Page 31 of 31 FirstFirst ... 62126293031
Results 601 to 617 of 617

Thread: 'No Photography' Plz...

  1. #601

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Are the flats above Tekka market private place? I was once told off by an Indian guy for taking pictures from there. Was I trespassing?

  2. #602
    Member 9V-Orion Images's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Autenticate ALGRN @ 7987.8270
    Posts
    1,760

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by soeypixels View Post
    just tell them ur civilian
    HAHA
    What are the MPs going to do? Charge him? Send him to DB?
    CS Aviation / Flickr
    Per aspera ad astra

  3. #603
    Senior Member +evenstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Singapore / United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,655

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images View Post
    What are the MPs going to do? Charge him? Send him to DB?
    call in the police, and charge him under ISA
    eat. drink. shoot

  4. #604
    Senior Member redstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Beyond the outer limits
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by +evenstar View Post
    call in the police, and charge him under ISA
    Since when is photography of personnel a threat to national security? If the said person is not obstructing the duty of the MP.

  5. #605
    Senior Member +evenstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Singapore / United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,655

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by redstone View Post
    Since when is photography of personnel a threat to national security? If the said person is not obstructing the duty of the MP.
    quoting what chanjyj said, "military police told me that "military exercise, no photo"." he got pissed and took the photo of the personnel to lodge a complaint.

    if it's indeed a military exercise, then photography is likely not allowed. same reason as to why cameras are not allowed in military camps
    eat. drink. shoot

  6. #606

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by +evenstar View Post
    call in the police, and charge him under ISA
    tot the whole pt of isa is no need to charge..
    straight away detain..

  7. #607
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by +evenstar View Post
    quoting what chanjyj said, "military police told me that "military exercise, no photo"." he got pissed and took the photo of the personnel to lodge a complaint.

    if it's indeed a military exercise, then photography is likely not allowed. same reason as to why cameras are not allowed in military camps
    i will regard actual military exercise (that will be in the jungle, camps or walled up areas) and security assignments (protection of VIP) as valid reasons to politely request for ceasation of photographing after explaination.

    Quote Originally Posted by +evenstar View Post
    call in the police, and charge him under ISA
    that will make ISA a real satire. i dun think the acts should be abused to that extent.
    Last edited by zoossh; 31st August 2010 at 01:31 AM.

  8. #608
    Senior Member dennisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Freezing Upp Thomson/Mandai!
    Posts
    2,008

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    shot my baby @ universal studios, the security asked us if we're doing editorials. I told them I'm just like the rest of the visitors, shooting their loved ones. But the guard seems to have a different impression. Forced her to change her sundress or we can't roam any further nor shoot.
    Heck, I wasn't even using any lighting nor flash. Most I did was giving her instructions on the direction the light falls. That's all!

    Same went for the national museum where the guard threatened to call the police if we shoot. I can see people using hp/compact cams shooting away, we're visitors too, except using dslr, no difference to me

  9. #609

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by +evenstar View Post
    quoting what chanjyj said, "military police told me that "military exercise, no photo"." he got pissed and took the photo of the personnel to lodge a complaint.

    if it's indeed a military exercise, then photography is likely not allowed. same reason as to why cameras are not allowed in military camps
    You can easily tell when it's a military exercise or not - military exercise is always made known beforehand.

    Btw for those unaware - Bedok Jetty is MINDEF's land. So military exercise or not, if they ask you to stop, you have to. Anywhere else is free game less it's a real military exercise

  10. #610

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Anyway as a professional you have to know the law, especially when it comes to your area of expertise.


    The action taken by me might border on overreaction, but I was darn pissed at the way I was treated. I'll leave it at that.
    To clarify matters, this is what I questioned MINDEF about (extract from my ancient email)


    1. Does MINDEF/SAF not give/release a press release when an exercise is imminent? It has done so in the past and I have never seen a military operation held in a public place without a press release although it is not required by law (Refer to Cap 295, s. 208).

    2. Should a operation be held in a public place without a prior press release, what documents are the personnel involved in the operation required to produce to prove to the general public, that indeed, this is a legal military operation/exercise?
    All aid to civilian authorities approved is required to be published in the Gazette (Cap 295 s. 201C) as soon as possible. Are other operations not so?

