Tue, November 30th, 2004 by Frank Lynch
It sounds now like it was only "mostly dead," not "totally dead," as some skeptical bloggers feared. Gothamist has an update; the official 45 day comment period began last Wednesday.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, November 30th, 2004 at 9:09 am
and is filed under Photography News.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
November 30th, 2004 at 10:15 am
I understand sensitivity to perceived threats but I just don't see that banning 'amateur' photography in any public space is acheiving, anyone who really wants to photograph these areas will do so without being obvious about it, the only people who suffer are enthusiasts like us.
November 30th, 2004 at 10:16 am
NYCTA moves forward with photo ban
Well, it looks like the MTA has trotted out the proposed ban out again (here's a recap) - just in time for the holidays. The proposed rule amendment was killed six months ago in a blaze of negative press, but...
November 30th, 2004 at 11:18 am
Well since there are already 9 billion NY subway photographs, it isn't all that necessary to take more anyhow.
November 30th, 2004 at 11:32 am
Well since there are already 20 billion flower photographs, it isn't all that necessary to take more anyhow.
November 30th, 2004 at 11:32 am
While Ross' point is (humorously) dead-on, I don't see how this ban can survive Constitutional muster. The subways are not protected installations, like a naval base, where the Government has a police power justification for the ban.
November 30th, 2004 at 11:33 am
I took some on a recent trip to NY, that makes it 9 billion and 10
November 30th, 2004 at 11:40 am
Err, I sense some angst Ross. It's a delicate balance between maintaining 'homeland security' and exercising our civil liberties. While I'm all for the former, what I fear most is that it's 'small' bans like this that become outright photography bans later. We really don't need any reason for the NYPD to become more gestapo than they've already become.
It really sucks when you realize just how deep the effects of 9/11 trickle down into our everyday lives.
An interesting article (with feedback)
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/3802.htm
November 30th, 2004 at 12:40 pm
We need to protect our rights. Senseless legislation such as this will make the US a police state rather quickly.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." B. Franklin.
November 30th, 2004 at 2:26 pm
I think the most obvious point is that if someone wants to take photographs down there they will, ban or not, there are plenty of hidden cameras and camcorders that would never be spotted. This ban wouldn't deter any terrorist from their reconnaisance, the only people it will really effect are people like us.
November 30th, 2004 at 2:27 pm
"Well since there are already 20 billion flower photographs, it isn't all that necessary to take more anyhow."
This is so very very true.
November 30th, 2004 at 2:34 pm
I'm sure the "terrorists" or whoever could easily get ahold of any subway blueprints or the like. I don't really see why they would send someone down there to snap pictures. But maybe I'm wrong.
And I really don't see why they've chosen to try and ban photography in subways. Shouldn't they also ban photography in every building, monument, airport, train station, everywhere where there are people anywhere near...
November 30th, 2004 at 2:47 pm
I think they are worried about flashes scaring the CHUDS, really.
November 30th, 2004 at 2:58 pm
if there are no bee-in-flower shots to be had in the subway, there is no need to have a camera down there. seriously.
November 30th, 2004 at 3:16 pm
November 30th, 2004 at 6:02 pm
is CHUD that terrible 80s horror film? I remember someone eating someones last coin that they were about to put in the phone booth to warn everyone
November 30th, 2004 at 6:06 pm
There are already 2 photos of Ross on his site, so it isn't all that necessary to take more anyhow.
Someone should flood a subway car, preferrably one full of cheerful after work commuters, with lime jello. *Then* you New Yorkers would really have something to take photos of, and the New York authorities would see that you're just fun-lovin' kids.
November 30th, 2004 at 6:37 pm
LOL at the Lime jello thingo...
seriously though. This is a worry, so much so that I put my 2 bobs worth in (miles ~ I borrowed from you in a section of this)
Using the MTA feedback form I sent this:
Subject: Proposed changes to Rules of Conduct - an 'outsider's view.
I do not live in New York, I am actually an Australian citizen. I am asking you to please consider my concerns just as seriously as if I were an American citizen living in New York however.
