Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


More restrictions in Trafalgar Square.


loweskid 14 2.0k 1 United Kingdom
2 Feb 2012 3:52PM
Apologies if this has been posted before but nothing came up in a search.

There is yet more proposed legislation to ban photography in Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square Garden unless you get written permission... "for the purpose of or in connection with a business, trade, profession or employment or any activity carried on by a person or body of persons, whether corporate or unincorporate".

Effectively this means it will be illegal to take photograph of Nelsonís Column without written permission if you intend to submit them to a stock library.

More details here

Deadline for objections is Feb 29.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Ade_Osman Plus
12 4.5k 36 England
2 Feb 2012 4:05PM
Ridiculous and my objections have been sent. What a complete waste of taxpayers money. I don't suppose they intend to stop the BBC or the plethora of other news media gathering companies from setting up their cameras nearby.....What a complete FARCE!

Ade
Carabosse Plus
12 39.8k 269 England
2 Feb 2012 4:13PM

Quote:Effectively this means it will be illegal to take photograph of Nelsonís Column without written permission if you intend to submit them to a stock library


How will anyone know your intention? Wink
KevSB 11 1.5k 5 United Kingdom
2 Feb 2012 4:19PM

Quote:Effectively this means it will be illegal to take photograph of Nelsonís Column without written permission if you intend to submit them to a stock library

How will anyone know your intention? Wink



I should Imagine Libarys will be forced to ask for writen permission before excepting the images much like National trust.

We Have heated discussion about supplying images for free ect while the athoritys seem to be intent on denying everyone the right to even take the pictures, Ive come across this before and seems to be becoming more frequent, such a shame.
monstersnowman 10 1.7k 1 England
2 Feb 2012 4:19PM
I wonder what the motivation behind this is. I cant see any anti-terrorism motive as non-commercial activity is not covered and a terrorist is hardly likely to carry out reconnaisence under the guise of being a commercial enterprise taking images. I wonder, if they do not wish people to benefit commercially from images of the area, what loss people this could possibly create for them. So I really see it as a totally unecessary and arbitrary piece of legislation and a complete waste of time and money. Maybe it is just a way for some suited waste of space to justify their existence somewhere by doing something. Hmmmmm ...
KevSB 11 1.5k 5 United Kingdom
2 Feb 2012 4:29PM
It seem that this is not new and already in force so unsure why it looks like a new law being introduced unless its being reworded

In general under the law of the United Kingdom one cannot prevent photography of private property from a public place, and in general the right to take photographs on private land upon which permission has been obtained is similarly unrestricted. However a landowner is permitted to impose any conditions they wish upon entry to a property, such as forbidding or restricting photography. Two public locations in the UK, Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square have a specific provision against photography for commercial purposes without the written permission of the Mayor,[2] and permission is needed to photograph or film for commercial purposes in the Royal Parks.[3]
Carabosse Plus
12 39.8k 269 England
2 Feb 2012 4:43PM
What is so special about Trafalgar Square anyway? Parliament Square I can understand, but Trafalgar Square is hardly somewhere where VIPs flock to!
rabdhu 3 18 United Kingdom
2 Feb 2012 4:57PM
I recently shot Nelson and I and 160000 Japanese tourists were flashing away, people posing on the Lions and fountains as usual, they'll never stop that or they'll need a black Maria with thirty thousand seats!
But yes, when you see the blurred holiday digi-images most folk take you couldn't identify anything from them. So what's the problem? Have the authorities never read Day of the Jackal? A professional would get shots of CCTV locations and such like if they need them with ease, no matter what the Law is, so why crimp the normal tourist style?
Agreed then, there seems no reason for all this especially Trafalgar, except the usual corporation 'let's jerk them around because we can' attitude
Carabosse Plus
12 39.8k 269 England
2 Feb 2012 5:02PM
I think the perceived problem is tripods.

But they are going about it in cackhanded way by trying to ban professional photography - on the basis that if you use a tripod you must be a professional.
Geoffphoto 9 13.5k United Kingdom
2 Feb 2012 5:13PM

Quote:on the basis that if you use a tripod you must be a professional.



Not if you use a Leica !!!!!!!Smile
Carabosse Plus
12 39.8k 269 England
2 Feb 2012 5:44PM
So if you use a Leica on a tripod you are not a professional? Interesting! Wink
MikeRC Plus
10 3.6k United Kingdom
2 Feb 2012 7:10PM

Quote:on the basis that if you use a tripod you must be a professional.


I got thrown out of the Royal Armouries in Leeds, by a jobsworth for that very reason.....

....obviously he'd never seen my stuff.
cameracat 11 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
2 Feb 2012 7:32PM

Quote:have a specific provision against photography for commercial purposes without the written permission of the Mayor


Not sure what all the fuss is about, Its quite simple, Anyone including Japanese tourists can take snaps of Nelson and the Square, Take them home, Put them on thier computer, Print a few for the family album, Maybe.....Smile

BUT, If you should then sell this snap, Or take the snap with the intention of selling it for commercial gain, Money to most.....Grin Then and only then are you breaking the rules........Sad

So whats the problem.....???

I have done the London landmark thing years ago with film, Have absolutely no intention of doing it again, Or visiting London if I can avoid doing so ( Lived and worked there for far to many precious years, No way I'm going back )......Grin
lemmy 8 2.3k United Kingdom
16 Feb 2012 8:58PM
I think there is a confusion here about the meaning of commercial. Editorial use of pictures is not considered commercial use.

If you wish to shoot pictures for advertising purposes, say, you will need permission. Nothing has changed in this respect for may years.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.