| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/17/2004 12:19:42 AM · #1 |
|
|
|
12/17/2004 12:27:13 AM · #2 |
| i just heard david letterman talking about it on tv, |
|
|
|
12/17/2004 12:31:10 AM · #3 |
Since you are underground, i suppose it'd looka bit suspicious to be using your cell phone camera, huh?
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 12:35:27 AM · #4 |
I got the impression from reading your website reference that the MTA is more concerned about the appearance of security than actual security. Just another over zealous, bureaucratic kneejerk. How long will it be before people are afraid to photograph anything in public?
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 02:00:52 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Since you are underground, i suppose it'd looka bit suspicious to be using your cell phone camera, huh? |
What if you are just:
* playing a game
* watching previously recorded photos
* watching sent private photos
* watching downloaded photos
* watching a movie (?)
* using infrared to sent a joke to a mate's phone
And some security officer starts to harass you because someone claims to have you seen making photos?
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 02:05:35 AM · #6 |
Cell phone cameras are ultimately gonna cause problems for all photographers. People use them in places where they shouldn't and it will cause bans on cell phones and cameras in lots of places before long. People's privacy is being invaded.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 03:03:10 AM · #7 |
|
|
|
12/17/2004 03:19:06 AM · #8 |
AHHHH HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
(I sure showed them) |
|
|
|
12/17/2004 04:46:15 AM · #9 |
lol how stupid
How is placing a ban on taking photos gonna stop am hijacked plan ploughing into the subway?
The rule still allows press-photographers!! if a terriost can gain a pilot license whats stopping them getting a press card?
What could a terriost gain from these type of pictures anywazs?
This attitude explains This thread
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 08:10:04 AM · #10 |
What a crock of crap. They might as well just ban everyone everywhere from taking photos.
But a painter who is good at painting can walk through the subway still, take a mental image and pretty much make a fully realistic 100% life-like painting of any part of the subway -- AND the painter doesn't have to worry about lighting or lenses or camera shake (he makes his own!!!). Maybe I'll sell my camera for a paint brush, a canvas, and a little skill!
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 08:35:57 AM · #11 |
It's been against train company policy in Japan for some time to take pictures of people, especially with cell phone cameras. People sneaking photos of others, especially low-angle photos of women wearing skirts, became such a problem here that Japan passed a law to require that cell phones make a loud noise each time they take a photo. It has nothing to do with security here, just privacy.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2004 09:37:28 AM · #12 |
Picture taken was banned in the NYC subway years ago. Then they loosened the ban because they really were not enforcing it. But now with 9//1 past us, they want to enforce it big time. Only way you will be able to shoot is with special permission. And even if you get special permission, it has to be approved by MTA.
As far as what Deapee has said, he is right on.
I have had this arguement for the last 18 months. I have been to the protests and have even spoke at two board meetings, and I have wrote letters, and had others write letters. The way I look at it is this:
I have been taking the NYC Subway system since I was 6 with my dad. Then from the age of 9 on, by myself. I can easily tell you alot of stuff just from memory.
Also, I live near by the West End elevated section. I can easily take pictures from my window.
Another thing.... you can draw this crap up. So whats next? Ban drawing? How about writing? Hell, lets just ban speech and eyesight while you are at it.
These are the many arguements we have brought to their attention. Its really rediculous what they are doing. There is so much stuff on the internet that you don't even have to go take pictures.
I have this same problem while taken pictures of bridges.
The bottom line is people are paranoid. And it has nothing to do with privacy here in the NYC. Maybe in Japan, but not here. They have made it quite clear why they want to put a ban in place. If you read their statement it clearly states security reasons.
Banning photography is not going to help anything. You have to see the size of some of these backpacks people carry. Who knows what can be in those things if the wrong person with wrong intent decided to do something.
Anyway... here is an update on the ban:
November Update
There is also another protest scheduled on December 18th.
Read here to find out more: Forgotten-NY
Message edited by author 2004-12-17 09:42:56.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2004 12:31:18 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Since you are underground, i suppose it'd looka bit suspicious to be using your cell phone camera, huh? |
There is cell phone service in the MTA subway stations (though not in the tunnels between stations).
-Terry
|
|
|
|
12/20/2004 07:41:21 PM · #14 |
This paranoia seems to be worldwide. While I was taking this photograph
the security guards got real nervous & wanted to know what I was doing there. I thought the camera was pretty much a dead give away but they wanted me to stop taking photographs and wanted me to leave or at least get written permission to be taking photographs from the management.I was a little surprised to say the least because this really is a tourist attraction & there are always tourists there. The train I was waiting for arrived in at about the same time so I left but I wondered all the way home what would of happened had I of stayed & carried on taking photographs.
|
|
|
|
12/20/2004 07:47:10 PM · #15 |
At some point we have to ask ourselves if we want to continue to allow our freedoms to be systematically reduced or are we willing to do what is necessary which is to quarantine citizens of nations that harbor, sponsor and support terrorists. Citizens of these nations should not be able to travel to free nations.
|
|
|
|
12/20/2004 07:47:11 PM · #16 |
it is becoming ridiculous...i was just recently in the city with my photography class and we were stopped on numerous locations, even at what you would consider a tourist attraction.
i got:
kicked out of tiffany's (understandable i guess)
spoken to at a clothing store (hadnt even taken a picture yet)
chased out of some other building by a really large security guard
spoken to again at the trump building
i just feel that if your security so lacking that a simple picture could reek havoc...then maybe you need to rethink your security
Message edited by author 2004-12-20 19:50:21.
|
|
|
|
12/20/2004 08:17:36 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by maxj:
it is becoming ridiculous...i was just recently in the city with my photography class and we were stopped on numerous locations, even at what you would consider a tourist attraction.
i got:
kicked out of tiffany's (understandable i guess)
spoken to at a clothing store (hadnt even taken a picture yet)
chased out of some other building by a really large security guard
spoken to again at the trump building
i just feel that if your security so lacking that a simple picture could reek havoc...then maybe you need to rethink your security |
Were you inside these buildings? Or outside? At least 2 you mention being inside and being chased, but what about the Trump Building, or the clothing store?
