MTA Photography Ban

I heard on radio station WCBS-AM in NYC that the MTA is moving forward

with the proposed ban on photography in the subway. Mayor Bloomberg

was opposed to the ban, calling it ridiculous. Supposedly, the MTA

said it's an unfortunate step that has to be taken in the interests of

security.

Of course. What else would the MTA say? ("We're glad that security

paranoia gives us an excuse to bring in this long hoped-for reform",

maybe?) Anyway, my evaluation of Bloomberg goes up several notches.

I lodged a complaint about this on their website several months ago (I did receive a

response), despite living in Santa Barbara. I hope that others can add to the protest. I know

that there was a gathering of photographers last time who traveled around taking shots.

Perhaps something like that could be done again. I will be in the tri-state area from Dec.

15-Jan. 15th, and would gladly come along if people were planning something. I love civil

disobedience in the name of a good cause.

<p><a href="http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/nyct.htm" target="_blank">Proposed Revisions to NYCT Rules of Conduct</a><br>

See 6© (1050.9)</p>

<p>Members of the public have until January 8 to submit comments.</p>

 

<p>Here is the language to be deleted:</p>

<p><blockquote>© Photography, filming or video recording in any facility or conveyance is permitted except that ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or tripods may not be used. Members of the press holding valid identification issued by the New York City Police Department are hereby authorized to use necessary ancillary equipment.</blockquote></p>

<p>Here is the new language:</p>

<p><blockquote>© No photograph, film or video recording shall be made or taken on or in any conveyance or facility by any person, except members of the press holding valid press identification cards issued by the New York City Police Department or by others duly authorized in writing to engage in such activity by the authority. All photographic activity must be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this Part.</blockquote></p>

<p>The official 45 day comment period started Nov. 24. You read the overview <a href="http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/proposed.htm" target="_blank">here</a>. There is a link on the page to submit comments.</p>

<p><center><img src="http://image.pbase.com/u21/agardner58/medium/36928789.01.jpg"></center></p>

well, I told them what I thought ;o)

I just moved to NY a month ago and in that amount of time I have shot close to 20 rolls on the E, F, G, R, V, Q, 6, and 7 trains in Manhattan and Queens. I have gotten a few looks, most approving, some suspicious. I intend to shoot non-stop until one minute till midnight the day before the new rules (if approved) go into effect. I'll live by the rules, but up to that time, let 'er rip.

Wonder how many tourists will have their vacations spoiled when they get busted for photographing on the subway. Maybe they'll just look at it as part of the New York experience. Or do you have to turn over your camera or camera phone before you go through the turnstiles?

 

What I really wonder about is if they'll eliminate all the subway maps and train schedules (which seem like much more useful tools than a few snaps for terrorists planning an effective attack).

There are no secrets that can be exposed on film that will be protected by such a ban. What possible security benefit could there be by such a restriction?

This proposed ban was discussed in today's New York Times. The ban on photography is

just one of many rules being discussed. Another is a ban on placing one's feet on

adjacent seats. One must be careful and place feet on the floor of the bus or train.

"What possible security benefit could there be by such a restriction?"

 

The $25 fine is expected to strike fear into the hearts of would-be terrorists.

If you folks hate this photography ban on the MTA, wait 'til you see the USA's Patriot Act II.

I'm sorry I can't give you a link but, you see, it's top secret. I think that Republican U.S.

Congressional leaders have seen a preview, but no ordinary citizens have seen it. As I

understand it, it pretty much does away with what's left of the civil rights guaranteed in

the U.S. Constitution. Sooner (rather than later) every crime in the U.S. will be defined as

act of terrorism punishable by death. Good method of population control.

Any references at all, Jim?

<a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/01/nyregion/01manners.html>NY Times article</a>. <p><p>

 

Note: subscription required ... and you cannot put your feet up while you're reading the article.

Is the Patriot Act II still alive? I'm only seeing 2003 references to it. Or is there a plan for the next Klansman Attorney General to revive it?

