Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Quote: The analogy with walking is a little lost on me I have to say - but I have never paid much attention to Private Property signs which I know is bad!!
People often say that they only walk on public rights of way - bridle paths for example and never see anything other than that. Thing is if they only walk on public rights of way they won't see the wrong do ers. I shoot. I shoot rabbits. I spend a lot of times on farmers land looking for the pests. It's private land, no public rights of way. How do I know? Because I ask. It's important. I need to know that I'm not likely to have walkers appearing in my backstop area and risk hurting anyone. And yet, I have lost count of the number of times i have seen the little groups of happy wanderers tramping over land they have no right to be on. I've even had the blighters call the police and report seeing a man in cammo, with a high power rifle with a telescopic sight lurking menacingly. fortunately sight of my letter of permission has got rid of them. By the way, the high power rifle with a telescopic sight is an air rifle. Running below the legal limit of 12 ft/lb.It is common to be accosted by these trespassers, telling me i am cruel for shooting these poor little animals! And they are trespassing on land to which they have absolutely no right of legal access. They are not the mistaken 0.001%. Thats rubbish. They have their maps and silva compass's. Or is it that they have no idea what map they are reading and think that their compass is an alarm to tell them when to light their campfire (and yes, I have seen that too) and boil their collapsible kettle to make tea?
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
Why don't you just shoot the vermin and leave the rabbits alone?
Quote: Why don't you just shoot the vermin and leave the rabbits alone?
I guess you're just taking the piss.
Rabbits are vermin to many farmers. Perhaps you should take the trouble to find out.......................
I grew up on a farm and still live in the country.
Least the rabbits let us take pics in their shopping centres and railway stations
Always have lived in the country and have a pretty good idea of where it's safe to go and where it is not - I have even shot things and poached the odd bit of small game (but that was in my youth - these days the only things I shoot and want to shoot are with my camera) - on most private property I have asked for permission TBH, but there are large tracts of land owned for example by National Trust, Woodland Trust and others where I am not supposed to be - but my argument would always be that these organisations only exist because of the public purse so it might be private but it also belongs to all of us. Actually NT et al are pretty good at providing good access but it is not universal.
As for private landowners they have every right to prevent me from accessing their land - its just sometimes they are not that good at it. I also beleive these rights are thankfully being challenged and being erroded by the so called right to roam act. The ownership of land should not automatically mean that you can exclude the world from visiting it.
I live in a very rural area in Somerset - I frequently hear and see bods shooting (guns not Canons) - and they can be a bloody nuisance I have to say. But they almost certainly have every right to be there and to kill and maime too - so you just let them know you are there with a friendly wave and move on.
Quote: What do people who look like they are going to cause trouble look like? would they necessarily have dogs, cameras or hoodies?
Bin Ladens representative in Cambridge is unlikely to have a sign on his back saying "terrorist at work, sorry for the inconvenience-but i need to know where i can place a bomb to cause maximum damage"
I was referring to the more common, garden-variety trouble maker, not necessarily a terrorist. Making the assumption that security guards should be trained to spot these (even if they do make mistakes sometimes!).
Quote: Give me a decent market in a market town, selling locally grown produce and goods at reasonable prices any day. And I can walk around with a camera and look for people who are interesting enough to take photographs of, without being acosted by a security guard telling me I can't take pictures.
Totally with you there. I'm sick of these identikit soul-less centres, where you could be anywhere, you have no sense of the town you're in. When will town planners realise that we don't want 'everything under one roof'.
To be honest shopping is such a boring activity having everything under one roof and free parking makes it just about bearable.
Quote: having everything under one roof and free parking makes it just about bearable.
No it dosn't. If god had meant us to spend time at shopping centres he wouldn't have created the internet.
Quote: If god had meant us to spend time at shopping centres he wouldn't have created the internet.
Photographs of everyday places, such as shopping centres, are part of the photographic heritage of the future - when there's a slight chance they might look strange and interesting. Are they perhaps also a genre of street photography, which many people find interesting?
Despite these stories appearing every so often it seems that plenty of people still get to take photographs in these places, so perhaps it's not as much of a problem as it seems.
Whilst it is private property and they have every right to ban whatever they like, maybe there should be a principle that if you allow free and unchecked access to the public then normal civil liberties must apply.
Editing decisions should be discussed via report, not in open forum. Thank you.
Quote: Editing decisions should be discussed via report, not in open forum. Thank you.
? Is this in the right thread?
It is, yes. Sorry. A line which was removed earlier was reposted, and removed again, so that we can try and keep on topic. And with that in mind...
Quote: Whilst it is private property and they have every right to ban whatever they like, maybe there should be a principle that if you allow free and unchecked access to the public then normal civil liberties must apply.
Excellent point. It is fair to say that some of the normally quoted reasons for these no-photography rules include shoplifting, terrorism and minor industrial espionage/ copyright issues surrounding logos etc.
If someone wanted a building to come down, then they'd probably need a background in structural engineering or architecture in order to know what they were looking at. Any experienced architects would be able to look at a building and come up with some general dimensions, and probably be able to come up with some sort of sketch that would provide more usable information than any photograph.
Copyright: I think we all know what the Next sign looks like by now, it appears in every high street in the country, as do the window displays.
Anyone walking around a shopping centre daily (which is not uncommon for anyone living close to one) could provide all of the info required for any of these purposes, including shoplifting. Most of it would require a person to know the building intimately, and the movements of all of the staff. You're not going to get that from a photograph, so banning photography seems a bit futile, when the shops are hardly going to restrict visits to one a week
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar