Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Photography in Public Places

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Photography in Public Places

    Ok, so I was at Cardiff Bay with my wife, taking photo's of the area.

    We were standing on a small bridge overlooking the fair, from which I had a good aspect of the fair and right to the Millennium Theatre. Great for a photo.

    I had taken a couple of images ( see image for position), when I had a tap on my shoulder...it was a Community Police Officer.

    Excuse me he said can I just ask you to make sure you do not have any Children in your shots.

    Erm what! It's a funfair there will be children how am I supposed to not get any in the image?

    I just said I will do my best, he then just left.

    My question is, if he had insisted on seeing the images or asked me to stop taking photo's. Has he the right to do this, it's not a swimming baths, sports field etc, but a public place.

    I would have had no problems with any one checking the shots at all.

    Just wondering what my rights are.

    My wife was flabbergasted by it.Made me smile as there were 100's of people taking shots with their mobiles!


    [IMG]Cardiff bay by Roy Dale, on Flickr[/IMG]

  • #2
    Re: Photography in Public Places

    You have the right to take photos of what you wish in a public place including children police officers etc.
    He has no powers except under terror laws to do much.

    You can only be made to delete images with a court order. The owners of the land you are shooting can set their own rules and have the right to stop you taking photos without permission.

    You will only get hassled for using a camera not a phone
    OMD E-M1 OMD E-M5II MMF3 12-40 pro 12-50 EZ 14-42 EZ 9-18 f4.0 -5.6 40 -150f4-f5.6 R 60mm f2.8 macro Sigma 105 f2.8 macro Holga 60mm plastic Holga pinhole lens lens and a XZ-1 Olympus - 35 SP Trip 35 Pen EEs OM2sp

    I nice view does not mean a good photograph. My FLickr

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Photography in Public Places

      Go back and show him this

      https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q717.htm
      OMD E-M1 OMD E-M5II MMF3 12-40 pro 12-50 EZ 14-42 EZ 9-18 f4.0 -5.6 40 -150f4-f5.6 R 60mm f2.8 macro Sigma 105 f2.8 macro Holga 60mm plastic Holga pinhole lens lens and a XZ-1 Olympus - 35 SP Trip 35 Pen EEs OM2sp

      I nice view does not mean a good photograph. My FLickr

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Photography in Public Places

        Thank you ,I have book marked that and will print a copy off to carry with me.
        It is a public place and no signs any where restricting photography

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Photography in Public Places

          Originally posted by royd63uk View Post
          Thank you ,I have book marked that and will print a copy off to carry with me.
          It is a public place and no signs any where restricting photography
          As regards printing something to carry, also have a look at Linda Macpherson's guide HERE
          Best Regards
          Bill

          The nearest I have to a home page.
          http://www.flickr.com/photos/peak4/
          They're Watching You!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Photography in Public Places

            That site is written by the police and necessarily puts a police slant on their interpretation of the law. Google UK photographers' rights and see what comes up. There has been much publicity over this matter in the last few years and extensive reading is required to obtain a truly balanced view.

            I have copies of various interpretations which I am not at liberty to reproduce, but they are all freely available on t'tinterweb.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Photography in Public Places

              I think if you were there with a large telephoto lens, he might have had a point.

              I guess he was just being cautious...………..:-)

              Must admit if there are kids around, I am a bit careful where I photo...…..

              ??
              Last edited by MJ224; 8th August 2019, 04:39 PM. Reason: more thoughts

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Photography in Public Places

                [quote.]Must admit if there are kids around, I am a bit careful where I photo...….[/quote]

                Yes so am I.
                The other side of the bridge looks over the bay...but they had set up a paddling pool underneath there so i deliberately did not go to that side so there was no chance I could be accused of takng images of them

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Photography in Public Places

                  Originally posted by royd63uk View Post
                  [quote.]Must admit if there are kids around, I am a bit careful where I photo...….

                  Yes so am I.
                  The other side of the bridge looks over the bay...but they had set up a paddling pool underneath there so i deliberately did not go to that side so there was no chance I could be accused of takng images of them
                  Yes It is a sad world, 99+% of us are **cked by the 0.1% 0f tools...……..

                  Gunlaw might be appropriate (really only making a point...NOT serious_)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Photography in Public Places

                    I am very happy to go to public places, such as fairs and shows with the 40-150mm Pro. I can get some really good "human" photos, none with any offence, some slightly amusing (to me anyway). I don't think its necessary to get the photographees (new word) to give permission....Unless they ask or demand. matter of taste (?) and discretion. Nothing new in what I think, its been done for as long as photography has existed...……………

                    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-49151953

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Old divers never die, they just go down on old wrecks
                      Take nothing but photographs, leave nothing but bubbles
                      My website

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Photography in Public Places

                        Originally posted by Wreckdiver View Post
                        I am surprised that this attitude still exists.

