RareBear From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 553 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 8153 times:
There are about as many scenarios on this as there are airports. Some have no problem with picture taking, others throw a fit. I agree that there should be signs posted if it is not permitted. Best to ask first before you take photos in U.S. airports.
Adriaticus From Mexico, joined May 2004, 1140 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 7931 times:
This is lunatic. Not long ago, I was stopped from taking a picture from Gate A7 @ MIA. However, the security guard told me that I couldn't take it from the gate, but I could take it from the hallway that leads to the terminal building instead. I am glad, as it resulted a much better spot.
I agree with the signage proposal. Like when you are in line at the security post and you see tons of signs prohibiting "talking about, making references or even jokes" about weapons and other items.
Rdu777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 221 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 7894 times:
I went up to ORD during spring break to take photos. I took off from RDU around 6:20 and made it to ORD by 7/8ish I believe. From then on I took pictures in Terminal 2 at the end of the pier until around 11:30, when I went to get my room at the Hilton. I had no problems that day. The next day I got to the same location around 12:00 and my plane didn't depart till 6:30, so I had plenty of time. I made it for about two hours and then a man working the counter for United Express told me to put it away. I did so, that way not to attract attention to myself. That was the end of it. I sat there and watched planes for the other 4.5 hours. So if your lucky they will just tell you to put it away, but I guess it also has to do with who it is.
Vorticity From United States of America, joined May 2004, 337 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 7854 times:
Try and stop them. They can and will, and they'll make up any reason they wish to not return it.
LOL, yes you are probably right. Even if they are wrong, I'd say there's good money you could lose your camera. You can't always win, I'd say comply if someone hassles you about it. I took pictures at HOU, DFW, EFD, and CID recently without problems.
In my experience, not all security staff/ police have the same understanding of the rules. I've known some to have imagined policies. Unfortunate
So what will they do about camera phones? The US has truely gone insane now. Best avoid the place imho.
Where I work camera phones are forbidden, as all things that take pictures. Hopefully it won't ever come to the point where places like airports forbid them as well. No the US hasn't gone insane, just a few places. Don't judge us all on one security guard
Nucsh From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 7820 times:
I dont know of a single place in the US where its illegal to take pictures of ANYTHING, no doubt aircraft. Any officer or security guard who may threaten you with arrest or comfiscation is surely ignorant/incompitent of the TRUE rules and laws, or is just not tolerant of our hobby. They could also be thinking that they could've of just stopped the next "9/11" by having you quit with the pictures. Trust me, someone SOMEWHERE has had that for a reason of such intolerance.
All you can do is bite your tongue and comply though. They can and WILL take away your camera if so provoked by a resounding no from the "perp".
If landing is about "kissing" the ground, you just about raped it.
7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 7814 times:
I had no problems whatsoever taking pictures in IND and TPA a couple of weeks ago. Granted i have had some stare at me when taking the pictures but they just don't understand out enthusiasm for this hobby
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4044 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7726 times:
I am usually all over the map, including ORD at lease twice a month and like some here I enjoy taking a few snaps of the tarmac, planes, ect..and I have yet to be approached anywhere. Incidents like these sound like nothing more than power trips on the part of some low-level, low paid rent-a-cop who has dreams of grander. Granted some airport authorities may put in place rules prohibiting photography. If in doubt check with a given airport's website and e-mail them and as some just mentioned here, check this or the photography forum.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 7651 times:
Incidents like these sound like nothing more than power trips on the part of some low-level, low paid rent-a-cop who has dreams of grander. Granted some airport authorities may put in place rules prohibiting photography.
Hehe, rent-a-cop. Sadly, that is usually what it is. Some idiot thinks that they're preventing a terrorist attack by stopping the "evil photographer".
The only airport I know that actually has rules against taking pictures on airport property is CLL (my home). The idiots who run the airport think they’re some special terrorist target and don’t want people taking pictures. Of course they won’t post signs telling the public of this. Their logic is “if we post signs for everything, people won’t pay attention to any sign thus defeating the purpose.”
Coronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1617 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7573 times:
the worst part is most Americans don't see it coming.
Anybody that has read "1984" should see this coming. Security is always the reason for losing your rights. How can you argue against it?
