Are Tripods becoming illegal to use?

[lifeboat1721]

When I was doing my photo shoots at Heysham harbour lancashire, a Security pulled up and said that they had been told that soon Tripods were not going to be allowed, I said that he had his facts wrong.

But today I spoke to one of the 'boys in blue' who had come to check on what I was snapping and I asked him if the Tripod story was true! and he replied 'it all depends on where you are and what you are doing' ?

I asked him how about a Monopod! reply was 'Oh thats fine'.

I must look like a KGB spy to the Security guy and mister Normal to the police.

Regards Ian

[Joe]

I think it all depends on the position of the tripod, whether blocked access/ public right of way, who's using the tripod and why, who's asking and how, the reply to questions asked. The phases of the moon and the time of year seem to influence the reaction a tripod gets too.
Production of BFP blue card or NUJ yellow card will not necessarily be a 'correct' answer, and may even provoke stronger reactions

[lifeboat1721]

Thanks Joe,

I went back up to day to see if they had sorted that sunken dredger out and walked past 6 police and 2 security guards and not one batted an eyelid

Ian

[Jonathan Hare]

Just seen this thread. Heysham, is there a power station close by, if so it could of been the CNConstabulary. By which means if they feel security reasons, but usually chatting to them and explaining what you are doing helps ease any concerns, or they may be able to offer some advice.

[thelevone]

With all the electronic devices you can get today, spying with a camera on a tripod just seems a tad old don't you think. They think nothing of putting up cctv and spy cameras every where but woe betide you if you have a SLR and a tripod.

[NedWard]

Guys and Galls,
I'm no expert however, I have visited Heysham many times. Not for the nettle beer either.

Be careful that's the watch word. Both the power station and the harbour have been under "scrutiny" for a long time. Issues ranging from terrorism during the troubles in Ireland, gun running to illegal immigration and importing are sensitive subjects.

There is a similar sensitivty in parts of airports, where there are no go areas with cameras. Terrorism being the main reason.

Anti terrorism laws are far reaching.

As long as you are on a public footpath and not causing obstruction you should be OK. However security gaurds have their own interpretation of things.

You could approach the harbour authority to get clarification of what and where you can photograph and any restrictions on equipment. You may get mixed inerpretation from the police.

They don't have the right to confiscate equipment, memory cards, film etc. But you could be guilty of trespass, if you don't have permission for your activities or are in restricted or private areas. Anti terrorism laws have more power including arrest, and questioning in the polkice station.

If in doubt retire to the Strawberry Gardens, if its still called that, and reflect through some amber nectar.

Cheers
Ned

[Joe]

Much is made, with lots of debate over tripod useage (and indeed photography in general) in 'public spaces'. However, many parks are now being subjected to 'no tripod' rulings. The two most common reasons behind City and Borough councils are that tripods can be an obstruction, and that use of that space for commercial gain requires written permission.
We must therefore summise that tripods=commercial photography
Technically someone taking kit,film or memory cards from you is assault. However, a little bit of forethought and deplomacy goes along way.....normally
Photography in cities now means the authorities will probably be watching your activities long before you realise you are being approached.

[gordon g]

I think you're right about being closely observed Joe - certainly if you are using a camera around any 'sensitive' venue or event. There was some very interesting and alarming footage on Panorama the other night about police Forward Intelligence teams following and filming people attending various protests, including the journalists covering the events (and to take it to its absurd conclusion, the people recording the police recording the journalists recording the people ...)
Fortunately the only problems I have had have been easily resolved by a friendly conversation about what I'm doing, but using a conspicuous camera like a 1DsII, on a tripod or not, often draws attention even out in the wilds where I usually work.
'Tripod = commercial photography' - yes, I think you may be right, and also 'bulky camera/lens = professional photographer' seems to hold true as well. This does cut both ways though - on occasion I have been invited onto private estates because I look like the 'real thing', on others alarmed land owners (with guilty consciences?) have asked why I was taking pictures of their livestock or fences (actually landscaping or birding from public paths or roads)- their main concern being if I was from the council!

[adamcoupe]

The comments regarding situation and usage apply with tripods in public places - a recent shoot at the Real Food Show at Earls Court had restrictions regarding anything that might be seen as a h&s trip hazard - understandable in v. busy areas.

www.adamcoupe.com/blog

[walwyn]

Don't forget that Esther Rantzen got arrested, charged, and fined £15 for causing an obstruction whilst filming for "That's Life' on North End Road back in the early 1980s.

You can usually get away with a monopod in most places that don't allow or charge for tripod use.