Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Peter McLennan on June 03, 2011, 12:11:18 am
-
A brave photographer refuses to be intimidated by police. Long video in two parts. Educational and inspiring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iMr76atjUA&feature=related
-
A brave photographer refuses to be intimidated by police. Long video in two parts. Educational and inspiring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iMr76atjUA&feature=related
I have watched the first video, and apart from the photographer's determination and the obvious (understandable) nerves in his voice, I see this as a typical stand-off where there is an impossible conflict between those who seek to prove a point from their perspective and those who seek to prevent possible danger to the public. It's a difficult situation, but as with most such events, common sense could easily resolve the thing, as would a situation where the opposing minds were able to compete on the same level. (Then think of the public pay structure that would require.)
From my personal point of vew, I think it quite reasonable that there have to be limits on what's freely open to recording. After all, should the guy have a real, legitimate need for such imagery then I would be surprised if permission were not granted. Its a dangerous, nervous world; why not do things in a manner that avoids confrontation and keeps everybody happy? There can never be total freedom to do everything: that opens the doors to crime. I can just imagine the stick those guys would get if tomorrow that railroad echoed Madrid and London. Reason and common sense is all it takes to keep life smooth.
Rob C
-
Well ... Rob .... that reminds me of that frog story ... if you throw him in a pot with hot water he'll jump out, but if you slowly heat it up the frog dies ...
-
Well ... Rob .... that reminds me of that frog story ... if you throw him in a pot with hot water he'll jump out, but if you slowly heat it up the frog dies ...
But the trouble with that lies within the frog: sensible frogs remain in different waters. It's just those daft ones that keep trying to 'test' the system that get cooked.
Rob C
-
But the trouble with that lies within the frog: sensible frogs remain in different waters. It's just those daft ones that keep trying to 'test' the system that get cooked.
Nice try, however, in the same vein. It's not the frog testing the water, he gets 'water' thrown at him ... ;)
Cheers,
Bart
-
And I thought stranger danger was only used to scare kids.
I have watched the first video, and apart from the photographer's determination and the obvious (understandable) nerves in his voice, I see this as a typical stand-off where there is an impossible conflict between those who seek to prove a point from their perspective and those who seek to prevent possible danger to the public. It's a difficult situation, but as with most such events, common sense could easily resolve the thing, as would a situation where the opposing minds were able to compete on the same level. (Then think of the public pay structure that would require.)
And what exactly is the possible danger to the public in taking photographs in a public place of a public transportation system?
-
it's easier than taking notes and making drawings ( and sometimes less obvious) when you are trying to figure out how to place something to do the most damage or not have it be discovered.
Hence their nervousness and reaction.
Over the top, yes.
-
This is exactly why every photographer operating outdoors should have in his pocket a copy of Bert Krages one-page summary of the law: "The Photographer's Right." Here's a passage that applies directly to this kid's situation:
They Have Limited Rights to Bother, Question, or Detain You
Although anyone has the right to approach a person in a public place and ask questions, persistent and unwanted conduct done without legitimate purpose is a crime in many states if it causes serious annoyance. You are under no obligation to explain the purpose of your photography nor do you have to disclose your identity except in states that require it upon request by a law enforcement officer. If the conduct goes beyond mere questioning, all states have laws that make coercion and harassment criminal offenses. The specific elements vary among the states but in general it is unlawful for anyone to instill a fear that they may injure you, damage or take your property, or falsely accuse you of a crime just because you are taking photographs.
There's more in this little sheet worth being familiar with -- especially suggestions about how to handle the kind of situation in which the principal found himself.
-
"it's easier than taking notes and making drawings ( and sometimes less obvious) when you are trying to figure out how to place something to do the most damage or not have it be discovered.
Hence their nervousness and reaction."
I use to live exactly one block from that spot and the building in the background is a very popular art school the concept that photography is even remotely unfamiliar with that metro stop is quite ridiculous countless photo-students each and every semester are walking around taking pictures of everything in that vicinity including quite a bit of video.
