Photos in a public place

Minch

Minch

Messages
45
Name
Aidan Mincher
Edit My Images
No
Could someone point me in the right direction to read up on the law of taking photos in a public place please?

Today I was in Wellington place in Leeds. A new collection of buildings that have just gone up when a security guard stopped me in the grounds from taking photos. He explained that I needed the site managers permission to do that.

I didn't want to argue back as I wasn't sure if I was in the wrong.
 
AFAIK the received wisdom is if the land is private, their rules. Though if you are positioned on public land then they cannot stop you.

NB in either case there may be either more relaxed or bye laws affecting photography respectively in each case above.
 
Funnily enough I've been to that exact spot on numerous occasions and never been hassled, admittedly I was shooting with only my x70 and I did notice the cctv's following me but no one has challenged me yet.
 
PSILVERMAN said:
Funnily enough I've been to that exact spot on numerous occasions and never been hassled, admittedly I was shooting with only my x70 and I did notice the cctv's following me but no one has challenged me yet.
Click to expand...

I was less inconspicuous with my tripod.
 
Slyelessar said:
If you are on public ground you can shoot buildings. If you are in buildings or on private ground they set the rules. So if you were on the street path shooting the building they have no right to stop you.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it wasn't from the street path it was in the space between the buildings. I was told the area was for people to sit and smoke in but not to take pictures without permission.
 
chrism_scotland said:
I'm sure ISIS are wandering about with that amount of camera kit carrying out "surveillance"..... probably wouldn't blink an eye if you were snapping away with a phone...
Click to expand...
I'm sure you are right about phone snappers but I don't think these things are really about ISIS/terrorism (even though that is often used as an excuse). I think businesses are increasingly concerned about controlling their public image and get suspicious when someone turns up with "professional" looking gear, you could be from a newspaper or news website looking to run a story, or you could just be looking to make money of something that they see as their property and so they want a slice of the cash.
 
If it's private land there will be notices or signs to say so. If challenged, just ask them to point out the signage, then if it is private how to contact the site management for permission.

I've been challenged many times. If private then I've never had an issue getting permission as I'm only a hobby tog and the main concern seems to be for commercial use.

On some occcasions I've been on public land and simply advised the jobsworth to go away, and/or call the Police, and if he/she continued to harass me then I would!

Be polite, but make it clear you know your rights and theirs.
 
JohnX said:
If it's private land there will be notices or signs to say so. If challenged, just ask them to point out the signage, then if it is private how to contact the site management for permission.
Click to expand...
I would think that most private land has no signage saying so. My garden is certainly private land and there is no sign saying so. If I go into Lincoln city centre, there is plenty of private land with no signs - courtyards with shops and such and two churchyards belonging to the Church of England that have been turned into rest areas.
 
JohnX said:
If it's private land there will be notices or signs to say so. If challenged, just ask them to point out the signage, then if it is private how to contact the site management for permission.

I've been challenged many times. If private then I've never had an issue getting permission as I'm only a hobby tog and the main concern seems to be for commercial use.

On some occcasions I've been on public land and simply advised the jobsworth to go away, and/or call the Police, and if he/she continued to harass me then I would!

Be polite, but make it clear you know your rights and theirs.
Click to expand...

I really wouldn't recommend this stance.

Private land isn't always signed, or obvious (as John says above).

Common sense will get anyone past this, and this advice is just asking for bother IMHO.
 
Check out local police authorities as I have seen a letter stating that officers need a court order
to get you to delete the photographs or conficate your card......
 
The main issue here is the tripod. As soon as you get one of those out on private (urban) land without permission, then you are likely to get moved on because it represents an obstruction and trip hazard.
 
tom1946 said:
Check out local police authorities as I have seen a letter stating that officers need a court order
to get you to delete the photographs or conficate your card......
Click to expand...

I believe your right as its something to do with potentially destroying evidence
 
I have a copy of a letter from the Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland
Dated 2010. Laying out the guidelines for the police and I carry a copy of it in my camera bag just in case.
Unfortunately it's on my phone as a PDF andcan't get it downloaded as a photo to post you could see if you could turn it up on Google?
Stating that they have no authority to confiscate nor to get it delated.......
And as Simon has said it is to do with deleting evidence as per Boston Marathon bombing where photos and videos took a prominent way to catch the culprits..
 
