Thursday, July 28, 2011

Poor Frog

This toy frog was found in a parking lot. It seemed lost and alone. It could have stayed there for some time to come with strangers walking by and nature taking its toll. So I picked this guy up and will let him have a new life in my photographs. I often look for lost memories like these. I am drawn to the discarded. Those items that others have used and left. They become my treasures.

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

AWESOME SUMMER PHOTO CLASS THIS SATURDAY

Summer Photo Workshop being offered by Blake McCollum on July 30th this Saturday
This should be a great workshop. Blake is very talented and approaches photography with fun. 
He is very skilled in photography so expect to learn a lot!


Contact him for more info - discounts for students.


Blake McCollum
Blake McCollum Photography
http://www.blakemc.com/



My dog wished she had a camera and thumbs so she could take his workshop!!

Monday, July 25, 2011

New Photo Challenge - Best Friends

New Photo Challenge - Best Friends




Enter CliQ Photo Challenge - Best Friends
Who is your best friend?

Your pet? Your sibling? Your spouse? Your teammate? Your imaginary friend? Whoever or whatever your best friend is, we want to see how you visually represent that friendship! Grab your camera phone, your point & shoot, anything that takes a photo and get shooting now.

To enter the Best Friends Photo Challenge, just follow these three steps:
1. "Like" our Facebook page here: http://www.facebook.com/CliQworld
2. Click the "Contests" link on the left navigation
3. Click "Enter Contest"

That's it. There is no cost to enter, and the first place prize package is worth over $1100. Contest ends July 31 and winners will be announced on August 8, 2011.

Good luck!

The CliQ Crew

Camera and Rockwell at the Eastman House


NORMAN ROCKWELL: BEHIND THE CAMERA

rockwell
Norman Rockwell. THE RUNAWAY, 1958.
©1958 SEPS: Licensed by Curtis Publishing, Indianapolis, IN.
Reference photo ©NRELC: Licensed by Norman Rockwell Licensing, Niles, IL.
Norman Rockwell Museum Collections.

Experience the iconic paintings and illustrations of artist Norman Rockwell alongside the meticulously staged photographs on which he based his work. Beginning in the late 1930s, Rockwell adopted photography as a tool to bring his illustration ideas to life in studio sessions. He served as the director and carefully orchestrated the photographs, hand-selecting the props, locations, and models. Rockwell created an abundance of photographs for each new subject, sometimes capturing complete compositions and other times combining separate pictures of individual elements. For the first time, Norman Rockwell: Behind the Camera presents these study photographs with his drawings and related tear sheets from magazine covers, offering a fascinating look at the artist’s working process. Organized by the NormanRockwell Museum in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, in collaboration with guest curator Ron Schick. The Eastman House exhibition is sponsored by M&T Bank with additional support provided by The Robert Lehman Foundation.
From June 25, 2011 through September 18, 2011 in the Brackett–Clark Gallery.

Friday, July 22, 2011

Still Time with Trees

Taken last year in Indiana. There is a silence with in this image. I feel I want to pass between the trees once they complete their conversation.

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Apprenticeships - interesting

Into the forest, out of the house © Jonny Briggs, who is graduating from RCA this summer.
Further education for photographers is changing, with apprenticeships and work-based learning taking an important role alongside the traditional BA and MA courses. Miranda Gavin surveys the options.
Author: Miranda Gavin

Skillset survey carried out a few years ago put the number of students leaving degree courses with photography or photo imaging in the title at around 5000 a year. Skillset, the Sector Skills Council for the Creative Industries, concluded that workers in this sector are highly qualified, stating “more than two-fifths have a degree and over a fifth have a technical qualification, including a quarter of all photographers”. The value of these qualifications isn’t universally recognised, however, as a recent Russell Group report showed. A survey of 20 universities, including prestigious institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge, found that most colleges consider photography A-level to be a “soft” option.