Two other quick points I've spoken with a contractor (PHD - very smart guy) who worked in cooperation with DOD blowing up targets, according to him exterior photos would provide very little help in deciphering where to place charges and or how much. This is such a misconception that photography has anything to do bombings (maybe capturing peoples IDs as they leave a zone but not the engineering designs of a ghetto metro stop in Baltimore)
Second and most important what the video does not show is the HORRIBLE crime (ghetto) one to two blocks away from that train station. Most people won't use the light rail to visit the symphony hall to the right because of that. I was assaulted two blocks away and with a bloody nose the cop I spoke with did NOTHING. Finally that street has killed quite a few students and Baltimore and the art college always seem to cover it up with very little info and most likely because the intersection is horribly designed. If a transportation student wanted to study that intersection and metro Baltimore shouldn't be harassing they should be going out of their way to get any intelligent suggestions possible to fix that death trap.
-
yeah, well not every bomber or Sarin user is so smart. This isn't a building implosion demolition they are trying for. The point was, as you mentioned, that is the perception reality on the ground and that is what people react to.
-
And I thought stranger danger was only used to scare kids.
And what exactly is the possible danger to the public in taking photographs in a public place of a public transportation system?
feppe, that's too disingenuous by far; nobody is worried about the act of photography, the trouble lies with the unknown usage and the reaction of a guy who, when challenged, obviously wants to fuck the system and refuses to see the understandable point of view (as most seem determined here, too) of those charged with public safety. As I said, think London, Madrid, and throw in Moscow for good measure; what on Earth makes you imagine the States has less than its fair share of nuts?
Rob C
-
As I said, think London, Madrid, and throw in Moscow for good measure; what on Earth makes you imagine the States has less than its fair share of nuts?
Hi Rob,
The question should be, how many of those misguided perpetrators used photography to execute their orders?
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi Rob,
The question should be, how many of those misguided perpetrators used photography to execute their orders?
Cheers,
Bart
Only offer you a further question: who knows?
I always believed that spy planes, satellites, surveillance cameras, drones and even Minoxes had one specific purpose: know the ground. How naive I must have been; they're just to blow tax dollars!
;-)
Rob C
-
Well those MTA people clearly don't know there own company policy :
http://mta.maryland.gov/filmphotoapp.cfm
"MTA Film and Photography
We allow filming and photography on most MTA property that is open to the public, including local bus, light rail, Metro Subway, Commuter Bus and MARC. However, some activities require prior notice, a permit and insurance.
Do I need a permit?
No permit required: A permit is not required for non-commercial, personal-use filming or photography by the general public that does not interfere with transit operations or safety.
..."
This is scary not one out of 7 "enforcers" did know it.
-
"The point was, as you mentioned, that is the perception reality on the ground and that is what people react to."
No the point is there are serious crimes taking place almost daily near that light rail stop - And there is no doubt in my mind that Officer never even suspected a terrorist activity when questioning the photographer he was just doing STUPID busy work instead of using tax payer's money to truly make the streets of Baltimore safer. One could even argue the Officer was protecting the Photographer from showing off a shinny camera anywhere along Howard ave. Or preventing a juvenile stunt unfolding that could have dire consequences when dealing with a railroad car that can't stop on a dime. But nothing about terrorism
As for perception, call me cynical but I believe if a terrorist bomb blew up there or most places along the Baltimore light rail - most people even confronted with the evidence would believe it was a cover up by the MTA for a lack of quality control. No way would terrorist ever get their precious credit (idiots)
Let's also not forget why the terrorist where allowed to live here undetected. Go two blocks from that stop and as long as you don't speak to the cops you can most likely hide out. Of course if you do speak to the cops a neighborhood away from that metro what happens. Your nice neighbors nail 2x4s across your doors and set fire to your house. Yes I guess terrorism especially with cameras are so prevalent that we should ignore all the real crime that happens in our cities. The more the police make every situation even the minor ones a major harassment the greater the chance that ghettos will hide the truly bad people.