Last edited:
Another thing I have just thought of. Try telling them you are getting photos off the old and new buildings in the town
For reference in future as there is a good site over here called Old Belfast. I have to go into town sometime as there is a large building project going ahead taking in about 4streets which are lying derelict at present and they will disappear shortly to become a large shopping area with all types of businesses. But some of the old grand buildings will disappear which where large stores in my youth lot's of memories there....
 
I have had security guards attempting to stop me taking photos in public spaces before. From what I have heard, it seems to be getting more and more common.
 
Eddy where you might be stopped is in a shopping centre however this is a public place but to photo in a shop is a no no.
A freiend of mine went to a shopping centre on a monday night after a christmas treewas light on the friday. He was there on the friday but couldnt get shot he wanted so came on monday was told by security wasntallowed to take photos. He stopped found out they where wrong put in a complaint. Went back on the wednesday was approached again he told them he was within his rights as he was in the open air and not on any shop premises. Produced copy of letter and security didnt know what to say. Needless to say he was left alone to photograph the christms lights.
 
tom1946 said:
Eddy where you might be stopped is in a shopping centre however this is a public place but to photo in a shop is a no no.
A freiend of mine went to a shopping centre on a monday night after a christmas treewas light on the friday. He was there on the friday but couldnt get shot he wanted so came on monday was told by security wasntallowed to take photos. He stopped found out they where wrong put in a complaint. Went back on the wednesday was approached again he told them he was within his rights as he was in the open air and not on any shop premises. Produced copy of letter and security didnt know what to say. Needless to say he was left alone to photograph the christms lights.
Click to expand...
A shopping centre is usually private property.
 
It is important to understand the difference between a public place, a privately owned place and a privately owned place to which the public have access.
Only in the first instance will there generally be a free right to take photographs but even then it may be curtailed e.g by a police action in a terrorist event etc.
Where most people get confused is in the last case, private but where the public have access ... just because the public have access doesn't make it a public space and the owner may preclude photography by a blanket provision, (possibly by signs), or by a specific statement on a ticket of admission, or by a decision 'on the fly'.
 
gramps said:
It is important to understand the difference between a public place, a privately owned place and a privately owned place to which the public have access.
Only in the first instance will there generally be a free right to take photographs but even then it may be curtailed e.g by a police action in a terrorist event etc.
Where most people get confused is in the last case, private but where the public have access ... just because the public have access doesn't make it a public space and the owner may preclude photography by a blanket provision, (possibly by signs), or by a specific statement on a ticket of admission, or by a decision 'on the fly'.
Click to expand...

The South Bank along the Thames by the London Eye is a good example of private property with public access. Photography there is not an issue, but use of a tripod is. I once had a security guard tell me I couldn't take photos of a shopping centre even though I was standing on the street outside (not on their forecourt). They eventually called the Police :police: who told them I was right :p. You just need to be civil and try not to wind them up. In this case the "Head" security guard said "Fine, I'll just stand here". And stood 2 inches from my lens. The very nice WPC advised him that that could be seen as obstruction, or even harassment, so best he went back inside.... :rolleyes:
 
The shopping centre I was talking about is called Junction 1. Which is a pedestrian precinct with the shops in seperate units all of the area is open air except the shops.
Thought how do you stop people taking photos in Trafalgar Square or other major landmarks especially if you are a tourist. Especially at say a football match or a rugby match as they would be classed as a private...
Think its hard to police however if you are civil with people they are usually are civil with you.
This is asubject that can run on without a outcome......
 
So I dont take photos of prominent buildings zoo street or holiday camps or in places like disneyland or even local harbours as they are all private. Doesnt leave much as ?
 
tom1946 said:
So I dont take photos of prominent buildings zoo street or holiday camps or in places like disneyland or even local harbours as they are all private. Doesnt leave much as ?
Click to expand...

No-one's saying you can't take photos on private land, just that you can't assume that you have an automatic right to do so.
 
fabs said:
No-one's saying you can't take photos on private land, just that you can't assume that you have an automatic right to do so.
Click to expand...