I am a dedicated amateur photographer and am wondering exactly why you would want to curtail the rights of hobbyists to photograph innocuous subject matter whit no real rationale that I can see besides paranoia, and misplaced reactionary restrictions based on paranoia at that. I understand sensitivity to perceived threats but I just don't see what banning 'amateur' photography in any public space is achieving, anyone who really wants to photograph these areas will do so without being obvious about it, the only people who suffer are enthusiasts.
How many photographs, plans and the like of the New York's Transportation system already exist in the public domain? Shutting the gate after the horse has bolted helps no one.
I have already read many disturbing reports about rude and aggressive behavior by New York Police and Transit Authority against individuals in regards to this matter. Words like 'Gestapo like behavior' have been used, more than once.This is surely a concern to the Metropolitan Transit Authority, or if not should be.
How do you think all this would affect my and many other potential tourists travel plans in the United States of America? My family and I would certainly have second thoughts about visiting New York, and third thoughts about using the metropolitan transport system there.I would also be expressing my concerns to all I know and those I don't through whatever mode of communication available if your proposed changes were to go through.
Please consider the real harm being done with these proposed changes. Creeping infringement of civil liberties is a grave danger in these troubled times. Public perceptions of freedom, civil liberties and the treatment of ordinary citizens may have some effect on the tourist dollar also. Perhaps this may be of some concern to the people of New York as well, especially those who profit from tourism.
You may think my concerns are trivial or unfounded, but I put this question to you ~
If I, in Australia have heard about this matter and have been concerned by it, how many others have?
After about 3 more pages of clicks, my email was finally sent...
The reference number for your e-mail is '041130-000247'.
Thank you for your inquiry. You will receive a response as soon as possible; however, some responses can take up to 15 business days.
Hopefully the transit authorities will know where Australia is....
:-)>
November 30th, 2004 at 7:18 pm
Photos of Ross are not nearly as over done, and rarely done as poorly, as NYC street/subway photography.
November 30th, 2004 at 7:42 pm
"mostly dead"
awesome!!
December 1st, 2004 at 1:04 am
Nice letter, Cameron.
December 1st, 2004 at 9:26 am
Well it's your occasion to travel around the world and discover other subways where it is permitted to photograph... We could do somekind of "free subways of the world" reportage and publicize it in NY. Everybody who has a free subway near by do something!
December 1st, 2004 at 4:30 pm
Thanks lane, clem - Sounds like a good idea to me! I also urge all photoblogging citizens from other cities, states and countries to do as I did and voice your concerns. As members of the world wide photoblogging community we can still do something, even if we don't live in New York...you see, it may be our subways or (insert name of public space) next!
December 6th, 2004 at 10:14 am
Idiocy in the name of "security" has always been the modus operandi of totalitarianism.
Ross may feel like HE has no need or desire to shoot on the subway or the bus or even AROUND subways and busses but this hardly seems a good reason to idly harp at the world while the freedom of others is restricted. Check out PhotoPermit.org, there has been a steady stream of negative incidents in recent months and not one of them has made the citizenry safer -- but a lot of them have affected people just like Ross.
December 6th, 2004 at 12:17 pm
Ross picks his homeland security battles. Ross thinks that shitty subway photography is very, very trivial relative to other 'freedoms' that are being affected.
Ross thinks that if you are going to be proactive about something, make it worthwhile.
December 6th, 2004 at 6:20 pm
Freedom to pursue ones creative pursuits whilst posing no real threat to others is worthwhile. Freedom to voice opinions is worthwhile. Freedom to push back a tide of increasing infringements on individual liberties is worthwhile.
This is a collaborative blog based around photoblogs and photographers, so if any individual doesn't feel that fighting for photographers rights in a proactive way is worthwhile then it really makes me wonder what they are doing here.
Ross you may think that subway photos are "shitty" ~ thanks for sharing that considered opinion btw, but a lot of people might actually like them and like taking them.