-
Only offer you a further question: who knows?
I always believed that spy planes, satellites, surveillance cameras, drones and even Minoxes had one specific purpose: know the ground. How naive I must have been; they're just to blow tax dollars!
;-)
Rob C
Well the requirements depends on what you want to do. For blowing up a few trains in rush hour you only need to know some busy routes. So anybody that's using public transportation is a suspect. But off course if it uses bridges it also makes everybody suspect that drives a car under those bridges... BTW a cell phone is handy to detonate it from a distance, so ...
If you want to add some "listening devices" inside a business building, you probably need some drawings or accurate detailed info. Dressing up as business people does help here. Probably best is to dress like a security gard, nobody will ask questions ;-)
-
feppe, that's too disingenuous by far; nobody is worried about the act of photography, the trouble lies with the unknown usage and the reaction of a guy who, when challenged, obviously wants to fuck the system and refuses to see the understandable point of view (as most seem determined here, too) of those charged with public safety. As I said, think London, Madrid, and throw in Moscow for good measure; what on Earth makes you imagine the States has less than its fair share of nuts?
I'm fully aware of the outrageous and ridiculous implication that the photos might be used to plan terrorist attacks.
We might as well ban Google since one can plan for attacks on chlorine production facilities, chemistry books for supplying bomb making guidance, or train schedules for allowing to plan for best concentration of trains. These are far less far-fetched and much more actionable than any set of photographs of any public transportation system taken in a public place.
Fear of photography is the stranger danger or boogey man of today, along with plenty of others born from terrorist attacks which occupy way too much mind share, but are useful in keeping the masses compliant and in fear.
I'm done with this BS.
-
I've been watching old seasons of "24", first 135-6 episodes so far, with tons of terrorist acts, from nerve gas to bombs (including nuclear), and in no instance whatsoever there was photography involved. If Jack Bauer is not concerned with photographers, why should we be? ;) Apparently, even script writers consider the idea too silly to be accepted as realistic.
-
I've been watching old seasons of "24", first 135-6 episodes so far, with tons of terrorist acts, from nerve gas to bombs (including nuclear), and in no instance whatsoever there was photography involved. If Jack Bauer is not concerned with photographers, why should we be? ;) Apparently, even script writers consider the idea too silly to be accepted as realistic.
HAH ! Slobodan ! You surely are a terrorist ! I can smell it !
-
HAH ! Slobodan ! You surely are a terrorist ! I can smell it !
Oh, you got me! ;)
Actually, my only "involvement" with terrorism is coincidental and post factum: I happened to be visiting New York and the 9/11 site precisely at the moment when a fire in the Deutche Bank building, originally damaged in the 9/11 attack, erupted and killed two firefighters on August 18th, 2007. This is my "artistic" rendition of the event, with the concept of Gotham City as inspiration:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3604/3483987934_c878b91c0f.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/slobodan_blagojevic/3483987934/)
Ground Zero Fire (http://www.flickr.com/photos/slobodan_blagojevic/3483987934/) by Slobodan Blagojevic (http://www.flickr.com/people/slobodan_blagojevic/), on Flickr
P.S. For those new to Flickr, once you are there, click again on the picture to see it larger and on a plain, black background
-
Fine street photograply, Slobodan. Bravo!
-
I'm fully aware of the outrageous and ridiculous implication that the photos might be used to plan terrorist attacks.
We might as well ban Google since one can plan for attacks on chlorine production facilities, chemistry books for supplying bomb making guidance, or train schedules for allowing to plan for best concentration of trains. These are far less far-fetched and much more actionable than any set of photographs of any public transportation system taken in a public place.
Fear of photography is the stranger danger or boogey man of today, along with plenty of others born from terrorist attacks which occupy way too much mind share, but are useful in keeping the masses compliant and in fear.I'm done with this BS.
Now that is paranoia!
Rob C
-
Now that is paranoia!
Is it?
