Should interest most photographers.

Doesn't the presence of the Video Camera suggest that the whole set up was very obvious - hence the security men having what may have been a rather more robust attitude ?

One person with a camera - OK more than one , with possibly a tripod AND someone with a videocam ?

If they were outside your house wouldn't you want to know what was going on ?
 
Was it a set up? Of course it was....they even state so at the beginning of the video;

"All were instructed to keep to public land and photograph the area as they would on a normal day. The event aimed to test the policing of public and private space by private security firms and their reaction to photographers."
 
Smeggypants said:
The paranoia over 'terror nonsense' from the security people on the video is hilarious though.
Click to expand...

Why? London is a city on high security risk of terrorism, probably higher than any other city in the UK. The security people would not be doing there jobs properly if they did not at least approach anyone they find acting suspiciously or out of the ordinary.

inkiboo said:
What a load of nonsense.

They weren't looking to get a reaction, they were looking to show the reaction they would get. Subtle but important difference.

If I walk down the street and someone asks me what I am doing, I don't have to justify it. Same is true with photography.
Click to expand...

If all you are doing is walking down the street, you are highly unlikely to be asked what you are doing. If someone is taking photos, this raises the questions as to why. If you can't give a reasonable answer as to why and lets face it unless someone wants to be a Class 1 'A'hole why would anyone refuse to answer. At the end of the day security staff are only there to ensure things remain secure. In this video all were polite, some may not be aware of peoples rights but they remained polite.
 
nilagin said:
Why? London is a city on high security risk of terrorism, probably higher than any other city in the UK. The security people would not be doing there jobs properly if they did not at least approach anyone they find acting suspiciously or out of the ordinary.
Click to expand...

It's about discretion. One of the security guards in the video quoted the Terrorism Act (and "other acts") but had no idea about why he was doing so. That's not on. The security people were trying to do their jobs but as the photographer notes there needs to be some element of common sense to their approach.

If all you are doing is walking down the street, you are highly unlikely to be asked what you are doing. If someone is taking photos, this raises the questions as to why. If you can't give a reasonable answer as to why and lets face it unless someone wants to be a Class 1 'A'hole why would anyone refuse to answer. At the end of the day security staff are only there to ensure things remain secure. In this video all were polite, some may not be aware of peoples rights but they remained polite.
Click to expand...

They're there to ensure things remain secure but some may be unaware of people's rights? That doesn't sound very reassuring to me! The photographers in the video didn't refuse to answer. Some of the people asking were polite, the building manager in one of the videos was reasonable and asked the photographers if they wanted a better vantage point.

Common-sense and discretion surely?
 
paulminus273 said:
“London is a city on high security risk of terrorism “ less than a minute on Google
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxTQEltYrkhEzRzfbJo-zU4U1fk8FY8KIhAqCeP2XW5FYiY18z

why would anyone need a dam great big DSLR. Photographers and terrorism is just male bovine excreta
Click to expand...

If you want to do something that would just as likely go unnoticed, do it in public in full view of everyone. How many things have you heard of go by without someone questioning it just because someone had the front to do it in full view and people would think they wouldn't be doing it had they been upto no good. A few years ago the young lady that lived across the road from me had come home at 6:00 pm in broad daylight, parked her car in the road outside her house, gone in doors and come back out less than an hour later to go out again to find the car without wheels sitting on it's brake discs and brake drums. The whole time there would have been cars and buses driving past as well as people walking past, but no one saw anything "out of the ordinary" so no one saw fit to intervene.
 
nilagin said:
If you want to do something that would just as likely go unnoticed, do it in public in full view of everyone. How many things have you heard of go by without someone questioning it just because someone had the front to do it in full view and people would think they wouldn't be doing it had they been upto no good. A few years ago the young lady that lived across the road from me had come home at 6:00 pm in broad daylight, parked her car in the road outside her house, gone in doors and come back out less than an hour later to go out again to find the car without wheels sitting on it's brake discs and brake drums. The whole time there would have been cars and buses driving past as well as people walking past, but no one saw anything "out of the ordinary" so no one saw fit to intervene.
Click to expand...

Just my point if you cannot find the images you need for a terrorist activity on the internet go around with a P&S no one will stop you
 
nilagin said:
If you want to do something that would just as likely go unnoticed, do it in public in full view of everyone. How many things have you heard of go by without someone questioning it just because someone had the front to do it in full view and people would think they wouldn't be doing it had they been upto no good. A few years ago the young lady that lived across the road from me had come home at 6:00 pm in broad daylight, parked her car in the road outside her house, gone in doors and come back out less than an hour later to go out again to find the car without wheels sitting on it's brake discs and brake drums. The whole time there would have been cars and buses driving past as well as people walking past, but no one saw anything "out of the ordinary" so no one saw fit to intervene.
Click to expand...

I take the point you're making to be the same as that that video is trying to get across, that sometimes poorly informed security are abusing the rights we have in this country in broad daylight and it feels like few see anything "out of the ordinary" or the need to intervene.
 