 

http://www.alternet.org/story/15541

My link is to an article that discusses the proposed MTA rules.

 

I think Jim was just attempting a little joke there. As one who's often expressed concern about new restrictions and related matters (and sometimes disagreed with Brad and others), I must say I wasn't amused.

 

Two reasons: first, my own bias, as I rarely find civil liberties (or the abuse of them) to be funny; and second, because the "sky is falling" approach is in my experience an ineffective way to persuade rational, intelligent skeptics (such as Brad) that concern is warranted.

 

But then again, my sense of humor doesn't appeal to everybody either.

Hi All,

 

Got this message from a friend in NYC. I passed this posting on to her...this is what she had to offer about a friend's problems with MTA...

 

>He's a structural engineer and has encountered problems trying to do >his job--like look at historic photos and plans of [the] subway >before they plan foundations for a building next to it.

 

Banning photography is just a tiny step for the MTA.

 

L.

Larry...

 

Funny thing about that is they are also planning a lot of token booths...

 

There are relatively detailed plans (as in floor plans, schematics, etc. in PDF format) of all the stations that might have closed token booths. I'd think that would be much more internesting to a potential terrorist than some lousy snapshots. Oh well...

 

Anyone interested in doing a Critical Mass style thing taking snaps on the trains? They did it earlier this year...could be a last chance for (a legal) 24 Hrs in the subway!

That should be token booth closings...

i cant wait to take pix of schmucks gettin busted

<i>Another is a ban on placing one's feet on adjacent seats.</i><p>

 

Can you put your camera on the adjacent seats and your feet on the camera?

I think Bloomberg's criticism was that the subway is such a New York City icon that tourists often photograph it, so what's the harm, is this how we welcome out of towners, with a $25 fine for taking a picture of the A train?

 

I defy anyone to explain how taking a picture in the subway compromises security. It's utter nonsense and serves no purpose. As any railfan can tell you (I'm one), full track diagrams, station layouts, wayside signal locations, pictures of rolling stock, you name it, are already available on the Internet, in published books, at railroadiana shows ready for purchase, etc. You can easily get your hands on just about anything.

 

Then again, the MTA is not known for its smarts.

Passing this ban will merely cause photography in the subway to go underground.

If they go through with the ban, it will just be a return to the way things were for

most of the NYC subway's history. Back when Walker Evans was doing his series of

surreptitious photos of subway passengers in the late 1930s, it was definitely illegal

-- though the reason then was privacy and property rights, not terrorism, as far as I

know.

 

I live in NYC and occasionally take pictures in the subway, so I hope they don't impose

a fine, but I must say that working in secret and with some risk attached could be

conducive to art. After all, not every good thing in life is laid out on a silver platter for

the easy taking. Sometimes you have to use your ingenuity, right? Walker Evans did!

 

And speaking of Evans, the definitive edition of his subway pics, "Many Are Called," is

just out from Yale University Press. It's really well printed, and fascinating. One thing

you notice is that the subway cars were a lot darker then than now, with just a few

incandescent bulbs piercing the gloom. Today's blinding fluoresents make for a less

photogenic light, I think. But they do make photography a lot easier in terms of

exposure; I figure 1/60 at f4 on Tri-X, or the equivalent. God knows what settings

Evans would have had to use with his slow films and murky lighting. Probably he

pushed the film a great deal.

 

Also, one thing I have never been able to figure out is how he wound on his film for

the next shot, hat with his Contax under his coat with the lens peeping through a

buttonhole and a cable release running down his sleeve! There are definitely

sequences where he shot the same person several times in a row without them

noticing. I've read that he sometimes took Helen Levitt along with him as a kind of

decoy, to divert attention from him if necessary. Maybe she knows the answer --

she's now in her late 80s -- but she's probably not telling! She's known to be very

taciturn, and when she got some press recently for a retrospective book and exhibit,

the few interviews she gave were downright monosyllabic.

I meant "WHAT with his Contax under his coat..."

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009ybc">Light in the old subway cars</a><div></div>