Jobsworths nil...

[greypoint]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1107/11072115streetphotog.asp

[nickt]

Fascinating. At least the police seem to have some common sense and actually know the law. I was in the City a few weeks ago and had no problems at all.
Nick

[Oldboy]

Some of those security people looked like the US secret service! 

At least some of the security guards knew the law and all the police did. 

Thanks for posting. 

[jinky]

Good result for the Police that. I`ve only ever problems with security staff myself but not usually as glamorousy suited and booted as these people- some of who don`t know the  law,

[Graham]

   Interesting, and quite reassuring. Strange no one mentioned the use of tripods (Insurance, H&S, thatsort of thing.)
   Only ever had any trouble once.
   Details here for those who hav'nt seen it. 


http://cameracraniums.com/forum/index.php?topic=1777.msg20372#msg20372

[ABERS]

When I saw this, and the security guards threatened calling the police, my immediate reaction was, "No I am calling the police to report your harassment of me going about my lawful business".

I must admit I've never had any such problems around the city, but I shall keep that response up my sleeve.

[Jonathan]

I've seen this video a few times.

I was taking pics for a client in Docklands this week.  I was approached on 3 occasions by security guards.  Each time I had a choice:

1. Get as angry as possible with them and get somebody else to video it, put it on YouTube and become "famous" for 5 mins

2. Have a chat, listen to their concerns and see if we can agree a way where we are both happy.

Guess which one got me the pictures the client needed which meant I got paid?

Every time I see these videos I'm reminded of those really annoying people who constantly goad somebody they know has a short temper until they get punched and then scream "assault".

I know my rights.  But for some reason I've never had to insist on them.

[krennon]

Like it a lot, and I do get what Jonathan says about not goading them as there is no need to be rude or abusive, but at the same time if we don't stand up to the private security guards then Street Photography runs the risk of going the same way as the Norwegian Blue it won't be sleeping it will be well and truly dead, bet Cartier Bresson and the such like are turning in their light sealed boxes at what is happening now...rule of thumb if you're in a public place they can't stop you photographing and if the police are called as was shown in the video they will tend to err on the side of "It's a public place you can take photographs"....at the same time if you really want to take photos at a particular site doesn't hurt to tell the security companies what you're doing and why..never been stopped meself but if it happens I do at least know my rights

[Hinfrance]

Being polite goes a long way.

As you know I was on a visit to London last week, and during that we went to the City. I took pictures of several buildings, people on the street, Leadenhall Market (spent a lot of time in The Lamb when I worked across the road). Never saw a security personage.

Maybe using a compact is the answer . . except I was using a DSLR

[greypoint]

Being polite goes a long way.

As you know I was on a visit to London last week, and during that we went to the City. I took pictures of several buildings, people on the street, Leadenhall Market (spent a lot of time in The Lamb when I worked across the road). Never saw a security personage.

Maybe using a compact is the answer . . except I was using a DSLR

Yes, but it was a Pentax - and everyone knows to be a serious photographer you have to have 'Canon eos' on your camera strap..

[Jonathan]

rule of thumb if you're in a public place they can't stop you photographing

True.  But lots of places that you think are public really aren't.  For example, unless you're on an actual road (and not even some of those) most of Docklands is privately owned.  The bit of the Embankment in front of the London Eye really is owned by a Japanese bank and they can make up whatever rules they like (for example if the fancy took them they could ban certain brands of camera), most train stations aren't public and neither are most shopping centres.  As for taking pictures of buildings and terrorism - well, lots of buildings in London really are owned by security services.  let alone US banks who tend to be somewhat jumpy.  When I worked at Citibank we had a building blown up and they were nervous os suspicious types hanging around after that.

(spent a lot of time in The Lamb when I worked across the road).

Oh yeah - when I worked for a Japanese firm we took childish delight meeting for drinks in the Lamb.  Just so we could correct the bosses when they said "see you in the Ram".

[picsfor]

The bane of London - private security goons. 

I've almost given up going London because of them. 1 trip in the last 2 years without being stopped, and only then because i stayed off the normal tourist trap.
Even got approached outside Buck House because i wasn't Japanese, American or Russian (i think that's all the nationalities that made up the 500+ tourists outside using cameras).

The voice of reason seems to have gone altogether - just need to wait for them to turn up Speakers Corner - then we'll know it's all over! 

[Markulous]

The bit of the Embankment in front of the London Eye really is owned by a Japanese bank and they can make up whatever rules they like (for example if the fancy took them they could ban certain brands of camera)

Yeah, I know someone who was refused entry to the London Eye because they had a dSLR

Only had a couple of incidents, one at the Sefton Park Palm House when we went to take pics of eldest's concert and were stopped by security (it's owned by the council). But they were only asking us to check in with Marketing to ensure we weren't commercially exploiting the Palm House. The other was sunrise in Cardiff docks and I strayed too close to a naval frigate, setting off a proximity alarm on the bridge. Armed guard appeared but didn't challenge me (or take a shot!)