Photographers rights

Patexpat · Post by **Patexpat** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 7:27 am

It is interesting that the rights of photographers have been raised in another thread, and would like to share this with you.After a lot of pressure in parliament, revised guidelines were issued to all police forces regarding photography in public places. This came about after petitions and letters from many sources, one of which was from the railway enthusiasts movement after many photographers were stopped by 'officials' when taking photos of trains even from public locations.A friend of mine is a semi-professional photographer based in Wakefield who specializes in street photography, and last November he along with about a dozen others visited London with the simple intention of taking photos of buildings from public locations and then to see what, if anything, happened.They worked in pairs, one as the photographer, one as an observer.Over the course of the day they had about half a dozen brushes with private security companies telling them they could not take photos of the buildings (that the security people were 'protecting). They were threatened that the police would be called, which in several cases they were. Which is of course exactly what the photographers wanted.The police response was unequivocal and clear in every case. A member of the public has every right to take photos of anything they like as long as they are on public property. In a couple of cases the police happily posed for photos too! Now I wouldn't want to go and take a photo of Menwith Hill for example, as that falls under different legislation, but next time a 'jobs worth' tries to stop you taking a photo ....

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 7:39 am

A large part of this problem arises from the type of person attracted to this kind of uniform job and the obvious power it holds.I know you can't label everyone as bad apples, and of course there are some very good employees in jobs like security guards, Police and P.C.O's. But quite a large proportion do use, and enjoy using the power of the uniform, threat of arrest, and other intimidation tactics. This is further fuelled by people who know their rights, and who won't basically pander to their every whim. They don't like their position challenged, and will turn very awkward. It really is a case of them saving face and getting their own way at all costs, in so tearing up the law and making up their own. The P.C.O's and security guards seem worse for this, but it does exist in the Police force too. PCSO NEEDS TO KNOW THE LAW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vj4imfG ... tedKnowing your rights just seems to make matter worse!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiPJ2WkA ... elatedIt's a very confused situation regarding photographers rights and this harassment. It seems to be as much about human behaviour and not wanting to back down their stance, as it is about unclear law. They will, and have wrongfully arrested many innocent people in the past just so they feel they have won that particular little battle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... N4io#t=44s

String o' beads · Post by **String o' beads** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 10:43 am

Patexpat wrote: Over the course of the day they had about half a dozen brushes with private security companies telling them they could not take photos of the buildings (that the security people were 'protecting). They were threatened that the police would be called, which in several cases they were. Which is of course exactly what the photographers wanted.The police response was unequivocal and clear in every case. A member of the public has every right to take photos of anything they like as long as they are on public property. In a couple of cases the police happily posed for photos too! I suspect this thread will disappear since it isn't solely Leeds-centric, but before it does I'll bung in my two-penn'orth.I was astonished to read that not only do some security people exceed their duties in this way, but they have on occasion actually called out the police. That is a supreme example of waste of resources, and if I were police, then rather than happily posing for pics I'd be considering bringing a case of wasting police time.

CathJ · Post by **CathJ** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 12:08 pm

Hi, I'm not sure if this is of much help but I may as well put it out there just incase. As many of you who read a previous thread of mine know, I am a journalism student at Leeds City College and as a part of my course I have to do photography and filming for projects. I did email LCC requesting information on whether or not permission is needed to film and take photographs in Leeds City Centre and they told me that I can film and take photographs as long as I abide a few guidelines which were basically not being an obstruction, if I was using props that could cause worry to the public then I should contact the police first and also I was not to stand in the middle of the road and endanger my life (that one got a fair few laughs from my tutor and class mates) they also said that certain buildings cannot be filmed without prior permission i.e. the civic hall. So you may just need to get prior permission to take photographs of certain places which may be seen to have a security risk. Again not sure how useful this information is here but it may help someone. I did have an experience with a security guard from the german market just before xmas, we were out using video cameras and just filming around Leeds in order to get used to using them and he told us we need a license before filming the market and basically kicked us off the site. Apparently what he told us was not true as we asked college admin about these licenses and they don't appear to exist as far as college are concerned.

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 1:12 pm

I was 'bollocked' by some jobswuth in Leeds Museum/Civic Theatre for taking a photo of the lovely statue of Circe.'pparently it's ok without a "flash" but I had already used my flash (or a photo wouldnt have happened).I suppose the flash may have set someone off with a fit or woken jobswuth from his torpor (only me in).I felt that after funding the city for so many generations this was little to ask?I left with a glow in the secret knowledge that I hadn't 'untaken' the photo.

String o' beads · Post by **String o' beads** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 1:15 pm

I think that's to do with such bright light affecting the colouration of artworks.

raveydavey · Post by **raveydavey** » Sat 07 Jan, 2012 4:17 pm

This may be handy to have - print it out and keep it in your camera bag.http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/ne ... 00122.html

String o' beads · Post by **String o' beads** » Sun 08 Jan, 2012 1:35 pm

Has anyone in the UK been successfully prosecuted for taking photographs of anything other than say, military installations?

CathJ · Post by **CathJ** » Sun 08 Jan, 2012 3:23 pm

Geordie-exile wrote: Has anyone in the UK been successfully prosecuted for taking photographs of anything other than say, military installations? Not sure if this ever led to a prosecution but there was a guy in Lancashire who was taking photographs in a town centre when a Police officer stopped him and eventually arrested him. The link to the story is below. http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/ne ... ccrington/

String o' beads · Post by **String o' beads** » Sun 08 Jan, 2012 3:35 pm

Held for eight hours and released without charge.http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/2 ... ror-arrest