Spot on :)

If in doubt go ask. There's a market in Leeds where I know a pal was asked to stop taking photos once, so I when I went I went straight to the manager and explained that as his market was so great I'd love to take some photos in it, for private use only, and that if any stall holder objected I'd immediately stop. He radio'd his security staff, gave my description and off I went snapping, complete with a lanyard and badge dangling as 'Guest'

Be an arse and get treated like an arse I say :D

Be nice though and you'd be surprised sometimes that others are nice back. The biggest concern I usually get is commercial usage. I've even shot with a tripod in Trinity (a Leeds shopping centre), a guard saw me erect my tripod and came over, I explained I was shooting blurred people for my LRPS panel and we chatted while I shot - he thought the photos were crap lol - but then also radio'd his pals and I was fine to continue

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
Spot on :)

If in doubt go ask. There's a market in Leeds where I know a pal was asked to stop taking photos once, so I when I went I went straight to the manager and explained that as his market was so great I'd love to take some photos in it, for private use only, and that if any stall holder objected I'd immediately stop. He radio'd his security staff, gave my description and off I went snapping, complete with a lanyard and badge dangling as 'Guest'

Be an arse and get treated like an arse I say :D

Be nice though and you'd be surprised sometimes that others are nice back. The biggest concern I usually get is commercial usage. I've even shot with a tripod in Trinity (a Leeds shopping centre), a guard saw me erect my tripod and came over, I explained I was shooting blurred people for my LRPS panel and we chatted while I shot - he thought the photos were crap lol - but then also radio'd his pals and I was fine to continue

Dave
Click to expand...

100% Agree, as whenever I have asked nicely the answer I get is, Of course you can sir.
 
I think if i was taking photos out & about & the police asked me for ID it would not bother me showing them.:)
 
tom1946 said:
So I dont take photos of prominent buildings zoo street or holiday camps or in places like disneyland or even local harbours as they are all private. Doesnt leave much as ?
Click to expand...

Just because somewhere is private doesn't mean they will insist you don't take photographs - it simply means that they are within their rights to ask you not to (which can be by posting signs to that effect, by having staff make the request in person, or any other means, in the fine print on the back of the ticket, etc).

English Heritage and National Trust properties, for example, have a 'non commercial' restriction (unless you obtain a permit from them), but personal use is generally fine (some properties do have restrictions of photography inside).
 
tom1946 said:
Check out local police authorities as I have seen a letter stating that officers need a court order
to get you to delete the photographs or conficate your card......
Click to expand...
Or, if they suspect you of committing a crime, they could arrest you, lock you in a cell and search your house, computer and camera without any search warrant. I think the most likely request you would receive from a police officer is to view the images. If I was asked I would have no problem doing so.
 
According to the RPS, the police have a right to stop and search you and view your images if they believe they could be used in connection with terrorism but they have no right to delete them. If they do decide to stop and search you and look at your images, they must give you a Stop and Search slip which identifies the officer concerned and his reasons for doing so.
 
john.margetts said:
According to the RPS, the police have a right to stop and search you and view your images if they believe they could be used in connection with terrorism but they have no right to delete them. If they do decide to stop and search you and look at your images, they must give you a Stop and Search slip which identifies the officer concerned and his reasons for doing so.
Click to expand...


Yes, under Sect 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The caveat being that they must have a reasonable suspicion that you are gathering material to be used for terrorist purposes. That's a very high standard to meet.
 
john.margetts said:
According to the RPS, the police have a right to stop and search you and view your images if they believe they could be used in connection with terrorism but they have no right to delete them. If they do decide to stop and search you and look at your images, they must give you a Stop and Search slip which identifies the officer concerned and his reasons for doing so.
Click to expand...

DemiLion said:
Yes, under Sect 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The caveat being that they must have a reasonable suspicion that you are gathering material to be used for terrorist purposes. That's a very high standard to meet.
Click to expand...

Hmmm! so should there be a concern over the reason for the stop meeting the "standard" is the 'Stop & Search slip' sufficient documentation to then ask for clarification post the stop? And are there public records of the outcome of such enquiries?

Afteral unless possible spurious stops are challenged/qualified how will our public servants learn ;)

PS though in the light of the tragic event in Manchester and the now elevated threat level it is possible that both warranted & unwarranted attention will be paid to photographers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top