I’m not a terrorist

It’s hard being a press photographer out on the streets, and it’s not going to get any easier! If you do lot of photography in the streets, reportage  work, or even just taking a photo of a nice buliding/architecture, at some point, whether you’re a tourist or a professional photographer, you will be stopped (and sometimes searched) by a police officer or a police community support officer, and be questioned about why and what you are taking pictures of.

I have experienced this myself, back in Norway. I’m not completely sure of how the laws of photography and filming in public places are there, but they are milder than in the UK.
What happened was, I was filming some stuff for a commercial or something, in the middle of the high street in my town, and a security guard came up to me and asked if I had permission to film there. I said no, because I didn’t think I needed permission to film in a public area. He said that it was okay, but I should check with local authorities beforehand next time.
I checked, and there was/is no restrictions of filming/photographing in that particular area.

Most probably officers will use the Public Order Act, the Criminal Justice Act or Section 44 under the Terrorism Act 2000 as reasons for stopping you. Now, you should know your rights, and here are some tips (From The Independent):

• If police stop and search you, the first thing you should ask is on what grounds they are conducting the search and under what powers.
• Police are able to conduct searches under a number of different pieces of legislation but they usually use either the Public Order Act, the Criminal Justice Act or under Section 44 under the Terrorism Act.
• Unless you are stopped while driving a car, you don NOT have to give your name and address.
• Police officers are obliged to ask for your give ethnicity. Once again, it is up to you whether you choose to answer or not.
• If police use Section 44, they are entitled to view any of your images you have taken but they are NOT allowed to delete them. (The same goes for film cameras, they are NOT allowed to take your film out of your camera.) They can only do so with a court order.
• Under Section 58a of the Terrorism Act, police are only allowed to stop a photographer to taking pictures of officers if they reasonably suspect the photos are intended to be used in connection with terrorism.
• Wheter you are stopped and searched or merely stopped and accounted for, the police officer should hand you a record of your stop.

I encourage all photographers to join this movement/group:
>I’m a Photographer, Not a Terrorist!<
>Become a fan on facebook.<

And here’s a couple of articles from today’s papers:
The Independent - “Warning! Do not take this picture”
Telegraph.co.uk – “Police misusing anti-terror laws”

Ever been stopped by the police or security guard for this?

The portrait

The renowned movie magazine Empire has some great photographers that knows how to get great portraits, and in their latest issue, a twenty year anniversary issue, they have gathered some of their greatest photos and portraits.
These are some of the images that I will be using as inspiration for the new brief; “The Portrait”. (Photos: Empire Magazine)

To see more fantastic portraits, >click here!<

And for your pleasure, here are some of my portraiture:
(Photos: Aleksander Karlsen © 2009)

Mononchrome Falmouth

“Monochrome Falmouth” is a (individual) digital B/W project i’m currently working on. I’m not quite sure where I’m going with this, but it’s something that I will be working with the next couple of months or so. Here are some of the photos so far;

Tech specs: Canon EOS 350D DSLR, B/W-setting. 50mm, 70mm and 80mm lenses.

(Photo: Aleksander Karlsen © 2009)

35mm

Here is some of the prints I’ve gotten this far. The picture is from the assignment “The Person at Work”. I’ve photographed a bike repairman and some butchers. Enjoy ^^

All projects/assignments the first term has/had to be shot in B/W with a 35mm film camera.

Tech specs:
-Canon EOS 500 with Ilford HP5 Noir, 400.

(Photo: Aleksander Karlsen © 2009)

Take #2

“Aaaand we’re back!” Yes, I intend to take up blogging again, this time in retro style, back to my original blog!

As everyone knows, a blog is a personal arena for opinions and statements of personal or public matters. This blog is no exception. I will also use the blog as a venue to show work that’s being done, pictures taken, etc.

So let’s get crackin’!

***

There is an considerable ongoing debate in British media at the moment: Should newspapers charge for their web content? For a few weeks ago  Rupert Murdoch, the world's most powerful media mogul and owner of News Corporation, the world's largest news agency, said that he wants to remove their newspapers’ websites from search engines, and charge for them, as they do with physical newspapers. Some of the newspapers in question are The Times, The Sun, The New York Times and several other major newspapers around the world. Chief-editor of The Times in England, James Harding has already announced that starting next spring, they will shut their website for free use, and begin charging for it’s web content.

Yesterday, I read an article in The Independent, where the profitability of charging for online newspapers was discussed. According to Simon Kelner, editor of The Independent, it's going to be difficult to implement a model in which advertising is the main income for the management of online newspapers. Why, if I might ask? It works in Norway. Why can’t this work in England? There’s discussion about if they don’t charge for the entire online newspaper, they will charge for more specific areas in the web content, such as health or sports.

The problem with British online newspapers, is that they publish everthing that gets printed, online as well. The online newspapers / newspapers are not as "exclusive" as in Norway, where only 50-60% of the content that is published in the physical newspaper, is published online. Norwegian online newspapers also have exclusive articles / features that is published online only and vice versa.

This is the way I feel about it; if they start charging for online newspapers, I will completely stop buying and reading their newspapers. To charge for online newspapers, is a media-suicide, in my opinion.

More info; The article in The Independent.

Are you willing to pay to be able to read e.g. Guardian.co.uk or Times Online?
(Ville du betalt for å f.eks. lese VG Nett eller DB.no?)

(Photo: The Guardian)