View Full Version : Int'l Asc. of Patriotic Street Photographers
Thought I'd start a new thread on this:
Mission Statement: We are patriotic and law-abiding citizens of our respecive countries. We wish to cast off the air of suspicion surrounding our artisitc pursuits of documenting daily public life, and plege our assistance to public law enforcement by our observing and reporting possible terrorist activities. All of our members have undergone and submitted police criminal background checks. We state that street photography is not part of the problem and that we wish to be part of the solution with our viligence for homeland security.
This is a suggested mission statement, or perhaps there is a better term for it? If you can suggest improvements in wording, please feel free.
What we still need is a well known photographer, photographer-celebrity, or photographer-politician to act as leader or at least spokes-person.
What do you all think?
bmattock
03-24-2008, 19:07
Do we only photograph patriotic streets, or can we photograph the usual sorts?
OK, just kidding.
If it is international, get Leonard Nimoy! He's cool, and very logical. He does photography.
I know this sounds a bit kiss-a$$, but you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
as Pixtou suggested, we should call ourselves Fotographers Against Fascism, but I think that the positive "patriotic" spin is more sellable and acceptable, since we street photographers are trying to gain acceptance form law enforcement types and the public.
Do we only photograph patriotic streets, or can we photograph the usual sorts?
OK, just kidding.
If it is international, get Leonard Nimoy! He's cool, and very logical. He does photography.
Anyone have his e-mail? :)
hunghang
03-24-2008, 19:11
You don't have to be "patriotic" to be a photographer without bad intent!
Patriotic, Street Photographers
Like I said tripod, it's a good idea and I'd like to participate in some way.
But you have to be careful with your wording, Patriot and Homeland can have different connotations, esp' here in Europe.
This is for public consumption, to gain acceptance for street photography, not motivated by patriotic zeal.
Like I said tripod, it's a good idea and I'd like to participate in some way.
But you have to be careful with your wording, Patriot and Homeland can have different connotations, esp' here in Europe.
Very true. Thank you for that international perspective!
I can see how homeland can be troublesome, but patriotic is okay, isn't it?
cosmonot
03-24-2008, 19:17
When we get those new, federally issued ID cards, I want to be able to ask for an OD (organ donor) endorsement AND something to designate me as an official, SSP (serious street phtographer).
Chris101
03-24-2008, 19:17
...
If it is international, get Leonard Nimoy! He's cool, and very logical. He does photography.He's also liberal (http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Leonard_Nimoy.php). I suspect voluntary submission to police background checking might not sit well with any true patriot.
Off to bed, see you tomorrow. You guys keep going!
back alley
03-24-2008, 19:18
'pledge'
wouldn't work for me...living in canada with a paliament and way too much queen stuff...never could really get into the monarchy.
besides no one harrasses me here, well there was that big fella in the mall;)
but patriotic is okay, isn't it?
Not when your country is under occupation as is mine.
If I say I'm abertzale (patiot) I would be taken for a terrorist by the French.
bmattock
03-24-2008, 19:20
When we get those new, federally issued ID cards, I want to be able to ask for an OD (organ donor) endorsement AND something to designate me as an official, SSP (serious street phtographer).
Ick.
I will not ever have one of those ID cards, if I can possibly avoid it.
My photographer's ID is pretty famous. It's called the Bill of Rights. All I need.
bmattock
03-24-2008, 19:22
He's also liberal (http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Leonard_Nimoy.php). I suspect voluntary submission to police background checking might not sit well with any true patriot.
It irks quite a lot of us, irrespective of political ideologies. In this, I join my liberal colleagues and extend the hand of friendship - conservative, meat-eating, gun-toting, heavily tattooed hand that it is...
infrequent
03-24-2008, 19:30
Would we be reporting everyone taking pictures of bridges?
arrest everyone who takes a shot of the coat-hanger in sydney. ; )
infrequent
03-24-2008, 19:32
My photographer's ID is pretty famous. It's called the Bill of Rights. All I need.
no bill of rights for us down under. it reminds me people in foreign lands asking cops for their miranda rights to be read. except they don't have any.
xayraa33
03-24-2008, 19:33
"The new thing is to care passionately and be right wing".
bmattock
03-24-2008, 19:41
no bill of rights for us down under. it reminds me people in foreign lands asking cops for their miranda rights to be read. except they don't have any.
Another reason why I truly enjoyed the time I spent in your country on HMNS Stirling outside of Perth, WA, but when it came time for me to go home, home I went. Lovely country, but I have this thing about the Bill of Rights.
I suppose everyone watches "Cops" nowadays, eh? Must paint us in a lovely light. We all live in trailers, beat our wives, and have three teeth. Oh, and run from the cops - badly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporters_Without_Borders
"Reporters Without Borders states that it draws its inspiration from Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights), according to which everyone has "the right to freedom of opinion and expression" and also the right to "seek, receive and impart" information and ideas "regardless of frontiers."
This is for the press, but I think something similar could be done for amateurs:
"Photographers Sans Frontiers"...?
xayraa33
03-24-2008, 19:57
Ick.
I will not ever have one of those ID cards, if I can possibly avoid it.
My photographer's ID is pretty famous. It's called the Bill of Rights. All I need.
ah .. just get a RFID chip inserted under your skin Bill, ever so handy .:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArGIff9fprs
bmattock
03-24-2008, 20:04
ah .. just get a RFID chip inserted under your skin Bill, ever so handy .:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArGIff9fprs
Not until I assume room temperature.
I feel that this is an excellent idea. However, I'm uneasy with the word patriotic myself. Although I cherish (most aspects) the culture and the land of my Portuguese ancestors and love my life in Canada, I have a thing against nationalism. I like Pitxu's suggestion and I think it's on the right track. I also like the name - the use of the word 'sans' really does it for me. :)
CSB 5858
03-24-2008, 20:28
This is a bad idea which won't work the way it is intended. Law officials will take one look at the IAPSP Membership card and see it as proof the photographer is a certified card carrying trouble maker. Things will go downhill from there.
Alex
I feel that this is an excellent idea. However, I'm uneasy with the word patriotic myself. Although I cherish (most aspects) the culture and the land of my Portuguese ancestors and love my life in Canada, I have a thing against nationalism. I like Pitxu's suggestion and I think it's on the right track. I also like the name - the use of the word 'sans' really does it for me. :)
Thanks Nando,
I have a problem with my own patriotism. My mother is Scots, my father Welsh, I was born in England, I married and had a son in Canada and am now living in the Basque Country.
This is a bad idea which won't work the way it is intended. Law officials will take one look at the IAPSP Membership card and see it as proof the photographer is a certified card carrying trouble maker. Things will go downhill from there.
Alex
This won't cause a problem if the wording of the statutes and aims of the IASP (which will be put on public record) are correctly worked out.
Thanks Nando,
I have a problem with my own patriotism. My mother is Scots, my father Welsh, I was born in England, I married and had a son in Canada and am now living in the Basque Country.
If you were living in Florida instead of the Basque Country, you would be the typical middle-class, white Canadian. :)
Maybe we can do a group buy on those Jack Bauer messenger bags :D
Under the French law of association "loi 1901", any three or more people have the right to form an association, to meet, in public or in private, and to discuss or carry out activities freely and legally. Such an association is to be non profit making.
All that is needed is to apply to the prefecture with three names (president, tresorer and secretary). A statement of the aims of the association and an address.
I am and have been a member of a few of this type of association, was even the president of one.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_loi_de_1901 (in French)
Here is a condensed version in English.
http://midipyrenees.angloinfo.com/countries/france/loi1901.asp
If there's enough interest I could handle the formalities and start an association;
"Photographs sans Frontiers"
Who would be interested?
Pitxu,
Does one need to be a resident of France to join such an association?
If not, count me in please.
Gert
Canberra, Australia
Gert,
I plan to make enquiries about that, but as far as I can tell only the registered address and one active member have to be in France.
Like I said earlier, I was president of such an association for two years and I'm not a French citizen.
hunghang
03-25-2008, 03:27
OK... getting back to the original proposal.... I still have an issue with the concept of having to "profess to the authorities" that I am a patriot so that they leave me alone to do my photography.
Who will be in a position to "determine" or "judge" whether one is worthy of joining such association? If you have not passed the "police background check" (btw.. based on what criteria?), does that mean your rights as a photographer is less?
What is the true definition of being a "patriot" so that one can prove their worthiness?
Does being a member of this elitist association give me more photographic freedom than those not "deemed worthy"? What are the risks associated with this assumption?
and so on......
Hi Hung,
As I have stated in previous posts, I am not in favour with the "patriot" angle.
