Permission To Speak Sir...
Or should that be film?
A while ago I mentioned that I wanted to take some pictures for my blog and in general you'd think you could take photo's of where you live. I can understand in these days that some of the taking of photo's has become more complicated as people worry about images being used to help terrorists, but there is access to all kinds of material in books, magazines, newspapers and on the web.
Then, we have the worry over children's images in case they appeal to a paedophile. Now, I'm naive enough to think whilst I can understand an abusive image of some kind being abhorrent and unacceptable, but if a child happened to be in a picture say riding a bike but was not the main subject and was incidental and there was nothing strange about it, I get a little confused how that could be a problem. As if you follow that line of thought, you could never have a child in a tv programme, an advert or a film for fear how certain people will react.
What about when a tv news crew is on location and there are people walking in and out of shot?
Can you remember in an earlier post, I mentioned someone had approached me and said "You cannot take photographs on our property" even though I thought it was a public area and in theory with modern technology and a decent zoom lens you can go and stand off the property.
If this is now the normal state of affairs, just where can you take an image these days?
How practical would it be to constantly ask for permission to film or take a picture and what situation does that put a tv, film company or press photographer?
This post all comes about because I was watching a documentary on the television about pop music and the opening shot was on a street in London and the journalist Paul Morley was being interviewed on a vox pop shot. No public was being held up and it was coincidental that in the far off distance you could make out the name of a London Train Station, most of the picture was of Mr Morley.
In the middle of the opening dialogue some security guard introduced himself and asked who was filming and tried to stop the filming taking place and said that "The BBC should know better"
This was left in the programme and so I wonder if the guard had to give permission for his objection to be included. What a strange way to start a documentary about pop music.
So just where can you take a photo? Especially as many mobile phones have built in camera's.
Has some new law been passed? If so I have missed it? but it would appear that another aspect of life has been closed off to us. Or is this an official being over zealous?
A while ago I mentioned that I wanted to take some pictures for my blog and in general you'd think you could take photo's of where you live. I can understand in these days that some of the taking of photo's has become more complicated as people worry about images being used to help terrorists, but there is access to all kinds of material in books, magazines, newspapers and on the web.
Then, we have the worry over children's images in case they appeal to a paedophile. Now, I'm naive enough to think whilst I can understand an abusive image of some kind being abhorrent and unacceptable, but if a child happened to be in a picture say riding a bike but was not the main subject and was incidental and there was nothing strange about it, I get a little confused how that could be a problem. As if you follow that line of thought, you could never have a child in a tv programme, an advert or a film for fear how certain people will react.
What about when a tv news crew is on location and there are people walking in and out of shot?
Can you remember in an earlier post, I mentioned someone had approached me and said "You cannot take photographs on our property" even though I thought it was a public area and in theory with modern technology and a decent zoom lens you can go and stand off the property.
If this is now the normal state of affairs, just where can you take an image these days?
How practical would it be to constantly ask for permission to film or take a picture and what situation does that put a tv, film company or press photographer?
This post all comes about because I was watching a documentary on the television about pop music and the opening shot was on a street in London and the journalist Paul Morley was being interviewed on a vox pop shot. No public was being held up and it was coincidental that in the far off distance you could make out the name of a London Train Station, most of the picture was of Mr Morley.
In the middle of the opening dialogue some security guard introduced himself and asked who was filming and tried to stop the filming taking place and said that "The BBC should know better"
This was left in the programme and so I wonder if the guard had to give permission for his objection to be included. What a strange way to start a documentary about pop music.
So just where can you take a photo? Especially as many mobile phones have built in camera's.
Has some new law been passed? If so I have missed it? but it would appear that another aspect of life has been closed off to us. Or is this an official being over zealous?
posted by The Great Gildersleeve | 3:04 am
4 Comments:
Vodaphone (or Orange...or Virgin!!) some big company got done the otehr day because they used the image of an oriental girl taken off the web (Google images I suppose!) and used it in an ad campaign...she saw herself and sued.......celebrities and thier image rights...that added to not taking photos of school sports etc as a peadophile may get hold of the pictures...blah blah blah...it's all becoming a bit silly.
There's a different attitude in Britain to France in my experience. When we went over in August I was filming on the streets and nobody batted an eyelid, whether standing in the middle of the Champs Elysees on in the Tullieries gardens - I suppose if somebody feels you've invaded their space you might get some reaction. Funny thing is the stock footage that is supplied with my Sony software as an example of what you can do features street filming - USA or Canada judging by the street signs and buildings.
We've seen people taking photographs on beaches in France.
Can you imagine the problems, if every single time you went onto the street with a camera, video camera etc...you had to get permission.
Many of the images we see are captured as a spur of the moment thing. Unless, you wish to take a photo of your family in front of a landmark to prove you were there.
And how many press photographers would or could keep stopping and asking for permission?
In general, I guess unless someone stops you or makes it clear you need permission and you then offer to remove an image, you just have to take the photo. You probably can getaway with it until you want to publish it in a book or on the web.
I saw a bit more of the documentary(now maybe permission had been granted)or they took the risk but as they discussed music, some of it was filmed on a train but the picture was croped so you could not tell if anyone else was on the train and their image was not in shot.
It sounds like that security guard was trying to make a name for himself. The bottom line is that if he had any brains he wouldn't be a security guard. Harsh? Maybe. True? Yes.
Post a Comment
<< Home