I can understand not being able to photograph if the airport has military operations on the field. This is usually the case in poorer third world countries that cannot afford to have separate military and commercial airports and I can understand that. But here in the U.S., there is no excuse but to be a reactionary turd.
Mriya From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7571 times:
At ORD, I've had the least trouble. I've taken tons of photos there, and the only complaint I've gotten was from a Mexicana employee who spoke to me in Spanish. I just went to the next gate and snapped away. Over there, I think the general consensus is that photographing the planes is okay (I did ask a few people, they ok'd it) but you never know who you'll run into who's having a bad day. This was all in the international terminal.
EWR has rules against photographing planes. You can't, unless you get permission from... the port authority, I think it is (corrections welcome).
Currently not active in aviation photography or this site. Thank you for your interest.
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12665 posts, RR: 34
Reply 22, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7542 times:
What I've always found scariest about this is not just the inconvenience of it for enthusiasts, but the fact that it proves that security is unfocused. This really is a very good test of airport security and whether they are actually thinking or just strutting about, making rules and ticking boxes. We need more than just goons saying "camera bad", etc. As enthusiasts, we also fly more than the average person and like all travellers, we deserve to feel secure; that's the whole point of security and it certainly doesn't make me feel more secure if security thugs are intimidating photographers in the name of that security. THINK, THINK, THINK - that's how terrorists are challenged and stopped, not by mindless idiocy like this.
Mriva mentions EWR and its rules against photography: you've got to ask - what have they learned. In what aspect of what those animals did on 9/11 did photography feature. Even the dimmest of security people must know that people will take photos of aircraft, one way or another. They can either focus resources on stopping this, OR take an intelligent approach, get to understand it and provide a place where it can be done without harassment. Really, it's not rocket science. Focus thought, focus resources on WHAT THE THREAT ACTUALLY IS, not what certain morons think it is or should be.
I would always try and obtain some legal statement, i.e. from your lawyer, for example, or a statement from the TSA, to back you up - if challenged.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2478 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 7513 times:
"EWR has rules against photographing planes. You can't, unless you get permission from... the port authority, I think it is (corrections welcome)."
Is this only since 9/11? I took quite a few shots out the windows (at airplanes) in the terminal by Continental before a fall '99 trip and wasn't bothered. Is this posted, also? I don't recall seeing any signs banning photographs back then. If there are no signs in evidence specifically saying so, I can't see how this is enforceable. I would definitely ask to see such a regulation on paper and ask for a rationale, if it wasn't posted. To me, such a stipulation without a clearly posted notification seems like an infringement on civil liberties. Just last summer, I took a bunch of shots at JFK and Heathrow and last fall, at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. I wasn't bothered at those airports, either. I'd definitely avoid doing it if there were clear warnings that it was banned but if not, it seems ridiculous, especially since I only take shots of airplanes, not anything INSIDE the terminal. I'll have to check for this at Newark on the 28th when I leave for Seattle. A lot of this post 9/11 stuff seems like paranoid nonsense to me. I think this is a bit different than with corporate policies that clearly prohibit photography on their premises for sound reasons of information security or safety issues regarding cameras, these bans are quite understandable.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13244 posts, RR: 16
Reply 24, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 7479 times:
There are substantual inconsintancies - especially in the USA - from airport to airport as to photography inside airport terminals, onto airport properties, taking pictures from terminals of the ramp and runway areas. I would say it is a universial you cannot take pictures of any security/TSA checkpoints, customs and immigration. As to other areas, this is probably due to the not unreasonable fear of someone someone trying to gather information on the security details and patterns at certain areas of airports. The non-TSA private security Guards are probably told the simpilest line and told to not allow any photography. Police whom are at the airports have their orders too and from their experience probably would rather err on the side of restricting the use of cameras. It is too bad the paranoia of the TSA, some police and some airport authorities cannot come up with well posted and consistant policies that wouldn't hurt the casual traveler or a/c enthusiest.
: I have always had problems with taking photos, whether its outside looking at aircraft, or even within the terminal building, following airports i've
: When a country goes around the world talking about freedom you have to laugh when they say in their own country taking picrtures of aircraft is agains
: EXCEPTIONAL POINT, N754PR! Thank you for that gratifying observation!