The type of association I suggest would have membership open to anyone who agrees to abide by the statutes, goals and aims (yet to be discussed) of the association, so not elitist at all.
I think some of the principle aims would be:
1. To educate non photographers of our rights, and the legitimacy of our "hobby".
2. To report and publicise abuses of our rights by public authorities,
3. and to lend aid and support to those who's right have been infringed.
etc etc.
Public awareness too.
The 2008 Street Project started by Stephanie Brim (if it gets to a book or exhibition stage) could be a good way of showing what photography in public places is all about, the artistic and documentary value of our work.
hunghang
03-25-2008, 04:40
Pitxu,
I hope that you did not take my post personally - it was not intended that way.
It was purely a theoretical post based on principles. I can see that this thread may progress into a political one. I have my own strong views, but have kept them to myself and only referred to principles rather than real-life examples/perceptions.
I promise to refrain myself and no more posts for Hung on this topic :)
No problem Hung,
I just wanted to shed some light on the proposal.
I'd like to hear your personal views, I agree with you when you said this earlier:
You don't have to be "patriotic" to be a photographer without bad intent!
Good morning. This thread has taken a different direction, but one that I'm happy with. My initial thought was to make things easy, and cosying up to government by expressing patriotism, but I suppose that if we are going to do something, it may as well be with the highest intentions, above politics, and I think Pixtou has expressed those well in post 35. Let's keep going!
Welcome back tripod,
I don't see why we couldn't cosy up to governments too.
Here's one British politician on our side:
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Labour_MP_Austin_Mitchell_launches_photo_petition_ in_Parliament_news_197555.html
I've watched this develop with interest while simultaneously mulling it over from my own point of view. Here are my thoughts, for what they are worth,
Firstly thanks to Tripod for the original idea, and to Richard for running with it. If this is to work it has to be a robust and sensible concept that - critically - makes sense to the non-photographer.
We absolutely need principles, goals and aims - a "constitution", for want of a better word, and I am broadly in agreement with Richard's suggestions in post #35 above.
IMO, the best and most long-lived associations and movements work because they are FOR something, not AGAINST it. We should therefore be very clear that we are FOR the freedom to photograph, not AGAINST legislation to curb our activities. People sign up more readily, and are more sympathetic to, something that has an air of purpose, and a positive goal, than something that sounds like a protest movement.
Right now, we NEED people to play Devil's Advocate, like Hung. This has to pass the "ho hum" test, and add value, both to the individual members and to "society as a whole". We need people to be negative - to think of the "gotchas", because if we don't, someone else will, and this idea will founder at the outset.
Random thoughts:
- Avoid publicity until we have a clear idea of what we are doing
- Make it INTERNATIONAL - this will almost certainly mean having localisations of certain things, for example statements of photographer's rights - but it will be worth it. Not all countries have a "bill of rights" and, as we have seen already, the terms "liberal", "conservative" and "patriot" can be both positive and pejorative depending on context and audience, so therefore should be avoided. There will be others, no doubt.
- Avoid "celebrity" endorsements. One man's hero is another's nonentity, or worse, villain.
- Avoid any "branding" or affiliations with any one manufacturer
- Think outside the rangefinder box - we want to appeal to as broad a group as possible
- Consider a membership fee - both to defray running costs, but also to deter the "me-too" members who would join a milk bottle top if they thought there was something in it for free
- Consider a membership pack. I don't like the idea of a badge, per se, but a laminated card with, on one side, a statement of the aims, or constitution, and on the other, the words "I am a photographer pursuing a lawful pastime" in a number of languages would be useful (for example)
- Consider a "library" of photographers' rights in different countries, that could be downloaded in PDF format as requried
- Consider a network of volunteer advocates - people in each country who would be willing to assist a non-native speaking, visiting photographer, both with advice before arrival and with positive assistance if they run into trouble while in country
As I said, these are just random thoughts - feel free to disagree, I offer them as contributions to the "straw man".
Regards,
Bill
That's fantastic Bill. I agree with everything.
This plastic laminated card is essential. It must state the aims of this association as well as factual laws, esp' international law such as this
"Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights), according to which everyone has "the right to freedom of opinion and expression" and also the right to "seek, receive and impart" information and ideas "regardless of frontiers.
This article is used by "Reporters sans frontiers", but surely it, and others like it, could apply to amateurs.
We need to formulate a list of (possible) aims, goals and statutes.
anselwannab
03-25-2008, 05:45
International Patriotism sounds like some kind of anarchist subtrefuge. You can't have international patriotism, by definition it has to be national.
From recent reports out of Iraq, I can just show my hairy back to prove that I'm not a suicide bomber. Who has to be completely shaved before going out on their mission? It sounds like some frat prank run horribly wrong.
Thaks Bill! I do agree with the positive spin rather than a protest group. Let's lose the word patriot.
bmattock
03-25-2008, 06:43
FYI...
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Press_photographers_to_stage_rights_protest_at_New _Scotland_Yard_in_London_news_199861.html
He's also into nekkid lady pix, not that's there's anything unpatriotic about that.
He's also liberal (http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Leonard_Nimoy.php). I suspect voluntary submission to police background checking might not sit well with any true patriot.
Roger Hicks
03-25-2008, 07:35
The more I think about this, the less it works. First of all, like many others, I am not happy about the idea of having to 'pledge' anything to anyone, just in order to keep rights I already have. To do so is implicitly to recognize their authority to impose arbitrary rules and requirements. I will not do this.
Second, what the hell is a 'patriot'? Look at the Spanish Civil War and you'll see that both sides claimed the label with equal enthusiasm.
Third, precisely because I have been security vetted for both UK and US government jobs, and worked (in very minor capacities, but on military bases) for both governments, I am well aware of how shallow and potentially worthless most forms of vetting are.
Fourth, the whole things is all a bit too gung-ho for my taste. There is, I suspect, a major cultural difference here. Americans are used to the Pledge of Allegiance. To many Europeans, the sight of people chanting a formula like this is deeply uncomfortable and indeed suspect: who are they trying to convince?
So: what are we FOR? We are FOR things that have already been set out in numerous documents, national and international. Perhaps we need a gatefold leaflet with all relevant quotes from the Declaration of Human Rights on one side, and national quotes on the other.
People who travel may need several copies. Showing a stroppy copper quotes from an international organization will upset him enough, especially if he is acting outside his rights, as he will be; showing him quotes from another country will be worse, as he will simply say, "You're not in ______ [fill in country] now."
Cheers,
Roger
bmattock
03-25-2008, 07:46
How dare you inject common sense into this! I take umbrage! I take offense! I take exception! And I take the silverware, if it isn't locked up.
To bring you up to date Roger.
We're not going to do any pledging, but we will be bound by the rules of the association if we wish to join.
We've dropped the "patriot" tag.
We would like to bring it to the attention of the general public and the forces of order that we are doing no harm by pursuing our hobby.
FYI...
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Press_photographers_to_stage_rights_protest_at_New _Scotland_Yard_in_London_news_199861.html
Thanks Bill. That sounds interesting, one guy demonstrating and the rest of the press there to cover it.
It will be interesting to see that tonight on the news.
john neal
03-25-2008, 08:06
Bill, Richard,
Much as I applaud your aims, I think Roger has hit the nail on the head.
It is difficult enough to get the English, Scots and Welsh to agree on laws these days, let alone trying to get something like the PSF (acronyms anonymous, her i come!) recognised across national boundaries. I would not want to even think about compiling a multi-national list of photographers' rights and trying to keep it up to date - there are just too many laws to include, and the potential for winding up a tired p**d off cop, with disasterous results, is just too real.
Here in the UK, we are supposed to be able to legitimately take a picture of anything that is in a public place - it used to be anything we could see from a public place, but that gets restricted because you can "see" too many government installations from public places (MI5 HQ, GCHQ, RAF bases, etc). This does not stop people from getting hassled and having their gear confiscated - OK, it normally gets handed back after a few hours, but often minus the film and, probably, plus a few scuff marks.
In France (I believe) you cannot take a picture of someone in a public place without their permission - Roger? In 3rd world countries it will be much different - I nearly got arrested in India for taking a shot that included an electricity distribution point!
I don't think there is an international panacea for what ails public photography, however hard we try. The best defence is to make sure you know the law for where you happen to be, remain polite and (in extremis) call a lawyer who speaks your language to bail you out!
Having said all of that, and to quote Groucho Marks (I think): "I wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have me as a member". [sorry!]
John,
In France you can photograph people without their permission, but without their permission you can not "publish" the photo.
I wouldn't try to wind up a pissed off cop.
The work would be more aimed at getting the cop, and everybody else, informed of the reality of the laws and their rightful/wrongful application.