In reality, qualifications in the photographic industry differ widely. New photography and photo imaging courses, plus drives to supportapprenticeships and work-based learning, mean there is a growing range of vocational and academic paths to choose from. But with Government plans to increase tuition fees from the next academic year, vocational approaches could boom as budding photographers seek out affordable ways to learn, get work experience, make contacts and gain qualifications.
Foundation Degrees
Foundation Degrees in Arts (FdA) were set up in 2001-02 by the Higher Education Funding Council for England and DfES as an alternative to the traditional three-year degree. A vocational qualification of “academic and work-based learning through close collaboration between employers and programme providers, usually universities in partnership with further education colleges”, it typically takes two years full-time and is equivalent to the first two years of an honours degree.
Skillset developed a guidance document for colleges offering photo imaging courses, summing up industry views on the most important topics to be included in the curriculum. For those who want to keep up with professional development, Skillset has also developed flexible training with its ‘Build your own MA’ short courses. These are industry-focused and offered individually or in combination, with credits being used towards a qualification ranging from a Postgraduate Certificate to an MA in Professional Media Practice. Of particular interest is a course in Digital Video for Photographers, which is under development at University of Gloucestershire.
The Photography FdA at City College Brighton and Hove has been running for two and half years, and has seen a steady rise in the number of applicants for just 15 places. Head of photography Graham Hulme, who has worked at the college for nine years, says, “After the first year, word spread and numbers have tripled from when we started the course. I also think there’s been an influx this year before tuition fees go up next year. If a student gets on a course this year, the tuition fees will stay the same for the duration of the course.”
Hulme researched the FdA qualification nearly three years ago, and at that point found “perhaps, no more than 20 or 30 courses”, a fraction of the number of degree courses. He believes the short duration of the FdA is one of its selling points – the fees are the same as for a degree, but students have to pay for two years, not three. But the flexibility of the qualification may also make it attractive, as students can progress to the final year of an appropriate degree if they decide they want to take it further (although in practice, this depends on matching the student’s previous two-years’ study to an appropriate course).
This doesn’t have to be done straight away – students “can wait about six years and still turn the FdA into a BA later on”, explains Hulme. Students also gain from studying in an institution, as they can use its facilities and equipment. City College has in-house studio space and “a HD Hasselblad medium format camera and scanners”, high-end kit that would be beyond most students’ budgets.
On the job
At the start of 2010, Skillset redeveloped its Advanced Apprenticeship in Photo Imaging for 16-25-year-olds. A Government-funded, modular scheme, it was developed from a similar (and successful) programme delivered by the MoD and the Defence School of Photography to train photographers in the Forces. The idea is to “raise competency standards to an apprenticeship level of confidence” and the apprenticeships are kept deliberately broad to give them “as wide an appeal as possible, as jobs are not as clearly defined as they used to be”, according to Skillset’s photo imaging sector manager Pippa Walkley.
Successful apprentices get a nationally recognised Level 3 qualification, and “hopefully future employment”, which could be as anything from a trainee social photographer or minilab printer to a picture library keyworder. Apprentices are paid no less than £2.50 per hour by the employer throughout, but the exact sum depends on their age and the number of hours they work. An apprentice aged 16 to 18 when they start can work a 37.5-hour week, including the time they spend training, for example, and earn a minimum of £2.50 per hour. Once the apprentice turns 19, they can work up to 40 hours a week including the training, which has an incremental effect on their wage.
If the apprentice is over 19 when they start, they can work a 40-hour week including training, and have an hourly minimum wage of £2.50 per hour for the first year. For the second year they will earn the national minimum wage, which is currently £4.92 per hour for a 19 or 20-year-old, and £5.93 for a 21-to 25-year-old. These are minimum rates, and there is nothing to stop an employer paying more, but the levels have led some to brand the scheme little more than undervalued, cheap labour.
Even so, it could prove popular. Getting into the photography industry is difficult because the market is saturated and competition is fierce, and young image-makers are often badly informed about the kind of work available to them. “One of the most difficult things is when someone says ‘I want to be a photographer’,” says Walkley. “There are so many sub-sectors in photo imaging and there’s no right or wrong answer to the question, ‘Should I go to college?’ It’s all about trying to provide as much information and guidance as possible so that they can make informed choices about careers in the industry.” With this in mind, Skillset also provides information on its website, at 
