Shooting on Trains and Other Security Concerns

[calgodot]

OK, first let me say that I am not making a political beef or trying to foment a political discussion.

The topic of shooting on subways has come up in this forum before.

Last night my partner (a music photographer) was doing promo shots for a local band. The shots were asked for at the last minute (yesterday evening) and had to be done by today. (Don't big talent agencies plan stuff?)

The band wanted to shoot on the LA subway, as it figures prominently into their first single. They all went out last night - the four band members and the photographer - got on the train in Hollywood and rode it down to Union Station, taking pictures all along the way, even talking to Metro security about the photo shoot.

At Union Station two police officers accosted them and informed them that "due to heightened security measures" people are no longer allowed to photographed areas that might be at risk of some terrorist attack. They, being more mild-mannered than myself, did not protest but merely explained themselves. Nonetheless they were not allowed to take further pictures at Union Station.

Given that we are now at "yellow alert" and that there is no Metro or CIty of LA regulation restricting photography in Union Station, this was likely an arbitrary move by a couple of bored LA County Sheriff's Dept morons. I'm still checking if there's a new federal reg regarding this, but I doubt the lack of a law or reg backing their claim would have dissuaded these two-bit tyrants in blue. (After all, our alert status was just lowered, to the place it's been since it was started, so there's really nothing "heightened" about our current "security," and there's certainly nothing "heightened" about only 2 cops guarding the entire train station. Private security, byt he way, did not bother her.)

We don't need to get into a discussion about whether what these two lackwits did good thing or a bad thing. Obviously I think it was a bad thing. (For the record, I think it would have been fine for them to inquire as to what was going on, as that is certainly their task. But cops inventing law on the spot is just a little too Gestapo for me.)

I just wanted to tell you all this tale because most of us like to do things "guerilla style." (By the way, I wouldn't use that G-word around edgy cops.) My partner is a pro, looks like a pro, carries pro gear (though they were shooting g-style, mostly sans flash [though she said she thinks it was the one use of a flash that got their atention], using fast B&W film), is a blonde and blue-eyed woman, and the band is mostly a bunch of typical LA white boys (though I haven't yet met the new drummer), so not exactly a band of would-be terrorists.

I wonder: Would a shaggy-haired guy with a Super8 camera attract more or less attention? Would he have to explain that the Beaulieu 4008 is not a weird ray gun, no matter what it looks like? Maybe I should just cut my hair, pit a flag pin on my lapel, and carry my Republican Party membership card (expired) with me whenever shooting.

[S8 Booster]

A sort of sad story because the "freedom" is gone "everywhere". In my hometown - a rather sleepy 55 000 citicens one there is a rather big harbour area mixing everything from leisure to buzz. This area has always been open to everybody for fishing, leisure or whatever. This is common for most harbour areas in Norway.

Now, due to new international "anti terrorist" regulations this huge area now has to be fenced off and guarded - just silly, controversal and impopular.

I wonder where this is going to end?

Anyway, with a 4008 you need to pull the "trigger" only once to convince most "people" it is not a terrorist gun or an information sampler for terror planning. Who on earth would use a big NOISY S8 cam for that?

Some restrictions may be nessecary but isn´t it going over the top?

[As far as I know/remember - I did not live then - during the Nazi occupation in Norway 1940-45 people were not allowed to gather on the streets (only two at the time) and sports arrangements+++ were forbidden - organazing may be dangerous. Wonder where the terror stuff is going to take us?]

R

[mg]

Anyway, with a 4008 you need to pull the "trigger" only once to convince most "people" it is not a terrorist gun or an information sampler for terror planning. Who on earth would use a big NOISY S8 cam for that?

Here in the USA, if you were to pull a "trigger" you'd most likely wind up in a pool of your own blood. Just ask Amadou Diallo. Once would be one time too many in this age of suspicion and paranoia.

mg

[kentbulza]

and i just move somewhere else. A few times (say for a time-elapsed) I've put up a stink about how it'll ruin the shot, and I've always been able to continue. Just be nice...and keep shooting!

I believe you're correct -- I think there are few actual regulations about this. In the U.S., it would never stand up to a supreme court challenge under freedom of the press.

Remind them you're shooting on Super 8 film and not video -- no terrorist ever would have such good taste!

[S8 Booster]

Anyway, with a 4008 you need to pull the "trigger" only once to convince most "people" it is not a terrorist gun or an information sampler for terror planning. Who on earth would use a big NOISY S8 cam for that?

Here in the USA, if you were to pull a "trigger" you'd most likely wind up in a pool of your own blood. Just ask Amadou Diallo. Once would be one time too many in this age of suspicion and paranoia.

mg

I did not mean to point it at anyone while "triggering" but that may not make no difference these days?

R

[jean]

The frustrating thing is that you ARE subject to these mini-dictators, and the rules both of law and common sense are suspended.

So what's the options, either bring it to court and sacrifice a whole lot of your lifetime to fight, or pack up and leave the set..

[camera_wizard]

I'm going to Washington next week, and planning to document the trip in super-8. That includes Union Station. Great. Just great. :?

[Herb Montes]

I live near the oil refineries here on the Texas Gulf Coast and just last week the F.B.I. sent out a warning that they are a possible terrorist target. If I was to setup my tripod and camera outside one of those plants and start filming it would look suspicious. Digital cameras are so small and concealable now that my Bolex would stick out like a sore thumb though. I've seen those cameras that look like a pocket pen so if a terrorist was casing a possible target he wouldn't be as obvious as someone with a movie camera.

