Had to happen sooner or later - Ottawa Views Photographers as Suspicious

[tanel]

It's not photographers who terrorize people but the law that terrorize photographers.

It's hilarious and concerning at the same time for me. I live in a small country in Northern Europe. - this terrorism act against photographers hasn't happened here but who knows, who knows.
I never would have imagined that something like that can happen to us. But now we're labeled as criminals just by taking pictures.

 

[Matus]

Well, in this particular case I would guess that the main "target group" are painters as they spend much more time on one location than photographers ...

I am only wondering when this bull**** (a very primitive version of fear actually) will start to spread across Germany.

 

[migtex]

I would like to share something about it but then I may lose the job.
Let me just say that the power to be in charge of security they just see everyone else outside their circle in two ways, or an enemy of society or a moron that is "stupid enough to help the enemy".
But who is the enemy you may ask (I did, stupid!).
All the ones who think they have Rights! We are on War! Don't you get it!
(by now I was with a moron Tag!)

Yes, it's paranoia all right...!
---------------------
IMHO a Photographer is useful as a target for two reasons.
1- the normal John Doe is Pi*%$ed already with all the surveillance they put on him but he can not do anything about.. it's beyond his/her reach... so they give him the Photographer. It's recognizable (has a camera), it's the same size has him and can be grabbed.
2- People can download the rage on the photographer. Yes you can call the cops due suspicion activities (taking photos).. and even take pictures with the phone while police gives that naughty photographer a hell of a time. While doing it... they don't even think they will be next.

It's the old story of the Sheppard, the sheep's, the dog and the Wolf.
The Wolf it's bad bad bad.
So, You got beaten by the dog and eaten by the Shepard because the Fear of the Wolf....

 

[Al Patterson]

@semilog

It's true... if I was a child now, instead of 20 odd years ago, my parents would probably be arrested for child endangerment... my mom used to send me off to play in the woods with nothing but a pocket knife, a compass, a couple band-aids and a couple of sandwiches in a backpack... I'd leave in the morning and wouldn't be back till dinner time. I had a ball... and actually learned to find my way home using compass 🙂

Most people would think this was horribly dangerous nowadays... but is it really more dangerous than letting a kid loose in the world with nothing but a decade of Xbox as preparation?

"decade of Xbox as prepartion"... A classic! I am old enough that we played games like "Battleship" with pencils and graph paper, and I did a little of the "playing in the Woods" when I grew up.

I'll bet some kids today have never gone on a snipe hunt... 😉

 

[ruben]

I think that these sort of situations we have been having since 9/11, are a bit more complex than just "politics of fear".

True, there is always an ingredient of political manipulation of fear, but there is also an ingredient of true concern.

Lately I perceive some sort of women reluctance out of their legitimate right for privacy. This legitimate right for privacy is to be respected, in my opinion. Should we abstain from now on from street photography of women ? Not at all, but when a woman protest I would explain myself and even delete the image if the protest continues.

This new world order in which we are less and less allowed, also endangers the survival of our street photography genre. Thsi is a red light that I do not accept, at the same time that I would deal with each situation in a specific way.

Meaning that I photograph whatever I want, conspicuously, and no matter any explicit prohibition, but at the same time out of awareness towards the fears of common people, I would be ready to retreat when specifically asked.

Specially concerning children, we should not ignore current adults paranoia. I also hear radio daily and cannot ignore the myriad of sexual or/and violent abuse taking place in a growing brutalized world. Therefore I am not sure I will go to a public square to take pictures of children playing, in the same spirit that by evening/night when I walk and there is a single woman before me, walking in the same direction, I either walk faster or slower, in order to let her clearly feel I am not after. Just common sense.

But on the other hand I know by experience that at some places when there are water fountain sculptures and a lot of children inside, the general spirit is of joy and clear understanding why this is a special photographic opportunity and an ocassional photographer like me is harmless.

Finally any AF camera will enable a lot of conspicuos picture making, and any Panasonic G with both a flippable back and a great electronic viewfinder will be an astonishing instrument for both conspicuous and unconspicuous photography.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Jaans]

I think that these sort of situations we have been having since 9/11, are a bit more complex than just "politics of fear".

True, there is always an ingredient of political manipulation of fear, but there is also an ingredient of true concern.

Lately I perceive some sort of women reluctance out of their legitimate right for privacy. This legitimate right for privacy is to be respected, in my opinion. Should we abstain from now on from street photography of women ? Not at all, but when a woman protest I would explain myself and even delete the image if the protest continues.

This new world order in which we are less and less allowed, also endangers the survival of our street photography genre. Thsi is a red light that I do not accept, at the same time that I would deal with each situation in a specific way.

Meaning that I photograph whatever I want, conspicuously, and no matter any explicit prohibition, but at the same time out of awareness towards the fears of common people, I would be ready to retreat when specifically asked.

