Busted taking photos in a public place!!

[evad1962]

Just thought I'd share this with everyone - I'm a pro photographer & just yesterday was shooting some candid stuff (not paid work, some from the hip & some not) at the Sydney Royal Easter Show which is a big annual event - lots of colour, noise, people, sideshows, amusement rides etc. I was in the middle of taking a shot of the 'Break Dance' ride (with Q'ing people in foreground) when a couple of cops interrupted to inform me that a security guard had noticed me taking photos of people, including children, and they asked me why. I told them it was for the purposes of social documentary and that I could only capture 'real' events as they happened by doing it on the sly. I was upfront with them, answered their questions truthfully, told them I was a pro snapper & gave them my business card & driver's licence.

Anyway to cut a long story short, I was 'detained' (not physically) by one officer while the other presumably ran some checks on me. After an extremely long half hour (during which time she talked again to the security guard) the second officer came back & informed me that she still considered my activities suspicious & that she was confiscating my film (some unused) and both my cameras. I protested that the cameras were my tools of trade, they conferred and relented but searched my bag, kept the film to process and then escorted me off the site - apparently the security guard claimed that he'd seen me hanging around kids at another area of the show at 10am that morning, which was a full 5 hours before I'd even arrived - amazing.

Has anybody else had this sort of unpleasant experience? I've been looking into my legal rights in this country re: public photography and there IS NO LAW against doing what I was doing on publicly owned land, so at the moment I'm trying to find out who owns the site, to see what sort of recourse I have. I'll keep you posted - It's a sad, sad world, as recent events demonstrate. Thanks for reading, Evad.

 

[rogue_designer]

sorry to hear about your experience.

It's very possible that during an event like that they treat the land as private property for liability issues. I know in the US, they don't have the right to confiscate your film - but that, of course, doesn't necessarily apply in Australia.

Do you have any lawyer friends you can chat up?

Or an editorial/letter to the editor you could write?

 

[winoto]

evad,

that's a croc. sad to see this happening but it's true. can't seem to take any pictures in Sydney without either rousing suspicion or a negative reaction. my tourist friend was taking pictures of bondi beach with its multitude of interesting images and pulled up by the lifeguard and police and told to either stop or they will confiscate his camera. they claimed that he was taking pictures of children playing?!?!!

unlike yourself, i dont have a business card to back myself up. i take street/candid photography simply as an outlet and hobby. more and more, my sites of interest are limited to those which have tourists already so that i can blend in, or overseas where i AM the tourist.

the thing that bugs me most is that it's probably the people with mobile phone cameras who are the peeping toms or perverts but seem to get away with their "non prefessional gear".

 

[jaapv]

It is indeed a sad world; the saddest thing obviously the perverts that triggered this response. However, as an active participator in the 60-ies revolution I would like to encourage you to protest this and take action. There is no excuse for taking your rights and freedom away from you.

 

[Keith]

If you check federal and NSW law regarding photography you will find that they have gone way beyond their rights in confiscating film or gear ... that is your property and they cant do that!

I posted of a similar experience a while ago and spent a lot of time researching my rights after the event. I would imagine that the location would be classed as 'private property with public access.' You can be prevented from photographing ... if the owners of the property request such action ... but no other way.

Australian law states that no person in this country has a right not to be photographed in a public place ... it's as simple as that! Your rights have been transgressed!

Cheers ... Keith

ps ... have you noticed that the anti terrorism adds that are shown in prime time TV in this wonderful country show a series of events that a 'responsible' citizen should react to and take 'appropriate' action! Tragically one 'suspicious' scenario is ... someone taking photographs!

What f***ing hope is there? 😡

 

[ducttape]

This issue is prime here in America. Pre 9/11 the issues were clear cut. Public/private land, copyrighted/public item, etc. Now, in the interests of 'security', many legitimate law enforcement people try to get away with many illegitimate things.