www.skillset.org/careers.
“Apprenticeships wouldn’t suit everyone, some people need space in college to find their way and explore, others want to be in employment,” adds Walkley. For the rest, she’s been sourcing employers willing to take part in the Advanced Apprenticeship, and has had input into the creation of a new apprenticeship in Creative and Digital Media, which offers units in web design, interactive media and production, as well as photography and image management.
In tandem with this, the National Apprenticeship Service, a separate entity has developed a database in which photographers can submit information and search for vacancies.
Foundation Degree interns
Skillset is also working on industry-led Foundation Degree Internships, combining Foundation Degrees with unpaid, work-based learning. Pitched as a vocational, work-based route through Higher Education, these qualifications will feature on-the-job training and structured academic teaching. The student interns will be taken on full-time, two to three days a week for a minimum of 25 weeks per year by the host companies. The businesses are encouraged to commit to taking on interns for two years, and should allow the students to attend regular tutorials and study blocks at the Skillset Media Academy. The University of Westminster has already agreed to provide one such internship at its Harrow campus.
The host companies get the interns’ help free of charge, though they’re encouraged to provide travel or subsistence support; the students pay 50 percent of the college fees. At the end of the two years the student intern will have earned a Foundation Degree qualification, which (as with other Foundation courses), they can top up over a third year to gain an Honours Degree. So far the programme is only targeting picture libraries and agencies, but there’s potential to expand it, Walkley explains.
“Student fees for UG courses rise considerably from September 2012,” she says. “Many media courses will cost £7500+ and students will want to be sure they have selected a course that the industry values. A course that allows you to combine the rigour of a degree programme with the opportunity to develop workplace skills as well as good contacts will become increasingly popular, and this programme is such a course.
“Students will leave with a high level of professional skills, honed by working alongside media professionals, complemented by academic and theoretical understandings and excellent interpersonal skills. They will be creative, responsible, reflective and effective young professionals ready to slot straight into creative teams when they start work.”
Academic route
At the other end of the academic spectrum are courses such as the full-time two-year MA in Photography at the Royal College of Art(RCA), which has provided many young photographers with a route into the highly conceptual art world. “The MA is not about careers and professionalism at all, but personal development,” says Olivier Richon, professor of photography of the RCA course. “It’s for people who want to develop their own practice and explore how to think about images.”
For Richon there’s no direct, vocational qualification for art photographers, because being ‘an artist’ sums up so many different skills. “It is quite ambivalent as to what one means by a practising artist,” he explains. “Some students may have shows in good galleries, but don’t end up making any money from it, and so do other things to make money. Others may use their skills as a photographer to take pictures of sculptures for galleries, or of architecture, for example.” Around 85 percent of former students end up “doing photography in various forms”, though, with some going into teaching or taking up artist residencies.
One of the most-respected courses in the country, its applications have remained stable at around 200 for 20-22 places, but Richon says student fees have already made a difference over the last few years. “I think the students are different now,” he says. “If they decide to study, they usually commit themselves more. Our students are much more prepared to borrow money, be in debt and work at weekends. It’s a different attitude.”
Personal choice
With so many options available, young photographers need to do their research and work out what suits them best, Nick Sargeant, head of the art and design department of the University of Gloucestershire, points out. “The decision regarding going straight into industry, taking an FdA or getting a degree is one that prospective students must make.
“Like other universities, we are looking at the possibility of two-year fast-track degrees. Whether that would be appropriate for photography courses is something we need to decide. Alternative study methods are bound to be on our agenda but the bottom line is that it’s important we deliver courses that help students acquire a range of skills to enter employment.”
© Incisive Media Investments Limited 2010, Published by Incisive Financial Publishing Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, are companies registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 04252091 & 04252093.