I know from experience that even before 9/11, you will be harassed for trying to take pictures inside, or even right on their property outside the building. That is normal. Now, if you are taking a picture of the Trump Towers from across the street, then yes, that is rediculous.
|
|
|
|
12/20/2004 10:25:28 PM · #18 |
Yes, it was inside on all occasions, and i understand the security concerns. I still don’t see why taking pictures of a place that is open to the public is harmful. If your security procedures/weaknesses are so exposed that an everyday person can observe them, then I don’t believe that prohibiting photography will do you any good.
...another question, the people in the clothing store told me that they were not concerned with security but more so with people taking pictures of the clothing itself...could someone please elaborate? I did not understand what he meant.
|
|
|
|
12/21/2004 12:17:59 AM · #19 |
In these situations, you do have an option that you should explore. If you enter a place of business or private property with the intent of making photos, go to the nearest person you see who works there and ask to see a manager. Tell the manager what you would like to do and generally, they will give you permission to do so. It puts them at ease and lets them know that you are not doing something for the purpose of hurting them in any way. Have any of you tried this? I have and I have not been turned down yet.
|
|
|
|
12/21/2004 09:51:46 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by maxj:
...another question, the people in the clothing store told me that they were not concerned with security but more so with people taking pictures of the clothing itself...could someone please elaborate? I did not understand what he meant. |
Advertising concerns or copyright issues maybe... thats all I can think about.
As far as your comment Setzler... Yes... I have also asked and have never been turned down. But I always ask on "good days". For example... Monday morning usually is not the best time, because people can be cranky on Monday mornings. But a good day would be at the end of the week. The Manager of Property, and the Security people are generally in a great mood knowing that the weekend is upon them.
|
|
|
|
12/21/2004 12:05:28 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by maxj:
...another question, the people in the clothing store told me that they were not concerned with security but more so with people taking pictures of the clothing itself...could someone please elaborate? I did not understand what he meant. |
They are concerned about the designs, patterns and decorations being photographed and emailed to (for example) China, where cheap counterfeit knockoffs will compete with the output of the manufacturer's own sweatshops. Wal-Mart (by itself) is China's eighth-largest trading partner, and gets approximately 1/3 of its stock from China. Note that the USA just set a record high trade deficit, despite also having record-high exports. China (last I knew) is not a signatory to the International Copyright Convention, and does not recognize US copyrights.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
In these situations, you do have an option that you should explore. If you enter a place of business or private property with the intent of making photos, go to the nearest person you see who works there and ask to see a manager. Tell the manager what you would like to do and generally, they will give you permission to do so. It puts them at ease and lets them know that you are not doing something for the purpose of hurting them in any way. Have any of you tried this? I have and I have not been turned down yet. |
I have often gone into grocery stores and ask the person at the front if I could take pictures in
the produce section.
 |
|
|
|
12/21/2004 01:40:30 PM · #22 |
| If you are about to make millions from counterfeit clothes then you would probably be able to buy a couple of real ones to photograph and measure at your leisure. Hey that rhymes. If you pronounce leisure properly anyway. |
|
|
|
12/21/2004 02:40:01 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by zarniwoop:
If you are about to make millions from counterfeit clothes then you would probably be able to buy a couple of real ones to photograph and measure at your leisure. Hey that rhymes. If you pronounce leisure properly anyway. |
I never said the rationale for prohibiting photos was rational. |
|
|
|
12/21/2004 03:11:44 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
In these situations, you do have an option that you should explore. If you enter a place of business or private property with the intent of making photos, go to the nearest person you see who works there and ask to see a manager. Tell the manager what you would like to do and generally, they will give you permission to do so. It puts them at ease and lets them know that you are not doing something for the purpose of hurting them in any way. Have any of you tried this? I have and I have not been turned down yet. |
that is a really good point...i never thought of that, i just became so aggravated that simple logic escaped me. I will try that next time.
thank you
|
|
|
|
12/21/2004 04:46:39 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Cell phone cameras are ultimately gonna cause problems for all photographers. People use them in places where they shouldn't and it will cause bans on cell phones and cameras in lots of places before long. People's privacy is being invaded. |
It is almost impossible to ban the use of cell phones anywhere the companies choose to provide service. The wireless provider companies worked hard to get laws enacted to prevent banning them early on when they were not as widely used. Most places that have considered banning them from being used by drivers have been forced to back down. Restuarants that have attempted to set up cell-free sections have been sued. And now the providers are going to pressure the government into allowing, indeed facilitating them, on flights under the pretext that air marshalls need to use them. Air marshalls may need to communicate, but passengers have gotten along without cell phones so far. How hard would it be to set up a system for air marshalls to communicate without allowing all passengers unfettered use of cell phones? Technically feasible, probably easy, and maybe even less expensive. But the companies would not profit from that kind of a system. Privacy and security interests usually fall by the wayside if they stand in the path of profit.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 07:40:09 AM EDT.