Being on even private land in America, no one has the right to take your equipment. They can take your film. And they can certainly show you to the door, but your private property conveys the same rights as theirs.

On the other hand... I was walking THRU THE WOODS(!) on the campus of a large, to remain unnamed clothing designer in Columbus Ohio. When I got to the door of the building of the person I was there to visit a plain clothes 'security' guard asked for my camera. Ah, bite me. (Like I'm going to give a M7 to a guard simply for the asking.) I eventually opened the bottom, tore off the exposed film and threw it in the cigarette can.

I DO understand the concept of copyright laws, design theory, etc etc. But I was walking in the friggin' woods, scores of yards from the building! And it was outside the buildings which contained what they sell! They are clothiers, not building merchants. Go figure. I can't believe they had people watching me walk in the woods.

George Orwell must surely be crying, while Yuri Andropov grins from ear to ear.

 

[rpsawin]

Yep, and I'm afraid the stupidity has just began.

Bob

 

[RML]

I can't wait to go to Paris with a bunch of other RFF members! 😛

 

[jan normandale]

get a 5 MP camera phone! They will suffice. Email yourself the images as you take them. These police and security people know the "safe profile".. and you are it.

It's like the police who give the local store manager a speeding ticket.. it's safe. They don't want to go after people whose profile isn't safe. They are afraid, so they pick the safe route to show their monthly statistics...

"Hey commander.. I stopped 15 potential's , I'm a productive and busy guy!" or
"Hey commander I went after a couple of drug dealers and didn't get any paper out because they got away... "

Which story do you think you'd want to sell to move up the ladder. It's all about low risk career enhancement.

Get a cell phone camera.

 

[iml]

Still, nothing is as bad as London these days.

I take street photos in London all the time, never had a problem. There's been a couple of high profile stories in the press, but they've turned out to be either untrue (the story of police stopping people photographing in Trafalgar Square, or the online petition against non-existent proposals requiring photographers to carry id), or exaggerated.

Private security guards are increasingly acting aggressively towards photographers, but I handle them by politely pointing out that they have no rights at all to tell me what I can do in a public place.

Policing is heavier than it has been, and public paranoia about paedophilia and terrorism definitely means we are all potentially treated with suspicion, but so far at least, London is still a relatively easy place to take pictures in public, despite the insane number of CCTV cameras.

Ian

 

[David Murphy]

While I sympathize completely with the harrased photographer here, I thought I'd make an interesting observation.

My dad was in television network news most of his career and I got to know quite a few film cameramen and other photojournalists. They were real pros of the trade, and they were hassled, harrased, beaten, shot at, arrested, threatened, had their extremely expensive cameras smashed, film stolen, etc. etc. Some of them were killed in Vietman, Nicaragua, the Middle East, in helicopter and plane crashes, or attacked by police dogs at Selma, or brutally beaten by cops in Chicago ('68) or Miami Beach ('72, I witnessed that personally). And how did they regard all of this? They took it in stride as an occupational hazard! They even liked to laugh, tell stories, and compare notes about it all in watering holes after the film was in the can. Their main goal was to not get killed so as to keep the still cameras clicking, or the movie cameras rolling even as this sort of thing was going on. I really admired them!

I live in LA and occasionally get to see the local paparazzi in action. They remind me a lot of these (more mainstream) photo journalists and camera men I used to know in that they are also purely focused on what matters: the shot. They go for the shot- while bucking up against the thug security guards, or local city police (who are in the pocket of the movie studios).

So you street photographers need to suck-it-up, get some backbone, take some chances, and get tough. Keep some spare cameras and film in the trunk of your car so you can reload and keep shooting after the thugs take your gear and film. Toss the exposed film to a friend with good fast feet who can get it to the lab while you're going down (he can also bail you out of jail later after you've been arrested on phony charges). Most of all get the shot -- that's the glory of this dammit!