Sunday, July 17, 2011

Screens make good neighbors

Just a fun image taken of a lizard on the pool screen. I find the simple observations are the most interesting.

Sunday, July 10, 2011

Checkout this site

artgrad.net | Affordable artwork by modern graduate artists


Here is some information about them from the website:


About Us

Welcome to ArtGrad.net!
All the work you see on this site is done by people that have studied art or design at an educational establishment: they are all professionals in various stages of their career development.
We have some of the most contemporary, interesting and affordable artwork pieces that can be found anywhere – at the click of a mouse.
Artgrad.net is a global marketplace for all art graduates to exhibit and sell their work in a professional environment, teaming with buyers, collectors and enthusiasts - all searching for contemporary art from emerging artists.

Our website is free to use.
If you’re an artist, please click on the Artist link to the right to find out how we can help you sell your artwork, and help you develop your art career
If you’re a buyer - or "just looking!", please click on the Buyer link to the right to see a huge range of affordable artwork, and more information about how you might decide to use art as an investment

Monday, July 4, 2011

There are times to GIVE and times NOT.

4 Questions to Ask Before Donating to a Charity Photo Auction

Save | E-mail | Print | Most Popular | RSS

© WILL RAGOZZINO/PATRICKMCMULLAN.COM
Auctioneer Denise Bethel of Sotheby's leads the bidding at inMotion's annual Photography Auction & Benefit, April 2011.


According to the gallery owners we interviewed in “Benefit Analysis: The Pros and Cons of Donating To Charity Auctions,” the explosion of fundraising auctions in recent years has not been a boon to artists who donated works. Many auction organizers say that the auction sales, and having work in a prestigious auction catalogue, can be good exposure, particularly for lesser known artists. Gallery owners, however, believe that at many auctions, buyers are looking for bargains. If a print sells for well below market price, it can confuse buyers about its actual value. Worse still, with so many auctions selling so many prints, some works won’t sell at all.

As we note in our July issue, gallery owners have different ideas about how to prevent prints from selling at bargain basement prices, such as setting a reserve price and issuing special editions just for the auction. Gallery owners have also become more selective in choosing which auctions they want to participate in. To make their selection, they ask a variety of questions to size up the quality of the auction. Here are some of the questions they ask.

How many prints will be up for sale? (And how many people are expected to attend?)
If an auction includes a large number of lots up for sale, at least some of the prints may go unsold. “If it doesn’t sell, people will maybe think that it is not worth buying,” says David Fahey of Fahey/Klein Gallery in Los Angeles.  “As we know, this is not really the case, but often times perceptions carry great weight.”

Toronto gallery owner Stephen Bulger estimates that only ten percent of the crowd at a charity auction attendees is seriously interested in bidding for something. He prefers to see the number of bidders outnumber the auction lots by a ration of two-to-one, to ensure bidding competition and higher prices, he explains.

Some well established auctions have cut back the number of prints for sale. For example, Center for Photography at Woodstock cut its benefit auction lots by 75 percent, from 200 to about 50 a few years ago. At its annual auction gala last year,  Aperture Foundation held back lots to match its audience size. “We want each piece to get enough attention,” says Yseult Chehata, manager of the individual giving program at the Aperture Foundation.

Who is attending, and who are the organizers?
The charity inMotion, which provides free legal aid to low-income victims of domestic abuse, is in the fortunate position of having to turn down photographers who want to donate to its annual auction. Its board  is comprised of attorneys and investment bankers who attract a well-heeled, big spending crowd. The auctioneer in the past few years has been Denise Bethel, senior VP and director of the photographs department at Sotheby’s, who has experience in stoking the crowd to spend big.

But attendees who buy prints to support a worthwhile cause may be less interested in collecting photography. Los Angeles gallery owner Paul Kopeikin notes, “Is this someone who’s going to come to the artist’s next show? It’s difficult to say.” Non-profit organizations like the Center for Photography at Woodstock argue that their auction attendees are primarily interested in the Center’s mission, which is to support photographers. The relationships that are forged between photographers who donate to their auction and the people who buy auction prints, “can continue for years afterwards,” says Ariel Shanberg, executive director.

What information about sales and buyers will be available after the auction?
Julie Saul, owner of Julie Saul Gallery in New York, asks auction organizers to agree in writing to disclose after the auction how much each print she donated sold for, and to whom. “Particularly if it’s a unique work, you want to know where it is, and secondly you want to know what it sold for to evaluate, for example, if you want to donate to that cause in the future,” she explains.

The organizers of the inMotion auction inform donors of the price their prints sold for, and also provide contact information on the buyers. “Our goal is to help galleries and photographers build new relationships with collectors,“ says Carol Lindley, inMotion’s director of development and marketing.

Not all auctions will disclose their sales figures. But it's worth asking before you donate what the average sale prices have been for past auctions, and whether you'll be told the sale price of your prints after the auction so you can generate publicity if your work fetches a good price for a good cause.