This won't be done in a few days, it's going to be a long job but I'd rather take this route than to give up my hobby and my rights.
If you don't want to join in that's fine. I would just advise you to sell your Leicas now, while they're still legal.;)
Gabriel M.A.
03-25-2008, 08:49
What do you all think?
I think that agreeing on a Coat of Arms for the assoc. is going to be difficult.
Should the motto be "Old Sic Transit Gloria"? ;)
"Honni soit qui mal y pense"
Very fitting.
Roger Hicks
03-25-2008, 09:02
To bring you up to date Roger.
We're not going to do any pledging, but we will be bound by the rules of the association if we wish to join.
We've dropped the "patriot" tag.
We would like to bring it to the attention of the general public and the forces of order that we are doing no harm by pursuing our hobby.
Dear Richard,
I fully take all your points - you had yourself eloquently made the point about 'patriotism' - but I'm not sure what the 'rules' would or could be, which is where patriotism raises its head again.
Essentially, all we want to do is to keep the rights we already have; we are, therefore, inherently agaist the abuse of power.
As one of the principal attraction of power to some people seems to be the right to abuse it, we are therefore automatically seen by such people as 'against' them -- not as being 'for' the law and international declarations as they stand, which all right-thinking and well-informed people will want to keep.
In other words, we are looking at rapidly diminishing returns. Les us say that 90% of all police are reasonable, and indeed, on our side and that 9% will see reason with a polite reminder of our rights. The remaining 1% are unlikely to be persuadable by such an association, or by the production of a card or pamphlet.
I have been challenged in a number of countries, most recently in Romania and the UK, but in every case, the police have been civil. This was even the case on the most recent occasion, at Clacton:
Policewoman: "Excuse me, we have had a complaint from MacDonald's that you may have been taking pictures."
After asking her to repeat this, as I could not believe what I was hearing, I said (with a smile):
"Tough. This is a public place and they have no right to stop me. I have no wish to be rude to you, but it is none of their business."
Policewoman: "I fully understand that, sir, but perhaps I could ask, out of personal curiosity, why you are taking pictures."
Me: "Certainly, officer. I have some new lenses to try." (It was the Summarits)
Policewoman: "Thank you."
I then went and photographed McDo, very pointedly; I had not previously taken a single picture of their miserable emporium, in which (after all) I had no interest until that point.
No further questions or complaints from anyone.
Cheers,
Roger
Pherdinand
03-25-2008, 09:06
hm
"international ..patriotic" sounds funny to me.
EDIT: sounded. When it was still in there. :D
....I'm not sure what the 'rules' would or could be, which is where patriotism raises its head again.
Essentially, all we want to do is to keep the rights we already have; we are, therefore, inherently agaist the abuse of power....
Cheers,
Roger
I don't think that any "rules" would be necessary Roger.
The "association" would have a list of aims and objectives, one of the most important (for me) would be the education of the general public as to the "art" and "documentary" value of street photography, and it's validity as a lawful activity.
If your "Mrs Mc Do" was aware of the fact that you were an artist or a fan of architecture, then she may not have felt threatened and called the police.
I fully realise this would be a long term work.
It's not as simple as carrying a "card" of any kind.
I'm no youngster, but I would like to be able to continue photography in public places for some time to come.
Edit: It's not the death of film that will stop us, but rather the illegality of camera ownership..:eek:
Maybe "code of conduct" is a better term than rules. I would hope that we can agree on:
1. Our objectives
2. Our aims
3. Our "core message"
I very much like the idea of acting as advocates, or educators as to the value of photography. That makes this whole idea more proactive, more outward facing. Instead of just standing there digging your heels in saying "I AM WITHIN MY RIGHTS" over and over again, if we treat every interaction, curious or hostile, as an opportunity to get a clear and cogent message across, we will be doing something constructive. Yes, I know that won't always work, or be appropriate; trying to explain that photography is art to a chap who is about to punch me is not necessarily the best way forward, but every person enlightened is one less to complain.
In fact, this gives me an idea. Bear with me for a short while. My day job is selling consultancy; to do that I have to be able to articulate a "core message" and then articulate it to various parties "stakeholders" - I have a proven model for doing this. I'm going to play around with this for a couple of days, then post the results.
And please - can we forget patriotism, nationalism and politics in this - they distort the issue un-necessarily.
Regards.
Bill
Al Patterson
03-25-2008, 10:28
Maybe "code of conduct" is a better term than rules. I would hope that we can agree on:
1. Our objectives
2. Our aims
3. Our "core message"
I very much like the idea of acting as advocates, or educators as to the value of photography. That makes this whole idea more proactive, more outward facing. Instead of just standing there digging your heels in saying "I AM WITHIN MY RIGHTS" over and over again, if we treat every interaction, curious or hostile, as an opportunity to get a clear and cogent message across, we will be doing something constructive. Yes, I know that won't always work, or be appropriate; trying to explain that photography is art to a chap who is about to punch me is not necessarily the best way forward, but every person enlightened is one less to complain.
In fact, this gives me an idea. Bear with me for a short while. My day job is selling consultancy; to do that I have to be able to articulate a "core message" and then articulate it to various parties "stakeholders" - I have a proven model for doing this. I'm going to play around with this for a couple of days, then post the results.
And please - can we forget patriotism, nationalism and politics in this - they distort the issue un-necessarily.
Regards.
Bill
In order to leave out patriotism, nationalism and politics, we do need someone withe the talents of your day job. I'm the probably the last person here who should be drafting "mission statements" about our "core message". But, it is probably the most important part of any project of this nature.
I'm sure it will be worth the wait.
I'm sure it will be worth the wait.
Sure it will Al.
For us, our kids and our grandchildren etc (no, really.)
And a code of conduct as Bill suggests is a good idea.
A code of conduct for taking pictures, ie, not "in your face", but also a code of conduct when dealing with a law officer or angry Joe Public.
It will do us no good at all to act snotty like, "Tough! This is a public place!" (sorry Roger).
A civil approach such as; "I'm sorry sir, there seems to be some misunderstanding, let me explain". At this point you pull a flyer out of your bag to show him.
Now, this flyer is important, it should not be a list of your rights, but an explanation of what street photography is about, art, documentary etc, with some URLs to some quality sites such as HCBs for example. "Education".
(This flyer will need a lot of work to get it right. Maybe Bill's "core message").
bmattock
03-25-2008, 10:54
"Honni soit qui mal y pense"
Very fitting.
"Quid Me Vexari?"
Noiz nahi, nik ez dit fixu. Kaixo pentsatzen düzü?
Al Patterson
03-25-2008, 11:03
Sure it will Al.
For us, our kids and our grandchildren etc (no, really.)
And a code of conduct as Bill suggests is a good idea.
A code of conduct for taking pictures, ie, not "in your face", but also a code of conduct when dealing with a law officer or angry Joe Public.
It will do us no good at all to act snotty like, "Tough! This is a public place!" (sorry Roger).
A civil approach such as; "I'm sorry sir, there seems to be some misunderstanding, let me explain". At this point you pull a flyer out of your bag to show him.
Now, this flyer is important, it should not be a list of your rights, but an explanation of what street photography is about, art, documentary etc, with some URLs to some quality sites such as HCBs for example. "Education".
(This flyer will need a lot of work to get it right. Maybe Bill's "core message").
You may have missed my point of something being worth the wait. You are correet in the length of time it might take to actually correct the problem, but I'm referring to waiting to see what Bill comes up with regarding this issue, which will be a shorter wait.
And, I do have the Krage's "Photographer's Right" printed and in my camera bag, but I'm not sure showing it to a clueless member of the public or a rent-a-cop will help matters much. One would have to choose carefully whom to show the flyer to, as it may actually get you in deeper trouble with some people.
bmattock
03-25-2008, 11:07
Noiz nahi, nik ez dit fixu.
Gezundheit.
Thanks for your input Bill, after all this is your problem not mine. I can photograph who I want, when I want.
5753657537
Gabriel M.A.
03-25-2008, 12:22
Thanks for your input Bill, after all this is your problem not mine. I can photograph who I want, when I want.
5753657537
Excellent. Just excellent.
I also have photos of gendarmes, a politician, and a few army soldiers when I was at the Vrai Terre des Libres.
Bela Georgozy (aka Sarkozy) wants to change the "Libres" part, of course.
Sarkozy's not happy about nudie photos of his wife being auctioned in NYC.:D
I'm happy to see that this idea is moving forward in a much better direction than I first proposed. Thank you for inputs and improvements!
I'm happy to see that this idea is moving forward in a much better direction than I first proposed. Thank you for inputs and improvements!
