Brits Ban Cameras on Planes

[rover]

Gentlemen, again.......

Opinions have been expressed, I will not allow this thread to deteriorate into a flame war. Please

 

[dcsang]

Gentlemen, again.......

Opinions have been expressed, I will not allow this thread to deteriorate into a flame war. Please

Ralph,

I think it's too late - I've been reading and there's some really hateful things in this thread 🙁

*sigh*

Dave

 

[rover]

I agree Dave....

I want to respect our rights and desire to discuss the current issues, but trying to lead that discussion down a "better" course.

There is no way to truly discuss the current events in a sterile way. There are tons of web sites where these discussions can be had without restriction. I am hopeful that we can do it here with some restraint, and that if individuals feel it is necessary take their comments further they will find an appropriate place for that.

 

[VinceC]

We should try to bear in mind that one of the chief powers of photography is its ability to show us other places, other points of view and other perspectives. It is part of the tolerance and diversity that most of us cherish.

 

[dcsang]

We should try to bear in mind that one of the chief powers of photography is its ability to show us other places, other points of view and other perspectives. It is part of the tolerance and diversity that most of us cherish.

I agree Vince.

And yes, we should be able to discuss such things without hurling racial epithets or painting with broad brushes.

Rover, I hope that the discussion can be had in a way that we can better understand how to try to live in the current state that we find ourselves.

Dave

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Why is checking in a camera such a problem?

 

[rover]

Why is checking in a camera such a problem?

Stop making so much sense. :angel:

 

[VinceC]

In a practical sense, in the past I've often traveled with two camera bodies in my carry-on camera bag while placing other camera equipment, including bodies, into checked luggage. Packing a mechanical body among a thick stack of clothing is remarkably safe.

While this sorts out, travelers might want to stick to replaceable cameras instead of classic or collectible gear. When I was a military photographer, I packed Nikomats in my rucksack when parachuting, which was also hard on the luggage. They still work fine.

 

[VinceC]

From the UK Daily Mail:

The oldest of the named suspects is 35 and the youngest 17. Thirteen of them are from east London - nine from Walthamstow, one from Chingford, one from Leyton, one from the Limehouse and Poplar area and one from Clapton.

Four are from High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, and the other two are from Birmingham and Stoke Newington, north London.

The imam of Walthamstow mosque, where many of the suspects live, urged the Muslim community to remain calm and assist the police in their inquries. The unnamed imam added: "We'd like to remind people that the suspects are innocent until proven guilty."

Meanwhile, a senior Pakistani government official said today that two British nationals arrested in Pakistan provided information about the alleged UK air terror plot.

 

[Al Patterson]

Why is checking in a camera such a problem?

Because likely it will dissapear when you need it the most. I'm not putting $3,000 worth of camera in the hands of the luggage apes...

And, BTW, with all thye nasty anti-American drivel, it's long past time to lock this thread and give a few users a time out.

 

[VinceC]

Locking threads because of a few particpants isn't really fair to those who've kept their wits about them. It also freezes the conversation at its negative ebb instead of allowing calmer hands to prevail (which has been the general mood of this thread).

 

[RayPA]

In a practical sense, in the past I've often traveled with two camera bodies in my carry-on camera bag while placing other camera equipment, including bodies, into checked luggage. Packing a mechanical body among a thick stack of clothing is remarkably safe.

While this sorts out, travelers might want to stick to replaceable cameras instead of classic or collectible gear. When I was a military photographer, I packed Nikomats in my rucksack when parachuting, which was also hard on the luggage. They still work fine.

From what I've read and heard, one of the plans to detonate the explosives, involved the flash on a disposable point and shoot camera. Maybe take a disposable along with your regular gear and let them confiscate the disposable--to satisfy that urge. 🙂 I would not want to be heading out on any vacation or holiday while this is going on. My sympathies to those photographers in this predicament.


.


🙂

 

[StuartR]

Though it is a large inconvenience, a tenba air case and insurance is a good way around these issues. I have traveled a great deal lately (I spent 3 months living in Japan last fall, and two months living in Iceland), and I have used a tenba air case to protect my equipment. I had a Leica R9/DMR, Mamiya 7II, 43mm lens, 180 apo, 100 apo, 19mm elmarit and so on in the case. In other words, well over 10,000 dollars worth of stuff in it. It all came out fine and has on a number of occasions. Yes, it is no fun to surrender that much stuff to someone elses hands, but sometimes you have to. You put a fragile sticker on it, make sure your insurance is in order and get on with your life. Life is too short to flip out about losing camera equipment. Concentrate on why you are traveling in the first place, and remember that the best camera and film are your eye and your mind. Even if someone takes your camera, they are not taking your memories.