[greenplastic79]

Generally speaking, trains like Conrail/Amtrack have low/no security. They don't make enough money to have security on board.. You can basically do whatever you want on a train. You can bring your own liquor. You don't even have to stay in your seat. Some trains have smoking cars and window cars so you can watch the countryside scroll by. When I went to DC people would smoke pot and drink cheap vodka in the smoking car.

I can understand that they don't want you photographing potential terrorist targets, but there are a lot of other things you can film. Neil Young got busted at some bridge with his super 8, but he was being a dumbass about it. They parked a truck on the bridge and were less than inconsipuous. If Neil didn't dress like a bum, and wasn't trying to film his small entourage, I'm sure he wouldn't even had any hassle.

[wahiba]

The biggest worry is the quality of peson recruited for security.

With modern, and less modern photographic gear any self respecting person up to no good is going to take the pictures they want. However this is to much for our security person, so anyone obviously taking pictures is suspect.

Train spotters (railfans) have recently suffered this on the railways. Fortunately the market/publicity departments of the companies concerned realise that the ame people are usually good customers so general edicts have been forthcoming to use common sense. Commercial film makers should naturally seek permission, but as any publicity is good publicity probably get the red carpet treatment.

Plane spotters have been treated rather differently. Realising that they are inteested participant they have been asked to report anything suspicious.

However, a word of warning if visiting France. People photographing trains have been approached by the Gendarmerie. However, knowing France this is probably an order from on high that will be rescinded as soon as the first British train spotters are locked up.

[tim]

I recently got approached by security on Cambridge, UK, station while filming. I guess the 'scope gear is a bit prominent. However, I was travelling by train, and had notified the railway company that filming was the purpose of the trip. There appeared to be no other railway photographers on that station.

We moved to Ipswich a couple of hours later, and found it crawling with railway enthusiasts. No one there took any notice of us.

A consistent policy coupled with sensible security personnel would help no end ... .

[calgodot]

Generally speaking, trains like Conrail/Amtrack have low/no security.

Not any more. The US rail system is now "code yellow-plus" - which I suppose means "not quite orange but scarier than yellow." This is the wording from the American Public Transportation Association, which is not an official government body but yet another one of those private groups.

This translates into heightened security all around on trains, buses, and in their terminals. According to the AP, "Federal officials are encouraging local transit authorities to conduct random passenger inspections and security sweeps of stations and to increase public announcements encouraging people to report unattended baggage or suspicious behavior."

You can basically do whatever you want on a train. You can bring your own liquor. You don't even have to stay in your seat. Some trains have smoking cars and window cars so you can watch the countryside scroll by. When I went to DC people would smoke pot and drink cheap vodka in the smoking car.

The feds are said to have actually asked Amtrak to restrict passenger movement between cars. They were told that would cut off access to services included in the price of the ticket, so the idea was put on hold. There will be increased security personnel on trains, as well as undercover federal law enforcement.

I can understand that they don't want you photographing potential terrorist targets

I can't. No more photographs of the Brooklyn Bridge? The Golden Gate? Photography of secured facilities such as nuke plants, chemical dumps, etc is and has been restricted for years. The US government is simply acting in a hysterical manner. (The FBI recently issued a warning to local law enforcement to be on the lookout for people carrying almanacs. Those damn trivia fiends are a threat, I tell you.)

Neil Young got busted at some bridge with his super 8, but he was being a dumbass about it. They parked a truck on the bridge and were less than inconsipuous. If Neil didn't dress like a bum, and wasn't trying to film his small entourage, I'm sure he wouldn't even had any hassle.

Yeah, but you gotta admit: it's a damn shame that the land of the free is turning into a place where you have to think about how you are dressed before you go out for a walk.

I wouldn't try to film in a train station (sans official permission & a bunch of insurance) right now for anything. When I consider the mentality of the security people I encountered on my various train trips across the US (I don't like to fly, even back when you didn't get strip-searched and interogated like a cirminal for goign to see your parents), I shudder:

Once I got asked by a security guard in a train station (I think it was St Louis or KC) to STOP READING A BOOK ("Hayduke Lives" by Edward Abbey) because the cover had a picture of a fist holding dynamite. (The book is a sequel to "The Monkey Wrench Gang," which is about a bunch of "eco-terrorists" fighting corporate domination of the wilderness.) I told the security guard he could call the police if he wanted to, but as I was sitting quietly in a corner and the closest passenger was about 50 feet away and fast asleep, there was no way I was causing a disruption. He did not want any trouble, just likely wanted to exercise a little authority over the skinny college boy in the corner, and I kept reading my book.

The year was 1989. I'd probably be arrested now.

[T-Scan]

i whipped out my camera (VNF loaded) in a retail store last night. took a few shots and some kid ran up.. "sir i'm sorry but we don't allow video cameras" so i said, "i was sent here by corporate to document the integrity of the store" he almost pissed his pants untill my friend started cracking up.

[FilmsUP]

Ok , this first idea would not work with your tight deadline and last minute shoot. Get a Film permit! Find someone in film school and make it a student shoot, it will cost less.

Or.....go low teck, Less is More as to take less equipment and look like a tourist!

Try, shooting the background and comp. in the subject
you will shoot in the studio.

And, Welcome to :evil: The New World Order!

Don't use any camera light meter or other gear that looks like a gun.

[camera8mm]

dont use a light meter? dont even bother? go low tech? sure just bow down to the nuts who want to exert this ridiculous power to control the masses who arent going anywhere anyway. yeah right.

film all you want.