What are you going to do when YOUR own personal rights are infringed when you want to take a photograph of *insert whatever rows your boat here* because "homeland security" (a bit of newspeak if ever I heard it) has gone just that little bit too far?
December 6th, 2004 at 7:10 pm
Ross may be willing to give up some basic rights to allow the government to enforce a pointless law that does nothing to secure the 'Homeland', but there seem to be many others that aren't. I guess waiting until they make some other pointless laws that actually effect the things that you want to do is a great head in the sand strategy.
Then again you just seem to be 'trolling'.
"The more laws, the less justice" - cicero
December 6th, 2004 at 10:32 pm
Good point miles. I hope my previous post didn't come across as trolling ~ slightly sarcastic and a bit narky perhaps...I'm a bugger like that sometimes. Of course Ross has every right to voice his opinions as anyone else here, I think I was just posing the question: "As photographers, why are we here, and what do we consider worth standing up for?"
December 6th, 2004 at 11:38 pm
I don't think you were trolling, I was reacting in the same way. These kind of pointless restrictions should matter to everyone, whether they're photographers or not, even whether they happen to like subway photography or not, it all adds up.
December 7th, 2004 at 1:32 am
I already have to fight for the ability to photograph in all kinds of settings. Almost anytime I want to plop a strobe pack on the street in LA I need to get a license.
Regardless..
I do think it is ridiculous for anyone to think that somehow restricting photographs in subways is going to someone stop terrorism in any way what so ever. All I know is that those restrictions would not stop ME from taking photographs in the subway, if that photo cliche bug happened to be up my ass.
Also, as I suggested before, there are much much more dire issues regarding the degradation of our freedoms that our abillity to photograph legally on underground trains.
December 7th, 2004 at 6:14 pm
While not exactly dealing with the NYC Subway deal, here is a series that starts tonight on the subject of the 1st Ammendment. Might be of interest to some folks here.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/12/07/apontv.first.amendment.ap/index.html
December 8th, 2004 at 9:04 am
ian thinks ross should stop referring to himself in the third person.
ian also thinks that restrictions on subway photos should be self-imposed rather than legislated.
December 8th, 2004 at 11:49 am
Matt thinks ian and Ross are actually the same person, or maybe a computer program, and will henceforth be referred to as ianross.
Matt is however not here to just disrupt everything with silliness, and is very agitated about bans on anything that doesn't hurt anyone else.
December 8th, 2004 at 1:14 pm
i hear ya, matt. and i agree. there are many examples of our diminishing rights here in the u.s. that get my blood pressure up. just the thought of where we will be four years from now fills me with dread.
i will not, however, allow that to get in the way of my disruptions - which, btw, are not silly, but rather quite calculated.
and i am fine with ianross. so long as it's not rossian. i would hate for people to think that i am some kind of communist.
December 8th, 2004 at 3:20 pm
lol
December 9th, 2004 at 1:31 pm
no doubt people are doing this already, but now is an opportunity to send thoughtful letters to New York City newspapers on this topic.
NYT how-to:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html
Daily News how-to:
http://www.nydailynews.com/services/contact_us/index.html
Post how-to:
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/letters/letters_editor.htm
December 11th, 2004 at 12:31 am
Pixpop agrees with ian re ross and the third person. Also, isn't it about time we had a fourth person? I'm tired of this artificial restriction to only three. If we have freedom of speech, then we have freedom to speak in the fourth person.
Justin, you're some kind of a language maven, no? Make it happen, wont you?
January 18th, 2005 at 3:30 pm
National Photography in the Age of Homeland Security Day
Tues., February 1, 2005
Calling on all photographers to document beauty and drama unique to the imagery
of skyscrapers, trains, bridges, tunnels, highways, subways, buses and dams.
Spread the word!
National Photography in the Age of Homeland Security Day
Tues., February 1, 2005
Calling on all photographers to document beauty and drama unique to the imagery
of skyscrapers, trains, bridges, tunnels, highways, subways, buses and dams.
Spread the word! http://anyonewithacamera.blogspot.com/