 

[dcsang]

This makes me laugh..
Please, folks, read these little posts on BoingBoing:
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/08/10/if_the_liquid_could_.html

I can't believe it... I could have seen the secruity briefing at all the major airports yesterday

"ya.. there's potentially dangerous liquid chemicals that could potentially be used as explosives. We'll stop the bad guys alright; NO ONE gets to carry any liquids on board the aircraft. As security staff you should dump all liquids from passengers into the same large tub "

What a bunch of idiots - chemicals, potentially dangerous, being MIXED together..

From now on, I'm taking the bus:

Dave

 

[wrenhunter]

I wouldn't mind the checking thing so much if 3 things happened:

1) the airlines could cut down on the rampant theft by airport employees of items in checked bags (and since there are no locks allowed in the US on bags, it's pretty easy to do)

2) the airlines could actually manage to get the bags to me without losing them. This happens far too often

These two points might be addressed by RFIDs -- in the first case, our private use of them with our stuff, and in the latter in use by the airlines.

I must say, however, that as occasional traveller, I have never had lost luggage. Nor do I know anyone who has. I'm sure it stinks when it happens, but I suspect it's fairly rare.

 

[RayPA]

Though it is a large inconvenience, a tenba air case and insurance is a good way around these issues. I have traveled a great deal lately (I spent 3 months living in Japan last fall, and two months living in Iceland), and I have used a tenba air case to protect my equipment. I had a Leica R9/DMR, Mamiya 7II, 43mm lens, 180 apo, 100 apo, 19mm elmarit and so on in the case. In other words, well over 10,000 dollars worth of stuff in it. It all came out fine and has on a number of occasions. Yes, it is no fun to surrender that much stuff to someone elses hands, but sometimes you have to. You put a fragile sticker on it, make sure your insurance is in order and get on with your life. Life is too short to flip out about losing camera equipment. Concentrate on why you are traveling in the first place, and remember that the best camera and film are your eye and your mind. Even if someone takes your camera, they are not taking your memories.

A good perspective on things!

 

[SuitePhoto]

For what it's worth, travel within the US is pretty much business as usual. I flew from Salt Lake City to Sacramento yesterday with my Bessa R and a couple rolls of exposed Neopan 1600 in my carry-on. I had my film in a little zip-lock bag, and asked to have the film inspected by hand while going through secruity - and the TSA officers did as requested with a smile.

The funny thing is that I actually had some chapstick buried at the bottom of my bag which I had forgotten about. I believe such items are on the no-no list, but I went through just fine.

The only thing that sucked was getting to the airport 3 hours early because of 'expected delays' at the security check-points, and then having no issues at all. We went through the ticket and security lines within 30 minutes, which left us we 2 and a half hours to wait for the flight...

 

[c.poulton]

I'm not sure what to do - I am hoping to fly off middle of next month for a two week holiday to Barbados (well, if it's good enough for Tony Blair......!) and if this situation persists I will have to re-think what gear I will be taking with me:

So far I reckon that I will just pack my 'lesser' valued (earlier cla'd) IIIf in the checked baggage with just the one 50 summitar - take a chance with the baggage handler's, and then buy B+W film out there. (If possible) At the end of the two weeks I'll post back to the UK the exposed film and get it developed as usual here in London.😕

 

[MelanieC]

The funny thing is that I actually had some chapstick buried at the bottom of my bag which I had forgotten about. I believe such items are on the no-no list, but I went through just fine.

I carry a pocketknife in my purse at all times (and it is fairly large -- a four-inch Laguiole with a corkscrew on it -- never know when you might need to open a bottle of wine!) and forgot to remove it from my carry-on when I flew in May. Boy, I was sweating waiting to go through security, thinking they'd confiscate it -- it has a lot of sentimental value as well as being a beautiful knife -- but the screeners missed it.

 

[ampguy]

I never fly

I never fly

without one of these ... 😉