Travel Photography - So...photography in airports/flights

I hear a bunch of different things about the legalities of this and I get pretty confused. I am a very visual person. Going to Australia once a year is not something that any of my family/friends will ever be able to do...maybe not even once in their lifetime. So I like to capture it in pictures. I like to be able to show them what is past security in the airports...the surroundings, etc. I also like to be able to help someone else out if they are taking a trip that requires them to be in airports I have experienced. As we all know, being in an airport for the first time can be pretty nerve wracking.

I have a couple of rules for myself. First and foremost, I make sure no airport workers, security guards, or other personnel are in the photos. If they are, the photos go to moot. Secondly, I make sure my "camera" is not noticeable so I am not disturbing or offending others. I currently use my iTouch which is very crappy but will probably be getting a compact camera because the iTouch is SO BAD. Thirdly, I limit where the pictures are posted. I post them on my personal Facebook and will post them on various forums but any pictures that have very recognizable faces in them are usually thrown out. I want to ensure privacy of all (not like flying on a plane is private or anything!).

So in flight or past security, is it illegal or wrong to take pictures and/or videos?

Also...a question I am sure a lot of people ask, and fight about. What about when taking off? I see youtube videos of takeoffs all the time taken from cell phones or cameras. I know that the "rules" are to keep ALL electronics off. But what about a regular camera that doesn't emit any waves of any sort (that I am aware of)? I will admit that I used my iTouch (not my phone, however, I did turn that off, and put my iTouch on airplane mode) to take videos of the takeoffs from Boston and Melbourne. I don't like disobeying rules, so I should probably just pack it away, but I am such a visual person...I like it for memories and to show others.

So let the debate begin...

personally I almost always shoot with dslr so I never feel uncomfortable but on those occasions where it's just a snap of things going on I place my phone into airplane mode and feel comfortable that I will not cause the plane to go plunging to earth. Although, there is bound to be someone (uneducated about this mode) who will be calling FA and causing a scene.
As for airports... everything to me is fair game PAST security. Including passengers, workers.... anything.

Thanks for your input. I do have a DSLR that I carry on board with me...but not to take photos with in flight...just in my travels as the camera is quite large. I think that would make people uncomfortable. It would at the very least be noticeable and I am NOT good in confrontation. So if an airport worker came up to me and asked me to stop, well, yeah.

I am looking into the Canon A1200 as a compact digital to bring with me. My itouch pics are just...despicable. Why they put a 0.7mp camera in that and a 5mp camera in the iPhone (which is no different, other than it's enabled for a phone) I will never know.

I want it all to be as unnoticed as possible. Last year with my iTouch people assumed I was texting...I made it look good...LOL!

As a past "working pro photog" I learned a lot about capturing people without them knowing. One trick I use to this day is to set up the camera with a 20 or 35 mm lens and set to AF and AE and hold the camera down at hip level with my finger on the shutter release. I then walk the streets, markets or airport and get amazing candids.
I have to admit to being payed big cash while "on set" for these photos BEFORE the actual shoot began :D

lol nice! I am just an amateur who loves taking pictures...I love my DSLR (Canon Rebel T1i) and I love candid shots. You know now that I think about it, the T1i does have a feature where I can see the pic through the screen and not the viewfinder...that could help me a lot.

However, I'll probably pick up a Powershot A1200 or a Canon ELPH 100.

Ya, do the powershot, it has a 28mm lens and a quiet function that will let you do what I explained earlier. have fun with it.
I've taken lots of pics with my wife's panasonic lumix that I'm very proud of too ^

I can't speak for foreign airports or airlines, but there are absolutely no legal restrictions on photography at the airport, of aircraft or while in flight - absolutely none.

Some airlines, UA in particular, prohibit photography of the cabin crew or the nonsense they call "security procedures" :rolleyes:, but you are free to take photos of the cabin, seating or anything your heart desires out the window on UA or any other US airline or foreign airline traveling in international airspace.

There is only one category of "airport worker" with the authority to give you a hard time at the airport if you're taking pictures - the airport cop. While the law is clear - you have the unhindered right to take photos at will of the airport, ramp, aircraft, security checkpoint, security procedures, etc etc (US airports), there are quite a few cops who will try and take your camera away or threaten you with arrest if you don't stop taking photos at their command - you can either challenge them and eventually line your pockets with cash at their expense, or just back down and wait until you're away from them or onboard.

No other airport worker, be it TSA, airline or vendor has the right to interfere with your photo taking and you're free to flip them off and ignore them - all they can do is throw a hissy fit and run and call the police. If they physically try and interfere, you have the right to fight back to protect yourself and your property.

If they do it onboard, you can still ignore them as crew member instructions must be legitimate to carry the weight of federal regs, and telling you stop taking photos out the window is not a legitimate crew member instruction and can be ignored.

Obviously you must follow the prevailing rules in the country you're visiting, but as far as the USA is concerned, photo taking is not restricted in any way. Your personality will be a factor in determining how far you'd be willing to push things if confronted. Personally, I told a Delta ramp worker to go F himself and step outside if he had a problem when he "ordered" me to stand back from the security checkpoint ropes when I was seeing someone off - I wouldn't hesitate a moment to flip him the finger if he "ordered" me to stop taking photos - simply put, airport workers don't give orders - but if you're the non-confrontational type, then just practice discretion to your taste.

I take pictures with my iPhone all the time - the cabin, seats, meals, window views, etc...when I travel with my SLR, I would do the same. If I end up getting the NEX7, it will likely be on all my trips and hopefully produce some great out-the-window shots.

I've considered getting throwaway film cameras for takeoff and landing photos (so they're not electronic).

You don't mention a country, so I'll start with the United States.

Any photos taken from "public property" such as a sidewalk are fair game. I have a DSLR, but I end up doing most of my "public" photography with a smaller Point and Shoot like a Cannon G11.

Airports fall under the 'public property' category. I never hide the fact I am taking photographs. I like to snap and shoot as I move along - I'll take pictures of many different things from signs to artwork to aircraft out on the tarmac .. or planes departing and landing if in a good position.

Again, the sterile side of the airport falls under public property - you are in a public place. In busy public places, ultimately, people passing by will be in your shot.

If I ever want to purposely take the photographs of a group of people, I will get permission first. For example, I have some nice pictures of the "welcome home" greeters for US servicemen/women as they come out of US Customs.

If I'm ever approached by someone who claims no photography (I can count the times on one hand) - I'll first stop and listen - admittedly I did have one guard attempt to grab at my camera (this was brought to the attention of his employer and company that hired the guard company, which was met with an apology and a statement indicating the guard went overboard).

If it is a security guard, I'll ask who their boss is at (the property) and attempt to call them on the spot (assuming it is a workweek/hours). This works well.

If you're stopped by a police officer, tell them the truth, which could be as simple as I'm a tourist documenting my travels. There are two types - the ones just doing a quick evaluation, exchange a few words and they're on their way -- then there's the airport cop who is wrongly informed that photography is illegal, violates the patriot act, etc. It doesn't and it isn't illegal -- up to you on how to deal with this one. If you do back down, I (personally, at least) would ask for their business cards.

As for airlines, etc. As has been pointed out, some carriers have "rules" in place, but if you're shooting photos out the aircraft window, I don't expect anyone to bug you.

I keep the sound off on my camera and shoot photos during taxi, take-off, and landing. Never been an issue with an air carrier.

Oops, my bad on the no country thing. I am in the US, yes. Going to Australia. I had no issues taking pictures with my iTouch before but again they likely assumed most of the time that I was texting or something.

I am looking at two cameras...the powershot a1200 as I mentioned and the Canon ELPH 100. But I am not sure the ELPH has a quiet mode. But it does have the Lithium battery which would last longer than the two double A's. Hmm...choices choices.

Oops, my bad on the no country thing. I am in the US, yes. Going to Australia. I had no issues taking pictures with my iTouch before but again they likely assumed most of the time that I was texting or something.

I am looking at two cameras...the powershot a1200 as I mentioned and the Canon ELPH 100. But I am not sure the ELPH has a quiet mode. But it does have the Lithium battery which would last longer than the two double A's. Hmm...choices choices.

You'll love Australia. I've spent nearly a couple of years there, primarily between Melbourne and Perth. In fact, I still keep my Melbourne telephone # here in the states - since it was originally with a VoIP carrier, I just access it here via VoIP now.

You shouldn't have any problems taking pictures in Australian airports, other than Immigration and Customs, which is off-limits.

I'd go for something with a Lithium Ion battery -- between that and a large SD, you won't have to worry too much about re-charging and can easily get thousands of photos.

Long battery life and storage are two big items I look for with a quality camera.

Be sure you have an adapter for your charger -- I would read the find print on your charger and see how much voltage it will allow for. Some will accept 120-240 input, in which case all you need is an adapter plug, others do only 120, in which case you need a 240 to 120 conversion device plus the adapter plug.

If you've never been to Australia and have any airport specific questions, let me know. I've flown to/from/though most major airports in Australia -- Sydney Intl, Sydney Domestic, Melbourne, Perth Domestic & Perth International, Cairns, Canberra, Townsville, Rockhampton, Mackay, Brisbane, and a number of other smaller ones.

For international arrivals, I prefer Melbourne as their international terminal and domestic terminals are part of the same facility.

At both Sydney and Perth, the Domestic and International airports are setup as separate, despite using the same airfield.

I'll never forget the time I had to tax a taxi from Perth Domestic to Perth International. My arrival was late and I couldn't wait on the bus which does the trip like twice an hour. Taxi driver was bloody pissed that he missed a fare to the city, but I told him I'd take care of him, which I did.

Luckily, I caught my flight just as it was closing and Qantas staff had me jump queues as I went through formalities (exit immigration & security).

Domestic security is a walk in the park compared to TSA here in the states and is actually pleasant.

Nuff rambling, but any questions, let me know.

The photography in airports airplanes ticket counter thing comes up on a very regular basis, often in response to somebody being told they will be arrested if they don't delete the pictures they just took.

The responses here always come in two flavors, those who feel it's a public place and nobody can stop you from doing anything, and those who believe the airline or airport can enforce their photography rules.

It's an endless circular argument. At the very least I would look up the policy for your airline or airport, it's probably somewhere on their website, and see what they say. Expect the same with any camera you are using when electronics are supposed to be off, you may find other passengers who complain that you are using electronics when you aren't supposed to and you may find that many flight attendants agree with them.

There are specific rules for things, much of this is not even open for debate, if you are told anything with an on off switch should be off, that's pretty cut and dry. If the airline's policy, like one of them is

However, photography, audio, or video recording of other customers without their express prior consent is strictly prohibited. Also, unauthorized photography, audio, or video recording of airline personnel, aircraft equipment, or procedures is always prohibited


there's no debate, if you don't have authorization, you shouldn't be doing it.

It pretty much comes down to the risk you are willing to take to get the pictures.

As to batteries - If you go to a non standard battery like a lithium rechargeable, I would recommend getting a spare battery and an external charger. If it's a popular model, you can often find chargers and two replacement batteries on ebay for ten to fifteen dollars often with free shipping. This way you can always have a charged battery ready to go and not have to wait for the battery to charge in the camera.

There are some airports which have photo and video bans in place; I believe NYC is one. Whether these bans are Constitutional or not is debatable (I personally think they're not), but until or unless they are struck down in court, the local police can and will enforce those photo bans, and you may be ordered to cease photography and threatened with arrest.

there's no debate, if you don't have authorization, you shouldn't be doing it.

Except in places where you don't need any authorization, and in situations where the airline or other private entity has no legal authority to prevent you from taking pictures... such as taking pics of their planes from off airport property, or pictures of their employees from the public areas of a terminal with no photographic restrictions.

Private entities like airlines are perfectly within their rights to write those restrictions into their CoC, and to enforce them by denying you carriage on their aircraft if you violate them. However, a private entity like an airline has no authority to enforce those bans on anyone who has not agreed to them, or is not on property they control such as their spaces within an airport or their aircraft.

In other words, if I'm not flying UA, and I'm not on US property within the airport, I can take as many pics of the UA counter, UA employees, and UA aircraft as I like from the public areas of the airport, and there's nothing they can do about it, so long as I don't violate any other laws such as harassment, assault, or trespassing. They can call the police, and police in America generally (wrongly, in my opinion) will tell you to move along and give you some hassle over your activity, but they will have no real legal basis for that order unless you have violated some other law.

It all comes down to the rather stupid idea that photography, in and of itself, is a "suspicious" activity.

SDF-thanks for that! I do love Australia. Part of me wants to move there.

I have been twice. This year (err...2011) I went from April to May. The year before that was March to April. Next year, I'm going March to April again. I always fly into Melbourne and have had no issues there. This year I'll have to go through customs...boooo...but I want my Aussie friends to have REAL Vermont Maple Syrup lol. And I am betting the dogs will smell that.

I stay with my best friend who lives there, a couple hours north of the airport. I really love it. I love the climate, and the people!

Thanks all for your responses.

There are some airports which have photo and video bans in place; I believe NYC is one. Whether these bans are Constitutional or not is debatable (I personally think they're not), but until or unless they are struck down in court, the local police can and will enforce those photo bans, and you may be ordered to cease photography and threatened with arrest.Make that can and might enforce... I spent a long cnx happily snapping away in the JetBlue terminal. Now admittedly I was only shooting the planes through the windows but nobody paid the slightest attention.

Most definitely, if someone asks me to stop, I don't have a problem with that. As an amateur "photographer" I like to take risks no matter where I go. Sometimes I break rules...but in photography you do that a lot lol. But if someone asks me to stop, I will. Hopefully...I will be discreet enough!

I love taking pictures in airports and from the airplane, and I always have my little Sony Cybershot within reach. Approach shots, videos of landings, etc. never had anyone make a comment, but also try to be somewhat discreet about it.

This picture that I took at the Basrah airport in Iraq (http://minus.com/meb4SDTyh#1o) didn't go down too well with the dudes in the background, but I didn't need to delete it or anything! :)

^^ That's great!! I love to see pics of different airports and scenery. I am mostly a portrait photographer myself, but when I'm going places, I most definitely want to document via pictures where I've been. I can't wait to try my new little camera (I picked up a Panasonic Lumix ZS9) and see how it fares. I took pictures and videos at BOS, LAX, and MEL and on AA and QF flights last year and no one seemed to notice or care. I was pretty discreet about the camera during takeoff however...I covered it with a jacket and pretend to be "sleeping" or looking out the window LOL!

I can't speak for foreign airports or airlines, but there are absolutely no legal restrictions on photography at the airport, of aircraft or while in flight - absolutely none.

Some airlines, UA in particular, prohibit photography of the cabin crew or the nonsense they call "security procedures" :rolleyes:, but you are free to take photos of the cabin, seating or anything your heart desires out the window on UA or any other US airline or foreign airline traveling in international airspace.

There is only one category of "airport worker" with the authority to give you a hard time at the airport if you're taking pictures - the airport cop. While the law is clear - you have the unhindered right to take photos at will of the airport, ramp, aircraft, security checkpoint, security procedures, etc etc (US airports), there are quite a few cops who will try and take your camera away or threaten you with arrest if you don't stop taking photos at their command - you can either challenge them and eventually line your pockets with cash at their expense, or just back down and wait until you're away from them or onboard.

No other airport worker, be it TSA, airline or vendor has the right to interfere with your photo taking and you're free to flip them off and ignore them - all they can do is throw a hissy fit and run and call the police. If they physically try and interfere, you have the right to fight back to protect yourself and your property.

If they do it onboard, you can still ignore them as crew member instructions must be legitimate to carry the weight of federal regs, and telling you stop taking photos out the window is not a legitimate crew member instruction and can be ignored.

Obviously you must follow the prevailing rules in the country you're visiting, but as far as the USA is concerned, photo taking is not restricted in any way. Your personality will be a factor in determining how far you'd be willing to push things if confronted. Personally, I told a Delta ramp worker to go F himself and step outside if he had a problem when he "ordered" me to stand back from the security checkpoint ropes when I was seeing someone off - I wouldn't hesitate a moment to flip him the finger if he "ordered" me to stop taking photos - simply put, airport workers don't give orders - but if you're the non-confrontational type, then just practice discretion to your taste.

