Photo taking of government building

[BBTM]

I went to took the railway tracks at Bt Panjang area. The station master ask me, why dont go further down to took. His "Further down" is mean the station next to MinDef Camp! I told him, not a good idea to take photos over there. If ask to del those is ok but what if format the whole card!!!

Another incident. I taking photos of IBP during night time. Cause one of the building display nice lights and also, got a nice art piece over there. I sitting on the ROAD, out come 1 security. I told him, I taking photos, he is ok with it. Another came out of no where, says I couldn't take. I reply him, i in public area, why can't take? His reply, wait I publish in magazine, his boss scold him. Free publish, still got scold? Lame excuse.

Sg is full of building. We got nothing left to take, if still restrict us, dont allow camera to be sale or use at all is the best choice, haha! POV, some security might have this "jealous" feeling. Imagine you holding a DSLR and they might not able to afford a mobile with camera. Sure they try to use their "power" to stop you from taking photos lor. 101 reason to fight abt when taking photos, really sad....

 

[cutecdo]

It's even worse in the UAE. They confiscate your camera or cellphone on the spot. And they go through and delete whatever they deemed inappropriate before you go for an interview to get it back. During government events official photographers are not spared as well.

 

[flipfreak]

It's even worse in the UAE. They confiscate your camera or cellphone on the spot. And they go through and delete whatever they deemed inappropriate before you go for an interview to get it back. During government events official photographers are not spared as well.

yeah. they are really sensitive over in the middle east.

 

[xray]

There's nothing wrong with photographing government buildings unless they are protected installations like police stations (!!!), military bases, airbases and airports.

 

[9V-Orion Images]

There's nothing wrong with photographing government buildings unless they are protected installations like police stations (!!!), military bases, airbases and airports.

For those who have access to the Government e-Gazette, one particular matter that I had notice when cross referencing coordinates provided in any of the Protected Areas and Places order on Google Earth is that in numerous cases the land lots that was gazetted as such often include public accessible pedestrian pavements and roads passing through rather than the actual building itself.

So when you think that you are in a public area, it could really just be a public accessible area instead. I have a feeling that this also apply for private properties such as shopping centres when the immediate public accessible areas outside including pedestrian pavements and roads actually comes under their ownership in which their security personnels have direct "jurisdiction" over?

Not an expert in this field, just sharing my 2 cents worth for discussion sake.

 

[BBTM]

Will you dares to reply like that?

Security : No taking of the building.
You : I not taking photos of the building. I taking photos of the sky, if your building BLOCKING my view only!
Security : ....

:bsmilie:

 

[AkemiOgre]

Will you dares to reply like that?

Security : No taking of the building.
You : I not taking photos of the building. I taking photos of the sky, if your building BLOCKING my view only!
Security : ....

:bsmilie:

LOL security guard nvm one la . Police den need to be more respectful

 

[kei1309]

i just took pictures of parliament while the guard watched me. doing long exposures for like 15 minutes? :bsmilie:

 

[AkemiOgre]

i just took pictures of parliament while the guard watched me. doing long exposures for like 15 minutes? :bsmilie:

Lol whayywa need 15 minutes ? Midnight ?

 

[Prince Photogenic]

For those who have access to the Government e-Gazette, one particular matter that I had notice when cross referencing coordinates provided in any of the Protected Areas and Places order on Google Earth is that in numerous cases the land lots that was gazetted as such often include public accessible pedestrian pavements and roads passing through rather than the actual building itself.

So when you think that you are in a public area, it could really just be a public accessible area instead. I have a feeling that this also apply for private properties such as shopping centres when the immediate public accessible areas outside including pedestrian pavements and roads actually comes under their ownership in which their security personnels have direct "jurisdiction" over?

Not an expert in this field, just sharing my 2 cents worth for discussion sake.

the walkway outside the building belongs to the owner, gahmen or otherwise, but the padestrian paths and the roads belongs to MND and LTA. The security guards do have jurisdiction over, say the just outside Paragon, but they cannot contradict the law. (means they cannot allow you to smoke in front of the door)

Will you dares to reply like that?

Security : No taking of the building.
You : I not taking photos of the building. I taking photos of the sky, if your building BLOCKING my view only!
Security : ....

:bsmilie:

hahaha.. security guards shld be ok la.. they cant do anything to you. worse come to worse you run lor, they cant catch you one.. cuz they are usually old and/or fat..

i just took pictures of parliament while the guard watched me. doing long exposures for like 15 minutes? :bsmilie:

Lol whayywa need 15 minutes ? Midnight ?

he was trying to bio some super chio ang moh tourist la.. nevermind that his photo later became over-exposed..

 

[commonjunks]

I know near KK hospital there is police office and everywhere it is written cannot take picture. Or you can do what i did