Yes,
Let's hope that BillP comes up with something good.
danwilly
03-25-2008, 12:39
Sounds a little to anal for me. I think a good photographer should have a little anarchist inside of him or her. You tell them Roger.
dan
Softly softly catchy monkey.
(Advocating anarchy in the state of Wisconsin is contrary to "The Patriot Act")
Roger Hicks
03-25-2008, 12:49
I don't think that any "rules" would be necessary Roger.
The "association" would have a list of aims and objectives, one of the most important (for me) would be the education of the general public as to the "art" and "documentary" value of street photography, and it's validity as a lawful activity.
If your "Mrs Mc Do" was aware of the fact that you were an artist or a fan of architecture, then she may not have felt threatened and called the police.
I fully realise this would be a long term work.
It's not as simple as carrying a "card" of any kind.
I'm no youngster, but I would like to be able to continue photography in public places for some time to come.
Edit: It's not the death of film that will stop us, but rather the illegality of camera ownership..:eek:
Dear Richard,
I'm sure you're right in all of the above; it was your reference to 'rules of the association' in post 49 that confused me.
We are of one mind on the aims.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
03-25-2008, 12:56
It will do us no good at all to act snotty like, "Tough! This is a public place!" (sorry Roger).
Dear Richard,
A lot lies in the delivery. Delivered with a smile, and a faint air of disbelief, this need not come across as 'snotty'. The policewoman was not offended, not least because I hastened to clarify that this was not an attack on her, but on McDo. She was very soon on my side -- if she wasn't to begin with.
And I will not call a policeman 'sir'. That's his job, when addressing me.
(Or of course, 'madam', etc.)
Cheers,
R.
Yes,
Let's hope that BillP comes up with something good.
Working...:bang:
Regards,
Bill
Sorry about that Roger. In post 49 I was thinking more about internal rules of an association, paying your dues on time, no smoking, wipe your feet at the door sort of thing.
But this wouldn't be the case here as we'll probably never all meet around a table to hammer things out.
Maybe we could kick somebody out for bashing Joe Public over the head with a Kiev ?..;)
Dear Richard,
A lot lies in the delivery.
Cheers,
R.
Sure Roger.
All the nuance is lost with cold letters on a screen.
(BTW. I do like it when the French police salute me.)
Roger Hicks
03-25-2008, 13:52
Dear Richard,
As you say, it would be much easier to thrash everything out (and I am sure more pleasant) if we could all meet in a bar somewhere, preferably in Euskal Herria -- though I have to confess that I prefer the Spanish side of the 'border' because the endless deep-red shutters on the French side become rather repetitive after a while.
As long as we don't have to speak Basque, which is one of the most opaque languages I have ever encountered (up there with Maltese, Tibetan and Hungarian).
Cheers,
R.
I like my country but to call me patriotic is one step too far. No country deserves my everlasting allegiance or sacrifice. And, it's one thing to be patriotic in your country, yet another in somebody else's country, which is where I care to spend much of my time.
While I do think photographers are unduly harassed and limited in many places, I'd rather stay out of an organised "protest" group. Can't take photos from behind bars.
I would think of it more as an "awareness" group.
We're not talking revolution here.
"Give peace a chance"
bmattock
03-25-2008, 15:09
I would think of it more as an "awareness" group.
We're not talking revolution here.
"Give peace a chance"
Is glorious photographer-workers revolution, comrade!
We will have re-education camps, teach basics of aperture, shutter speed, focus, freedom to photograph glorious leader!
If this not work, many photo ops in glorious Siberia, worker's paradise!
Right.
*clears throat*
Here we go.
This is a "Communications Wheel". I normally use it to define what the core message is in a sales campaign, and who the stakeholder areas and individuals are. The Wheel can have any number of "segments" - this particular one has worked out to six, in my mind.
How to read it:
The "core message" is, unsurprisingly, at the centre. This is the common, simple message that we want to present to the world. It should be clear, unambiguous, and easy to remember. Too many threads in the core message dilutes its' impact. Too much complexity makes it "opaque".
Each segment is a "stakeholder area". In a sales campaign I would include in this area the name of the director, company officer, etc. responsible for that area.
The bullet points in red are the "drivers" - the key attributes for that stakeholder - what they want, what motivates them.
The bullet points in green are the "filters" - the words and behaviours that we should use with that stakeholder to tailor the core message to meet their drivers, and to neutralise and satisfy them.
A stakeholder may of course fall into more than one segment, depending on their behaviours. You may therefore encounter a "curious" or "aggressive" police officer or bar owner. Their primary stakeholder behaviour and our response to it is "modified" by their secondary stakeholder behaviour.
I am NOT putting this up as a finished product, or as the last word. This is a straw man - a means to an end. This should provoke further throught and discussion.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2296/2361668699_d1143052d6_o.jpg
Thoughts?
Regards,
Bill
Geez Bill! Great work!
I'm going to print it out and study it.
On first glance I really like the "Enthuse" and "Demonstrate".
Thanks, and good night..:)
bmattock
03-25-2008, 15:33
That's awesome, Bill. Very cool.
And I say that as a man who has sat through way too many "death by powerpoint" presentations that made NO sense at all. This is very clear. Very very clear. Neat!
Bill, that's a very interesting Comms Wheel and makes alot of sense. In fact, and I don't mean this in a derogatory manner, it elegantly "states the bleedin' obvious" which is no mean feat. I would like to add an additional green bullet point above "Be Courteous", remembering that, as much as anything, this is a PR exercise. That addition is:
SmileAgain, quite obvious, but difficult to remember when ruffled.
Cheers,
Mick
Thanks for your input Bill, after all this is your problem not mine. I can photograph who I want, when I want.
Richard, I thought you said you must have permission to publish. I guess you do have the permission of the 3 Gemdarmes to publish their pictures?
Steve
I heard this on the BBC today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/mainframe.shtml?http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/lawinaction
There's only a couple of minutes out of a 30 min programme that is specifically related to photography (you will need to skip to 00:25:00 ish) but what it says about the freedom NOT TO HAVE YOUR PHOTO TAKEN - while mostly related to celebs being snapped IN A PUBLIC PLACE but outside of detox clinics etc. I find disturbing. Privacy laws & all that.
I love that diagram, Bill. It sums up the personal interactions very nicely.
(FWIW, I also like the original "patriotic" part. I'm an unabashed patriot and apparently lack the dignity to even be properly ashamed of myself. I guess I've always been a bit of an iconoclast. ;) )
nextreme
03-25-2008, 17:42
This is very interesting and a bit disturbing at the same time. I've not yet been in a situation where someone objected to my taking pictures (I'm not really an "in your face" type of shooter, at least not yet). Maybe things are a bit more relaxed in Montreal.
I am interested though in the "association" (label it as you wish), particularly for educational material, i.e. what is permitted in what country and what your rights are in that country. Might even require details at the municipal level, didn't I read NYC is considering restrictions on photography in the city ?
Cheers.
patrickjames
03-25-2008, 17:52
Sprinkle a little bit of what Bill said and a little of what Roger said and I think you are there. There is no need for an association. The Bill of Rights is clear. There are no laws prohibiting photography if you are in public. Stand your ground if you are confronted by the police. They are always on a fishing expedition to find people to confront if you think about it. You are doing nothing illegal so tell them so and tell them to leave you alone. Better yet, just refuse to answer any questions at all! You have that right. They have no right to harass a citizen unless you are doing something illegal. Stand up for your rights. I am not a lawyer so use this info at your own risk. :)
Patrick
The Bill of Rights is clear. There are no laws prohibiting photography if you are in public.
Too many places in this world where any Bill of Rights or Constitution aren't worth the paper they were written on. And many places in this world do actually forbid photography, even in public. We don't need protection where we already are. We need protection where we're not. If the BoR really is such an infallible document we wouldn't be having these discussion here all the time. Obviously it's not.
john neal
03-26-2008, 00:59
....
If you don't want to join in that's fine. I would just advise you to sell your Leicas now, while they're still legal.;)
Richard,
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great idea, and I agree wholeheartedly with your aims - I can just see so many problems for you to overcome.
As for joining, well, I don't think my cameras are likely to be outlawed in my lifetime, but I probably would join if you can make it viable to protect the future of photography in public - I have a grandson who may want to do it.
Richard, I thought you said you must have permission to publish. I guess you do have the permission of the 3 Gemdarmes to publish their pictures?
Steve
You raise a valid question Steve.
There are, of course, exceptions to the rule.
1: Public figures performing their function. The gendarmes fall into this category. (even though I did ask the first two to stop and pose, the boss on the left is not too happy about it, but he's got to "grin and bear it", it's his job to be nice to the public.)
