Roger B. PRO 8:58pm, 20 October 2007
I spotted this story in tonight's Star: Snapper Phil left steaming at ban on photos
polly.jayne PRO 9 years ago
It's idiotic, isn't it! And notice how they refer to 'non-commercial' photos............
Gigglejuice 9 years ago
with technology these days and mobile phone cameras and what have you I have no idea how the powers that be (whoever that may be) can police such things. It's ridicuous anyway.

Perhaps we should all walk around life with our eyes closed
polly.jayne PRO 9 years ago
Ah, but the thought-police would still get us........
Gigglejuice 9 years ago
Yes you're probably right!

The thing that strikes me is it always tends to be events/exhibits etc that they think (and do) get away with these stupid restrictions. Things that are purposely there for visual enjoyment! It's madness we should be restricted from capturing what will become memories and things to share
Same place ive had hassels with.. Yes i read this with a passing intrest.. Againe medowhell strike.. There passing through (no choice) camera in bag but you have guessed i was stoped asked to look at what i had taken as they was certan they had seen me with my camera out of the bag.. A long debate took place.. I had my cards with me and the rights sheet.. It got to the stage of them trying to take my camera of me.. In then end all calmed down.. A long letter of complaint is been wrote and sent..

One is allso on the way to the Telegraph..
Gigglejuice 9 years ago
Absolutely ridiculous!!

So we don't have the right to even carry a bloody camera now?? What are they going to do? Confiscate all mobile phones too? I don't know wether to laugh or rant!
Mark-Lomas [deleted] 9 years ago
GJ - Don't believe everything you read in the papers...
Gigglejuice 9 years ago
Yeah I know

But nothings going to stop me carrying my camera around regardless.
polly.jayne PRO 9 years ago
All situations like this seem to boil down to one individual 'jobsworth' somewhere.
Account inactive go to: [deleted] Posted 9 years ago. Edited by Account inactive go to: (member) 9 years ago
I don't even read them.

Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"??

they are shooting themselves in the foot, but at least this venue has learned form its mistakes (apparently).

I'd love to know whether this was all down to the actions of the individual or a sort of company policy??

PS: whats wrong with them saying "non-commercial" photographs... I'd be pretty pissed if some one started selling pictures of something that I owned!
polly.jayne PRO 9 years ago
Well, I think if someone puts something on public display they are acknowledging that it may get photographed, though I do sort of agree with your point in a way :-) However, my original comment was more 'how can they tell from the look of the photographer/camera iwhether this is going to get used commercially?'. These days, that's a pretty big assumption they are making regarding the quality of some digital minis.........
aitch (aka priddypix) 9 years ago
Personally, I would have told her to go away and come back to see me when she had her supervisor to support her - when you know you are in the right stand up and be firm!
lizjones112 9 years ago
outallnight says:

GJ - Don't believe everything you read in the papers...

Agreed however this comes down to this post

and then this..

one is known at medowhell this said me and deck chair hippy walked through there a while ago and took some images for the shoping comp (none come out) so it can be down to who is working.. plus as liz jones 112 pointed us to seems to happen all to often because it don't happen to you outallnight dose not mean there is not some truth in what has been reported and this is of concern for people like myself who take images of the urban paranoia every day.. one is not without my pentax k100D and this means i get images such as this..

urban parkour (fargate)

i get a lot less hassel then i expect to be frank but medowhell are a
law upon to themeselevs it seems..

when i took this image


i was carefull due to the fact there was a load of young people there and i had the all clear from the organisers to take images but i still gave thought to what i was takeing..

had my rights card on me and new info cards on what and who one is just to ensure even though i was there as a guest and did know meny of the young people and there parents. it all comes down to jobsworths as polly jane says and here i could not agree more..

myself i would not have published this image

but we take our own risk in what we do some people would not go into an empty space to take images at the end of the day outallnight we are going to have to realise that politcal corectness be it for the better or as i think detrament plays a serious role in what we do as image makers..
Mark-Lomas [deleted] 9 years ago
Hmmm....i think maybe my comment was too subtle for some people to actually get. Nevermind...
Account inactive go to: [deleted] 9 years ago
it basically means that if you get caught using photographs of their stuff for a commercial purpose they have the rights to sue. but please note the difference between a public display on private property where rights are reserved and public displays on public property.


meadowhall are a law unto themselves when your are on their property/land.
sure they can't take your camera off of you, but they can kick you off it, ban your from it, request you don't take photographs, I think they even have to right to request you to remove images form the camera or internet etc...
Thunderchild7 PRO 9 years ago
@JD - just another white male photographer There is a corollary to that, if you apply in advance for permission to MeadowHell's management they may grant your permisission.

There is a burden of care on organisations where children attend to protect children from having their picture taken under the protection of children act. and that does require maintaining a register of people who are permitted to take photographs on their premises
Account inactive go to: [deleted] 9 years ago
yup they might, but its doubtful given their reputation, tho I can't say I've ever asked for it. I think I may try one day tho!!!
Dan Sumption 9 years ago
polly.jayne PRO 9 years ago
That was just the lift this thread needed ;oD
slack---line PRO 8 years ago
Resurrecting this old thread as I came across an interesting article in the Guardian by someone from Liberty on the topic of being stopped and searched whilst taking pictures by a PCSO.

I usually carry a copy of this PDF around with me.

Worth bearing in mind though that none of this applies to Meadowhell as thats private property so the laws are different.
33L 8 years ago
I applied to m.hall for images to be taken from their grounds, to be fair i was asking at christmas time and said i would need light stands for a shot i wanted to do.

they politely declined stating reason of health and saftey and no available escorts at the busy time.

I am happy they responded and gave me an indepth answer rather than a simple no.
slack---line PRO 8 years ago
They didn't seem too bothered about people milling around in their carparks, many of whom were touting cameras, when the towers were demolished!
Gigglejuice 8 years ago
I bought a photo mag yesterday and theres a small article about taking photos in public. It's a response from Gordon Brown to an online petition calling on the Government to clarify the law concerning photographing landmarks, buildings etc from public locations. Apparently Downing streets website states that there are NO legal restrictions on photography in public places however it cites "security considerations" as one situation where the police may legitimately intervene.

Apparently there is a full response on the website however the link in the magazine isn't working at present.
Roger B. PRO 8 years ago
Thankfully I haven't had much contact with "Community Support Officers", but it is my impression that some of them can be a little over-zealous.
Vidster9 8 years ago
I was standing on one of the raised sections (the grassed areas), in the peace gardens a while ago and one came over to make me get down. Every time we have a nice day those areas are full of people. I couldn't understand his problem.
Gigglejuice 8 years ago
God knows why I wasn't asked to leave Sheffield station yesterday (or at least asked what I was doing standing around). I had two bulky cameras around my neck, another in my pocket, a full backpack and was looking around and plotting to see if I'd get away with a sneaky shot.

I never tried in the end but I really want a shot inside the station so I'm going to try, even if it's just a shot from my mobile. Perhaps not the blatent "I'm taking pics!!" route! :D
SEC1941 tired of the snow [deleted] 8 years ago
Problems with Megahell (sic), but managed to get one at the Arndale Manchester. One has to be a bit careful with train stations, but I've never had trouble at Sheffield!
Gigglejuice 8 years ago
I just read in a photo mag that one tip to get pics at an event without being bothered is to wear a high-vis vest

Seems a bit naughty to me but I can see the idea working.
Groups Beta