I purposely havent read any of the other comments in this thread because I wanted to give me honest feedback without being influenced by other members comments.

While i am 100% behind the photographers plight about being allowed to photograph where ever we want without being harassed this filmed smacked of baiting security staff for a reaction, whether that is down to editing or not im not overly sure. I can completely understand companies being concerned about security of their buildings following 7/7 and agree that they should be more switched on to security issues which would include randoms photographing or videoing buildings. Majority of security whi approached the photographer were polite and explained themselves really well.

I think unfortunately the photographers came across a little too pushy in asking the security to constantly explain their reasoning behind requiring them to not photograph as opposed to what the vast majority of us would do and simply explain our situation and reach an amicable agreement.

I do understand that this was done for a documentary reason but dont think it was a true representation of how this situations can be resolved. I was recently asked in bham why i was shooting a specific building. I simply produced my student card and told them i was shooting for an assignment, the guy was very polite and told me i could continue.

Fair play to the police too, very understanding.
 
Last edited:
Rod.F said:
I take the point you're making to be the same as that that video is trying to get across, that sometimes poorly informed security are abusing the rights we have in this country in broad daylight and it feels like few see anything "out of the ordinary" or the need to intervene.
Click to expand...

Actually I was making the point that if a terrorist were to act furtively trying to hide the fact that he is taking photos or videos, if seen he would appear suspicious and raise concerns. To an everyday observer, passer by in the street, someone blatantly taking photos is likeley to go unnoticed, hence why building security have to be on their toes and question peoples motives.
If you take it from a photographers point of view, you will probably have seen something from an artistic point of view that you wish to capture. From securities point of view with no artistic interest, they see someone taking photos of their building and are compelled to ask why? A polite and informative response is all that is necessary with, if the camera is digital, the offer to show them the photos you have taken to allay their fears or suspicions.
I suspect the building manager who offered to allow photos be taken inside the building probably had some artistic knowledge of his building and wanted to pass it on, whilst others wouldhave been of th eopinion that their buildings had nothing of interest to offer to a photographer.
 
The police seem to be more well versed with the law.
 
I still can't decide where I stand on the whole issue. One one side, it does irritate me that security who clearly don't know the law think they can try and intimidate, and in some cases quote an Act they've heard of but don't really know what it says.

On the other hand, if I was asked what I was doing, I'd just tell them, rather than be defensive and demand what grounds they have for asking in the first place. It'll definitely be the quickest way to a peaceful resolution.

I also get the point though that if nobody kicks up any kind of fuss, the situation will never change..... it's a tricky one for sure!
 
ziggy©;3870449 said:
The difference is that one is trying to enjoy photography while the other is trying to prove a point.



I never actually said that we shouldn't photograph 'sensitive areas'. What i said is that we should be able to photograph these areas but only for the purpose of enjoying photography. What i dont agree with is people who do it to deliberately provoke the authorities just so that they can blag about it on internet forums and blogs.
Click to expand...

Whatever the intent the physical action was exactly the same and in that respect there was no difference. Thes photographers just set up camrea ns shot. They didn't invite the security people over. The security reacted exactly the same as they would




The other reason these security guards (especially at canary wharf or the London Eye) insist on not allowing people with DSLR with tripods in their compounds is that it is actually against the law to take pictures of the London Eye or Canary Wharf for commercial purpose. [Probably including pictures taken from public areas]. Now i know that a lot of people like myself only take pictures just for the enjoyment but a lot of them will also sell the pictures if they are offered a price so you can understand why they try and enforce the strict no tripod rule.
Click to expand...

What law is this please?


I have nothing against photographers taking pictures of anything provided they are doing it just for the enjoyment and not for showing off that they can say NO to security guards just because the law allows them to.

My point is that the ability to take pictures of anything from public places is in my opinion just a loophole that can quite easily be closed if need be. If people dont abuse the privilege then we will all enjoy taking pictures for many years to come but if they do abuse that privilege then its only a matter of time.
Click to expand...

The fact you call it a privilege speaks volumes. It is NOT a privilege it is a right.
 
nilagin said:
Why? London is a city on high security risk of terrorism, probably higher than any other city in the UK.
Click to expand...

I would disagree about that, but it's beyond the scope of this thread to discuss the largely, IMO fabricated scaremongering about 'Terror'


The security people would not be doing there jobs properly if they did not at least approach anyone they find acting suspiciously or out of the ordinary.
Click to expand...

Sure, but people taking photographs is not suspicious or out of the ordinary behaviour. it's perfectly normal behaviour.

The very fact that photography has been turned into a suspicious behaviour is the very issue us photographers are complaining about




If all you are doing is walking down the street, you are highly unlikely to be asked what you are doing. If someone is taking photos, this raises the questions as to why. If you can't give a reasonable answer as to why and lets face it unless someone wants to be a Class 1 'A'hole why would anyone refuse to answer. At the end of the day security staff are only there to ensure things remain secure. In this video all were polite, some may not be aware of peoples rights but they remained polite.
Click to expand...


When I asked I just say "for fun". It's an honest answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top