I take pictures with my iPhone all the time - the cabin, seats, meals, window views, etc...when I travel with my SLR, I would do the same. If I end up getting the NEX7, it will likely be on all my trips and hopefully produce some great out-the-window shots.

this is perhaps the worst advice ive ever seen given on any web forum, and could easily land you in jail. While yes, photography from public space is legal, you better be 1000% sure there is not some special restriction in place. In any case, the police can arrest you, and if you resist, add that to the charges. Even if wrongly accused/arrested that charge would still stand, and probaly get the $h!+ beat out of you in the process.

But most importantly, this attitude results in more photographers getting harassed and more restrictions on where you can and can't take pictures.

this is perhaps the worst advice ive ever seen given on any web forum, and could easily land you in jail. While yes, photography from public space is legal, you better be 1000% sure there is not some special restriction in place. In any case, the police can arrest you, and if you resist, add that to the charges. Even if wrongly accused/arrested that charge would still stand, and probaly get the $h!+ beat out of you in the process.

But most importantly, this attitude results in more photographers getting harassed and more restrictions on where you can and can't take pictures.

Excuse me, you better check your facts. Photography of, or from public spaces is legal. Any restrictions to the contrary are unenforceable on their face. This includes the Port Authority regulations which are not legal - except where it can be established you are taking a photo from or of private property while standing on private property - those are the only enforceable rules.

If you enter the Empire State Building, as an example, and take photos and are told you cannot, then you must stop - the building is private property. If you are standing on the sidewalk taking photos of the building and a security guard comes outside and tells you to stop, you can ignore them - you are on public property.

The *only* entity who can truly make like difficult for a photographer is the police - and no where in my post did I suggest resisting arrest, and stating you're probably be beaten in the process is just total nonsense. If they decide to confiscate your camera, arrest you or forcibly delete your photos, then you can (and should) hire a lawyer and sue them for a nice cash settlement. I would gladly step back and let them arrest me because the end result would be an nice expensive new camera for myself and probably a decent bump to my retirement account at their expense.

No one else at the airport, TSA included, has the right to interfere with your photography - and you can defend yourself from any attempt to physically restrain you or take away your camera.

The airport director could have you removed from the airport for taking photos, as they can remove anyone from the airport at their discretion, but again you have the option of suing for damages. The airport director or airport authority cannot make a rule that prevents photography of or from a public place - unless the terminal is private property.

This is one of the reasons why the TSA backed down from its own photography ban - it was not legally enforceable.

This includes the Port Authority regulations which are not legal


FWIW, I haven't had any problems with the PANYNJ lately and have photographed at both JFK and LGA on several occasions during the past few months.

At LGA, there are areas in the central terminal building prior to security, where you can just sit and photograph. I got a few good shots from that location and there were others sitting there doing the same. No problems airside at LGA either - just watch your camera settings and avoid reflection if shooting thru UV protected windows.

Been getting great Manhattan photos departing out of LGA by sitting in a left side window seat (the "A" seat) when they do runway 31 and runway 4 departures as you typically loop north of Manhattan and then turn south keeping the Manhattan view out the window.

Last few times pattern was 31 departure / 22 arrival which is good for photos from the terminal - with a good zoom you can watch the planes come in over the water. Departing out of JFK, I never seem to get the good Manhattan shots.

I don't know if they've backed down - but I do know they consider some areas more sensitive than others like the JFK AirTrain which can be a great place to get photos out the window as it traverses the airport - its elevation is ideal to get aircraft photos - but photo quality can be hit or miss with the movement of the AirTrain & direction of the sun.

I've dealt with PA public relations and they've assisted me with past problems. As a CYA, I do keep a contact name and # on my mobile if I need it.

SDF

this is perhaps the worst advice ive ever seen given on any web forum, and could easily land you in jail. While yes, photography from public space is legal, you better be 1000% sure there is not some special restriction in place. In any case, the police can arrest you, and if you resist, add that to the charges. Even if wrongly accused/arrested that charge would still stand, and probaly get the $h!+ beat out of you in the process.

But most importantly, this attitude results in more photographers getting harassed and more restrictions on where you can and can't take pictures.It's actually your attitude that results in more perceived restrictions on photographers than actually exist and embolden TSO's and LEO's at airports to exceed their authority. As such, yours "is perhaps the worst advice ive [sic] ever seen given on any web forum . . . ."

If more would assert their photography rights, perhaps incidents (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1118895-interrogated-detained-iah-photographing.html) in which TSA and police agencies do not understand the law would become fewer.

So what exactly are the "more restrictions on where you can and can't take pictures" and "some special restriction in place" that exist at the airport? Do you have specific examples? Due to the efforts of posters here, we have gotten the no photography signs removed at ISP and BWI. Two days ago I transited IAH Immigration and Customs and didn't notice the no cell phones/no pictures prohibition I have seen in the past (and many were talking on their cell phones).

It's actually your attitude that results in more perceived restrictions on photographers than actually exist and embolden TSO's and LEO's at airports to exceed their authority.The "obey a uniform syndrome". Very many security personnel, TSA and others, believe willfully or through ignorance that they have the authority to stop photography; and a significant number of police officers do as well.

Most people are unaware of their rights and will simply acquiesce to such misguided and illegal instructions. It's a personal call whether to capitulate or stand your ground and accept the consequences, but advice to always cave is indeed questionable.

Not the 'worst' I've ever seen though ;) .

SDF-thanks for that! I do love Australia. Part of me wants to move there.

I have been twice. This year (err...2011) I went from April to May. The year before that was March to April. Next year, I'm going March to April again. I always fly into Melbourne and have had no issues there. This year I'll have to go through customs...boooo...but I want my Aussie friends to have REAL Vermont Maple Syrup lol. And I am betting the dogs will smell that.

I stay with my best friend who lives there, a couple hours north of the airport. I really love it. I love the climate, and the people!

Thanks all for your responses.

You're Welcome - I have a good friend (plus friend's family) who lives in the South Yarra part of Melbourne and a business colleague, who is also a good friend in Perth.

If you're clearing Immigration & Customs at MEL, if you're directed to "lane 1" at Customs, that is the "secondary/extra attention" lane.

I've never had the pleasure of lane 1 - hopefully you'll get the standard baggage x-ray, or if they're trusting of you, send you down the outside lane to the right and have an officer direct you to make another right, out the side exit. ^

Just be sure it's declared.

SDF

SDF-thanks for that! I do love Australia. Part of me wants to move there.

I have been twice. This year (err...2011) I went from April to May. The year before that was March to April. Next year, I'm going March to April again. I always fly into Melbourne and have had no issues there. This year I'll have to go through customs...boooo...but I want my Aussie friends to have REAL Vermont Maple Syrup lol. And I am betting the dogs will smell that.

I stay with my best friend who lives there, a couple hours north of the airport. I really love it. I love the climate, and the people!

Thanks all for your responses.

I tried introducing some Aussie friends to a few local delicacies when they visited Baltimore, with mixed results. For some reason, they simply didn't care for Old Bay seafood seasoning (which I personally think has supernatural powers, it's so good), but they did enjoy the Tastycake brand chocolate cupcakes and butterscotch krimpets.

Don't forget to seal those syrup bottles in plastic bags before packing, in case of leaks or breakage. Checked bags are not treated gently!

You're Welcome - I have a good friend (plus friend's family) who lives in the South Yarra part of Melbourne and a business colleague, who is also a good friend in Perth.

If you're clearing Immigration & Customs at MEL, if you're directed to "lane 1" at Customs, that is the "secondary/extra attention" lane.

I've never had the pleasure of lane 1 - hopefully you'll get the standard baggage x-ray, or if they're trusting of you, send you down the outside lane to the right and have an officer direct you to make another right, out the side exit. ^

Just be sure it's declared.

SDF

Thanks to both of you...yes I will seal it in a bag...didn't even think about that! And I will declare it.

The first year I went, I brought a couple of chocolate things...I don't know why but I didn't go through lane 1. When i was in lane 1, a guy from the other lane had no one there so called me over. The guy asked me what I had, and I just said I have some chocolate and he was like ah, pft, you're free, and then had me go out the doors. It was so weird the first year since I had never met my best friend in person...when I went out the door she was standing RIGHT there and I probably backed up the line a little cause I didn't MOVE lol. Last year, I brought chocolate but didn't declare it and the dogs didn't pick it up so I was home free. This year I think being maple syrup the dogs probably would pick it up so I will just play it safe even though I don't want to. Hopefully they'll send me through the other line!

Note that I never said just cave. You should of course state that you know your rights to take photos from public land.