I thought that by now most people understood the principles of FUD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt). It's an only too common instrument, and it works exactly as intended. Unfortunately many people as easy to manipulate ('weapons of mass destruction' comes to mind).
Cheers,
Bart
-
I blame Jack Bauer; all these people thinking that terrorists photograph the targets they intend to blow up. Trust me, PIRA didn't wander Belfast, Derry & Crossmaglen with F3s & rolls of FP4. Had they done, things might have been a lot easier for the poor sods trying to stop 'em from killing people.
-
I blame Jack Bauer; all these people thinking that terrorists photograph the targets they intend to blow up. Trust me, PIRA didn't wander Belfast, Derry & Crossmaglen with F3s & rolls of FP4. Had they done, things might have been a lot easier for the poor sods trying to stop 'em from killing people.
[/quo
Probably not, Bill, but then they lived in the friggin' godforsaken place. Or at least had friends who lived in the next street. Do you remember the Europa Hotel? We did a shoot in the classic bar across from it one night for a Tennent's calendar. We had to wait until closing time to get in and work; the police had to be warned that flashes would be going off...
Yeah, it was a spooky gig and I hated every minute of it, almost as much as the leg of the shoot in Dublin where we spent a rainy morning watching the fuzz pull a stiff out of the Liffey.
In some places you can feel the tension, and I doubt it's all imported.
No wonder I like beaches and beautiful women, preferably far away from other people.
Rob C
-
The day I decide to blow up a building, I'll be using Google Street View to get all kind of images from such building, comfortably and anonymously from my sofa.
-
The day I decide to blow up a building, I'll be using Google Street View to get all kind of images from such building, comfortably and anonymously from my sofa.
And getting serious for a moment, I think you have touched on something very real there.
My son was showing me his new abode the last time he was here in Spain; it was amazing to see how clearly all the escape routes from his property were wide open to the view of every thief in Glasgow, ditto for everyone else who owns any real estate or actually lives in anything other than a tree.
It beggers belief that, somehow, such information is of actual use to anyone else - a clear invasion of privacy and security, and that's how it will always remain in my opinion, at least. Just another expensive answer looking for a problem that didn't exist. Progress, remember?
Rob C
-
The day I decide to blow up a building, I'll be using Google Street View to get all kind of images from such building, comfortably and anonymously from my sofa.
Except that "anonymously" isn't what it seems to be anymore, unless you use something like Tor (http://www.torproject.org/). The amount of information cross-linking in today's social internet is simply mind blowing .
A lot of it in the name of personalization.
-
Its a dangerous, nervous world; ..
No, it is not adangerous, nervous world.
Please do not equate the mindset and conditions in one particular country with the rest of the world.
-
No, it is not adangerous, nervous world.
Please do not equate the mindset and conditions in one particular country with the rest of the world.
Indeed, violent crime has been on a steep decline for centuries in the western world where such statistics are available.
-
Indeed, violent crime has been on a steep decline for centuries in the western world where such statistics are available.
Hell's teeth, feppe, you've done it again! I am compelled to agree with you.
Should anyone have doubts as to the huge improvements, just admire the progress in Mexico, to name but one shining example. Or the European continent in general, where earlier national barriers have been able to be relaxed to the extent that mafias from around that continent (and beyond) can settle with impunity absolutely anywhere they choose; that is indeed a strong sign of community spirit and comradeship.
;-)
Rob C
-
Hell's teeth, feppe, you've done it again! I am compelled to agree with you.
Should anyone have doubts as to the huge improvements, just admire the progress in Mexico, to name but one shining example. Or the European continent in general, where earlier national barriers have been able to be relaxed to the extent that mafias from around that continent (and beyond) can settle with impunity absolutely anywhere they choose; that is indeed a strong sign of community spirit and comradeship.
You got me there for a second :P
You read sensationalist and alarmist news* too much - facts are that violent crime is on a steep decline (http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/postgraduate/taughtma/mamodules/violenceearlymodern/topics/interpersonal/long-term-historical-trends-of-violent-crime.pdf), even recently in the UK (http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2010/07/crime_statistics).
* unfortunately it seems that those are the only type of news which sell, along with celebrity and sports "news."
-
... facts are that violent crime is on a steep decline (http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/postgraduate/taughtma/mamodules/violenceearlymodern/topics/interpersonal/long-term-historical-trends-of-violent-crime.pdf), even recently in the UK (http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2010/07/crime_statistics)...
Ah, yes.. facts and statistics... The same type of facts that tell us that the Great Recession in the USA was over two years ago... tell that to the 14-15 millions still unemployed, and god knows how many underemployed and those who "abandoned any hope" of finding work ever again.
As for the "dangerous and nervous world" original reference... The "danger" and "nervousness" just got different these days, not necessarily related to violent crimes. Try taking a picture of a cute kid at play in a local park, and see for yourself how "nervous" the world has become. Try telling to all those stopped and harassed by police, private guards, civil police, etc. for taking pictures on public grounds that the world has not become more nervous.
-
Ah, yes.. facts and statistics... The same type of facts that tell us that the Great Recession in the USA was over two years ago... tell that to the 14-15 millions still unemployed, and god knows how many underemployed and those who "abandoned any hope" of finding work ever again.
I've re-read that paper over the years several times and find it compellingly argued, and the research on it has been cited widely and expanded upon as well. I'm curious to hear if you have any substantial objections to its data, other than "all statistics lie 87% of the time."
As for the "dangerous and nervous world" original reference... The "danger" and "nervousness" just got different these days, not necessarily related to violent crimes. Try taking a picture of a cute kid at play in a local park, and see for yourself how "nervous" the world has become. Try telling to all those stopped and harassed by police, private guards, civil police, etc. for taking pictures on public grounds that the world has not become more nervous.
Fully agree here. On the other hand I guess it's better to be afraid of imaginary or marginal threats these days rather than the real ones of days past.
-
... I'm curious to hear if you have any substantial objections to its data, other than "all statistics lie 87% of the time."...
No, no objections. As you know, I also, by the virtue of my profession and personality type, often rely on and resort to facts and statistics... its just that life is often more than just facts.
For an interesting portrayal of the dichotomy, see the U.S. TV series "Bones", and the interplay between the two main characters.
-
I've been hassled a few times by security folks in Chicago. Once, a CTA guard who came from a CTA station onto a nearby street corner to say that I couldn't photograph a CTA station. I said "What station? I'm on this public city sidewalk and photographing this street corner, just like you see the camera doing on this tripod. I'll be here for another 45 minutes or so." She walked away and didn't come back.
The second time I set up my tripod on Chicago's LaSalle street in front of the Federal Reserve Bank shooting passersby with the various bank buildings in the background. A female guard from the bank came over and told me I couldn't shoot there. I said I could and would be there until I finished. She left and a few minutes later a man in a dark suit came out who very courteously said that the sidewalk there was actually on the property of the federal bank. After a few mild questions that convinced him I didn't have a RPG in my 200mm lens he left me alone.
I think half the battle is standing your ground with knowledge of the law and half the battle is to know when to move along. If he insisted I move off federal property I would have -- then used my 2X lens.
-
Quote from Piet
A brave photographer traveling on the metro system with real courage and stays put. Long video in two parts. Educational and inspiring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iMr76atjUA&feature=related
It is a real shame that 9/11 can be used for such mindlessness. It is true that in London, even in Malls innocent people taking pictures are stopped by security and asked if they have sought permission to take pictures. What a waste of police time. You cannot penalize the masses like this - and it will not stop terrorists. It is not impossible to work around officials like this.
-
And I thought stranger danger was only used to scare kids.
And what exactly is the possible danger to the public in taking photographs in a public place of a public transportation system?
Absolutely nothing! All one has to do is take a ride on the transportation system to gain all the information needed without any photographs being taken. If you want photographs they probably have plenty on the systems website.
It is simply a power trip to intimidate the public into subservience.