Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Health and Safety at Weddings !

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

keithh
keithh  1022818 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
7 Aug 2013 - 4:43 PM


Quote: A. Simple to protect the photographer and the client, there are rules and regulation when you are invited onto private land and regarding the photographing and publishing of photos of children or places which for both the sake of the clients and photographer should be know.

They are not rules of law, they are nothing more than 'rules' laid down by the venue....what rules and regulations?


Quote: A. Training not test, to prevent brides being washed away down rivers. Common Sense.

If you stand a Bride in a flippin river then no amount of training will prevent drowning.


Quote: A.The ability of anyone at an event or gathering to administer basic first aid can only be a positive. Again training not a test.

The venue should provide first response staff - you are the photographer, not the wedding planner.


Quote: A. Would have thought that was obvious. Dealing with children.

You don't need a CRB check to deal with children and who will provide this check and how often will you be checked? All it means is that at the point of vetting you had not been criminally convicted or appear on any relevant registers. That check might have taken place ten months prior to the wedding.


Quote: And would you complain if your photographer was caught out and had to cease trading by the Inland Revenue - ermm yes you would.

Yes, but you still don't ask your plumber to provide his last tax bill and what assurance would it give if he did! Being 'registered' does not make you any more cosher or likely to turn up than the next bloke.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
7 Aug 2013 - 4:43 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

llareggub
llareggub  3664 forum posts United Kingdom
7 Aug 2013 - 5:38 PM


Quote: The same sort of test most other industries who deal with the public take Keith, its a sensible question nothing to do with cliques - and not necessarily to do with technique or style

A test / Course could for instance include:

Checking the photographer is fully insured
The basics of copyright and legalities of publishing photos with people, private land, children etc
A basic level of Health and Safety Awareness
Basic First Aid ( fainting and heat exhaustion are two common occurences during summer weddings )
A CRB check and certificate
Checking the photographer is running a registered business legally

I don't think a test of equipment or technique could be fairly constructed as this is much more individual



What do others think ?

Most other industries do not require this at all!!!!!!!

1: Checking the photographer is fully insured: If you are photographing weddings the host venue has a legal responsibility to ensure that anyone working in that venue is appropriately insured.
2: The basics of copyright and legalities of publishing photos with people, private land, children etc: No need what so ever to protect a client!
3: A basic level of Health and Safety Awareness: There is no such thing as a 'basic' health and safety course, I sued to teach them and am fully aware that they are as useful as a chocolate fire guard.
4: Basic First Aid ( fainting and heat exhaustion are two common occurences during summer weddings ): I don't photograph people but if I did them succumbing to heat, or my experience at weddings, booze aint my responsibility.
5: A CRB check and certificate: To achieve what?
6: Checking the photographer is running a registered business legally: No other industry has to prove that it is run 'legally' in order to gain a professional certificate.

We are talking about folk taking pictures here, the inherent risks are negligible, the biggest problem is people taking crap pictures and upsetting their clients... Nothing you have posted above will fix that!

pulsar69
pulsar69  101611 forum posts United Kingdom6 Constructive Critique Points
7 Aug 2013 - 7:28 PM

So what we are saying then is we should have no ethics, not take any responsibility for anything going on around us, and just fly by the seat of our pants till something goes wrong.

I would love to take that attitude but unfortunately i would soon get a bad rep and be out of business, my business relies heavily on recommends and people remember all those little things you do during a day especially if it helps them or someone else, they are also eternally grateful for all the help and advice we give in other areas from explaining how things work and procedures to fixing things if they go wrong, we are not just 'taking pictures', its being part of someones special day and wanting it to go as smoothly as possible.

I have NEVER been asked by a venue for insurance details they do not bother checking , more fool them if something goes wrong. I was simply suggesting that its an idea that the industry be more regulated and i guess from the opinions of others i am on my own in those thoughts ! Hey ho it was an interesting conversation which broke up the photo editing for a few minutes Tongue

keithh
keithh  1022818 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
7 Aug 2013 - 7:39 PM

I'm not saying that it shouldn't be regulated but your suggestions are either unworkable or unnecessary. Neither has anyone said that you shouldn't have ethics - but do you need a certificate to say you have them?

So here's a suggestion - every photographer should have a degree in photography or are you happy for the industry to rely on self taught practitioners?

llareggub
llareggub  3664 forum posts United Kingdom
7 Aug 2013 - 7:50 PM

Regulatory bodies have nothing whatsoever to do with 'ethics', regulating photography is utterly pointless and will do nothing to curb the poor practices seen on a regular basis.

One could argue that you could set up trade bodies however time and time again it is proven that it is very easy to set up a 'trade' body and hand out a beguiling array of logos and letters and still do nothing to protect the consumer in fact will only serve to confuse the consumer who only use the services of a photographer on a relatively rare basis.

Provide a compelling structure for such a 'regulatory' body then a conversation can be held, however nothing you have listed will do anything to stop people who pay money to a photographer receiving crappy photographs!

answersonapostcard
answersonapostcard Site Moderator 1012554 forum postsanswersonapostcard vcard United Kingdom15 Constructive Critique Points
7 Aug 2013 - 8:20 PM

Be grateful photography isnt regulated, once it starts there will be no end to all the compliance and being members of this that and the other. Just when you've met all the H&S, environmental and employment policies, compliance and quality standards of each and every body someone wants you to be a member of before you can even apply or tender for a job, there will be another. Regulations take up a huge proportion of a business time, often unnecessarily so, be grateful you are picked on your work alone and not the huge tick box PQQ burden that dominates alot of businesses these days.

Last Modified By answersonapostcard at 7 Aug 2013 - 8:25 PM
thewilliam
7 Aug 2013 - 8:31 PM

Some wedding venues and most fashion magazines do demand that photographers have Public Liability Insurance and expect to see the certificate. Normal cover is 5 million. Neither wants to pay out in the event of an accident and I have been asked by both. Hairdressers and make-up artists are also expected to have PL insurance.

Many professional bodies such as Master Photographers Association also demand Professional Indemnity cover as a condition of membership.

Every worker has a duty of care under the Health & Safety at Work Act to anybody who may be adversely affected by their actions. A Risk Assessment is just a formal method of risk identification and mitigation. We have a RA and plenty of bodies have asked to see it.

llareggub
llareggub  3664 forum posts United Kingdom
7 Aug 2013 - 9:07 PM

What the good chap above says, I used to work in commercial property management and A grade office stock is perpetually marketed which used to lead to a string of photographers coming into properties in my portfolio on a semi regular basis to take pictures.

Not one of them was permitted to work on any site without a risk assessment!

Last Modified By llareggub at 7 Aug 2013 - 9:08 PM
keithh
keithh  1022818 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
7 Aug 2013 - 9:25 PM

The only thing to do would be ditch the wedding suit and get a St Johns uniform, wrap the entire wedding ensemble in bubble wrap and shoot the whole shebang from an MRAP Cougar.

llareggub
llareggub  3664 forum posts United Kingdom
7 Aug 2013 - 10:30 PM


Quote: The only thing to do would be ditch the wedding suit and get a St Johns uniform, wrap the entire wedding ensemble in bubble wrap and shoot the whole shebang from an MRAP Cougar.

That's the typical misunderstanding of operating in a safe manner that leads to eejits to claim it is 'elf and safety gone mad'... It's about having a sensible and pragmatic attitude to the risks faced whilst at work... The OP encountered a situation where he made a sensible decision based on the situation that he encountered, he did the right thing by both recognising that potential problems and changing the way he worked!

Whilst I agree that many 'elf and safety' professionals are far from professional and ridiculous rules are made by ridiculous people, true professionals in the field are both pragmatic and sensible (including those that work at the HSE) and in the main make the workplace a better place for everyone.

keithh
keithh  1022818 forum posts Wallis and Futuna29 Constructive Critique Points
8 Aug 2013 - 6:29 AM

Only someone in H & S would take my statement with any amount of seriousness.

Evertonian
8 Aug 2013 - 9:16 AM


Quote: At a recent wedding i had to make the decision that a group shot the b&g requested had too many people for the stairs it was requested on and looked like turning into an accident and did not take the shot but rearranged it elsewhere.

This has got me to wondering we are insured liability indemnity etc however , if a photographer organizes a shot and someone should be injured whilst taking the photo who is then responsible , the photographer , the venue , the person who is injured ?

If a B&G demanded a shot you thought was unsafe and you took it and something happened what then ? has anyone ever fallen fowl of the law taking photos at weddings ? ( other than idiots being sued for garbage photos that is )

I suppose as a business, it is incumbent upon you to provide a set of written risk assessments together with a Method Statement before starting the job in hand. The HSE of course does not have sufficient staff to ensure that all businesses do this so they concentrate on large businesses and the smaller to medium businesses to whom they contract work.

What you did of course was the next best thing. You completed a mental risk assessment that the stairs would most probably not support the weight and so moved elsewhere. For written RAs one would need to visit the place concerned and then write down your thoughts like the one you used. It is also perfectly normal to request such information from the owner or manager of the place ie what weight will these stairs take?

mikehit
mikehit  46191 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
8 Aug 2013 - 9:51 AM


Quote: it is incumbent upon you to provide a set of written risk assessments together with a Method Statement before starting the job in hand.

For a photography business....yeah, right.


Quote: It is also perfectly normal to request such information from the owner or manager of the place ie what weight will these stairs take?

OK - has any photographer actually asked this as a 'perfectly normal' pre-shoot routine?

llareggub
llareggub  3664 forum posts United Kingdom
8 Aug 2013 - 10:08 AM

I recently did a little freelance work for a friend that shoots commercial video and put together a simple set of risk assessments and method statements, basic tick box stuff with a box for other stuff as he was increasingly getting asked to provide this documentation when working on site.

It does not need to be rocket science and most of the time it is a paper filling exercise, but the work place has, rightly or wrongly, become a risk averse environment and you either provide requested documentation or get refused access to site, as simple as that.

mikehit
mikehit  46191 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
8 Aug 2013 - 10:20 AM


Quote: he was increasingly getting asked to provide this documentation when working on site

That's fine. It's the idea that seems to be coming up that a photographer should do this as part of their shoot preparation.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.