Where we diverge is after that. You propose becoming indignant and violent. I suggest that this is going to end badly for you. The police and national guard that ALWAYS accompany the TSA checkpoint will certainly be taking the TSA agents' side and backing them up first, finding out who is "right" later.

In today's digital world, there is no reason to sit there with the camera up to your face with a giant lens bringing attention to yourself. Be discreet, get the actual candid shot, and avoid the problem from the start.

Note that I never said just cave. You should of course state that you know your rights to take photos from public land.

Where we diverge is after that. You propose becoming indignant and violent. I suggest that this is going to end badly for you. The police and national guard that ALWAYS accompany the TSA checkpoint will certainly be taking the TSA agents' side and backing them up first, finding out who is "right" later.

In today's digital world, there is no reason to sit there with the camera up to your face with a giant lens bringing attention to yourself. Be discreet, get the actual candid shot, and avoid the problem from the start.

Exactly...I am very good at being discreet. I just got my little camera today. It's not as little or discreet as I'd like it to be but it makes no noise. It does flash a little red button once but that is it. I am hoping to be very secretive! lol

The police and national guard that ALWAYS accompany the TSA checkpoint will certainly be taking the TSA agents' side and backing them up first, finding out who is "right" later.At which airport(s) have you seen the National Guard in the past 9 years ?

At which airport(s) have you seen the National Guard in the past 9 years ?


LaGuardia, Kennedy airports get additional 80 National Guard troops to patrol at peak times
BY EDGAR SANDOVAL AND KATIE NELSON
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Security in and out of LaGuardia and Kennedy airports was as tight as a bursting suitcase Tuesday.

Weary jet-setters said they could feel the presence of the 80 extra National Guard troops that Gov. Paterson sent to patrol during peak travel times.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-12-30/local/17940908_1_national-guard-troops-laguardia-airports

and in August of 2006 in LA (and most of the other airports in CA)

U.S. National Guard troops deployed at Los Angeles airport for tighter security


U.S. National Guard troops were deployed at Los Angeles International Airport Friday as part of heightened security in wake of a foiled terror plot to blow up airliners flying from Britain to the United States.

About 200 Guard members reported to the airport early in the morning and they were assisting the Transportation Security Administration in performing secondary screenings at boarding gates, according to airport spokeswoman Nancy Castles.


and as recently as a couple months ago

National Guard Providing Extra Thanksgiving Security At NYC Mass Transit Hubs
November 24, 2011 8:11 AM


NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) – If you’re traveling in and around New York City today, you may see some extra security.

The New York National Guard says it will have more than 250 troops on duty for the Thanksgiving holiday helping provide security at airports and train stations in New York City.

At which airport(s) have you seen the National Guard in the past 9 years ?

I've seen them at JFK a couple times in the past few years. Saw them at LAX after the undie bomber.

It's very rare I see them. I've only seen them connected to busy travel periods and after the undie scare.

Traveling in NYC, I still see them at places like Penn Station.

Aside from the above, I've not seen them anywhere else. I don't know if this is true or not, but I've heard their heavy arms are not loaded and they're there for show thus deterrence.

To the best of my knowledge, their powers are limited.

Getting back to the topic at-hand, photography is fair game anywhere in the open public within the US.

If I'm wrongly not allowed to take photos - don't get oneself arrested by pushing the issue, but do file suit. There are attorneys who specialize in this area I've spoken to - they've provided me good advice and I've spoken to them about potential costs or how a claim would work, if I ever needed to go that route.

I've done a few cases Pro Se, but prefer to have counsel handle things. Sadly, most cases that could result in a change are settled prior to trial. The courts prefer less than 10% of cases go to trial and .. at least with Federal Court, the process is highly structured - but done so in a way so that the magistrate knows where our differences are and encourages parties to fairly settle during discovery and pre-trial phases.

Been though some state and a few federal cases, so I've seen how things work from both sides both in state and US District courts.

SDF

I am just wondering if the airport behind security is truly "public" as you cannot go behind there without a ticket and/or paying a fee to be there. I suppose that is not a legitimate argument since we go to other places and pay fees to get in and are usually free to take pictures. I don't know why past security is so "off limits". I like to see the inside of airports and the different terminals and views from them myself, and I also like to see the inside of jets...not just the outside! Anyone can look up a picture of a specific airplane and get hundreds or thousands of pics of the outside but rarely do you find good pics of inside planes. I really don't get what the "oooooo off limits" feeling is all about. I need a traveling partner just so I can have them "pose" in the "way" of the camera so it LOOKS like I'm taking pictures of them :D hahaha!

I am just wondering if the airport behind security is truly "public" as you cannot go behind there without a ticket and/or paying a fee to be there. I suppose that is not a legitimate argument since we go to other places and pay fees to get in and are usually free to take pictures. I don't know why past security is so "off limits". I like to see the inside of airports and the different terminals and views from them myself, and I also like to see the inside of jets...not just the outside! Anyone can look up a picture of a specific airplane and get hundreds or thousands of pics of the outside but rarely do you find good pics of inside planes. I really don't get what the "oooooo off limits" feeling is all about. I need a traveling partner just so I can have them "pose" in the "way" of the camera so it LOOKS like I'm taking pictures of them :D hahaha!

For the definition of photography, yes, the terminal behind security is public - the entire airport, runways included, is public-owned (unless it's an actual private airport - yes, there are many). Having said that, the government can place access restrictions on public property when it's in the public's interest to do so - thus as a Palm Beach County resident and taxpayer, I cannot stroll out on the runway at PBI and carve my initials in the concrete....even though it's 'my' runway.

Some airlines, UA in particular, prohibit photography of the cabin crew or the nonsense they call "security procedures" :rolleyes:, but you are free to take photos of the cabin, seating or anything your heart desires out the window on UA or any other US airline or foreign airline traveling in international airspace.

If the company has a policy prohibiting such then in what interpretation of such is one free to do it anyways? Just because you likely won't have any trouble with it doesn't mean it is actually permitted.

As I said above

The responses here always come in two flavors, those who feel it's a public place and nobody can stop you from doing anything, and those who believe the airline or airport can enforce their photography rules.

Yet once the police at the airport pull out the handcuffs, the delete button goes into overdrive.

I would be very careful about the advice you get from sources on the internet. Right or wrong, it's pretty much a given that when the cop reaches for his handcuffs after you are insisting you can do whatever you want as you are on public property, they aren't reading these posts (if they were, they would be laughing too hard to arrest anybody)

If the company has a policy prohibiting such then in what interpretation of such is one free to do it anyways? Just because you likely won't have any trouble with it doesn't mean it is actually permitted.

We're talking about an airline who employs people like the FA who screamed at a fellow FT to shut down his laptop because the picture of a plane on the wallpaper screen was a security threat :rolleyes: I tried reading Flying magazine a few times to see if it would bait a FA into a response, but so far, nothing.

I guess it's a personal choice - I think the UA security attitude is silly, so I ignore the nonsensical parts and will take photos inside the cabin at will. So far no one has said anything - but I will draw the line if a FA ever tells me to stop taking photos out the window or of my meal - that is one order I will ignore and even dare them to do anything about.

As I said above



Yet once the police at the airport pull out the handcuffs, the delete button goes into overdrive.


WHILE That is a valid possibility of outcome, a reply like this, IMO of course, ignores the other possibilities that are logically possible - regardless of how likely or not.

While that's true I don't remember seeing any threads about people actually standing up to the police and refusing to delete their pictures.

There have been more than a few threads about people who deleted their pictures.

While that's true I don't remember seeing any threads about people actually standing up to the police and refusing to delete their pictures.

There have been more than a few threads about people who deleted their pictures.

Oh, I would have no problem deleting my pictures - then following SDF_Traveler's advise and either hiring an attorney who specializes in these cases or just filing suit myself. As I wrote upthread, I would love for a police department to cover the cost of that nifty NEX7 I have my eyes on - lenses too.

Now if it's an airline employee, TSA or some other airport worker, not only would I not delete the photos, I'd be telling them to buzz off.

While that's true I don't remember seeing any threads about people actually standing up to the police and refusing to delete their pictures.

There have been more than a few threads about people who deleted their pictures.I guess that Phil's encounter (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1017373-flyer-processed-arrested-nm-after-declining-show-id.html) nor mine (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1118895-interrogated-detained-iah-photographing.html) counts. ;)

I guess that Phil's encounter (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1017373-flyer-processed-arrested-nm-after-declining-show-id.html) nor mine (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1118895-interrogated-detained-iah-photographing.html) counts. ;)

When were you threatened with arrest if you did not delete your pictures? I would assume if that was the case it would have been mentioned in your post.

So no, I would not say either of those counts as I very clearly said when people here have been faced with either deleting their pictures or being arrested, they choose to delete.

I think it's an incredible stretch, even for the people here, to say somebody refusing to show an ID has anything to do with a law enforcement officer telling somebody they will be arrested if they don't delete pictures. It's quite a stretch to say that was what I was referring to because he had a camera with him.

As I said in the earlier post, I don't recall a single post here about somebody who when given a choice of being arrested or deleting their pictures has chosen to be cuffed and taken away.

When were you threatened with arrest if you did not delete your pictures? I would assume if that was the case it would have been mentioned in your post.

So no, I would not say either of those counts as I very clearly said when people here have been faced with either deleting their pictures or being arrested, they choose to delete.

I think it's an incredible stretch, even for the people here, to say somebody refusing to show an ID has anything to do with a law enforcement officer telling somebody they will be arrested if they don't delete pictures. It's quite a stretch to say that was what I was referring to because he had a camera with him.

As I said in the earlier post, I don't recall a single post here about somebody who when given a choice of being arrested or deleting their pictures has chosen to be cuffed and taken away.Both our interactions were the direct result of photography. If we hadn't been photographing, we wouldn't have been subjected to LEO's. Phil was arrested because the TSO wanted him to stop recording prior to going through the non-ID process and, when he wouldn't, stopped the screening and called the LEO's.

Both of us had our camera equipment seized and retained by the police. Someone deleted Phil's camera card while it was in the government's possession. Since I was not permitted to document the number of pictures on my memory card prior to its confiscation, the same could have happened to me if someone decided to do so. There was no reason to ask us to delete our pictures while we were seized as they took our cameras and could do it at their leisure if desired. To me, your's is a distinction without a difference.

As I said before, neither of you were told you would be arrested if you did not delete pictures off your camera. So neither example has anything at all to do with what I was talking about.

It's not a distinction without a difference, it's two totally and completely unrelated things.

The responses here always come in two flavors, those who feel it's a public place and nobody can stop you from doing anything, and those who believe the airline or airport can enforce their photography rules.
In my opinion, the responses are not as black and white as you portray them to be.

It's an endless circular argument. At the very least I would look up the policy for your airline or airport, it's probably somewhere on their website, and see what they say.Do you know of any airports at which the TSA operates that have policies that prohibit private photography and would stand up in court?

If the airline's policy, like one of them is

However, photography, audio, or video recording of other customers without their express prior consent is strictly prohibited. Also, unauthorized photography, audio, or video recording of airline personnel, aircraft equipment, or procedures is always prohibited
I haven't been authorized to take pictures by that airline of one of its airplanes flying over my home, so that would be prohibited? I understand its prohibition when I am on its property and taking pictures of its property or employees, but not otherwise. Perhaps I should put out a policy that says no one is permitted to photograph my car or my home without prior authorization. :rolleyes:

there's no debate, if you don't have authorization, you shouldn't be doing it.You have it reversed. The default is that it is permitted unless legally prohibited.

As I said before, neither of you were told you would be arrested if you did not delete pictures off your camera. So neither example has anything at all to do with what I was talking about.

It's not a distinction without a difference, it's two totally and completely unrelated things.You're right; it's actually worse. The police had no need to tell us to delete the pictures since they seized not only the pictures (to delete at their leisure if they so desired), but the memory cards and all of our camera equipment as well. We both could have complied with all requests and not have been subjected to the seizure of us and our property.

Oh, I would have no problem deleting my pictures - then following SDF_Traveler's advise and either hiring an attorney who specializes in these cases or just filing suit myself. As I wrote upthread, I would love for a police department to cover the cost of that nifty NEX7 I have my eyes on - lenses too.

Now if it's an airline employee, TSA or some other airport worker, not only would I not delete the photos, I'd be telling them to buzz off.

You do need to watch for security guards as well that are hired to protect 'public' property. If they block your photography and threaten you with police, arrest, etc., document it and file suit.

I've filed suits pro se before - it can be a lot of work and research of case law when making pleadings, but I've been successful.

As I said the only problem is the courts will usually do everything it can to force a settlement and in many cases all you can say is "matter has been settled to satisfaction of both parties" or a "no comment"

However, the case could always be one of the 10% that do go to trial.

SDF

I am just wondering if the airport behind security is truly "public" as you cannot go behind there without a ticket and/or paying a fee to be there. I suppose that is not a legitimate argument since we go to other places and pay fees to get in and are usually free to take pictures. I don't know why past security is so "off limits". I like to see the inside of airports and the different terminals and views from them myself, and I also like to see the inside of jets...not just the outside! Anyone can look up a picture of a specific airplane and get hundreds or thousands of pics of the outside but rarely do you find good pics of inside planes. I really don't get what the "oooooo off limits" feeling is all about. I need a traveling partner just so I can have them "pose" in the "way" of the camera so it LOOKS like I'm taking pictures of them :D hahaha!

For photography purposes, it is public. It wasn't all that long ago everyone was allowed airside, flight or no flight. TSA wants to limit screenings and resources to passengers only.

Good pics inside airplanes can be difficult, as it is best done when the plane is empty or in a way that you're not photographing other (unknown to you) passengers.

I have taken pictures of seats things like seats, such as the Qantas Skybed (J class) - but I had no passenger next to me on the upper deck of the 744 when I took the photo.

Most airports used by passengers are not private, but property of the city / municipality / govt, etc, just like sidewalks are.

SDF

Thanks for that. I tend to lag behind when deplaning or sneak a picture or two when everyone has just barely sat down, using no flash and just manual settings. I could also ask the FA if I could take a picture after everyone's left but they might not appreciate that ;)

In my opinion, the responses are not as black and white as you portray them to be.

Do you know of any airports at which the TSA operates that have policies that prohibit private photography and would stand up in court?

I haven't been authorized to take pictures by that airline of one of its airplanes flying over my home, so that would be prohibited? I understand its prohibition when I am on its property and taking pictures of its property or employees, but not otherwise. Perhaps I should put out a policy that says no one is permitted to photograph my car or my home without prior authorization. :rolleyes:

You have it reversed. The default is that it is permitted unless legally prohibited.

Two things to remember here, Sol:

1) TSA prohibiting photography is not the main issue, since TSA has assured us time and again that it does not prohibit imaging in the checkpoint. Those TSOs who tell you other wise are wrong; most of them are poorly trained or just plain stupid and don't actually know the difference. The main issue is generally whether the local airport authority has imaging prohibitions in place, which are enforced by the local LEOs.

2) Whether such imaging restrictions could or could not hold up in court is completely irrelevant. What's relevant is whether they have or have not already been upheld in court, because unless or until such restrictions are struck down in court, the local LEOs can and will still enforce them - which can mean arrest, ejection from the airport, or other problems for you with the LEOs.

I fully support those with the moxy to stand up to un-Constitutional laws, be arrested, and go through the long, difficult fight in court needed to overturn those laws. And I fully believe that imaging restrictions in public places are not only un-Constitutional, but futile and stupid (if people can SEE something, it doesn't matter whether they record it or photograph it, they've already SEEN it and recorded it in their brains).

I just think we should all bear in mind that being right is not a bullet-proof vest.

You do need to watch for security guards as well that are hired to protect 'public' property. If they block your photography and threaten you with police, arrest, etc., document it and file suit.

I've filed suits pro se before - it can be a lot of work and research of case law when making pleadings, but I've been successful.

As I said the only problem is the courts will usually do everything it can to force a settlement and in many cases all you can say is "matter has been settled to satisfaction of both parties" or a "no comment"

However, the case could always be one of the 10% that do go to trial.

SDF

Good advise, thank you. I'm not really looking to go to trial unless it's a major incident and my lawyer wants to push it, but a nice cash settlement with a professional dressing-down (or termination) of the cop involved would be perfectly fine with me.