    3. What jurisdiction do Singapore Armed Forces Military Policemen have on civilians, in this case me, ordering them to cease photography? They are authorised to arrest a person not subject to military law who willfully obstructs any military operation, training or function only (Cap 295 s. 166).
    Are they also not required to produce their identity cards? If they did not, how would I then determine if the operation was a legal one and would the military policemen in question not be committing an offence themselves under Cap 213, s. 6 subsections A and B?

    4. If this was indeed a legal operation approved at higher levels, I can only comment that it was extremely poorly done and to the tourists surrounding me, shows an unprofessional side of the SAF. If it was not a legal operation, I believe that those in charge of these military policemen can draw their own conclusions on the legal training these servicemen have, their professionalism and their attitude.
    Last edited by chanjyj; 31st August 2010 at 05:18 AM.

  11. #611
    Senior Member redstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Beyond the outer limits
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Anyone knows the rationale behind not allowing people to take photo of building model?

    Architect / developer worried any last min changes in design which differs from what is shown in the model, or the model doesn't portray exactly what is being built, and risk lawsuits?


    Photographer = spy, terrorist, private investigator, government inspector...

  12. #612
    Member 9V-Orion Images's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Autenticate ALGRN @ 7987.8270
    Posts
    1,760

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by redstone View Post
    Anyone knows the rationale behind not allowing people to take photo of building model?

    Architect / developer worried any last min changes in design which differs from what is shown in the model, or the model doesn't portray exactly what is being built, and risk lawsuits?


    Photographer = spy, terrorist, private investigator, government inspector...
    IIRC, it has something to do with issues pertaining to architectural copyright infringement or something.
    CS Aviation / Flickr
    Per aspera ad astra

  13. #613
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by 9V-Orion Images;
    IIRC, it has something to do with issues pertaining to architectural copyright infringement or something.
    you infringe the copyright when you build a building of similar design.
    that is - infringement.

    well, to put simply, there is no rationale and it is not rational.

  14. #614

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    My impression is that if you shoot with a DSLR and/or flash/strobes, your chances of getting stopped or questioned by security is several times higher than someone shooting with a compact or handphone..

    If refraining terrorist activities are the main concern, I just wonder whether all terrorist shoot with DSLR and strobes when they take pictures of the hotel..


    I guess that's is a good excuse to buy a Nex-5 or GF1 for shooting in S'pore..

  15. #615
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    117

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kongo View Post
    My impression is that if you shoot with a DSLR and/or flash/strobes, your chances of getting stopped or questioned by security is several times higher than someone shooting with a compact or handphone..

    If refraining terrorist activities are the main concern, I just wonder whether all terrorist shoot with DSLR and strobes when they take pictures of the hotel..
    I agree. I think Singapore's security personnel are focusing too much energy targeting the wrong people. Somehow security personnel freak out when the see the DSLR. What they don't realise is terrorists are NOT likely to go out holding a huge DSLR body and f2.8 lens simply because it attracts too much attention! And nowadays compact cams have relatively good IQ and zoom. As an example, I think security ought to watch the one holding a compact with 20x zoom as well, not just the one holding a DSLR with kit lens. The former could potentially be more dangerous.

  16. #616
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,755

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Quote Originally Posted by deltatango View Post
    I agree. I think Singapore's security personnel are focusing too much energy targeting the wrong people. Somehow security personnel freak out when the see the DSLR. What they don't realise is terrorists are NOT likely to go out holding a huge DSLR body and f2.8 lens simply because it attracts too much attention! And nowadays compact cams have relatively good IQ and zoom. As an example, I think security ought to watch the one holding a compact with 20x zoom as well, not just the one holding a DSLR with kit lens. The former could potentially be more dangerous.
    Well, for starters, most of them have zero understanding of cameras. Whenever they see a big DSLR, they will automatically think photography and somehow relate it to a form of threat. They just aren't informed about the threats of a PnS or minicams or hidden cams...
    Michael Lim
    My Flickr Site

  17. #617
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    BB West
    Posts
    2,184

    Default Re: 'No Photography' Plz...

    Maybe their mindset? Cause when someone is holding a DSLR, is spend over thousands of $ on it which make them jealous? Whereby some1 holding a PnS, they just thought, cheap camera, can take much detail or zoom la.
    Only Sony device mostly, haha!

Page 31 of 31 FirstFirst ... 62126293031

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •