Public Photography. BBC "Law in Action"

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by chrisj.doran, Feb 11, 2009.

  1. chrisj.doran

    chrisj.doran Guest

    Problems faced by UK photographers were discussed in the BBC's "Law in
    Action" programme on Tuesday 10th. Hear it at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00hd42z
    starting about 1/3 of the way through. It covers the general issue of
    taking photos in public places and what has happened when some people
    fell foul of over-zealous constabulary. No mention of the urban myth
    about it being illegal to photograph children.

    Chris
     
    chrisj.doran, Feb 11, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. chrisj.doran

    Paul Heslop Guest

    aye, but just take a picture which happens to contain someone else's
    kids and see what happens.
     
    Paul Heslop, Feb 11, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. chrisj.doran

    whisky-dave Guest

    I took a couple of photos of the snow we had recently in London,
    first mistake was that the flash went off, then these kid's said to me
    "are you taking photographs of us" I said "No I am not"
    I wouldn't have minded but these kids were about 8 to 10 years old
    and it was 11:30PM !

    If anyone's interested.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/whiskydave

    A kiddie free site.
     
    whisky-dave, Feb 11, 2009
    #3
  4. chrisj.doran

    J. Clarke Guest

    I've never heard that it is illegal to photograph children, any more
    than it is illegal to offer one a Jelly Baby. But either can get you
    arrested as a suspected child molester.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 11, 2009
    #4
  5. chrisj.doran

    Paul Heslop Guest

    yeah. it's a dangerous business for sure
    :O)
     
    Paul Heslop, Feb 11, 2009
    #5
  6. chrisj.doran

    tony cooper Guest


    Starts @ 9.40

    The terrorism act sounds like a silly excuse to stop photographers taking
    photos. Afterall, many parts of the world are already covered by Google
    Maps and also Google Street Views. Come this summer, UK Google Street Views
    will also go live. So, if it's such a serious threat, then surely Google
    Street Views would never have got the go-ahead? Then, I'm not sure why a
    terrorist would want to take photos, but surely they would use a hidden
    camera if they were going to do so?

    Mind you, I have never had a problem taking photos and neither has anyone I
    know, so maybe there's more to the stories where some people have had
    problems? It's difficult to know without knowing all the facts.

    As for taking photos of children, the same goes to taking photos of anyone.
    Although it may not be illegal to take photos of people in public, it
    doesn't mean that you shouldn't respect their privacy or their wish not to
    have their/their children's photos taken by a stranger. If they're not
    happy with having their photo taken, use your mouth. Chat with them. Show
    them your photos. [/QUOTE]

    I've recently begun keeping one of those display books for 5" x 7"
    photographs in the car with samples of the type of photographs I take.
    I do some "street photography" and people shots, and having some
    evidence that the type of photograph I go for could be reassuring to
    anyone who questions me pointing a lens in their direction. I also
    keep my membership card in the Orlando Photography Club in the car.

    Neither would appease someone with genuine objections, but they might
    convince the uncertain that my interests are just in the composition
    of a good photograph.

    Dunno what I'll do if I show my photographs to some objector who is a
    photographer himself with a discerning eye and labels my output as
    horrible rendering.
     
    tony cooper, Feb 11, 2009
    #6
  7. Where does this happen?
     
    John McWilliams, Feb 11, 2009
    #7
  8. chrisj.doran

    J. Clarke Guest

    Whever Tom Baker hangs out. The opinion on Jelly Babies comes from
    him.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 11, 2009
    #8
  9. chrisj.doran

    MC Guest


    Starts @ 9.40

    The terrorism act sounds like a silly excuse to stop photographers taking
    photos. Afterall, many parts of the world are already covered by Google
    Maps and also Google Street Views. Come this summer, UK Google Street
    Views will also go live. So, if it's such a serious threat, then surely
    Google Street Views would never have got the go-ahead? Then, I'm not sure
    why a terrorist would want to take photos, but surely they would use a
    hidden camera if they were going to do so?

    Mind you, I have never had a problem taking photos and neither has anyone
    I know, so maybe there's more to the stories where some people have had
    problems? It's difficult to know without knowing all the facts.

    As for taking photos of children, the same goes to taking photos of
    anyone. Although it may not be illegal to take photos of people in public,
    it doesn't mean that you shouldn't respect their privacy or their wish not
    to have their/their children's photos taken by a stranger. If they're not
    happy with having their photo taken, use your mouth. Chat with them.
    Show them your photos. Put yourself in their position. If they are still
    not happy, be prepared to back down and delete the photo. If the person
    looks like Michael Clarke Duncan (from The Green Mile), run like f*ck!!!
    ;-)
    [/QUOTE]

    The UK law (so far) is quite clear on this.

    If the person is in a public place there is no legal reason why you cannot
    photograph them. As long as you do not publicly publish any photo in which
    the said person is identifiable, without a signed release, there is nothing
    they or the law can do about it. This goes for photos of children as well
    as adults. Never ever delete a photo on their say so. You have no legal
    obligation to do so. Always be polite and if the police get involved,
    remember that too are not allowed to demand the deletion of the said
    photo/s. Remember, you can only be arrested for breach of the peace or any
    other "illegal" action so keep your cool, be polite but above all be firm.

    As far as the new "guidelines", it is still up to the police and the
    authorites to prove the photographer is causing an offence, not for the
    photographer to prove he/she is not. Images can only be deleted by
    authority of a high ranking senior (if not a judge) but only if it is beyond
    doubt you have caused an offence by taking this photo. Again, this is for
    them to prove this.

    Every photographer has a duty to protect their right to practice photography
    freely and without hinderence. No photographer should give in to what
    amounts to bullying and intimidation.

    MC
     
    MC, Feb 12, 2009
    #9
  10. chrisj.doran

    Marty Fremen Guest

    But what if they beat the shit out of you, like happened to this guy in
    London who was photographing his own sons for a "unusual photo" challenge:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7886331.stm
     
    Marty Fremen, Feb 13, 2009
    #10
  11. chrisj.doran

    J. Clarke Guest

    I dunno about the UK but in the US the Bishop would be set for life
    after his lawyers got through with the cops.
     
    J. Clarke, Feb 13, 2009
    #11
  12. We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
    There have been numerous cases reported from the US about heavy-handed
    security and police actions against legal photographers.
     
    Grimly Curmudgeon, Feb 14, 2009
    #12
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.