Has this happened to you?

[silverhalide]

While shooting with film cameras, I often encounter curious people. Some cameras cause more commotion than others. For instance a Kodak K100 will go more or less unnoticed, while a Bolex RX5 will attract eyeballs like a bright light bulb attracts bugs on a summer night. Generally speaking, the more sparkly the camera, the more conversations I am drawn into.

Sometimes, shooting causes an adverse reaction. Transit properties are particularly nervous about cameras. The CTA in Chicago, for instance, has trained employees to pounce on people with cameras. This really messed up my plans in December 2010, when I wanted to shoot a few rolls of 16mm Kodachrome in and around their trains. I encountered friction in St Louis as well, near a transit station. I find it amusing that people think a terrorist would do surveillance with a bulky film camera.

Last week, I had another problem. This time, it was a driver for the Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District (IL). As you can see, he stops his bus and trots over to yell at me. Meanwhile, his bus is blocking a one-lane segment of the street, his door is wide open, and his engine is running.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aktPi9mIzlc

So what sort of situations have others faced?

[doug]

In the case of your Revere shooting though, it isn't very bulky and he probably thought it was a camcorder. But i doubt if a terrorist would use something even this big.
I haven't had any problems with my Bolex usually fitted with quite a long zoom. Although sometimes the smallish rucksack attracts attention, but once it's open and security guys see what i'm trying to do they and other folk simply smile which can be a bit offputting at times Then someone invariably starts a nostalgic conversation just when you're ready to shoot.

[Angus]

I am grateful that the London Underground actually encourages people to shoot film, video and stills there. As long as one doesn't get in the way of passengers or use a tripod - and even a tripod can be arranged with a permit. Also grateful that in the UK, anywhere designated as "public" is open game for photography.

In these days when a video surveillance device can be disguised in a working ballpoint pen, being suspicious of someone with a big camera or even an modern camcorder is rather silly.

What I do find is that members of the public are rather wary, and these days people don't generally want their picture taken. It's a far cry even from the 1980s when people were happy to be photographed on the street. Street photography is a dying art because ordinary people do not want to be photographed.

A few over-zealous police officers have been known to attempt to stop people photographing them and other emergency workers about their work, even a few stories of amateur photographers being asked to remove film or delete digital images. This is actually not a power the British police have, nor can one be arrested for any kind of photography in a public place here. Amateur Photographer magazine even published a small leaflet that rolls up nicely, informing any over-zealous police officer or security guard that an individual has the right in law to photograph, video or film anything their camera can see from a public place.

Publishing it might be another matter....

[pip]

My experiences are not the same. I was filming in the entrance to an underground station and was asked by a "security" person to stop filming. I was bugged by a helicopter once when filming in the vicinity of Hammersmith bridge. I filmed a postman making a delivery - I was about 25 yards from him - and he said " I hope you're not filming me". I was asked by a policewoman not to film her conducting manual control of the traffic at a lights controlled crossing (again I was about 25 years away). I was given the thumbs down by a driver of a street cleansing machine. I was accused of being a paedophile by children walking along the street who happened to be included in a street shot. I think the objections usually arise from: "security" issues, sensitivity about children and persons who don't want to be filmed going about their work. Persons walking about/tourists do not generally object, although they sometimes react in such a way as to indicate they assume you do not want them to appear in the shot. Because of the well-publicised actions of a minority, there has been an erosion of freedom and people are generally more edgy about these matters.

[aj]

It is indeed curious how much filming and phototaking is going on using informal devices like smartphones. And then still how people react to proper gear. As if these recording are more of a threat. Public transport does have some regulation on photography, I would assume to protect the privacy of its customers. But with personell enjoying their enforcing 'power' you can expect to get harassed over nothing while at same time are recording their lives 24x7.

It is of all times though. I recall how, 1999, a NYC parkinglot guard came out soley to forbid me of taking street scenes with this/his lot with the three high lifters in the background. It is a public space and nobody can forbid to photograph general scenes.

[Will2]

The bus driver is probably concerned you'll film him doing something wrong, like stoping the bus and getting out to confront you.

I was filming at the State Fair grounds in Dallas once before it opened and a cop saw me and started walking over. I thought, "oh no, the po-po...I'm busted." I had my "it's a public place" speech ready but he just thought my camera was cool and wanted to see it.

He was probably checking me out at the same time which I have no problem with. It's kinda their job as long as they're not a jerk about it.

[silverhalide]

The bus driver is probably concerned you'll film him doing something wrong, like stoping the bus and getting out to confront you...