Specially concerning children, we should not ignore current adults paranoia. I also hear radio daily and cannot ignore the myriad of sexual or/and violent abuse taking place in a growing brutalized world. Therefore I am not sure I will go to a public square to take pictures of children playing, in the same spirit that by evening/night when I walk and there is a single woman before me, walking in the same direction, I either walk faster or slower, in order to let her clearly feel I am not after. Just common sense.

But on the other hand I know by experience that at some places when there are water fountain sculptures and a lot of children inside, the general spirit is of joy and clear understanding why this is a special photographic opportunity and an ocassional photographer like me is harmless.

Finally any AF camera will enable a lot of conspicuos picture making, and any Panasonic G with both a flippable back and a great electronic viewfinder will be an astonishing instrument for both conspicuous and unconspicuous photography.

Cheers,
Ruben

Nicely put. I follow a similar pattern when out taking street photography.

There was a case recently wasn't there when a photographer was banned from taking photos and even entering certain shops in an area. I recall in the article that he refused to delete a photograph that a lady had asked him to delete. If that were me AND I was using digital then I would have deleted it. I think that that when out doing street photography that a policy of 'give and take' will get me through a days shoot without inflammatory situations. Personally I believe that it is important to take the express wishes or desires of a subject into account if the situation calls for it. Common sense will often dictate whether you are welcome back into certain precints.

Now, what can become confusing is when you take a photo of a subject with a film camera and they want the photo 'deleted'. Once in London I took a photo of a man about 50 years old in Camden markets. It was quite a nice scene with him standing in half light. He saw that I had taken his photo and demanded that I delete the shot. I told him that it was a film camera and that I would destroy that particular negative when I developed it (I hand process my TRI-X). This wasn't good enough for him and things detiorated rapidly as he started to demand the whole roll of film. He said that if I didn't give him the film, then he would call the police.

I am not English, but I knew that I had a right to take photographs in public and the law was on my side, but he was overtly aggressive and grabbing at my arm. So, I really didn't want to have to explain myself to the police given all of the terrorist hysteria as I was supposed to be on a holiday. It was the start of the roll of my film and I caved in - I just opened up my M6 and tore out the film and plonked it in his hand. I recall telling him at the time to remember to use diluted D76 to achieve the best processing results (despite the fact that the roll had been cooked in the sun by my slight of hand!) He didn't seem to understand my last remark.

That was the only time that I have had someone ask me to delete a photo in 10 years of photography.

So, what do other film users do when confronted with an ugly situation like the one I had??

 

[sepiareverb]

I offer to call the police right away, this has always ended any argument.

 

[oftheherd]

...

I am not English, but I knew that I had a right to take photographs in public and the law was on my side, but he was overtly aggressive and grabbing at my arm.
...

At which time under USA, and I would presume British law, he had just committed assault and battery. That doesn't mean you didn't do the right thing, as he obviously didn't care about law, and might have gotten more violent before police could arrive.

Interesting question you pose about what others do, or would do. I don't really do street photography as such. I try not to include people in photos if I am photographing a building or street scene. If I were confronted, I would try to use my skills at de-esculation if possible. I would try very hard not to have the confrontation esculate. I am that way.

If that didn't work, I would have a decision to make. I am not sure I would give up my film. I think I would just tell the person I found him rude and confrontational, and I was going to leave. He could do what he wanted, and if that involved attacking me, he should expect me to defend myself and he would suffer the consequences. That would include physical pain and damage, then police intervention. I have the skills to back that up.

Unless of course he had a gun or several companions to back him up. These days that is always a possibility. Each situation is different. I can't honestly say what I would do as a general statement. Each of us has to decide at the time based on the circumstances at hand. I might indeed cave myself depending on the circumstances I perceived.

If you felt you did the right thing, then you did. You were there to evaluate all the circumstances, such as the person, the area, the others in the area, etc. And you shouldn't feel lessened by that decision.

 

[ruben]

.........

So, what do other film users do when confronted with an ugly situation like the one I had??

I think that performing street photography only with digital cameras, can be a sensible adapation by us to the realities we live.

It is not just the issue of terrorism, which itself has aggravated to monster proportions worldwide, but also the high polarization of economic income, which is the father and mother of a changing world, full of nerves, tensions, traffic, pollution, less and less health attention, more and more drugs and alcoholism, massive cover and uncover prostitution, TV easy pornography and violence.

We must be aware we live in a fastly deteriorating world, where there are more and more mouths to feed and less and less coockies - even if we accept corruption and profit unequality as a basic factor to adapt ourselves.

Africa is next door our building and I do not know anymore who is better off, the one who knows it or the one who ignores it.

We are happy, the street is colorfull, the market plenty, and everything looks ok. Really ?

Cheers,
Ruben