Latest advice about taking photos at stations

It might be worth printing a copy of T&CoC and waving that at them..... Highlight the relevant bit, and use it to back yourself up.

Might be worth waiting until ChrisW comes along and he'll be able to give a fuller picture (pardon the pun)

Last time I was pulled was at Covent Garden at the precise moment I forgot to turn the flash off, but in my defence, it was just outside the lifts.

One thing though, I don't tend to get intimidated, and stand firm and keep reiterating my point, but it probably isn't the best approach.

I'm not easily intimidated either: I've had parents storm into my classroom screaming at me before now demanding to know why I'm 'picking on' their child, so a security jobsworth doesn't scare me

So far I've found letting whoever it is finish their rant, smiling and politely explain what I'm doing the best course of action, but it is tiresome and unnecessary.



I recall hearing that too, whether it's the truth or not I don't know. I did have a bit of time before the train departed to look at the LU signs saying what to do/what not to do which were on the platform somewhere. Didn't mention anything about photography. I'm sure the man that tackled me wasn't LU though: frankly the phrase 'two short planks' comes to mind, but he'd obviously been employed to monitor 'security'. Empty vessels make the most noise and all that...

That's where the sudden 'deaf ears' help.. or at least the mental power to completely block out what they say

I did T5 "on the quick" because of the BAA issues, plus later semi-officially when there was an LU platform presence there (now removed), I also managed a name roundel shot from a stationary train which meant I was out of view. God knows what would have happened had the 38TS operated to there this year as was planned at one stage.

A regular question asked by enthusiast photographers be they railway, bus, plane or street photographers... and of course professional photographers too! I could rant on for weeks regarding the inane ramblings of police, private security guards and uneducated members of the public regarding restrictions on photography on public land... but please remember that LU and stations at airports, whilst accessible to the public, are not public land, being instead owned privately. The owner can exercise whatever restrictions or permissions they wish to enforce, however its important that its agents/staff know what these are as opposed to making up something on the spot - this makes both a fool out of them and whatever organisation they represent at the time!

Some may remember the TfL TUBE Common Questions, one answer of which related to photography... it asked:
Do I need permission to film or take photographs on the tube?

The answer was:


Its seems though that this page has disappeared since the beginning of the year...

Can anyone please confirm whether the Traffic Circular still states:


If this statement has disappeared too, I get the impression that LU are, at an official level anyway, now trying to play hardball... forgetting the fact that Police/LU were asking for photographers to supply photos captured on the morning of 7/7 in the days following this terrorist incident. The route LU want photographers to go is to apply for a Student/Non professional permit at a cost of £30 per month, which I have been obtaining for the past couple of years. In my experience it doesn't always stop hostility from a small minority of LU staff, but it does make life a lot easier!

In reality LU will never be able to stop every tourist from capturing photos... typically using flash!!! Every genuine LU enthusiast knows the photography rules as stated in the Conditions of Carriage, yet I have witnessed numerous characters who seem utterly oblivious to the danger using flash towards a moving train... its these irresponsible individuals that are perhaps to blame if LU are changing their approach.

The cold hard fact is that NO person has ever been found to have captured images as part of terrorist related hostile reconnaissance and whenever suspicious photographic activity has ever resulted in prosecutions (photos of children etc.), in almost every case smaller/more covert cameras are being used (e.g. camera phones). Indeed back in December 2009 City of London Police briefed the press about a gang with links to Al-Qaeda, as stated in the very first line of the new report, that were taking photos at underground stations. What they don't seem to have stated quite so emphatically is that no terrorist prosecutions resulted. So ironically the best example that Police could give to defend their approach towards the hostile reconnaissance threat from photographers, was an example when no terrorist link could be found let alone tested in a court of law Do the words 'COPS' and 'KEYSTONE' spring to mind... or is it just me!!!

IMO the UK has sold a dummy under the guise of terrorism as a means to further control the population by keeping us afraid. Typing in terms such as PHOTOGRAPHER and HARASSED into any popular internet search engine reveals a plethora of new incidents week by week of the unprofessional jobsworth wearing a variety of uniforms berating an innocent, law abiding member of the public who have acted within the law. True we only read of incidents which have got out of control and never when nothing has happened or when a quick word has ended with "okay I'll leave you to it", but these events indicate a trend that incidents are becoming more common.

Photographers need to take a common sense approach too. A militant "I'm right and you're always wrong" attitude is just as unprofessional and counter productive as the rabid, paranoia led hostility that some officials use against us.

I do see your point entirely, I suppose the only reason I would immediantly think that is because of the threat, but I don't
imagine you can cause any harm simply taking some photos... Now you mention it, BAA are a bit OTT when it comes to phototaking... I mean what about planespotters?

Of course BAA has no problem about enthusiasts photographing planes at their airports.

At times I've considered approaching LU's security manager in an attempt to get a definitive, published and publicised LU set of guidelines for transport enthusiasts. The trouble is, it might be decided that the best policy is no photos without written pre-permission, even though this couldn't always be enforced, so is it worth risking this response? I understand new by-laws for the Glasgow Subway will ban photography and I wouldn't be surpised if something isn't put in place for transport in London during 2012 too.

Judging by your photos over the years you presumably work for LU in some capacity or other. If you still get hassled, what chance do the rest of us have! It is really annoying though and I do agree with you when you politely try to inform them (without sounding like a smartarse) that what they're saying isn't correct, this just gets their backs up more.

Mind you, LU employees are just members of the public and the public since 2001, or certainly 2005, have been conditioned to think that photography isn't allowed or that there are various restrictions on what can be photographed in public places; there are certainly too many anecdotes of this washing around on the internet, whether it be hassle from security guards, police, etc. I remember seeing four policeman surrounding an innocent German tourist outside New Scotland Yard. He didn't even know what he'd taken a photo of! Although this is an aside, it just shows how deep-rooted the anti-photography bias has become and hassle off misinformed members of staff who presume, rather than know the rules, seems to be sadly all too commonplace.