                        ...

                        Actually things seem to be moving against photographers' rights in this country, based on at least two trends.

                        Firstly a more recent update than some of the guidance that has been posted above is the emerging case law on GDPR. Taking photos including identifiable people, especially in an identifiable place and time and context, and particularly in an era with emerging facial recognition software, could be regarded by the courts as gathering personal data. The courts of different EU countries will no doubt come up with different interpretations of this, influenced by their culture (and their country's attitudes towards legalistic restrictions on historic freedoms). There is also an increasingly restrictive interpretation of the notion of taking photos of someone where they have a "reasonable expectation of privacy". This was introduced to stop paparazzi taking long lens shots of royals sunbathing topless, but now seems to be used to preclude various less intrusive and long-accepted genres (e.g. looking into a restaurant from a public place).

                        The other trend I've noticed is for what used to be public places are increasingly privatised. E.g. I think large chunks of central London are officially owned by the Duke of Westminster, and photography is not officially allowed, so the Duke's agents can ask you to stop or leave. There are also open air plazas surrounded by shops which seem public (and once were) but are now privately owned, so their security guards can treat you as a trespasser if you refuse to stop taking photos. Even some "public" parks are treated by the local authority as private council-owned spaces for this purpose, and so they can impose their own by-laws (including restrictions on photography) and their agents can use reasonable force to remove people who disobey after being warned.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Photography in Public Places

                          So, basically, just go about your day, take all the pictures you want and if someone tells you to stop, say "fair enough .... but will you also tell everyone with a phone to stop as well", then move on to take more pictures but at waist level so the 'guardian' thinks you are just carrying your camera. I've taken some great photos like that in places where photography isn't allowed.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Photography in Public Places

                            I remember years ago the AP mag used to have pictures of kids on the cover quite often. One of the contributors to that mag was a teacher who had his camera on his desk and would take photos of the junior kids.
                            No harm done to the kids, but a lovely record of children.
                            Of topic but relevant, some time ago I went to the gents in a large motorway facility. Unusually there was a queue, standing at the entrance to the loo was a female teacher, preventing men from entering because her boys were in there. She had been put in an invidious position as she could not enter the gents, and there was a lot of disgruntled men crossing their legs. I ignored her and went in.
                            World has gone crazy.
                            sigpicDave

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Photography in Public Places

                              Originally posted by RobEW View Post
                              Actually things seem to be moving against photographers' rights in this country, based on at least two trends.

                              Firstly a more recent update than some of the guidance that has been posted above is the emerging case law on GDPR. Taking photos including identifiable people, especially in an identifiable place and time and context, and particularly in an era with emerging facial recognition software, could be regarded by the courts as gathering personal data. The courts of different EU countries will no doubt come up with different interpretations of this, influenced by their culture (and their country's attitudes towards legalistic restrictions on historic freedoms). There is also an increasingly restrictive interpretation of the notion of taking photos of someone where they have a "reasonable expectation of privacy". This was introduced to stop paparazzi taking long lens shots of royals sunbathing topless, but now seems to be used to preclude various less intrusive and long-accepted genres (e.g. looking into a restaurant from a public place).

                              The other trend I've noticed is for what used to be public places are increasingly privatised. E.g. I think large chunks of central London are officially owned by the Duke of Westminster, and photography is not officially allowed, so the Duke's agents can ask you to stop or leave. There are also open air plazas surrounded by shops which seem public (and once were) but are now privately owned, so their security guards can treat you as a trespasser if you refuse to stop taking photos. Even some "public" parks are treated by the local authority as private council-owned spaces for this purpose, and so they can impose their own by-laws (including restrictions on photography) and their agents can use reasonable force to remove people who disobey after being warned.
                              A private or council employed security guard in this country has no more legal powers than any other member of the public.

                              They can make a Citizens Arrest if they believe an indictable offence has been committed but so can any other member of the public. Doing so however is fraught with pitfalls and best avoided. No security officer or member of the public can legally use force to remove anyone from any public or private or council owned space unless they know or have reasonable grounds to suspect an indictable offence is being committed.

                              A security guard who laid hands on a photographer in an attempt to remove him would leave himself wide open to a charge of common assault. The correct course of action would be to keep the person under observation and seek the immediate assistance of the Police. The security guard would then have to convince the Police officers the photographer had committed an offence.

                              The law pertaining to government or military security may be a very different matter.

                              I'm not suggesting private security officers would not use force, or that it doesn't happen, simply that they are not in most cases legally allowed to do so as is incorrectly suggested in the post quoted above.


                              Jax

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X