Self-appointed Authority Figures

I've never had a bad experience with "self-professed authority figures" while photographing. Nor have I had a bad experience with actual law enforcement while photographing. Maybe this pehnomenon is unique to rangefineder camera users. I only use a rangefinder camera when I'm actually a "tourist" so I get away with photography without confrontation.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
I should also point out that I've never seen a female photographer harassed the way male photographers do. Although, I did see one girl being asked by a rent-a-cop at a mall why she was taking photos. That's been the only time.
Click to expand...

I've never been harassed, but I've been asked not to shoot a few times.

Once was by a maintenance worker in the Chicago subway. He told me that it was "illegal" to shoot in the subway. I knew it was legal, but I didn't feel like arguing, so I feigned an apology and moved on -- and continued shooting. I actually have a photo which includes the guy, about 2/3 down the way on this page:

http://omababe.blogspot.com/2008/02/beneath-windy-city.html

Another was in the Westward Ho casino a few weeks before it closed. I was shooting the outside of the building, stepped inside, raised the camera to my eye and he was right on me, but extremely nice and very apologetic. He asked me very nicely not to shoot in the casino. How can you ever refuse a request like that? :)

The most interesting one was not really a confrontation, but where I realized that a security guy was watching me closely. I actually got a few good shots of him keeping an eye on me. They are here:

http://omababe.blogspot.com/2007/01/forbidden-images-polishing-bean.html

I think that since women are less likely to be confrontive or to escalate a situation, we can get away with more, in these cases, than men do.

Sexist? Perhaps. :)

Oh well ... :)
 
Bill Pierce said:
How do you deal with these self-appointed authority figures?
Click to expand...



If they are spewing "Laws and Policies" at me I will politely ask to "See" this policy "In Writing"...
I have also complied to requests not to photography when I know that the person asking is right...At a local Central Market in Los Angeles I was asked not to photograph inside but was also told that if I went to the front of the market I could try there...he also mentioned that I do this where the Market Security people wouldn't be able to see me...
I knew he was right so I decided to go somewhere else...

So far I haven't been harrassed at Union Station while photographing inside the station or around the trains...only once did this happen and that was because I was using a tripod...

At our local "Outside Mall" I was shooting and was asked to stop...I asked to see their policy in writing and all they would say was that it was "Confidential" and I couldn't see it...All they could do to stop me was inform me that I was on "Private Property" and they could remove me for trespassing...
I asked if they were stopping everyone with a camera because I could see mom's taking photos with their phones or small P&S...They said that that was alright because their kids were in the photos...I guess if I had taken my daughter with me and placed her somewhere in the shot I would have been good to go...
The policeman that was called to the scene heard both sides and then made a phone call of his own...He stated to the security guard that I had done nothing wrong and that he could not do anything about me photographing in the mall...BUT the only thing he could do is enforce the "No Trespassing" laws in favor of the mall...
 
Shoot first, answer questions later, explain with a disarming smile that I can't delete that image because it's on film, move away. An assertive, not aggressive, attitude gets you through a lot of situations ("What policy is that?"). Never tell them I'm a lawyer, that just seems to arouse their contempt.

I usually strike out with *appointed* authority figures, though, like that cop in Terminal 1 on Saturday. I always lose arguments to someone carrying an MP5 (that's not a Leica special edition).
 
Bike Tourist said:
An old curmudgeon like me stiffens in resistance when told he can't photograph somewhere he knows is in legally secure territory.

But, the resistance usually takes the form of calm, reasoned and charming argument so that the would-be enforcer ends up showing me the best places to get my shot.

OKay, well maybe not EVERY time!
Click to expand...

That's what I call effective conflict resolution skills!

While I was photographing an office building one afternoon, a security guard came out to ask if I had permission. I explained you don't need permission to photograph anything you can see while standing on the public sidewalk, although it might be nice to ask if you can photograph a person. She said, "OK, thank you" and went back inside.

I think during the Bush administration people became very confused about this. It should get better now.
 