Two things to remember here, Sol:

1) TSA prohibiting photography is not the main issue, since TSA has assured us time and again that it does not prohibit imaging in the checkpoint. Those TSOs who tell you other wise are wrong; most of them are poorly trained or just plain stupid and don't actually know the difference. The main issue is generally whether the local airport authority has imaging prohibitions in place, which are enforced by the local LEOs.TSA assures us, but time and again failures occur. Would the TSA be so forgiving about these transgressions if it was missing guns? (oh, never mind, bad example). :)

Then we have the monitors at the screening checkpoints that TSA says that we shouldn't photograph. Well, no authority exists to stop pictures from being taken, but the TSA couches it in terms that could easily be interpreted otherwise. TSO's are instructed to report anyone to their supervisor that is taking pictures of the monitors. We know that can end badly.

And now we have been told by a TSO on this board that a witness for the person being screened in private (by the TSA's demand) may not photograph that screening. But yet when asked for the authority for that prohibition, none has been forthcoming.

2) Whether such imaging restrictions could or could not hold up in court is completely irrelevant. What's relevant is whether they have or have not already been upheld in court, because unless or until such restrictions are struck down in court, the local LEOs can and will still enforce them - which can mean arrest, ejection from the airport, or other problems for you with the LEOs.Are you aware of any private photographer who has been convicted of taking pictures at an airport in the public area in violation of an airport policy? From what I have read, the government doesn't try to convict on that violation (since it almost always will fail), but looks for other charges unrelated to photography.

I fully support those with the moxy to stand up to un-Constitutional laws, be arrested, and go through the long, difficult fight in court needed to overturn those laws. And I fully believe that imaging restrictions in public places are not only un-Constitutional, but futile and stupid (if people can SEE something, it doesn't matter whether they record it or photograph it, they've already SEEN it and recorded it in their brains).Agree.

I just think we should all bear in mind that being right is not a bullet-proof vest.Absolutely true.

So by what could they really charge you for? Especially if you blur out the faces of the passengers/people...they don't have much they can call you on. No identifiable faces, and all of the businesses there are probably more than well aware that their business could and probably will be photographed in the background of shots. I'm not a professional but I know my way around a camera but am too chicken to pull out the big one in the airport. But should I do that and get clear shots of people's faces I'd be likely to blur them just enough so they are not identifiable. With that said, there are hundreds of "in airport" shots that are just brilliant that don't have blurred faces and I don't hear of much uproar about that. Ya know, I think the guards are just bored... :D

cover the cost of that nifty NEX7 I have my eyes on - lenses too.

Since there is only 1 worth buying, perhaps the money could be spent developing (or convincing Sony to develop) a line of lenses worthy of the body

In my opinion, the responses are not as black and white as you portray them to be.

Do you know of any airports at which the TSA operates that have policies that prohibit private photography and would stand up in court?

I haven't been authorized to take pictures by that airline of one of its airplanes flying over my home, so that would be prohibited? I understand its prohibition when I am on its property and taking pictures of its property or employees, but not otherwise. Perhaps I should put out a policy that says no one is permitted to photograph my car or my home without prior authorization. :rolleyes:

You have it reversed. The default is that it is permitted unless legally prohibited.

You left out the part about charging batteries. Since your panties are in such a wad you feel the need to quote everything I post in the thread and try to totally change what I said, you may want to pick up the battery comment too, if it makes you feel any better.

I'm so sorry to have dared to disagree with your unrelated ranting having nothing to do with what I posted. But honored to feel you have the need to go back to everything I've said and try to turn it into something totally different.

You left out the part about charging batteries. Since your panties are in such a wad you feel the need to quote everything I post in the thread and try to totally change what I said, you may want to pick up the battery comment too, if it makes you feel any better.

I'm so sorry to have dared to disagree with your unrelated ranting having nothing to do with what I posted. But honored to feel you have the need to go back to everything I've said and try to turn it into something totally different.Why would it be necessary to talk about your battery statement as it really doesn't have anything to do with the interaction of photographers and security personnel?

I do note that you don't wish to answer the questions posited that would help advance the discussion, but instead claim that I am making an "unrelated ranting" and my "panties are in such a wad". So be it.

So by what could they really charge you for? Especially if you blur out the faces of the passengers/people...they don't have much they can call you on. No identifiable faces, and all of the businesses there are probably more than well aware that their business could and probably will be photographed in the background of shots. I'm not a professional but I know my way around a camera but am too chicken to pull out the big one in the airport. But should I do that and get clear shots of people's faces I'd be likely to blur them just enough so they are not identifiable. With that said, there are hundreds of "in airport" shots that are just brilliant that don't have blurred faces and I don't hear of much uproar about that. Ya know, I think the guards are just bored... :DI'm not sure if you directed this at me, but I will provide some thoughts. If you are using the photo for non-commercial purposes and you are in the public area of the airport where no expectation of privacy exists (e.g. not the airport bathrooms), then no need exists to blur out the faces of passengers/people.

I understand and respect your decision that you are too chicken to pull out your DSLR in the airport. It is unfortunate that we are to the point where that is quite a rational decision since security personnel still don't get what is permitted.

I'm not sure if you directed this at me, but I will provide some thoughts. If you are using the photo for non-commercial purposes and you are in the public area of the airport where no expectation of privacy exists (e.g. not the airport bathrooms), then no need exists to blur out the faces of passengers/people.

I understand and respect your decision that you are too chicken to pull out your DSLR in the airport. It is unfortunate that we are to the point where that is quite a rational decision since security personnel still don't get what is permitted.

Nah, not directed at anyone in particular...more or less making up a hypothetical situation. I probably will end up actually putting my DSLR in my checked baggage because unfortunately American Airlines was dumb last time and said there wasn't room on board for my carry on so they checked it last time both ways so I'd rather not deal with that hassle. But my little camera will do the job just fine.

I probably will end up actually putting my DSLR in my checked baggage...Very Bad Idea.

I probably will end up actually putting my DSLR in my checked baggage

Make sure you say goodbye to it, as it's probably the last time you will ever see it.

Make sure you say goodbye to it, as it's probably the last time you will ever see it.

I had no choice...but I do put insurance on it every year just in case something happens to it. But they would NOT let me even open my bag and take anything out, they had no room on board for it and my laptop was the other bag I had and I wasn't about to let THAT be checked either as it is far more valuable than my DSLR. I may try to take the DSLR in its bag as a single carry on item if I can get away with it. They were just so rough with me last year and I don't know if I want to deal with that again. My camera made it fine both ways as nervous as I was.

We're talking about an airline who employs people like the FA who screamed at a fellow FT to shut down his laptop because the picture of a plane on the wallpaper screen was a security threat :rolleyes:


wowzers! I had to chuckle when I read this. Really ridiculous!

I always take pics with my camera when landing.

I think the difference is when you gate check a bag, it goes from the gate to the plane (in most cases) and not under the airport. It's very hard for somebody to get something out of it.

If however you check it at the counter, the bag begins it's path under the airport. It may go through a scanner, and anybody standing around will know there's a camera in it. It will be handled by people who may or may not have the chance to pop it open and go through it.

Don't be like the CNN Cameraman who found his stolen video camera on e-bay being sold by a TSA Employee. When they raided his house, they recovered 66 cameras, 31 computers, and other stuff.

I had no choice...but I do put insurance on it every year just in case something happens to it. But they would NOT let me even open my bag and take anything out, they had no room on board for it and my laptop was the other bag I had and I wasn't about to let THAT be checked either as it is far more valuable than my DSLR. I may try to take the DSLR in its bag as a single carry on item if I can get away with it. They were just so rough with me last year and I don't know if I want to deal with that again. My camera made it fine both ways as nervous as I was.Not everyone knows this, but for the TSA (http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1248.shtm), you may carry one bag of photographic equipment in addition to one carry-on and one personal item through the screening checkpoint.

Oh really? Interesting. I don't like taking a lot on board anyway as getting off is a PAIN when trying to drag a bag behind me or carry it. But this year I will have a backpack for my laptop that is very light and has room for my other stuff so bringing my camera bag and stowing it won't be a problem as it is fairly small. It's a bag made to carry lenses but I carry my camera and two lenses and a flash in it. Now that I am rethinking it I might do that. In that case maybe I don't need to check a second bag...hmmm...I'd like to avoid that if at all possible since UA is so dumb and is gonna charge me 70 bucks for it. Then again, I am going away for 6 weeks and getting everything to fit in under 50lbs is HARD. So we'll see. I hate the luggage part of traveling SO MUCH.

