the owners of the Eye can only restrict activities on the land they specifically rent, assuming of course they are not the same body.

Michael.
 
"I wasn't taking piccies of the London Eye gov. I was taking pictures of the lovely cloud formations that that monstrosity is blocking out."

Mass photographers march, and we could all sell the piccies to the press. :D
 
mij said:
By coincidence I was there on Tuesday night, around 11:30pm, with my tripod and 30D and there were several yellow coated security people guarding the area. I spent about 45 minutes messing around and not one of them said anything to me. Unlike last Friday when a security guard at Canary Wharf told me off for using a tripod.



If you are on privately owned land then the owners can impose any restrictions they wish, whatever country you are in.

One thing to be aware of though is that a tenant on a site may not be the landowner and so neither they nor their their agents (aka security guards) have any authority beyond their sites on that land unless acting under the authority of the landowner. So assuming the owner of the embankment does not prohibit photography then the owners of the Eye can only restrict activities on the land they specifically rent, assuming of course they are not the same body.

Michael.
Click to expand...


i was refering more to the fact of tourist attractions in other country's, assuming of course the london eye is supposed to be a tourist attraction and not some new MI5 lookout for alqaeda terrorists.
 
My bro belongs to another photo forum :eek:

He's just sent me a copy of this post from the forum today ...


Dear *******

Thank you for your email. Since opening in 2000 we've had such a great relationship with both amateur and professional photographers. We've encouraged photography at the London Eye on many different levels including online photographic competitions, onset photographic exhibitions and even photography classes. We are therefore incredibly disappointed that the relationships and platforms formed with amateurs and professionals alike has now been marred by the unbalanced article in Amateur Photographer published on December 9 2006. We strongly feel that our policies and the reasons behind them have been misrepresented by Chris Cheeseman. Articles like these should aim to assist photographers in the sense that is should relay the correct information that they will need on the day and not discourage them. In the six years that the London Eye has been open we have never had the kind of response we have recently had to our standard policy.

The London Eye will never attempt to restrict photography from anywhere that is not its land. London Eye security staff will also not confiscate photographic equipment. . The London Eye also has no jurisdiction over photography in the area. This was specifically pointed out to Chris Cheeseman, but unfortunately this was not reported.

The more people that wish to take pictures of the London Eye and share them with their friends, the better for us. Will never discourage photography of what has become a brilliant addition to the London skyline.

Best Wishes,
Liz Edwards
PR Manager
T: 0870 220 2777 M: 07968 998947 F: 0870 990 8882
For online bookings visit www.londoneye.co.uk
 
Iv got a meeting at waterloo next week, so i'll print this letter off and stick it in my bag, after the meeting i'll have a play with the security staff.
i'll let you know how i get on.
 
Madpup said:
Iv got a meeting at waterloo next week, so i'll print this letter off and stick it in my bag, after the meeting i'll have a play with the security staff.
i'll let you know how i get on.
Click to expand...

:lol: You naughty man. :nuts: :p

Seriously though that certainly does represent a different viewpoint to that which was printed in AP.

However, she doesn't actually contradict anything in the article. She doesn't actually say we're allowed to go and take photographs. She doesnt say we can set tripods up, she doesnt say staff won't quiz us on their land etc.

The London Eye will never attempt to restrict photography from anywhere that is not its land. London Eye security staff will also not confiscate photographic equipment. . The London Eye also has no jurisdiction over photography in the area. This was specifically pointed out to Chris Cheeseman, but unfortunately this was not reported.
Click to expand...

*ahem*
While it is not clear whether the guard worked for the London Eye, its press office claims that security staff are not instructed to confiscate equipment from photographers who do not seek permission.
Click to expand...

On the face of it, it seems like a positive response, but read deeper, and its easy to see both are quite biased. AP is biased towards the photographers rights to take images, and the press office biased towards keeping photographers out.......tis evidently an attempt at calming the waters with a bit PR though, while not actually contradicting anything the article says.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top