Rob-F said:
While I was photographing an office building one afternoon, a security guard came out to ask if I had permission. I explained you don't need permission to photograph anything you can see while standing on the public sidewalk, although it might be nice to ask if you can photograph a person. She said, "OK, thank you" and went back inside.
Click to expand...

That is the pseudo-authoritative way of saying "what are you doing; I'm curious." Too bad they aren't taught better interaction skills in their security guard training.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
I should also point out that I've never seen a female photographer harassed the way male photographers do.
Click to expand...

Bluewater, Kent (shopping mall).

Frances (my wife) is using a Contax SLR and 35/1.4. I'm using a Bessa-L and 15/4.5.

She's stopped and told she needs a permit. But I'm just using a 'snapshot' camera and am left alone.

This in not the only time we've seen this syndrome at work. It's the camera, at least as much as the photograper.

Cheers,

R.
 
I worried about the growing dislike of photographers when I went to Blackpool to do some hobby reportage last summer. Strangely in the event I had no bad vibes at all from anyone, not even the drunks. On one occasion I had been shooting for 45 minutes in a fairly busy arcade with those machines that kind of snowplough all the penny coins. Then I saw a 'Photography Prohibited' notice. Even so, nobody gave me any hassle; it was a real live and let live sort of atmosphere.

I wonder why. I think my defusing skills are pretty good, and I don't go round shoving 21mms up everyone's nose. I use Leicas, which are mostly quiet but the M8 is not that quiet. There must be more to it than that.

Maybe it's that most of the employees are Polish and are too concerned with important things like earning a living to worry about me and my camera. Maybe it's because people go to Blackpool to relax, so they are not as stressed as usual. Maybe it's just a touristy place so cameras are what you expect. Maybe it's true that a 35mm on a rangefinder looks less serious and less intrusive than a big body with a long zoom.

I agree with Ian Berry's approach. If he got any negative response at the start of a shoot he packed up and called it a day; if it started well he found the whole day went well.

At a slight tangent, I'm lucky to work in a British school where photography of pupils and events is actively encouraged: the parents love it because they can get pictures of events they don't otherwise get access to; the school loves it because they get an illustrated website; I love it because it's a paid (costs only in the main) hobby. We quietly withdrew a form sent out to parents by the last marketing boss about withholding consent for appearances in photos and school magazines - nobody has noticed, let alone complained. In a private school this is all good for business. In those state schools where it's not even permitted for pupils to play outdoors in break for fear of physical injury if they fall over.. enough said.

How long it will continue this way is another matter, but so far, so good.

Tom
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
Bluewater, Kent (shopping mall).

Frances (my wife) is using a Contax SLR and 35/1.4. I'm using a Bessa-L and 15/4.5.

She's stopped and told she needs a permit. But I'm just using a 'snapshot' camera and am left alone.

This in not the only time we've seen this syndrome at work. It's the camera, at least as much as the photograper.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I've read similar findings by Nikon digital users. A friend of mine went to events with a D200 and small-sized lens after finding that with the D2X and a larger f/2.8 zoom he attracted attention from officials.

For a while I used an Olympus Trip compact with a hammerhead Metz! Wonder what people would make of that? I did it because I could set the apertures and film speed on the camera, so it was a great compact.

Tom
 
bmattock said:
With regard to the topic of authoritarianism...

Authoritarianism 'fixes' the problem of the overpaid CEO's, but it also 'fixes' the problem of parents who think no one ought be able to take a photograph of their kid without their permission, or of paranoid citizens who think people taking photos of trains ought not be permitted to do so. In a new world of make-um-up laws that pander (at first) to the zeitgeist, there is no give-and-take or weighing of public necessity versus individual liberties when imposing law; every authoritarian response comes to be about keeping public order, without regard to freedom, liberty, or the rule of law.
Click to expand...



italso fixes the problem of parents who want to educate their own children, and again the revolt starts at the populist level...
 
A couple of years back I was on multiple flights from Joburg to NYC qnd back via London and Glasgow. I was a wee bit worried about fast film being X-rayed too often. When I asked the goon at Glasgow Airport if he would mind hand checking my rolls, he informed me that I could put them through the machine, or he would strip the film out of the cartridges. I call such creatures "The Children of Osama".
 