Some variation of that went through my mind as I grabbed the shots of him confronting me

The same transit authority had a big PR problem in 2010 when this happened:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ2aAmMRjxc

They were in the national news cycle for a day or two and they really didn't know how to handle it.

[slashmaster]

So what did this guy from the bus say to you? Depending on what he said it might have been very tempting for me to grab his glasses and run with them while continuing to film!

[slashmaster]

What I do find is that members of the public are rather wary, and these days people don't generally want their picture taken. It's a far cry even from the 1980s when people were happy to be photographed on the street. Street photography is a dying art because ordinary people do not want to be photographed.

I agree! This is all generally because today's arrogant stuck up women make fun of every little flaw a man has on social media sites and in real life behind their back!. Gray hair, acne, baldness, wrinkles, bad choices of clothes! You either have to spend a lot of effort every day to avoid all these things, or you can do the best you can to avoid people and cameras. I don't know what that bus drivers problem is though. You can't even see him with the tinted windows!

[silverhalide]

So what did this guy from the bus say to you? Depending on what he said it might have been very tempting for me to grab his glasses and run with them while continuing to film!

His opening line was, who gave you permission to film here? I never have good comebacks.

[slashmaster]

So what did this guy from the bus say to you? Depending on what he said it might have been very tempting for me to grab his glasses and run with them while continuing to film!

His opening line was, who gave you permission to film here? I never have good comebacks.

I probably wouldn't have had a good answer either but just look at that guys attitude in your film! I don't think I would have taken that! I would have pulled his glasses off and made him choose between having his bus or his glasses! That was a perfect situation you could have had so much fun with! Could have run down the street and pointed that Wollensak behind you all the way! Then you could have ran around the block to get behind the bus and pulled out that Revere to film the traffic jam! You should try that again. Film the buses from a place that would awkwardly block traffic like that again if they stopped like that! Do you ever ride these buses?

[silverhalide]

So what did this guy from the bus say to you? Depending on what he said it might have been very tempting for me to grab his glasses and run with them while continuing to film!

His opening line was, who gave you permission to film here? I never have good comebacks.

I probably wouldn't have had a good answer either but just look at that guys attitude in your film! I don't think I would have taken that! I would have pulled his glasses off and made him choose between having his bus or his glasses! That was a perfect situation you could have had so much fun with! Could have run down the street and pointed that Wollensak behind you all the way! Then you could have ran around the block to get behind the bus and pulled out that Revere to film the traffic jam! You should try that again. Film the buses from a place that would awkwardly block traffic like that again if they stopped like that! Do you ever ride these buses?

Alas, the spring only lasts about 25 seconds. I'd need a motor driven camera to do the full scorched-earth response

[nikonr10]

While shooting with film cameras, I often encounter curious people. Some cameras cause more commotion than others. For instance a Kodak K100 will go more or less unnoticed, while a Bolex RX5 will attract eyeballs like a bright light bulb attracts bugs on a summer night. Generally speaking, the more sparkly the camera, the more conversations I am drawn into.

Sometimes, shooting causes an adverse reaction. Transit properties are particularly nervous about cameras. The CTA in Chicago, for instance, has trained employees to pounce on people with cameras. This really messed up my plans in December 2010, when I wanted to shoot a few rolls of 16mm Kodachrome in and around their trains. I encountered friction in St Louis as well, near a transit station. I find it amusing that people think a terrorist would do surveillance with a bulky film camera.

Last week, I had another problem. This time, it was a driver for the Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District (IL). As you can see, he stops his bus and trots over to yell at me. Meanwhile, his bus is blocking a one-lane segment of the street, his door is wide open, and his engine is running.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aktPi9mIzlc

So what sort of situations have others faced?

Yes it has changed More so in the USA than in Europe / since 911 along with fear and terror of our AGE / I find people to be more blank or lost in there moblie world ie , unsmart/telephone / selfie sticks or just indifferent ,
The worst one still is people driving and using there moblie phone / thinking its OK ?

[slashmaster]

Alas, the spring only lasts about 25 seconds. I'd need a motor driven camera to do the full scorched-earth response

I realize that and that the cartridges are only 50 feet. Did you modify those cartridges so they could take single perf or did you thread them in that non conventional way? Those films seem short even for 50 feet.

[silverhalide]

At 24 fps, I get about 75 seconds of usable film. I used Wittner Chrome 200d, which is (or was?) available in 2R. I have them lube it for me and it runs great in the mags. Retrocine.com does a great job loading 50' mags - both 16mm and 8mm. He'll be offering TXR in both 8mm and 16mm mags shortly after the 16mm 2R TXR arrives from Wittner.

Dennis