Photography on the Rail Network

[Greg B]

Reading Jethro's comments about being told not to photograph on Hurstville station, I had a look at the websites for CityRail in Sydney and Connex in Melbourne.

Cityrail's site is silent on the issue of photography (as far as I can tell), howvere Connex's website has very detailed provisions.....

Rail Enthusiast Permits

Connex welcomes the interest of rail enthusiasts and has introduced a new permit system to allow them to photograph trains from our stations.

This system represents a compromise between the need for enthusiasts to pursue their hobby in an easy manner, while allowing Connex to exercise some control over photography at and around train stations.

Effectively, the new system allows an amateur photographer to apply for a three-month Rail Enthusiasts Photography Permit - Suburban Stations which will allow him or her to take photographs of trains at any Connex station.

However, the permit does not apply at a number of nominated major stations. These stations are: Flinders Street, North Melbourne, Richmond, South Yarra, Caulfield, Camberwell, Footscray, Clifton Hill, Box Hill, Dandenong and Ringwood.

Please note that Connex has no authority over photography at Spencer Street Station. Photography requests should be directed to the Spencer Street Station Authority on (03) 9619 1600.

A specific permit is required for each station with this Rail Enthusiasts Photography Permit - Major Stations valid for one week at a time.

Scroll down for PDF versions of the permit applications, which include the terms and conditions for each.

For further information, please call Andrea Schade on (03) 9610 2610.


How is security at your stations enhanced by these regulations?

There is no way we can stop a determined individual from getting around these regulations, either by posing as a rail enthusiast, using a mobile phone camera or otherwise taking photographs surreptitiously.

However, by making photography a controlled activity, we make it something that stands out for our staff and our customers.

Our objective is to create a situation in which someone taking photographs is noticed, remembered and reported.

Our staff are aware that anyone taking a photograph needs a permit so they will approach that person and ask to see it.

This creates a situation in which the photographer has to interact with our staff (in addition to the requirement that he or she 'sign-on' when arriving at the station).

It increases the likelihood that the person will be remembered. A staff member may also suspect that someone is only posing as a rail enthusiast, based on their actions or a conversation when the permit is being checked. (Our staff meet a lot of rail enthusiasts and have a good chance of detecting a fraud.)

Using a mobile phone camera or otherwise taking photographs surreptitiously obviously makes it harder to take the photos and take them in such a way that they provide useful information.

Again, our objective is to make it a little harder and increase, even slightly, the opportunity for this person to be noticed, remembered and reported.

We feel the new permit system strikes a good balance between the needs of rail enthusiasts and our need to set a minimum level of security.

Why do rail enthusiast have to apply for a specific permit for major stations which is only valid for one week?

Major stations are key locations on the rail network, where two or more train lines meet and which are used by many passengers.

On that basis, we feel they require a higher level of security with greater control of amateur photography at these locations.

Why is there an outright ban on photography at Flagstaff, Melbourne Central and Parliament?

As busy, underground stations, passed by virtually every train that runs on the network, these stations require some unique security measures.

This is the basis for the ban on photography at these stations.

Regardless of what we may think about the position, at least Connex has clearly defined it.

[Nnnnsic]

Regardless of what we may think about the position, at least Connex has clearly defined it.

It sure beats Westfield's approach.

[avkomp]

we are gettng too politically correct for our own good.

at least you know where you stand in victoria as far as railway photography goes.
At this rate we will all need to register our cameras soon. similar to firearms licencing.

VERY VERY SAD really

Steve

[Onyx]

So many words convey so little... I still don't understand why.
Were there any evidence that prior surveillence preceeded the catastrophic events that are labelled as a "terrorist attack"?! Equating photography with plotting to kill on a mass scale is quite warped... how did we ever get into this frame of mind?

[jethro]

I must add i believe they may have been observing me on ccd camera as i didnt see where he came from.
Jethro

[MHD]

yeah... if I was a terroist that is exactly what I would do...
Get the most obvioius looking camera on the planet, slap a huge non-concealable lens on the front and wander around in a non-secretive way...

Bloody idiots...

[ozczecho]

How sad.

Soon we will have a clearly defined marked area where we can shoot (with a permit)...errrmm sounds like a shooters club....

[losfp]

It's the usual knee-jerk reaction - similar to cracking down on people taking photos at beaches etc.

I agree with the point made above, why the hell would I choose to draw attention to myself by using a large camera/lens? You would think that terrorist standard issue gear would involve some compact spy camera action.

And maybe a large briefcase, marked with "W.M.D" in big lettering Sorry, slipped into my little Team America-influenced dreamworld for a moment...

[gstark]

While I certainly don't agree with this in principal, I applaud Connex for at least spelling out their requirements, in a clear and comprehensible manner.

ShityWail and Wastefield could do wto emulate this approach.

[avkomp]

this begs the question
that if city rail, westfield dont have this written anywhere and someone takes photos and gets nabbed by their bully boys, what offence if any are they guilty of commiting?