Is the auction supporting a cause you believe in?
This question sounds obvious, but according to gallery owners we interviewed, photographers tend to think that if they help support an arts organization or museum now, the relationship might someday lead to an acquisition or exhibition down the road.

Paul Kopeikin of the Paul Kopeikin Gallery of Los Angeles says that when museums call him for donations to their auctions, he’s often very blunt. “Listen, in 20 years you’ve never taken an interest in any of the artists I represent, so I’m just curious, which artist is it that you’re interested in?”

When you understand what you can and can't expect from participating in charity auctions, you can donate out of generosity, not in hopes of publicity. 

Something to think about on Independence Day.


Photographing in public: When the police gets it wrong

When they start reaching for handcuffs, something's gone a bit wrong.
+ enlarge gallery
A few days ago, I received an e-mail from a reader who had been through an interesting ordeal by the hands of UK police. They wanted a bit of advice, and I figured more of you might like to learn a little bit more about what happens when you are given a stern talking to by police about taking photos in a public place.
Also, let me point out right at the beginning that I'm not a lawyer, and that nothing in this post must be construed as legal advice - I'm merely a photographer who has a (probably more than healthy) interest in the aspects of the law pertaining to photographers.
Tim writes:
"I've been an amateur snapper for a while. I favour street photography but will snap most things if I find them interesting. I tend to visit events like steam rallies, street parades, music events and such as they are a good source of fun street shots, as a rule. At the weekend I decided to attend a car rally with the intention of snapping some old cars and bikes, and the people there to see them, plus the bands playing."
"All was well and good, it was nice day. I'd been there maybe a couple of hours and was thinking about leaving when I was approached by a police officer, who asked if he could have a word. Of course, I said. He told me, rather apologetically, that they'd received a call from a member of the public who was concerned I might have been taking 'inappropriate pictures'. I had to push him for him to add 'of children'. I wasn't overly shocked. I know numerous people this has happened to. There is a lot of suspicion among the ill informed, particularly stewards at such events. Officer asked if I'd have any objection to showing him the photos on my camera and I said no, of course not, feel free. He took camera and handed it to colleague who was in the police car which had drawn up."
Comments: A lot of people at this point feel they have done nothing wrong, and are more than happy to help police along. The thinking goes as follows: Police are people too, and if they take an interest in my photography (even if they have just accused me, indirectly, of being perverts), then it can't harm to show them the images.
Do remember, however, that a police officer demanding to see your photos is almost certainly on shaky grounds. There are a few laws under which they can do so, but the application of these laws is generally restricted to high-risk areas.
Tim writes...
"I was entirely confident I'd be on my way in a minute or two, once the images had been viewed and it became obvious I'd taken none, inappropriate or otherwise, of kids. First officer continued to be friendly and apologetic, and I assured him I understood the situation. I didn't point out that it's in fact entirely legal to take pictures of anyone in a public place, irrespective of age, as I do understand the genuine concerns some people may have in this modern world. However I was somewhat miffed as to how someone might have thought my behaviour was suspicious enough to call the police, considering I go out of my way to avoid taking pictures of children and am always entirely open about what I'm doing. Having taken tens of thousands of street snaps, I am yet to have my first run in with a person I've photographed, largely because I use my common sense don't go poking my camera anywhere just because I might have legality on my side."
Comments: There are a few important things to keep in mind here: If it's in public, you have the full rights to take photos of anything you can see. Police (or, indeed, anyone who so pleases), can ask you very nicely if you pretty please, with sugar on top, won't stop taking pictures.
It may be, for example, that you are at the scene of a horrific traffic accident, and a 9-year old boy has been badly maimed by a car. If the parents are present, and clearly deeply in shock and in discomfort about their son being photographed, police might walk over and say something like "Hey, mate, if you don't mind awfully, you're upsetting the parents a lot by taking these pictures, it'd be great if you could move along". It's up to you whether you decide to stop taking photos or not, but as a human being, you are, in my opinion, being a bit of a douche if you don't.
Tim writes...
