Int'l Asc. of Patriotic Street Photographers

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 said:
The Bill of Rights is clear. There are no laws prohibiting photography if you are in public.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Pitxu said:
....
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.😉
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
Public Fauxtography

Public Fauxtography

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 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.
 
BillP said:
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.

2361668699_d1143052d6_o.jpg


Thoughts?

Regards,

Bill
Click to expand...

Could we get this on a tee-shirt? lol Really, nice work Bill.

Bob
 
Pitxu said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
RML said:
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.
Click to expand...

Therefore, any sort of discussion about anything is futile because it could be rendered worthless in any part of the world?
 
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.
 
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
 
Pitxu said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
BillP said:
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
Click to expand...


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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Carterofmars
Article: UK Gov nationalises orphans and bans non-consensual photography in public
Replies
3
Views
1K
colyn
colyn
bmattock
Amtrak to Photographers: "Drop Dead!"
Replies
15
Views
2K
Gabriel M.A.
Gabriel M.A.
bmattock
The Pappa-rotsi again...
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
sfaust
S
bmattock
On Civility - Or - Why I Must Be Rude
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
FrankS
FrankS
bmattock
On the Nature of Copyright
Replies
2
Views
2K
DougK
DougK
Back
Top Bottom