2: People not singled out as to be the main subject, ie; close up telephoto shots. General street scenes with people taken with "normal lenses" are OK, even if some person is close and quite large in the frame.
After that there's the "risk" factor, and the "common sense" factor.
57556
The parents of these two girls, whom I photographed without their permission, could sue me for damages and interest, but why would they? On this forum I am causing no harm to them, not ridiculing them nor making any profit. Though if I used the image for profit, in an advertising campaign that would be a different story.
Hope this answers your question.
Pitxu.
Sprinkle a little bit of what Bill said and a little of what Roger said and I think you are there. There is no need for an association. The Bill of Rights is clear. There are no laws prohibiting photography if you are in public. Stand your ground... :)
Patrick
You're quite right Patrick and I agree with you and if things stayed this way that would be fine, but things are changing.
The London Met police have started a poster campaign telling the public to be wary of people with cameras. This is very serious as it stands, though it could be seen as just the first step towards further regulation or legislation.
What I proposed is NOT what some have seen as a "guide to photogs rights", but more a campaign like the London Met's in reverse. An education of the general public as to the validity, legality and merits of our hobby.
I know it's a mad dream, but imagine if we could "educate" politicians, police chiefs and Joe Public. Then we would not have the need to "protest" or "demonstrate" or have endless forum threads on this subject.
John Neal, post #91 says "I can just see so many problems for you to overcome."
I have to agree with you John, I am prepared to try.
What's the alternative?
Pitxu.
In Bill's "Communications Wheel" I really like the words;
"Legitimate and enjoyable pastime with a long and honourable tradition".
"Be courteous,
Share,
Explain,
Enthuse,
Demonstrate" (show/educate).
Let's work along these lines.
Pitxu.
I hope that this project gets off the ground, becoming action rather than mere words on a discussion forum.
I have a few issues. For one, we've already seen in the US the dichotomy between what our so-called 'rights' are, and what they are presumed to be by government. When the Preamble to the Constitution says "...all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights..." it would presume that we wouldn't have to ask for these rights in actual practice, since the government didn't give them to us (they were endowed by our Creator) and 'all men' possess them (presumably those in other countries, as well). However, the reality is that we don't have those rights in actual practice; they have to be assumed through actual use, and every few generation or so a people has to rise up and remind those in power that they serve at the benefit and permission of the masses. This is true not only of gun ownership (in the US) but also of freedom of expression, which public photography is categorically a part of.
I've assumed it upon myself to engage in a personal project, which I call 'Fauxtography', which is documented in this link (http://www.f295.org/DIYforum/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?b-cc/m-1204164238/)over on F295. It involves the making of a faux camera - a fauxtographic device - with which I go out on the streets and use as if it were being used in the making of actual images (it fact it wirelessly transmits those images, with crystal clarity, directly to my cerebral cortex.) The purpose of this project, partly street fauxtography and partly performance art, is to explore the role of public image making in our culture at a time when multinational corporatism, the outsourcing of public responsibility to the private sector and the post-911 security state all intersect.
I'll keep you informed of my progress. In the meantime, I encourage everyone to continue to participate in public photography, as well as fauxtography.
~Joe
I'm disappointed to say that although I live here in the heart of Londonistan, knee-deep in terrorists, and carry at least one camera with me nearly everywhere I go, I have yet to be challenged while taking photographs (ever) by a police officer, private security guard or member of the public, nor have I seen one of the Metropolitan Police's notorious posters.
Realistically, I don't think the actual position of photographers has changed very much since I took it up as a hobby. Most people don't seem to have a problem with it, and I wonder if the 'problem' being addressed here isn't an imaginary one. In reality, I wouldn't be surprised if, as a result of the advent of the cellphone camera, far more pictures are being taken on the streets now than ever were in the past.
Right.
*clears throat*
Here we go.
This is a "Communications Wheel". I normally use it to define what the core message is in a sales campaign, and who the stakeholder areas and individuals are. The Wheel can have any number of "segments" - this particular one has worked out to six, in my mind.
How to read it:
The "core message" is, unsurprisingly, at the centre. This is the common, simple message that we want to present to the world. It should be clear, unambiguous, and easy to remember. Too many threads in the core message dilutes its' impact. Too much complexity makes it "opaque".
Each segment is a "stakeholder area". In a sales campaign I would include in this area the name of the director, company officer, etc. responsible for that area.
The bullet points in red are the "drivers" - the key attributes for that stakeholder - what they want, what motivates them.
The bullet points in green are the "filters" - the words and behaviours that we should use with that stakeholder to tailor the core message to meet their drivers, and to neutralise and satisfy them.
A stakeholder may of course fall into more than one segment, depending on their behaviours. You may therefore encounter a "curious" or "aggressive" police officer or bar owner. Their primary stakeholder behaviour and our response to it is "modified" by their secondary stakeholder behaviour.
I am NOT putting this up as a finished product, or as the last word. This is a straw man - a means to an end. This should provoke further throught and discussion.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2296/2361668699_d1143052d6_o.jpg
Thoughts?
Regards,
Bill
Could we get this on a tee-shirt? lol Really, nice work Bill.
Bob
Ade-oh,
My experience is much the same as your own, though I wouldn't consider the problems experienced by others to be "imaginary".
There probably are a number of false stories, exaggerations and urban myths,
though lots of cases are fully documented and authentic.
Joe,
I fully agree with your first paragraph. This is why I see the case for "re-educating" our law makers/enforcers and the public. (Naive I know.)
On your second paragraph, I'm not really sure where you're at, but good luck.
Ade-oh,
My experience is much the same as your own, though I wouldn't consider the problems experienced by others to be "imaginary".
There probably are a number of false stories, exaggerations and urban myths,
though lots of cases are fully documented and authentic.
I don't doubt that people do get 'challenged' when taking photographs, I just wonder if it is increasing in frequency? I seem to recall, in the very dim and distant past, touring parties of British plane-spotters being arrested and imprisoned in such salubrious locations as 'The Colonels'' Greece and Franco's Spain when photographing at airports. That sort of thing hasn't happened in a long while.
In any case, I don't disagree with the sentiments of this thread: we should not be prevented from following our hobby provided nobody is harmed by it, but my experience has been that common sense prevails.
.... That sort of thing hasn't happened in a long while.....
There's lots of recent stuff Ade-oh. This thread started out of this one: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56672
There have been many more like it recently, not the least Roger's experience in this thread. This sort of thing didn't happen years ago but it does now and more and more frequently.
Gabriel M.A.
03-26-2008, 11:00
Sarkozy's not happy about nudie photos of his wife being auctioned in NYC.:D
I thought that was in London. :confused:
I'll re-read the article I saw this morning.
Gabriel M.A.
03-26-2008, 11:01
Too many places in this world where any Bill of Rights or Constitution aren't worth the paper they were written on. And many places in this world do actually forbid photography, even in public. We don't need protection where we already are. We need protection where we're not. If the BoR really is such an infallible document we wouldn't be having these discussion here all the time. Obviously it's not.
Therefore, any sort of discussion about anything is futile because it could be rendered worthless in any part of the world?
I thought that was in London. :confused:
I'll re-read the article I saw this morning.
Sarko was in London, having breakfast with the Queen !..:p
But I thought the auction was in NYC.
I've been re-reading this article on Austin Mitchell MP in AP,
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Labour_MP_Austin_Mitchell_launches_photo_petition_ in_Parliament_news_197555.html
Here is the "motion" he put before parliament;
"That this house is concerned to encourage the spread and enjoyment of photography as the most genuine and accessible people's art; deplores the apparent increase in the number of reported incidents in which police, Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) or wardens attempt to stop street photography, and order the deletion of photographs or the confiscation of cards, cameras or film on various specious grounds such as claims that some public buildings are strategic or sensitive, that children and adults can only be photographed with their written permission, that photographs of police and PCSOs are illegal, or that photographs may be used by terrorists; points out that photography in public places and streets is not only enjoyable but perfectly legal; regrets all such efforts to stop, discourage or inhibit amateur photographers taking pictures in public places, many of which are in any case festooned with closed circuit television cameras; and urges the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers to agree on a photography code for the information of officers on the ground, setting out the public's right to photograph public places thus allowing photographers to enjoy their hobby without officious interference or unjustified suspicion."
This is the same message that we, as a group of photographers, should also be trying to get across to those in authority and the public.
Sarko was in London, having breakfast with the Queen !..:p
I seem to remember Her Royal Highness using a gold (plated?) Leica. Maybe we could get her on board.
Ah. Maybe not gold plated.
http://prints.paphotos.com/pictures_680483/Queen-Elizabeth-II-uses-a-Leica-camera.html
I seem to remember Her Royal Highness using a gold (plated?) Leica. Maybe we could get her on board.