"Anyway, driver gets out of car and I had a sinking feeling when I saw he'd left my camera in his car. I asked him if there was a problem and he replied, incredulously, that yes, of course there was a problem. 'There are lots of pictures of people on your camera. PEOPLE! Do you know them all?' I admitted the no, obviously I didn't. 'Then you don't take pictures of them, simple as that. You can't just go around in public taking pictures of whoever you want!' I was astonished by his obvious ignorance of the 'public places' law but remained polite as I pointed out that yes, I could, because photography in a public place (car show was held in a public place, not on private land) was entirely legal and street photography was an increasingly popular niche - and one of my street snapping buddies is himself a serving police sergeant."
Comment: Okay, this is where the police officer is quite clearly completely wrong about the law. You are, as Tim says, fully in your right to take photos in a public place.
This is where you realise that you are fighting a losing battle. Police officers, like everyone else, are some times wrong. If they mis-perceive a situation, it might be that you get arrested for something that you should't ever be arrested for. However, remember that the main reason why you get arrested in the UK is to 'allow a prompt and effective investigation'. At this juncture, you probably have three choices:
  • Delete the photos off your memory card
  • Encourage the police to contact their sergeant ('skipper') or inspector ('governor')
  • Get arrested, explain the whole situation at the police station.
Now, to go through these options in order:
Deleting the images is something you should only do as an absolute last resort. Police officers on the ground have no right to tell you to delete anything; any 'destruction' has to be result of a court order. That it's relatively easy to recover the images once they have been deleted is a separate matter, of course: If you are confident in your skills in image recovery, go ahead and delete them (don't format the card - just choose 'delete all'), and then recover them later; but this isn't something you should ever have to do.
In the UK, if a police officer tells you to delete something, simply refuse. If they make motions to delete something from your memory card for you, tell them to stop right away, and tell them that it would be illegal for them to do that. Technically, a police officer deleting images from someone's computer would fall either under criminal damage (a common law offence) or under "unauthorised modification of computer material" under the Computer Misuse Act of 1990. If they do delete your images, make sure you don't touch that part of the camera (fingerprints!), take their shoulder number, and go to the nearest police station. At the front office, make a formal complaint, and don't leave until you have a crime reference number. You'll probably have to hand over your camera, but make sure that the officer who takes it knows what has happened, and that the camera will need to be forensically analysed.
Encouraging them to seek advice is something you have to do carefully. Telling someone "you don't know the law you bastard, how about you call and ask your boss" will obviously come across differently than "Uhm, I think you may be mistaken, but it's a complicated piece of law. Is there any chance I could wait here whilst you call your superior for some advice?". If you do manage to convince them to call the boss, you'll probably be sheepishly let go, pronto; most sergeants have the sense to either know the law or to seek advice from the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service), at which point you'll be sent on your way. If you subsequently want to make a formal complaint (you probably should - formal complaints are taken very seriously, and cause a huge machinery to roll into action. At the very least, all the police officers in that borough will be given a stern reminder of the rights of photographers), that's up to you.
Get yourself arrested... Finally, if it all goes wrong, then tell them that you aren't going to give them your camera, and that you won't delete any images. Most importantly: tell them that you won't tell them your name or address. This means that they will have to arrest you to take it any further.
Now, in the UK, arresting someone is a long, drawn-out procedure, which makes police officers think twice about arresting someone, at least if they aren't completely sure if they have valid grounds for arrest. Once you make it to the custody suite, the custody sergeant will probably not even authorise detention, which means that you'll never see the inside of a cell.
Tim writes:
"The first, more civil, officer had by this time also viewed the pictures on the camera. I am pretty much certain if he'd been alone I'd have been on my way with an apology for the inconvenience and a thanks for cooperating at that point. But the driver was clearly determined to continue his tirade and not just let it go. He indicated to the first officer to take my details. I asked why they needed my details when I'd proved my innocence of the non-crime (I didn't actually say that) of snapping kids. Driver asked me if I wanted to be arrested. I have responsibilities and couldn't afford to be out of commission for hours or more so just gave the first officer my name and address and DOB, knowing I had no record of any kind and nothing to fear."
Comment: If this were me, at this point, I would have just let them arrest me. It'll be a few hours of inconvenience, but ultimately, if you're sure that you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear. It's worth remembering that 'getting arrested' sounds dramatic, but isn't punishment in itself: It is simply one of many tools in a police officer's toolbox. Getting arrested won't get you a criminal record.