Nah, not directed at anyone in particular...more or less making up a hypothetical situation. I probably will end up actually putting my DSLR in my checked baggage because unfortunately American Airlines was dumb last time and said there wasn't room on board for my carry on so they checked it last time both ways so I'd rather not deal with that hassle. But my little camera will do the job just fine.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! For the love of all that's holy! PLEASE! NEVER EVER NEVER EVER pack sensitive and/or expensive electronics in checked bags!

Leaving aside the incredible likelihood of such gear being stolen en route, have you ever seen how the baggage handlers toss checked bags around? Have you ever seen how squished those bags are when the arrive at destination (from other bags being packed on top)? Have you ever felt the intense cold on your checked bag when you pick it up at destination, from the unheated luggage compartment of a commercial plane? Have you ever seen luggage being transited from plane to terminal or vice versa in open weather with rain and snow and heat and cold hitting the bags?

The dangers are many and varied. Please, please, PLEASE, don't ever pack your camera or laptop or camcorder or lenses in checked bags! If you don't want them any more, send them to me, but don't murder them that way! PLEASE! Think of the children!

Oh really? Interesting. I don't like taking a lot on board anyway as getting off is a PAIN when trying to drag a bag behind me or carry it. But this year I will have a backpack for my laptop that is very light and has room for my other stuff so bringing my camera bag and stowing it won't be a problem as it is fairly small. It's a bag made to carry lenses but I carry my camera and two lenses and a flash in it. Now that I am rethinking it I might do that. In that case maybe I don't need to check a second bag...hmmm...I'd like to avoid that if at all possible since UA is so dumb and is gonna charge me 70 bucks for it. Then again, I am going away for 6 weeks and getting everything to fit in under 50lbs is HARD. So we'll see. I hate the luggage part of traveling SO MUCH.

If you already have experience making your own bag, consider making a purpose-built carry-on for your camera and computer gear, as I did:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-photography/1252074-my-custom-camera-laptop-rolling-gear-bag.html

It was a fun project that I am very proud of, one of my best ever, and has served me well in travel since I finished it. Okay, I've only used it on one trip, but still, it served me well.

I knowwwwwwwww it's a cardinal sin...I know. My bag is SO well protected, it could be flung anywhere and nothing would happen...I am very protective of my "baby" and I'm not exactly umm a graceful person to say the least. Last year, I put the bag in another bag, and surrounded it with clothes and soft stuff so it couldn't move...did my own move and shake and throw test and it didn't budge. I don't want to check it...at all...but last year at the gate they forced me to check. Boo. Didnt' even give me time to grab the camera out of the bag. I'll admit it was nice not carrying around the extra bag. But the little camera bag wouldn't be difficult to carry around I suppose. I hate walking through the airport dragging/carrying stuff. My back is in enough trouble as it is without any extra weight. This year will be so much better since I've got that backpack for my laptop and other goodies.

That rolling laptop bag is freakin awesome and you should be proud of it. I would make it if I knew that it wouldn't get checked but my current carry on bag is that size, and it was what got checked last year *rolls eyes*. They didn't even check the size, they said that the plane was already full. This was American Airlines, a little 757 or 737 I flew on. I'll be on UA 757 on the way over so I'm hoping they're better about it. But I'm going to try carrying my little bag and the laptop and that should be fine.

I hear a bunch of different things about the legalities of this and I get pretty confused. I am a very visual person. Going to Australia once a year is not something that any of my family/friends will ever be able to do...maybe not even once in their lifetime. So I like to capture it in pictures. I like to be able to show them what is past security in the airports...the surroundings, etc. I also like to be able to help someone else out if they are taking a trip that requires them to be in airports I have experienced. As we all know, being in an airport for the first time can be pretty nerve wracking.

I have a couple of rules for myself. First and foremost, I make sure no airport workers, security guards, or other personnel are in the photos. If they are, the photos go to moot. Secondly, I make sure my "camera" is not noticeable so I am not disturbing or offending others. I currently use my iTouch which is very crappy but will probably be getting a compact camera because the iTouch is SO BAD. Thirdly, I limit where the pictures are posted. I post them on my personal Facebook and will post them on various forums but any pictures that have very recognizable faces in them are usually thrown out. I want to ensure privacy of all (not like flying on a plane is private or anything!).

So in flight or past security, is it illegal or wrong to take pictures and/or videos?

Also...a question I am sure a lot of people ask, and fight about. What about when taking off? I see youtube videos of takeoffs all the time taken from cell phones or cameras. I know that the "rules" are to keep ALL electronics off. But what about a regular camera that doesn't emit any waves of any sort (that I am aware of)? I will admit that I used my iTouch (not my phone, however, I did turn that off, and put my iTouch on airplane mode) to take videos of the takeoffs from Boston and Melbourne. I don't like disobeying rules, so I should probably just pack it away, but I am such a visual person...I like it for memories and to show others.

So let the debate begin...

ive seen many people using their phones to take pictutes 'inside a plane' and the cabin crew dont say anything. i think the problem is when you get the 'big gear' (DSLR users, lookingatcha!). i seen a poor chinese guy man handled at an airport in the middle east because he couldnt understand what the ground staff were saying to him. basically when the plane landed and as we were getting off the steps to enter the bus - he started to take photos using his dslr of the plane. i guess the safe side is to always confirm with staff nearby when taking pictures. each airport operates different and here in the UK, BAA airports in general have a policy section so its worth taking a look.

Australia is pretty amazing. I would recommend getting an aisle seat to get up whenever you want but before you land try to switch to a window seat to take pictures.

Australia is pretty amazing. I would recommend getting an aisle seat to get up whenever you want but before you land try to switch to a window seat to take pictures.

I had an aisle seat the first time I went over and not once did I get a chance to move to a window seat :( So I just pick a window seat now and deal with it. Thankfully I have a steel bladder so I can hold it a long time (must be something about being young or something lol) and I just time getting up when my fellow row people get up. So far the only not-full flight I had was on the way over last year and the seat next to me was empty (but was the only empty seat in the plane). I'm picky on my seat...I make sure there isn't anything behind the seat I pick if at all possible...which is why I'm going for 77K like I did last year. That way I don't have to worry about reclining, my stuff falling behind my seat (the person in front of me had her pillow and blanket fall behind me due to the fair bit of space between seat and window) and I can just chill. I don't mind the extra noise. Plus there's no one behind me to see if I'm taking pictures ^

I wait to start snapping until after security. After that, it's all fair game, IMO.
Video-ing the tromp down the ramp and people getting settled, taking pictures in the gate area, and of course, taking pictures/video of the takeoff and landing.
I've occasionally had people in either company or some sort of security guard uniform approach me but I've found just gushing to them about the 744 standing right in front of us ala "You can tell this is a -437B and not your run of the mill 437" will usually make them nod and smile and move on. :)

It seems like they don't really want to be subjected to a full-on lecture about empennages and radomes and trim-tabs.

Oh, and I make absolutely no attempt to hide the fact that I have a camera.

I'm really struggling with taking my camera on board...I hate carrying stuff around in the airport and with my already bad neck and back I'd hate to add weight to it. Plus fumbling around to get stuff...I don't know. I want to take it on board with me but I don't know if I feel like carrying the bag all around the airport. On the way over it won't be so bad because I only have a 2 hour layover but on the way back I have something like a 5 or 6 hour layover and walking around with extra weight is not pretty! Plus American Airlines has been stupid in the past about my carry ons and made me check it last time camera and all...they didn't even give me a chance to take anything out, they just said they didn't have room. So I'd rather pack it in well (it's already a well padded and protected case anyway) and hope and pray to the good Lord above that it gets through than to not pack it as well and then have it thrown under the plane without a chance, ya know?

It got checked both times last trip and it made it fine...I just don't know. I don't LIKE doing it but at the risk of having it thrown under there anyway, I'm not sure. Now I could just carry the bag around by itself, but I'd be afraid that someone on the plane would take it since all my needed stuff will be in my backpack (not to mention my laptop) so I'd have to stow it above. Not likely...but anyone could just grab it especially since I'm in a window seat.

I guess I'm just getting nerved up as it's just under 5 weeks to go!