"The Royal Rangefinder Society"
Very nice.
I believe Leica give her a new one each year??
D'you think her old 'uns end up on eBay?
Enough of this off topic banter! ;)
Mick,
Is Snowdon still alive and kicking?
"D'you think her old 'uns end on eBay?":D
Do you know, I thought he'd snuffed it, but no, he's still going it seems. It was Litchfield who shuffled off in 2005.
I'm mixed up now too!
What's Snowdon's real name?
Wasn't Patrick Litchfield the Queens Cousin?
Patrick Lichfield (the Earl of Lichfield) was the Queen's cousin. He's busy decomposing.
Tony Armstrong-Jones shagged Princess Margaret. Since she couldn't marry a commoner he was made the Earl of Snowdon. He's still clicking.
The natural-born toff was a far nicer person, by all accounts.
Regards.
Bill
In Bill's "Communications Wheel" I really like the words;
"Legitimate and enjoyable pastime with a long and honourable tradition".
"Be courteous,
Share,
Explain,
Enthuse,
Demonstrate" (show/educate).
Let's work along these lines.
Pitxu.
Getting back on-topic, words have power.
Using the right words in the right way has far more impact than behaving like an arrogant git and shouting the odds, or spindling your "bill of rights" and jabbing it up some officious git's nose.
Like it or not, every time you are out and about with a camera you are an ambassador for photography. When you interact with others you can choose to be an advocate for our pastime, or an arrogant and obnoxious prat. If you choose the latter course, not only will your immediate life be more uncomfortable, but so will that of those who come after you.
Let me make a plea here - PLEASE can we NOT be PAROCHIAL about this? Some countries have a bill of rights, some don't. Fact. Some of us don't get bothered, some do. Fact.
The point is that ALL of us have a right to photograph what we want, when we want, without let or hindrance. If we do not recognise, respect, and cherish that right, one day we will wake up and it will be gone.
Prevention is better than cure, Proactivity is preferable to inactivity. Education is more effective than confrontation.
Regards,
Bill
Getting back on-topic, words have power.
Using the right words in the right way has far more impact than behaving like an arrogant git and shouting the odds, or spindling your "bill of rights" and jabbing it up some officious git's nose.
Like it or not, every time you are out and about with a camera you are an ambassador for photography. When you interact with others you can choose to be an advocate for our pastime, or an arrogant and obnoxious prat. If you choose the latter course, not only will your immediate life be more uncomfortable, but so will that of those who come after you.
Let me make a plea here - PLEASE can we NOT be PAROCHIAL about this? Some countries have a bill of rights, some don't. Fact. Some of us don't get bothered, some do. Fact.
The point is that ALL of us have a right to photograph what we want, when we want, without let or hindrance. If we do not recognise, respect, and cherish that right, one day we will wake up and it will be gone.
Prevention is better than cure, Proactivity is preferable to inactivity. Education is more effective than confrontation.
Regards,
Bill
Well said!
Last thought for the night:
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied chains us all, irrevocably."
Regards,
Bill
We've got many positive things to work on here.
1:Bill's Wonderful wheel is still turning round in my head.
2:Austin Mitchell, the British MP is favourable to our cause and actively working on it in Parliament.
3:There may be ways we could tie up with him, to help him push for us.
4:We are a big force, over 17000 RFF members. (though I doubt everyone is up for it).
If we could find an American senator or congressperson who was keen on photography like the British MP that would be awesome.
Also there's the financial position. It would be interesting to know how many tax dollars the government makes from photography, from shooters like us and dealers like Cameraquest. That could give us some leverage.
Just some thoughts.
My immediate thoughts:
- I love Bill's Wheel. Perhaps this can be the basis of the association's website or literature of some sort. Forget the Bill of Rights but look to the Wheel of Bill.
- We should use shorter and clearer sentences than Austin Mitchell MP.
CSB 5858
03-26-2008, 18:37
4:We are a big force, over 17000 RFF members. (though I doubt everyone is up for it).
No, "we" are not a big force. RFF has nothing to do with it. "we" is only the people who have posted support. What is that, twenty?
Alex
That's good Nando, The Wheel of Bill.
I agree with the shorter sentences, Austin was using legal politician speak in the Parliament.
No, "we" are not a big force. RFF has nothing to do with it. "we" is only the people who have posted support. What is that, twenty?
Alex
You're quite right Alex, probably well less than 20 even.
What I was referring to with the 17000 was a pool of photographers here ready to listen at least consider the benefit of such an enterprise.
Though once a clear plan of action is worked out and everything is finalised I would think that a few hundred members would be realistic.
So a Labour MP is sticking up for my individual liberties, and the conservatives on both sides of the pond want to video my every move?
Man, I'm confused.
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/British_police_force_vows_to_act_on_photographers_ antiterror_fears_news_199339.html
AP reports that one photographer got positive results by writing a letter of complaint to the Met about the new anti-terror campaign. Just one guy!
This is the UK right. So if as many as possible of you living in Britain were to agree on a common letter, and each send them to the Met, (and to your own MPs as well), this could be a bloody good first step !
Maybe even us non, or ex Brits could do the same (write to the Met) for our "British photographer friends".
This would get covered by AP, and hopefully the dailies.
If we could get a reaction in the UK, then we could try the US.
Patrick Lichfield (the Earl of Lichfield) was the Queen's cousin. He's busy decomposing.
Tony Armstrong-Jones shagged Princess Margaret. Since she couldn't marry a commoner he was made the Earl of Snowdon. He's still clicking.
The natural-born toff was a far nicer person, by all accounts.
Both were nice enough blokes actually. Snowdon used to live just round the corner from me (he may still do) and I would regularly see him when I took my dog for its evening 'constitutional'. He would always say hello. Last few times I saw him he was on crutches or in a wheelchair as the result of his childhood Polio which had come back to haunt him.
But I believe it was Snowdon who introduced the Queen to Leica cameras.
...but back on topic. The real solution to this issue is to follow the Austin Mitchell example and take steps to make the political climate favour photographers. Senior police officers are politicians as much as they are operational law enforcement officers and if they think the actions of their subordinates are going to make them look ridiculous, they'll take active steps to stop it. A letter writing campaign to MPs/Congressmen etc, with copies going to police commanders, pointing out that photography is an entirely lawful activity and that policemen may be breaking laws by trying to stop it would be a good start, particularly if anyone can cite real examples of policemen interfering with lawful photography.
I dropped an email to Austin Mitchell this morning before work. Maybe he will take the time to look at our ramblings, and contribute?
Cheers.
UK readers:
How to contact your MP, MEP, etc:
http://www.writetothem.com/?keyword=mp&creativeid=605235279&gclid=CO-u446gq5ICFQxTQgoduVtQRA
Enter your postcode and you are taken through a series of steps to generate an emailed letter to your representative. You can write, or copy and paste, your text into the body of the "letter".
I urge as many people as possible to DO THIS. In your letter please be:
Courteous
Clear
Concise
Positive
Express WHAT your concern is, and WHY
Talk about what is GOOD about public photography, not about what is BAD about the police, authorities, etc.
A short, pointed, well-written letter is far more likely to be read, and acted upon, than a rambling rant.
Regards,
Bill
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/British_police_force_vows_to_act_on_photographers_ antiterror_fears_news_199339.html
AP reports that one photographer got positive results by writing a letter of complaint to the Met about the new anti-terror campaign. Just one guy!
This is the UK right. So if as many as possible of you living in Britain were to agree on a common letter, and each send them to the Met, (and to your own MPs as well), this could be a bloody good first step !
Maybe even us non, or ex Brits could do the same (write to the Met) for our "British photographer friends".
This would get covered by AP, and hopefully the dailies.
If we could get a reaction in the UK, then we could try the US.
Richard
That's an excellent idea. I'm sure that we can get cover in AP.
Roger H, could you help with that?
Ernst
UK readers:
How to contact your MP, MEP, etc:
http://www.writetothem.com/?keyword=mp&creativeid=605235279&gclid=CO-u446gq5ICFQxTQgoduVtQRA
Enter your postcode and you are taken through a series of steps to generate an emailed letter to your representative. You can write, or copy and paste, your text into the body of the "letter".
I urge as many people as possible to DO THIS. In your letter please be:
Courteous
Clear
Concise
Positive
Express WHAT your concern is, and WHY
Talk about what is GOOD about public photography, not about what is BAD about the police, authorities, etc.
A short, pointed, well-written letter is far more likely to be read, and acted upon, than a rambling rant.
Regards,
Bill
This is great, now the ball is rolling!
Bill,
Would it not be a good idea to come to agreement on a "common" letter, one thought out and well worded?