Tim writes:
"People had been gawping as they passed by and I was now 'invited' to get into the car. 'Don't worry, you're going to be arrested,' said first officer. Of course I wasn't, I'd done nothing wrong, but the continuing detention was making the onlookers think something iffy was going on, when I should have been on my way long since."
"Got in car and first officer remained outside, on radio, checking details. Driver then said he'd show me what he had a real problem with. He brought up a picture of a woman sitting on the grass watching one of the bands. 'You've obviously seen her showing a bit of leg and decided to take a picture, haven't you?' I told him I was taking pictures of the audience in general. He repeated the question almost word for word, and I did likewise in reply, to which he said that I was really starting to annoy him with my 'innocent act'. He said I'd clearly come out with the intention of snapping young ladies. He brought up another picture of a young woman - this one was giving a sweetie to her dog. He laughed at the suggestion that I was focusing on the dog taking the sweet, not the girl. He ignored the obvious fact that around 300 of the 324 images featured elderly men, young men, middle aged men, singers and bands (male), some dancers (mixed sex, mostly middle aged), some people dressed in Roman costumes, about 130 pictures just of vehicles, some pictures of the sun on the sea, boats, a plane etc. None of the pictures were of things such as bums or cleavage close ups. There was nothing on there that I wouldn't have been happy to show anyone, including kids or nuns or the people who appeared in the snaps."
"There then followed a 15 minute lecture from the driver about how wrong taking pictures of people was. He again said people had a right to privacy in public places. He made a big deal of a picture I'd taken of a woman drinking champagne on a balcony of a house overlooking the rally site. He said her husband would be within his rights to 'fill me in'. Her husband (or partner) had in fact raised a glass cheerfully to me when I'd taken the shot, though he wasn't actually in the shot. I could still see them up there and said he could ask them if they objected. He completely ignored me. Finally the other officer got back in the car and confirmed that I didn't have record, wasn't a known danger to the public/kids, wasn't on the run or wanted etc."
"But the driver wasn't done yet. He said that image of the woman sitting on the grass 'showing a bit of leg' could amount to indecency. If there had been 'three or four' such images in a series, I'd be under arrest and would be placed on the sex offenders register. Did I want that? Did I want my life ruined?"
Comment: Oh, wow, that's showing another pretty grim misunderstanding of the law. The Indecent Photographs thing the officer is speaking about in this case falls under S1 of the Protection of Children act 1978 as amended by S85 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order act of 1994 and s45 of the sexual offences act of 2003. It states that it is an offence to "take, make, or permit to be taken; Show or distribute; Possess with a view to distribution; Publish any indecent photograph (i.e. an image in any form) of a child (a person under the age of 18)". The discussion as to whether the woman was acting 'indecently' is irrelevant if she doesn't appear to be under 18 - and I think most people would agree that anything you see on an average beach (with the exception of 60 year old men wearing Speedos) cannot reasonably be argued to be indecent.
Tim's e-mail continues with several more thinly and not-so-thinly veiled threats, but it all ended well:
"Eventually I was driven back to my motorcycle and told that they'd wait over the road and make sure I left the area 'for my own protection'. Which I did."
Comment: Obviously, I have only Tim's side of this story, as I haven't been able to speak to the officers in question. If everything happened the way he perceived it, it appears that he has run into a copper who was having a ludicrously bad day - and a formal complaint may be in order.
There are a lot of lessons to be taken away from this encounter, however. A good exercise for photographers who take photos in public places, for example, would be to go through the account above, with the thought 'What would I have done in the same situation' - in the knowledge that this could very well happen to you.
You could do a lot worse than reading up on your rights of taking photos in a public place in theUKAustraliaCanadaNew Zealand, and the US (and those of your local country, of course), and to be aware of the rights you have to your own images.
Finally, if you do get 'hassle' from the cops, stay calm, but stand your ground. There's nothing wrong with taking a few deep breaths and giving an eloquent reply instead of blurting out whatever you are thinking. Ultimately, police have more important things to worry about than a photographer minding his/her own business, but it could be (like in this case) that the odd police officer have their own axes to grind. The best way to dodge out of that is by asking them to take advice from their bosses, and to stand your ground.

How about you?

So - have you ever had any nasty experiences whilst out taking photos? Leave a comment below and tell us about it!