I'm really struggling with taking my camera on board...I hate carrying stuff around in the airport and with my already bad neck and back I'd hate to add weight to it. Plus fumbling around to get stuff...I don't know. I want to take it on board with me but I don't know if I feel like carrying the bag all around the airport. On the way over it won't be so bad because I only have a 2 hour layover but on the way back I have something like a 5 or 6 hour layover and walking around with extra weight is not pretty! Plus American Airlines has been stupid in the past about my carry ons and made me check it last time camera and all...they didn't even give me a chance to take anything out, they just said they didn't have room. So I'd rather pack it in well (it's already a well padded and protected case anyway) and hope and pray to the good Lord above that it gets through than to not pack it as well and then have it thrown under the plane without a chance, ya know?

It got checked both times last trip and it made it fine...I just don't know. I don't LIKE doing it but at the risk of having it thrown under there anyway, I'm not sure. Now I could just carry the bag around by itself, but I'd be afraid that someone on the plane would take it since all my needed stuff will be in my backpack (not to mention my laptop) so I'd have to stow it above. Not likely...but anyone could just grab it especially since I'm in a window seat.

I guess I'm just getting nerved up as it's just under 5 weeks to go!

Personally, I'd much rather take the slim chance that someone might try to grab it from the overhead and run off the plane with it (when is the last time you saw anyone run off a plane, anyway?) than to take the much greater chance of having anonymous luggage thieves steal it in the "secure" areas or having it tossed around like a football by the Samsonite Gorillas who handle checked bags. It also helps that my bag is NOT a camera bag, it's a cheap, generic rolling overnight from WalMart that I turned into a camera bag; nobody wants to steal kettle luggage.

I have a wheeled bag, so handling the weight in the airport is not an issue for me, even if I had a long layover or delayed flight somewhere. I never carry it, because it stays on its wheels.

Please see my post above - checking camera and/or computer gear is like playing Russian Roulette. Ask yourself how much you could afford it if your bag were stolen, damaged, or re-routed, or if you arrived at your destination and its contents were stolen or damaged? I don't know about you, but my camera/computer bag contains somewhere between $2K-$3K in gear when I travel, and there is no way I will ever let that bag be checked, not even gate checked. I make sure to be one of the first aboard the aircraft so I can find a place to stow it in the overhead, and it's big enough and heavy enough that it's not going to be taken by any of the other pax during deplaning, even though I always take a window seat.

Please see my post above - checking camera and/or computer gear is like playing Russian Roulette. Ask yourself how much you could afford it if your bag were stolen, damaged, or re-routed, or if you arrived at your destination and its contents were stolen or damaged? I don't know about you, but my camera/computer bag contains somewhere between $2K-$3K in gear when I travel, and there is no way I will ever let that bag be checked, not even gate checked. I make sure to be one of the first aboard the aircraft so I can find a place to stow it in the overhead, and it's big enough and heavy enough that it's not going to be taken by any of the other pax during deplaning, even though I always take a window seat.

Case in point. (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/continental-onepass-pre-merger/1309086-difficult-lost-bagge-situation.html)

Personally, I'd much rather take the slim chance that someone might try to grab it from the overhead and run off the plane with it (when is the last time you saw anyone run off a plane, anyway?) than to take the much greater chance of having anonymous luggage thieves steal it in the "secure" areas or having it tossed around like a football by the Samsonite Gorillas who handle checked bags. It also helps that my bag is NOT a camera bag, it's a cheap, generic rolling overnight from WalMart that I turned into a camera bag; nobody wants to steal kettle luggage.

I have a wheeled bag, so handling the weight in the airport is not an issue for me, even if I had a long layover or delayed flight somewhere. I never carry it, because it stays on its wheels.

Please see my post above - checking camera and/or computer gear is like playing Russian Roulette. Ask yourself how much you could afford it if your bag were stolen, damaged, or re-routed, or if you arrived at your destination and its contents were stolen or damaged? I don't know about you, but my camera/computer bag contains somewhere between $2K-$3K in gear when I travel, and there is no way I will ever let that bag be checked, not even gate checked. I make sure to be one of the first aboard the aircraft so I can find a place to stow it in the overhead, and it's big enough and heavy enough that it's not going to be taken by any of the other pax during deplaning, even though I always take a window seat.

Well, this is true. No one can run off the plane although I am sure a few want to by the end of the flight :D But it's more the part of extra stuff to put through security, which takes more time, and there's more weight, more stuff to carry around. My camera is insured and my trip is insured for lost/stolen stuff, enough that it would cover my camera and equipment. I tried putting everything in one regular bag but it got checked last year both times so I want to keep it small. The camera bag doesn't look like a camera bag so I probably have nothing to worry about re: putting it in overhead. I just hate to carry around the extra weight.

My camera is insured and my trip is insured for lost/stolen stuff, enough that it would cover my camera and equipment.
Are you sure that it is insured if you place it in checked baggage? I could imagine an insurance company denying your claim since they would view that act by you as gross negligence. If you intentionally left your camera equipment in a crime ridden area out in the open, do you think that the insurance company just might have a reason to deny your claim?

And if it is stolen, what about all the pictures that were on the camera?

Are you sure that it is insured if you place it in checked baggage? I could imagine an insurance company denying your claim since they would view that act by you as gross negligence. If you intentionally left your camera equipment in a crime ridden area out in the open, do you think that the insurance company just might have a reason to deny your claim?

And if it is stolen, what about all the pictures that were on the camera?

You serve a good point and I have done some research since my last post in this thread and it wouldn't likely be covered.

Not worried about the pictures on the camera as I would take all of my cards on board with me since they're small and can fit in the laptop case.

I will probably just suck it up and carry that bag around the airports. I didn't want to be stuck with it because anything extra is so bulky and awkward but I also don't want to risk trying a large carry on bag as last year it got checked both times (and nothing smaller would fit my camera bag.

Sounds like I'm just going to chuck it on board with me. It won't be as bad as carrying the laptop bag around that's for sure. The backpack I have for my laptop is amazing and distributes weight well.

Thanks for all the input!

Has anyone taken pictures of the customs and Immigration area? They have signs prohibiting photography in those areas. I'd like to take a picture of them!

Has anyone taken pictures of the customs and Immigration area? They have signs prohibiting photography in those areas. I'd like to take a picture of them!


That is probably a bad idea.

Uh yeah, that's one I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.

If in fact you did take pictures of it and happened to put it on the web anywhere, though you probably wouldn't get in trouble with it, there's always a chance. Probably not a chance you want to take.

I am definitely taking my camera on board. I've got it all worked out to disguise it in another small bag so I won't worry about it being so obvious. Getting excited...I leave on Wednesday!

Has anyone taken pictures of the customs and Immigration area? They have signs prohibiting photography in those areas. I'd like to take a picture of them!

I'll be honest and say yes, but in a country outside of the United States.

I had just gotten off a small prop with 12-15 seats; pressurized, but no lav on board. We landed at an International airport for a scheduled technical stop (scheduled, but a necessary fuel stop). While a "technical stop", it was my destination. This airport was one of two (?) ports of entry for the country I was in.

I took my time walking on the tarmac towards the terminal as I had a great view of large commercial jets on the tarmac which were conducting international operations. This provided the opportunity to obtain some great photos.

Despite the fact I was already admitted into this nation and landed on a domestic flight, I was directed off the tarmac and into the immigration hall by an official.

I took a few pictures as I entered the mostly empty immigration hall.

When I reached the immigration booth I was asked for my passport and landing card. I handed my passport over and said I arrived on a domestic flight. Very few pax arrive domestic at this airport - the far majority are Intl arrivals.

The immigration officer paged through my passport looking for my admission stamp. Once located, the inspector initialed it, and allowed me into customs and out the door.

SDF

Well gee, I take my 10 foot pole comment back.

Because after thinking about it for a while, I realized that last year, I took a short video of immigration at an airport I was in...using my iTouch which everyone thought was a phone and it looked like I was texting.

Oops *blushes*

But I wouldn't try it again. Just too risky.

Has anyone taken pictures of the customs and Immigration area? They have signs prohibiting photography in those areas. I'd like to take a picture of them!Those signs about both photography and cell phone use were at IAH, but when I went through in December, they were gone (and I specifically looked for them). In addition, I saw a number of people on cell phones while waiting in line, but saw no one being admonished for doing so.

I would be interested to know if others are still seeing the signs at other US airports.

I'll be in BOS and LAX on Wednesday, I'll try to remember to look for ya.