Mick,
Good initiative ,well done, did you invite him to join us at RFF?
Ade-oh,
I'm glad you see it like this now. This is what I was trying to get across in some earlier posts, "to educate" (the blue line).
To get the "core message", (in black), by the "courteous and calm" route, (green) right out to the top of the "authority" (red).
57580
This is great, now the ball is rolling!
Mick,
Good initiative ,well done, did you invite him to join us at RFF?
Yep and I sent him the URL to this thread specifically.
Yep and I sent him the URL to this thread specifically.
That's great.
I remember seeing a documentary on British TV about 20 or more years ago. In it, they asked MPs what they carried in their pockets.
Austin had a camera in one and a lens in another !
He carried them everywhere.
Ade-oh,
I'm glad you see it like this now.
Well, if photographers are being challenged by police and public for no good reason, then it should be stopped.
Tomorrow I'm going to conduct an experiment. I have an appointment in Blackfriars which should end around 10.00am, after which I plan to walk across the centre of London photographing as many 'sensitive' locations that I can easily get to (should include MI5 and MI6, Ministry of Defence, 10 Downing Street etc etc) and see if I get stopped at any stage. It might prove interesting and will be good exercise.
Ade-oh,
You mentioned that you'd had no problems up to the present.
I think this is about to change tomorrow morning.
Be prepared ! And good luck !
As I remember, you are ex military, take some good ID with you, and maybe even a print out of your post #132 which would explain your "experiment".
As I remember, you are ex military, take some good ID with you, and maybe even a print out of your post #132 which would explain your "experiment".
Actually, I'm 'current' military, although only on a part time basis these days, so I don't expect to be 'extraordinarily rendered' to Guantanamo Bay immediately. I'll go digital rather than rangefinder so that I can post my results ASAP.
This is great, now the ball is rolling!
Bill,
Would it not be a good idea to come to agreement on a "common" letter, one thought out and well worded?
Mick,
Good initiative ,well done, did you invite him to join us at RFF?
Ade-oh,
I'm glad you see it like this now. This is what I was trying to get across in some earlier posts, "to educate" (the blue line).
To get the "core message", (in black), by the "courteous and calm" route, (green) right out to the top of the "authority" (red).
57580
Richard, good idea. I'll draft something tonight and post it up here as plain text. I see from your additions to the wheel that you have very much "got it" - want to run my next sales campaign?:D
Mick, I agree, a very good idea. Austin Mitchell is, as I recall, also a leading light in the parliamentary photo society. He used to be a TV presenter, so is certainly "media friendly"
Ade-Oh, that will be an interesting experiment. Let's see what happens.
Regards,
Bill
Right.
I have used the following link:
http://www.writetothem.com/?keyword=mp&creativeid=605235279&gclid=CO-u446gq5ICFQxTQgoduVtQRA
To send a letter to my MP.
The body of my letter reads as follows:
I am writing to you to express my concerns about the extent to which recent incidents and developments in the UK have contributed to a climate of suspicion directed at amateur photographers.
There have been a number of well-publicised incidents recently in which PCSOs and police officers have confronted and wrongly accused amateur photographers. Now there is a police anti-terror campaign that further seeks to call the behavior of amateur photographers into question.
Photography of people and public places is a legitimate and enjoyable pastime with a long and honourable tradition. It is legal to photograph people and public places with or without their knowledge or permission.
I am writing to you as my elected representative both to draw this to your attention and to seek your active support in the House of Commons to speak out against this creeping criminalisation of a harmless pastime.
Feel free to cut and paste, and use the same words, or a variation thereof.
Once you have hit the button, your letter is stored. You have to check the email address you have provided. They will send you a link, which you have to click on to to actually send the letter.
Regards,
Bill
As an ex-pat Brit, I could send this email explaining "my concerns for my British photographer friends."
Any Brits wanting me to do this must send me their post-code by PM, not here in the thread.
Pitxu.
As I said I would, I spent a couple of hours this morning wandering around central London photographing places which might be said to be 'sensitive' in some way. This included: the Ministry of Defence; the Foreign & Commonwealth Office; the Headquarters of the London Military District (aka 'Horse Guards'); 10 Downing Street from both front and rear; the Headquarters of MI5; and the Headquarters of MI6. The only time anyone spoke to me was when a policeman apologised and stepped out of my way when I was trying to take a picture of the Ministry of Defence from across Whitehall whilst standing outside Downing Street, and he had inadvertently moved in front of me.
Of course, this was no kind of scientific 'experiment' but from what I saw, one would have to work extremely hard to draw sufficient attention to oneself to be challenged or arrested. The reality was that everywhere I went, people were taking photographs with SLRs, video cameras, point and shoots and cellphones, despite the fact that it was a miserable, cold, wet and gloomy morning.
Roger Hicks
03-28-2008, 07:14
Richard
That's an excellent idea. I'm sure that we can get cover in AP.
Roger H, could you help with that?
Ernst
Dear Ernst,
I'll e-mail Damien. He shouldn't need much encouraging.
Sorry it's taken so long to reply but I'd not checked the thread lately.
EDIT: E-mail sent
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
03-28-2008, 07:37
... from what I saw, one would have to work extremely hard to draw sufficient attention to oneself to be challenged or arrested. .
Thanks for the experiment. I have to add though that I have never been challenged/questioned in London (or Moscow or Delhi or Beijing or...) but I have been challenged by UK police at seaside resorts (as has Austin Mitchell) and on the banks of the Danube, in the middle of nowhere, by Romanian border police.
The truth I suspect is that the vast majority of coppers are reasonable, but you only need one paranoid twerp in uniform, or a paranoid twerp out of uniform to complain to a copper who is too easily influenced.
Only once have I encountered a cop who was hostile (in Kent), and even then, she was civil (she had little choice, as I was breaking no laws). The one in Essex to whom I said 'Tough...' as described in an earlier post left me in no doubt that she was on my side, not the side of the idiot who had complained.
Cheers,
Roger
So.
I sent my letter as shown, and today I got a response. The Rt. Hon. Andrew MacKay M.P. wrote:
"Thank you for yesterday's email which I read with a great deal of sympathy. I think you are maiking a valid point in this age of over-regulation and that is why I have been a co-sponsor of the enclosed Early Day Motion which I hope will put pressure on the Government and public bodies."
He enclosed a copy of the Austin Mitchell Early Day Motion together with a list of the 99 other MPs who signed it.
Send more.
Regards,
Bill
Right.
I have used the following link:
http://www.writetothem.com/?keyword=mp&creativeid=605235279&gclid=CO-u446gq5ICFQxTQgoduVtQRA
To send a letter to my MP.
The body of my letter reads as follows:
I am writing to you to express my concerns about the extent to which recent incidents and developments in the UK have contributed to a climate of suspicion directed at amateur photographers.
There have been a number of well-publicised incidents recently in which PCSOs and police officers have confronted and wrongly accused amateur photographers. Now there is a police anti-terror campaign that further seeks to call the behavior of amateur photographers into question.
Photography of people and public places is a legitimate and enjoyable pastime with a long and honourable tradition. It is legal to photograph people and public places with or without their knowledge or permission.
I am writing to you as my elected representative both to draw this to your attention and to seek your active support in the House of Commons to speak out against this creeping criminalisation of a harmless pastime.
Feel free to cut and paste, and use the same words, or a variation thereof.
Once you have hit the button, your letter is stored. You have to check the email address you have provided. They will send you a link, which you have to click on to to actually send the letter.
Regards,
Bill
Dear Ernst,
I'll e-mail Damien. He shouldn't need much encouraging.
Sorry it's taken so long to reply but I'd not checked the thread lately.
EDIT: E-mail sent
Cheers,
R.
Hello Roger
Thank you. I'm sure that this will add to the momentum.
Regards
Ernst
Hansard Online: 18 Feb 2008
Public Order Offences: Photography
Mrs. Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will issue guidance to police forces on steps which may be taken against persons taking photographs in public places.
Mr. McNulty: The police may remove persons from public areas, prevent filming or confiscate equipment where they are responding to an offence or where they suspect an offence is about to happen in order to prevent it from being committed. They may also take action to prevent a breach of the peace. In such cases the police may require a person to leave a place or prevent them from entering a public area where their presence is likely to cause a breach of the peace. Police tactics and decisions on how to achieve these objectives are a matter for the independent judgment of chief officers of police.
So that is the official line from the Home Office...
Regards,
Bill
Very interesting Bill.
McNulty states that persons can be "moved", and cameras confiscated if police "suspect" that an offence is about to happen, or to prevent it from being committed.
Crazy.
Very interesting Bill.
McNulty states that persons can be "moved", and cameras confiscated if police "suspect" that an offence is about to happen, or to prevent it from being committed.