 

[RML]

Very inspirational, Dave! 🙂

 

[Sparrow]

David, it was an Easter Show not a war zone,
There isn’t anything glorious about being shot at or beaten that I can see

 

[varjag]

Dave has a point, although I believe getting charged with paedophilia due to overzealous officers is not as good for bragging.

In Belarus, while once waiting for an opportunity to emerge on a busy corner, I was detained to police station for background check. My assumption is I was pointed out to them as photographer by personel of a nearby McDonald's restaurant. They are notorious for "overcooperating" with law enforcement in Belarus and passing over pro-democracy protesters they spot. Officers at the station competed in joking loudly on what I could've been doing with my camera, but released me shortly and suggested not to take photos; I returned to the same spot and bumped into same officers patroling some 15 minutes later. They just glanced at me but didn't act. Shooting mood was runied that day tho and I don't eat at McD ever since 🙂

Also, once I was offered to have my bones broken by a group of president guards, a proposal I had to turn down and leave. They were expecting the president meeting common folk near monument, and I was wrong kind of common folk, worse yet with a camera.

Still Evads experience sounds more disturbing. It is deeply upsetting to be treated as a pervert :/

 

[cfoto]

My rant may be useful and may not... My methods I suggest below work for me in the US (so far).

In my opinion, that is an unfortunate side of certain styles of Street Photography. Some street photographers look suspicious. With the current events in the world today, everyone (security personnel, police, and average citizens) are more watchful and knowing about their surroundings and the people around them. The street photography style, where you try to snap photos while trying to hide the fact and try to make it look like your not snapping photos, draws attention to watchful eyes. That style makes you look suspicious. Try a more open style approach. Don’t hide your camera. Shoot in plain view. Try conversing with those around you. Once people see you around with a camera and are striking up conversations, they’ll forget about your camera. Candid opportunities will return. And, you won’t look suspicious. If you read some of the bios of National Geographic photographers (granted, their style is not classified as “Street Photography”) you’ll find they mingle with their subjects and converse while shooting. It brings more of a personal touch to their work.

Get a Qoop mini book with some of your work and have it readily available in a pocket or your camera bag. If you’re approached pull out your mini-portfolio and show them the work you do. It will show them the type of photos you’re taking.

Knowing your rights are important. But, confrontation in the manner of spouting off your rights, will only bring attention to yourself and likely banned from further photo taking for the day (or worse.) If you have a run in with law enforcement or security personnel, I would suggest making an appointment after the fact with someone in charge. Explain what you were doing and ASK them for suggestions in how you can continue your photo taking without further suspicion. Professionalism will get you further than attitude.

 

[ibcrewin]

First of all, you shouldn't eat McD's for other reasons.
Second, Thanks to David.. Makes me want to stand up to the man!

 

[Bike Tourist]

Yes, pedophiles are bad. Terrorists are bad.

Governments find it handy to connect the bad things with the public's sense of imminent danger in order to chip away at fundimental but inconveniient rights. Many don't fully appreciate those rights until it is too late.

Thise who would stop your legal photography on suspicion or because of some possible future use get disturbingly close to thought police.

 

[ywenz]

Should have taken digital pictures so they can see what you shot.

 

[dazedgonebye]

Yes, pedophiles are bad. Terrorists are bad.

Governments find it handy to connect the bad things with the public's sense of imminent danger in order to chip away at fundimental but inconveniient rights. Many don't fully appreciate those rights until it is too late.

Thise who would stop your legal photography on suspicion or because of some possible future use get disturbingly close to thought police.

Amen.

[Libertarian rant]
All organisms strive to survive and grow. The government organism is no different. Fear is the food that enables the transfer of power from individuals to governments.
Fear of pedophiles, terrorists, etc. has become the lever of choice/convenience used to seperate us from our rights.
[/Libertarian rant]

 

[georgefspencer]

Should have taken digital pictures so they can see what you shot.

That's what I do. If someone wants to see what I've shot I show them.