I once was confronted by a security guard of a Jewellers shop right in the center of Vienna (a tourist area) when I took photos with the shop's windows in them.
They told me thgings about laws prohibiting taking photos of shops. So I just went inside the shop talked to the manager, who allowed me to "Take pics of whatever I wanted" just to get rid of me. I would not have done that if that had not happended 5 minutes away from my appartement....
Meanwhile I have chat now and then with the same guards, whom I had assured that this was not personal, but simply stupid infos by the suits from the shop....And yes RFF was an inspiration for my behaviour
 
Last spring I was working as a subcontractor to a photo firm shooting a large soccer tournament. While I was working a guy bumped into me and walked away without apologizing for doing so. Some time later I got bumped again but didn't realize until he was several steps away that it was the same guy as earlier that day. When it happened a third time -- same guy, same day -- I was ready for a showdown. The guy was an assistant coach of one team or another and he eventually told me something about how he didn't like the way I was "concentrating" on taking pictures of the girl soccer players. I told him I was there working, as a professional, and that I concentrate on every shot. I told him I wouldn't hesitate to call the police if he bumped me again. So the world if full of jerks and not all of them carry badges and sidearms.
 
Last edited:
It's probably going to get much worse. Look at what is going on with health care. People speaking out against this current bill exercising their rights, people are being attacked at town hall meetings & the White House wants you to report anything deemed fishy to flag@whitehouse.gov? Obama said & I quote [If they bring a knife you bring a gun] I know he didn't mean that literally, but what is this attitude saying to people!
 
It seems this kind of cr*p is permeating society. I regularly shoot in my local mall - results seen here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/80702381@N00/sets/72157610362797162/

We have unemployed (sometimes unemployable) people standing around selling a magazine called the "Big Issue" - Damned if I know whats in it, could be blank pages for all I know. One such guy who sees me there a lot (I work nearby and always bring a camera with me) spoke to me last week. At first I though he was just being friendly and I responded in kind. But shortly thereafter he began lecturing me that taking photos in the mall is illegal under the "Security and Surveillance Act." There is no such Act of course except in this guys addled brain. I am afraid I was terribly short with the gentleman. I inquired if he knew a bit about the law. When he responded that he did and that I should definitely read the law as I was performing an illegal act I then asked him why he was not a lawyer instead of an unemployed social misfit who did not have a real job.

I acknowledge now the error of my ways and I felt bad after wards as maybe he was genuinely trying to help me (and as my mother used to tell me, "its wicked to mock the afflicted" but I am sick of this kind of semi sentient being with their imagined offences dominating our hobby. It only takes a complaint to the authorities from this kind of brain addled misfit and we are the ones who have to justify ourselves as inoffensive as we are.

Maybe its something about social conformance - most societies demand its members behave like sheep. If you are doing something that the run of the mill member would not do and could not comprehend themselves doing they respond violently. They understand that photography can be a business (ah yes - you are a (capital P) Photographer for the local newspaper, I get that!) and they accept this -- but someone taking pictures for art!!!!!!!!!!

That's what perverts and terrorists do!
 
Last edited:
You did okay in my book, Peter. The addled have been molly-coddled for too long and have grown not only annoying, but overly bold and unacceptably rude.

You also have a point about social conformance. However, the self-appointed authority is not unlike the bully in the school yard. If not stood up to, things will only get worse for everybody.
 
If you try to take pictures of jewelry shops in Hong Kong they send goons out to the side walk to confront you. Street photography there is quite legal however.

Spider67 said:
I once was confronted by a security guard of a Jewellers shop right in the center of Vienna (a tourist area) when I took photos with the shop's windows in them.
They told me thgings about laws prohibiting taking photos of shops. So I just went inside the shop talked to the manager, who allowed me to "Take pics of whatever I wanted" just to get rid of me. I would not have done that if that had not happended 5 minutes away from my appartement....
Meanwhile I have chat now and then with the same guards, whom I had assured that this was not personal, but simply stupid infos by the suits from the shop....And yes RFF was an inspiration for my behaviour
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom