How to deal with Police when out photographing (& Photographers Rights)

[Xenedis]

You'll be pleased to know that I have (several times now) corrected some police colleagues about their misconceptions regarding photographers and their rights. I'm not saying they would go out and unlawfully arrest people, but plenty do have a '2010 general public perception' about photographers. In general they were very receptive to what I had to say. Maybe I should put together a national training package on this LOL!

It might be good idea!

What your post indicates to me is that it wasn't what you said to those police officers; rather, it was how you said it.

If photographers get defensive to the point of hostility, they'll get nowhere with law enforcement; but if they explain politely and calmly in an education-delivering (rather than right-defending) manner, it may be far more effective.

Good on you for having the courage to do what you did. I imagine many people would not have.

[Beej]

Nick, Great post. You have eased my mind quite a bit. I have been snapping away at macro, nature, landscapes... pretty much anything that didn't involve me pointing my camera anywhere near people. Simply through an ignorance of how I should act as an amateur photographer. Maybe now I can get the gumption to go out and broaden my horizons with a little street photography. Cheers again, Nick. Well done.

[woosang]

great advice. Thank you
I was searched in London last year by a community officer. Of course I could have refused but it was just easier to show them what we were doing. It is a shame that people can't just go about their day without having to prove their innocence but there you are.
Our laws here are much better and I am very very glad to be back.

[Dachimas]

That's some good advice Nick, #3 the attitude test is a really good one! Same if you are pulled over for something, I try to get out of the car and move to meet the officer instead of making them come to me.

[Xenedis]

I was searched in London last year by a community officer.

'Scuse ignorance, but what is a community officer?

It is a shame that people can't just go about their day without having to prove their innocence

Actually, people can.

If people start acting like they have no rights, eventually they will have none.

[farmer_rob]

If people start acting like they have no rights, eventually they will have none.

Couldn't agree more - I just had to highlight it.

[Jeanette]

It's great to see that people are still contributing to the thread, and thanks for the thanks! You'll be pleased to know that I have (several times now) corrected some police colleagues about their misconceptions regarding photographers and their rights. I'm not saying they would go out and unlawfully arrest people, but plenty do have a '2010 general public perception' about photographers. In general they were very receptive to what I had to say. Maybe I should put together a national training package on this LOL!

i know you did the lol after this Nickmonk but why not put something forward,
as an officer they know a fair bit about the law but cannot remember everything or gain knowledge about everything especially when they are in different areas..
I am a nurse and so much i dont know about my field but we have on going education availabilities and so good when people come in and speak at functions or put information out there.. so why not put something forward in an education/informational way..
I am sure they would be open to that...

[andrask]

...
I was searched in London last year by a community officer..

Talking about London, I was apprehended (in a rather polite way) by two police officers when I was photographing outside the Liverpool Street Station in October last year. I guess I did attract attention with the 70-200mm f/4L attached to my Canon EOS 5D Mark II and dressed somewhat scruffily. Apparently with the heightened terrorist alert there they were routinely checking for any signs of surveillance activity.

They were quite young officers, the female being more involved with filling in the required questionnaire while the male was making polite small talk. I got a copy of the official form for my troubles. I guess I'm now in their routine database FWIW.

[peterb666]

I got a copy of the official form for my troubles. I guess I'm now in their routine database FWIW.

So what's it say "beware scruffy young person from Oz with big lens, could be dangerous"?

[andrask]

It probably just says "Must note scruffy 'older' Aussie with big lens not shoot crooked".

[SnowA]

Fascinating thread. Andrew Nemeth's article is a cracker.

[Aus Mackem]

Good thread and good advice Nick. I too work in the same vocation and find that if you are generally calm towards myself or my colleagues that the 'situation' will be dealt with quickly and amicably, however once someone fails that dreaded attitude test then it is always more difficult to deal with favourably. I've only ever dealt with a few photographers and have never had a problem yet...maybe it's because I'm interested so I understand, who knows.

Michael asked about procedures when you do arrest a person, here's WA's take on it. Like Nick said arrests can be, and have been, done without knowing the exact charge (yes we should know every law but honest truth is we don't...do we know everything about photography?). We know that they can be arrested so they will be arrested on suspicion of x, once back at the station the exact charge can then be preferred (if you haven't got it spot on). Once arrested they will be given their rights which do include the right to be informed of what they have been arrested on suspicion of.

It should never really get to that point though, just be nice to us, we really are only doing a job and believe it or not we're human too!

[darylcheshire]

Yes, you need permission to take photos at Southern Cross station in Melbourne. (formerly Spencer St. Station).
It is a magnificent building and worth taking. Plus lots of trains. Once I was photographing a short length of dual gauge track and two security guards came up to me in a golf cart and told me I shouldn't be taking photos. they were nice about it and I wasn't beaten severely. I didn't know if they just happened on me or if I was observed on a CCTV.

They turn a blind eye to Aunt Muriel photographing Grandma on the Albury pass.

You can go to the security office and sign a book. They ask what reason and then say "uh gunzel?".

You are however, not allowed to use a flash or tripod.

I'm a rail enthusiast and often photograph on railway property without any problems. Usually on country stations. Sometimes I stand on the tracks (the pit) but I get their permission to do so.

I recall some enthusiast in England who's thing was photographing buses, that was his thing, but in recent times people complained about him and accused him of being a paedophile and/or terrorism. Eventually he hung up his camera and didn't do it any more which I think was a shame.

Personally, I don't photograph people unless they are not prominent and it is unavoidable as public wander around and are part of the scenery, such as the air show or motor show.

If I'm just riding on normal trains or trams, I use the PHS camera or a 5D with a 50mm lens. I felt self concious riding trams with a canon 24-70mm lens as it's relatively large and sticks out on a tram. It's a bit different on Puffing Billy or on a special where everybody will be using a camera.

However I've not had any unwelcome attention so far.

In another post I mentioned using a camera taking time lapse photography sitting on a tripod in the passenger seat and I wonder what the reaction of police would be if I got pulled up for any traffic reason with a snapping camera in the front seat.

A reason why police would be nervy is that everyone can film things with their mobile phones and I saw this happen when railway Authorised Officers were interviewing someone and he made a run for it. Immediately the other dozen AOs surrounded him and did stacks on the mill like a rugby scrum. The normal passengers started filming them with their mobile phones, and I noticed some AOs remonstrating with the more obvious photographers. Imagine if I had a 5D and a 24-70 lens. I'd probably be in a scrum myself.

Daryl.

[woosang]

* post removed : admin *

Site Rule:

[13] Members with under 30 days membership and 50 posts cannot post complaints about service/people/organisations/products/businesses, etc. Join in, build up a reputation on Ausphotography and then your views will be allowed.

[NickMonk]

Good thread and good advice Nick. I too work in the same vocation and find that if you are generally calm towards myself or my colleagues that the 'situation' will be dealt with quickly and amicably, however once someone fails that dreaded attitude test then it is always more difficult to deal with favourably. I've only ever dealt with a few photographers and have never had a problem yet...maybe it's because I'm interested so I understand, who knows.

Michael asked about procedures when you do arrest a person, here's WA's take on it. Like Nick said arrests can be, and have been, done without knowing the exact charge (yes we should know every law but honest truth is we don't...do we know everything about photography?). We know that they can be arrested so they will be arrested on suspicion of x, once back at the station the exact charge can then be preferred (if you haven't got it spot on). Once arrested they will be given their rights which do include the right to be informed of what they have been arrested on suspicion of.

It should never really get to that point though, just be nice to us, we really are only doing a job and believe it or not we're human too!

Thanks for the backup

[Aus Mackem]

Thanks for the backup

No problem Nick, we are in a minority afterall! Have to look out for each other.

[Vince B]

Interesting read. Nice to hear from Nick. Maybe more police should be encouraged to do photography?
I must say that emotions can be stirred when confronted by the police. It isn't always easy to remain cool and detached! You always feel threatened because you wonder what you have done wrong to be intercepted and questioned.

I was at the Royal Easter Show in Sydney in April 2008 taking photos of the rides at night. I had my DSLR on a tripod and made sure I was visible and not in the way of people. Some older teenage girls saw me taking a photo and asked who I was taking photos for. Dolly? Cleo? No, I told them I was taking them for myself. Then they asked me to take their photo! These teens had stuffed toys and looked like they were enjoying themselves. So I put up my flash and took a few photos. One of the older girls did a pose and I told her to turn towards the other girl to make a better photo. There were three together. They didn't ask for the photos and we both went our own ways. They wanted their photo taken and I wanted to capture some of the local colour of the show. Big mistake!

About 10 minutes later I was shooting the Ferris Wheel using a 3 second exposure. Two police officers came up to me and asked me what I was doing. I clicked the shutter to show them. The female, older officer grabbed my lens and pulled it down. Then they accused me of taking 'provocative photos of underaged girls'! I was confused because I had no idea what they were referring to. What provocative photos I was wondering? They asked me to show them the photos I had taken. So I started to do so but stopped after a few frames and remembered I had read the article about not breaking any law taking photos. I objected and said that paparazzi are able to take photos. They said that is different because they take photos of celebrities. They said it was illegal to take photos of children under the age of 16 without the consent of their parents. This was getting nowhere. They said that paparazzi had ID so I gave the older officer my driver's licence and she moved away and made a call. I chatted with the young fellow during that time. Everything was pleasant but I was worried. After 10 minutes she returned and gave me my licence back. She said it didn't look good that I refused to show them the photos. I breathed a sigh of relief and told them I was going to take a few more photos of the rides. The young officer suggested that I should stop taking photos of the rides. I told him a 3 second time exposure would reveal no person at all. Well, he said he didn't know much about photography and maybe I could capture people that way. I put my tripod and camera away and went home.

I complained to my camera club and they sent a letter to the organizers of the Easter Show and after several months I was sent two free tickets for the next year's show! I made sure I attended.

This year I had set my camera up on my tripod and was shooting light trails of one of the rides after dark. A young security fellow approached and because I had a large camera and lens told me I needed a special permit to shoot professionally. I told him I was an amateur just taking photos. The Canon 5DII does draw attention with the 70-200f/4 attached. After a lengthy discussion/debate he said he would be back in half an hour to see what I was shooting. I told him to come and have a look. When he returned he was amazed at the interesting photos I had captured. He returned twice more to see if I had captured anything better. I returned another two nights and always invited police or security to have a look at my photos. While I was shooting, a couple of other photographers with tripods also shot the same ride. I even helped them by recommending settings and tricks. One bloke had a lanyard with a pass. Apparently if you enter the photo contest at the Easter Show you get a free pass and can use it as much as you like. Plus, they have a record of you so that pleases the security. I even wrote to the officials and was told it was okay to take photos there and I included a few samples of my shots.

I now refuse to take photos of young people unless with their cameras. Some people will approach you to take their photos if they see you have a large DSLR. I don't mind one bit and usually have to sort out the proper settings on their compacts so that they get good exposures.

Most people didn't seem to mind that I was set up to take photos there.

You people sure have a lot of rules around here!!!! I wanted to post a photo or two illustrating my points.

[ricktas]

You people sure have a lot of rules around here!!!! I wanted to post a photo or two illustrating my points.

Yes you can, so what was the exact problem you had posting a photo or two? Cause there are no rules stopping you from doing that.

[Vince B]

I want to comment of several points made by others in this thread. I think this is an important issue and it needs to be discussed more.

After the news on TV about the hapless young fellows who were fined for behaving in an inappropriate manner at Coogee most people now believe we are not allowed to take photos of people on our beaches. The fact that the girls in the photo were topless made the issue into a sexual one when it is not against the law for women to be topless on Sydney beaches. Men have been topless for over a century now! A lot of people see topless photo = pervert.

I have had debates with lots of people over this issue. Even friends stubbornly believe you aren't supposed to take photos of people on the beach. Others feel it isn't right to take photos in public without consent. So these are issues that won't go away and people feel strongly about them. I think we are losing the battle and there will be legislation to limit photographers.

Even though people don't have the right NOT to be photographed doesn't mean we have a right to take their photos. I am not sure where the line will be drawn but a reasonable person doesn't want to take a photo of someone who is hostile about it.

The media has broadcast the court cases and in both the young fellows were smart to plead guilty and not have to pay huge legal fees. They weren't charged with taking photos but behaving in an inappropriate or offensive manner. I believe subsequent, similar cases were dismissed by local magistrates. The public have beliefs and police, security, and lifeguards share these beliefs and react accordingly. Not everyone, of course, but enough participate to share this belief and that leads to disapproval of photographers at beaches.

[joeyvaldezjr]

This is a very informative topic.

Thanks Nick!