Crazy.
Exactly.
Anybody seen "Minority Report"...?
BTW, I have tonight written to Boris Johnson, Conservative candidate for Mayor of London, here: http://www.backboris.com/contact.php
I used a variation of my original MP letter, going further by pointing out the potential impact on the millions of pounds of tourist money that the capital receives every year.
Regards,
Bill
I have tonight written to Boris Johnson, Conservative candidate for Mayor of London, here: http://www.backboris.com/contact.php
I used a variation of my original MP letter, going further by pointing out the potential impact on the millions of pounds of tourist money that the capital receives every year.
Regards,
Bill
I've just done the same explaining "my concerns for my British photographer friends."
Thank you Richard. Every one helps
Regards,
Bill
One can do the same to cuddly Ken
http://www.kenlivingstone.com/page/s/contact
No reply yet from Mick's friend Red Ken, nor his rival Boris, though I did get a response from Austin Mitchell's office;
"Dear Mr Jenkinson,
Thank you for your email and the support you have shown for Austin
Mitchell's recent EDM on photography in public places.
Your address indicates that you aren't based in the UK, but please do
encourage others to write to their MP asking them to support EDM 1155.
Yours sincerely,
Amy Hopkinson
Research Assistant to Austin Mitchell MP."
Well, the buggers never replied to me!! Perhaps it's the exotic address that prompted them.
Basque France does look more impressive than Leicester!
Does anyone remember this thread?
Well, the BBC have finally decided it's worth a few kilobytes...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7351252.stm
"Guidelines agreed between senior police and the media were adopted by all forces in England and Wales last year. They state that police have no power to prevent the media taking photos.
They state that "once images are recorded, [the police] have no power to delete or confiscate them without a court order, even if [the police] think they contain damaging or useful evidence."
I'm competing in the latest "Barnack Challenge" over on the LUF. The theme this time is "uniforms". I was up in London today, in the City with my trusty IID. I wandered around searching for suitable subjects; the best I had found was a couple of street cleaners - two nuns that I spotted seemed to have a sixth sense and managed to dodge me not once but twice.
Then outside the Bank of England I spotted a couple of PCSOs hanging around near a statue looking bored. I strode up to them, smiled sweetly and asked if I could take their photo. One asked why - I explained as above - and the other asked where I would like them to pose. I popped off a shot, and asked for another, which was readily agreed to. I thanked them kindly for their co-operation and they wished me luck.
I would like to think that is was my personal charm that led them to believe as they did. More realistically, I think that the fact that I was polite about it, direct rather than surreptitious, and smartly dressed all contributed to a positive encounter.
I would also like to think that they will in turn be a little more tolerant to the next photographer they encounter.
Regards,
Bill
Let's hope they tell their mates how nice it is to be snapped in the street. Maybe there could be a sibling group set up, say the Int'l Asc. of Patriotic Street Photographees
UPDATE.
Austin Mitchell's EDM gains more support.
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/MPs_photography_petition_backing_soars_update_news _254033.html
Interesting. Thanks very mucb for that.
It's now apparently up to 177 signatures, making it 15th out of 1520 such motions. UK readers, if you haven't done so already, contact your MP and make sure they have signed. This is IMPORTANT - it's the thin end of the wedge.
Regards,
Bill
rolleistef
04-27-2008, 08:36
Dear Pitxu,
I just read the message about your current location on page 1 of the thread.
It could be interesting for those of our fellow photographers who don't live in France - and furthermore, for those who don't leave in Europe - to explain why you consider that the Pays Basque is occupied - no political debate about it, I perfectly accept what you think even if I don't really agree - and what you mean by "occupied", because most of the time it rather sounds like "occupation with tanks, army, restrictions of civil liberties, curfew", and it isn't really the case in this part of Europe.
Moreover, most people don't know where the Pays Basque is, for the same reason that we couldn't locate at first glance the Sierra Madre or Orange County. It could help explaining why you think it could be linked with the creation of such an association? Just my two centimes!
All the best,
rolleistef
04-27-2008, 11:24
I got a PM from Pitxu who answered he prefered not to start political debates.
I'd just like to explain to our fellow non-European what the "issue" for Basque Land is.
Once upon a time there was a people that came from a still unknown place. We may have some clue that they be related to the Japanese people (yes!) because of some biological specifity, and also some words that are close, such as the word for "river" : "gawa" in Japanese, "gave" in Basque
There are "two" Basque Lands : a "French" one and a "Spanish" one.
The "French" one is located on the far - South-West of France, on the Atlantic coast, in the region of Bayonne, Anglet and Biarritz. The "Spanish" one is separated from it by the moutains Pyrenées.
In France there are about 35 thousand Basques, much more in Spain. Both are asking for independance or devolution. I think Pitxu refers to the Basque Land as an "occupied" country because it's part of France and has very little autonomy, and it's not to be taken in the first meaning of "occupied" (military)
The Basque culture has a very strong identity, and is quite unique by its specificity, hence its interest.
I hope it will help knowing Pitxu a bit better. It was only an answer to my own message to his request , sorry for out-topicking.
Cheers,
Thanks for the geography lesson.
Using Bill P's template I have extracted a promise from my local MP to sign Austin Mitchell's EDM.
What actual good it will do I dunno. But every little helps.
Cheers.
Nice one, Mick. The more of our elected representatives do this, the better.
Regards,
Bill
And for those that think we are making a fuss about nothing:
This is what existing powers to counter terrorism are being misused for:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7369543.stm
Not only that - the Counter Terrorism Bill 2007-2008 is making it's way through Parliament. It contains a clause that is deeply worrying:
"The Bill contains a number of provisions which the Government states are designed to enhance counter-terrorism powers. There has been a lot of fuss about extending detention without trial, but that is not the only worrying aspect.
The main elements of the Bill are:
* a provision to allow the pre-charge detention of terrorist suspects to be extended from 28 days to 42 days in certain circumstances
* changes to enable the post-charge questioning of terrorist suspects and the drawing of adverse inferences from silence
* imposing requirements on people convicted of terrorist offences to let authorities know where they are living and any changes to their circumstances
* enhanced sentencing of offenders who commit offences with a terrorist connection
* provision for inquests and inquiries to be heard without a jury.
The Bill would also confer further powers to gather and share information for counter-terrorism and other purposes, and amend the law relating to asset-freezing procedures."
Source: UK Parliament - Parliament Home Page
In other words, remain silent and you will be assumed guilty.
The slippery slope is being greased as I type.
Regards,
Bill
Bill, What does that have to do with photography? I see no mention at all.
Steve
Many of the stops of photographers have been under the guise of "counter-terrorism". Existing powers are being abused, and more are planned.
Regards,
Bill
This is for public consumption, to gain acceptance for street photography, not motivated by patriotic zeal.
First, by "acceptance" for street photography, you're about talking about gaining a very broad cultural shift. Even with some sort of official status or credential, cameras pointed by strangers evoke deeply-set aversions. It's possible, but it would be a multi-decade project, and it's not likely to provoke the kind of groundswell needed to change attitudes.
Second, I have lots of concerns about the commodification of patriotism, terror, and so forth. These are serious and very particular phenomena, but they are appropriated by all sorts of commercial and ideological enterprises.
IMO, serious street photography is a quirky and niche occupation; it makes the photographers nervous, and that's not a disadvantage; it makes the subjects nervous, and probably should.
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Foreign_Secretary_Miliband_responds_to_photography _concerns_news_254889.html
The Boy Milliband has spoken up.
Regards,
Bill
"However, decisions may be made locally to restrict photography..." which seems to give authority to local police to not follow the everything is OK to photograph attitude.
Steve
"However, decisions may be made locally to restrict photography..." which seems to give authority to local police to not follow the everything is OK to photograph attitude.
Steve
...but they cannot act in contravention of the law.
Signatures to the early day motion are now up to 180
Regards,
Bill
"Police officers are not sufficiently trained in how to correctly apply anti-terror legislation when dealing with photographers, the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation has admitted....Parliament should think twice about implementing laws without putting in the training packages to go with them."
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Terror_Act_Police_attack_government_over_photograp hy_in_public_news_254852.html
FFS how difficult can it be?
"If you see someone in the street taking photographs treat them the same as you would someone walkiing their dog."
I know it's been said before, but someone obviously taking photographs is hardly likely to be engaging in terrorist activities, but those buggers with their miniature cameras disguised a mobile phones, well...
I bet if I was to walk around London talking into a huge WW2 Walkie-Talkie like what John Wayne used to use I'd be questioned by "the authorities" because I looked suspicious and might be dodgy.
Jesus H Christ!
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.