Steve

[Greg B]

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security

[gstark]

What "offence" ??

On Wastefield? none. They're not enforcers of the law and actually have few rights. Thay can ask you to leave, and you can comply, or not.

If you choose to not leave, they can call the police and have you removed, but they're not able to do this themselves.

Abd if their goons so much as lay a hand on you .... that may well consitiute assault.

ShityWail is a different story, because their goons - and they are goons - do have some rights in terms of enforcement.

Problem is that they are goons, and too closely focussed on enforcement, rather than compliance.

I would tell them that you've gone to the website speficially seeking this information, and couldn't find any, and you would now greatly appreciate it if they could now find for you the applicable regulations.

[birddog114]

this begs the question
that if city rail, westfield dont have this written anywhere and someone takes photos and gets nabbed by their bully boys, what offence if any are they guilty of commiting?

Steve

I have never seen any signs or conditions of entry of these "rules makers"
Why don't they put up the signs around the buildings or rail lines?

[avkomp]

My point exactly, birdy.

the only problem though is that cityrails rentacops may damage your equipment.

all this reminds me of nazi germany.
the gestapo can do what they want.

It would be could to have clearly defined rules covered by legislation. At least we would know where we stand. Even Though I find the whole idea of no photography in various places disgusting. It wont stop Pedos, sickos and whackos from doing what they wish.
they wouldnt be overtly doing what it is they wish to do anyhow.
they would use hidden cameras in briefcases, bags etc or even small spy type cameras.
I personally dont feel any safer with all these rules, just inconvenienced and pissed off. The bad guys, well, they are just going to do it anyhow.

Steve

[Greg B]

I have seen signs at the entrance to shopping centres, usually on the glass around the door, saying that it is private property, and giving a list of "NO" things, skateboards, alchohol, etc etc sometimes photography.

It is a simple matter for them to put anything they like on the no list, so you would want to have checked it out before challenging the security guys.

Having said that, I have taken a few photos in shopping centres without challenge.

However, almost without exception, a calm and friendly response is the way to go. You cannot win just by being morally right. The security guys don't make the rules, and there is little room even for interpretation.

[sirhc55]

Placing a security system in your car will stop yobs, but not a REAL thief. Protect your home but it will not stop a REAL burglar. Having rules and regulations will NOT STOP a terrorist, ever

[birddog114]

Placing a security system in your car will stop yobs, but not a REAL thief. Protect your home but it will not stop a REAL burglar. Having rules and regulations will NOT STOP a terrorist, ever

Chris,
Get rid of one cockroach today then another 20 cockroaches will invade tonight.
Prohibited photography in those areas won't stop the bad guys.
and these are never ending.

[kipper]

Greg, there was a comment in the newspaper about 2-3 months ago about a young boy who was with his young father. His son was a train enthusiast and was taking photos at either Flinders or Spencers, security approached them and told them to stop because it's a security issue or something like that. I meant to post it at the time but I forgot.

[glamy]

The only positive outcome I can see, is that it gives a lot of unskilled peolple a job opportunity in the "security" sector. Actually it may be easier for a terrorist to work for CityRail than take photos on the network. Who needs pictures to plan an attact? Only idiots can think of that...
Cheers,
Gerard

[Killakoala]

If a terrorist wants a photo of a train station, he really only needs to get on the internet and find one like the ones at this link for the Spencer Street redevolepment website.

http://www.spencerstreetstation.com.au/noflash.asp

Or this one which makes me go dizzy when i play with it. (the picture)
http://www.path.unimelb.edu.au/~bernard ... nders.html

Or just google it and click on images.
http://images.google.com.au/images?q=fl ... a=N&tab=wi

[Greg B]

I agree Steve. The prohibitions on photography are, in my view, futile and little more than tokenism.

The authorities want to give the impression that they are doing something, so they go for the easy and visible things, notwithstanding the ineffectiveness.

Let's face it, any prospective terrorist only needs to wander round and have a look. Surreptitious photography is simple and cheap. To target someone overtly taking photographs is very stupid, but at least looks like doing something.

False security is worse than no security, but we live in an age where appearances are everything.

[Deano]

Greg, there was a comment in the newspaper about 2-3 months ago about a young boy who was with his young father. His son was a train enthusiast and was taking photos at either Flinders or Spencers, security approached them and told them to stop because it's a security issue or something like that. I meant to post it at the time but I forgot.

I remember this story. After being "busted" the father inquired as to what would need to happen to allow his son to photograph trains. He was told to apply for a permit which he did. The application stated that his son wanted to photograph during the school holidays and was declined on the basis that this was not specific enough.

It was all reported in the paper and I wonder if this is the incident which led Connex to publish the rules and implement the permit system.

As for banning/restricting photography I agree with the concensus that this is a token effort which will have no real impact except to piss a bunch of people off.

Cheers
Dean