Professional Cameras

[Kris D]

Are you allowed to bring a professional type camera on the Amtrak? I have a EOS Digital Canon camera.

 

[haolerider]

Are you allowed to bring a professional type camera on the Amtrak? I have a EOS Digital Canon camera.

Yes. Why would you think you could not? You are not allowed to photograph the crew or other passengers, especially if you intend to use the photos for professional purposes.

 

[Ryan]

You are not allowed to photograph the crew or other passengers

Disagree, unless...

you intend to use the photos for professional purposes.

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

I have had several Crew who have enjoyed getting their picture taken.

 

[lthanlon]

Here's Amtrak's photography policy.

The policy is also listed on Page 142, Spring-Summer 2012 Amtrak System Timetable: "Photography and video recording by the general public from publicly accessible property and public areas of stations is allowed. Commercial and special photography requires explicit authorization from Amtrak. Ticketed passengers may photograph on station platforms while boarding or alighting from trains. Other photography from Amtrak-owned station platforms requires permission from a station manager or designee. Generally, on-board photography is permitted by ticketed passengers but is subject to directions from the train crew."

There have been some occasional reports of photographers being told not to take pictures of their food before consuming it in the diner, or of having received a stern warning to only photograph the backs of other passengers' heads, but I've never had any issues unobtrusively taking pictures on my Amtrak journey.

DSLRs are pretty common these days, so I wouldn't worry about the camera looking "professional" unless it's equipped with a white, 2-foot-long telephoto lens or some other accessory. Thieves, however, are likely to know the difference between a Canon EOS Rebel T3 and an EOS-1 DX, so I probably wouldn't leave it unattended in my coach or sleeper space.

 

[Henry Kisor]

What everyone else said. Just don't be in-your-face with either passengers or crew; be discreet and nondisruptive. Ask sleeper attendants and even conductors if a companion can photograph you with them at a station stop. More than one has told me he or she considers it part of the job. Best, however, not to disturb them when they're busy.

I use a Pentax DSLR with a variety of lenses for most train photography, but also carry a point-and-shoot as a "boot" camera for shooting where a big camera might attract attention.

And I keep all my camera equipment with me in a slingbag wherever I go on the train or in stations, just for safety. Probably nobody would notice if you stashed it under a seat in your sleeper room, but why take chances?

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

I carry My twin 1D Mk2's on the train all the time ..

No 2Foot L glass here ... but I do have quite a gadget bag . :giggle:

Just don't whip out this ! was on loan from the campus photographer .

Dady wants ! .... :wub:

not really darn thing is heavy ! .

Mind the F2.8 was a VERY welcome feature .

..This is what I run with ..

I have never had a issue with people . Granted some will talk shop witth me ,, and I LOVE to help others get the best out of there gear in the SSL ..

 

[lthanlon]

The question I've never seen answered regarding "commercial use" is whether Amtrak attempts to distinguish between a photo that would be used to illustrate, say, a luggage ad, and a photo used editorially.

In the latter case, I could see a photo originally taken by a tourist and displayed on Flickr finding its way online or into print when an editor needing an image to accompany an article about rail travel licenses it for purely editorial use from Getty or the photographer directly. I don't see any way Amtrak could expect to regulate common editorial use.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Are you allowed to bring a professional type camera on the Amtrak? I have a EOS Digital Canon camera.

Yes. Why would you think you could not? You are not allowed to photograph the crew or other passengers, especially if you intend to use the photos for professional purposes.

To the best of my understanding being on public property like sidewalks and such allows you to take whatever pictures you want however you want so long as you don't employ unusual methods. So, no crazy x-ray photography or weird contraptions to go far beyond beyond what a normal person would be able to see. However, if you choose to publish or otherwise distribute pictures that include easily identifiable people then you are breaking the law unless the subject(s) has provided informed consent. This would include placing them on a public blog. However, if you photographed easily identifiable strangers from a public sidewalk and simply kept them on your computer and only showed your family and close friends you would still be legal. It's when you leave public property and/or distribute photos of private citizens without consent that you start to run into serious problems. Public citizens, such as the President, can be photographed from any public location at any time and distributed whenever and however you please. Although with modern America's bipartisan-approved extrajudicial "kill list" you might want to avoid exercising your constitutional rights anywhere near the executive branch.

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

Are you allowed to bring a professional type camera on the Amtrak? I have a EOS Digital Canon camera.

Yes. Why would you think you could not? You are not allowed to photograph the crew or other passengers, especially if you intend to use the photos for professional purposes.

To the best of my understanding being on public property like sidewalks and such allows you to take whatever pictures you want however you want so long as you don't employ unusual methods. So, no crazy x-ray photography or weird contraptions to go far beyond beyond what a normal person would be able to see. However, if you choose to publish or otherwise distribute pictures that include easily identifiable people then you are breaking the law unless the subject(s) has provided informed consent

Close but wrong .

Any one is fair game in any public area . UNLESS its for commercial use .. the exemption to this is journalism

{Mrs hilton is hounded by the press on a Public street . do they get model releases !?}

Nope...

Source NPPA..

Is a Member

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Are you allowed to bring a professional type camera on the Amtrak? I have a EOS Digital Canon camera.

Yes. Why would you think you could not? You are not allowed to photograph the crew or other passengers, especially if you intend to use the photos for professional purposes.

To the best of my understanding being on public property like sidewalks and such allows you to take whatever pictures you want however you want so long as you don't employ unusual methods. So, no crazy x-ray photography or weird contraptions to go far beyond beyond what a normal person would be able to see. However, if you choose to publish or otherwise distribute pictures that include easily identifiable people then you are breaking the law unless the subject(s) has provided informed consent

Close but wrong. Any one is fair game in any public area . UNLESS its for commercial use .. the exemption to this is journalism {Mrs hilton is hounded by the press on a Public street . do they get model releases !?} Nope... Source NPPA.. Is a Member

So I can just start treating some random stranger like Paris Hilton and photographing her paparazzi style so long as it's not part of a "commercial" venture? What if I post these images to a public blog that charges no fees but displays revenue generating advertisements that provide income to me and/or my hosting provider? Not saying you're wrong, just wondering how you think that would be interpreted.

 

[Ryan]

In the latter case, I could see a photo originally taken by a tourist and displayed on Flickr finding its way online or into print when an editor needing an image to accompany an article about rail travel licenses it for purely editorial use from Getty or the photographer directly. I don't see any way Amtrak could expect to regulate common editorial use.

Good point. I've actually had that happen, I was contacted by a magazine that wanted to use a picture that I had taken and posted on Flickr. I think that unless you're doing a paid photo shoot on Amtrak property, you're probably in good shape.

So I can just start treating some random stranger like Paris Hilton and photographing her paparazzi style so long as it's not part of a "commercial" venture? What if I post these images to a public blog that charges no fees but displays revenue generating advertisements that provide income to me and/or my hosting provider? Not saying you're wrong, just wondering how you think that would be interpreted.

Pretty much. Here's a pretty decent article that covers the issues involved. The Dan Heller guide cited at the end is even more extensive.

http://dslrblog.com/do-you-need-a-model-release/

At the end of the day, it really all boils down to the phrase "expectation of privacy".

 

[lthanlon]

What many don't realize is that publishing is publishing, whether you're The New York Times and read by millions in print and online every day or someone with a blog and only read online by 47 visitors a month. The same First Amendment rights protect everybody. You also are legally responsible for what you publish.

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

Texas and all .. Yea the law is SO misunderstood .. But if you think of it .. If you really needed a release for everyone .. well ever photo in the world would darn near be againts the law.

I shoot for profit in 2 ways .

A) Iam on a photoshoot for a clent and being paid . EG Theatre Mugshots Ect Bands pay me Ect ..

B) Iam doing my work as a freelance photojournalist. Under this heading , as long as I dont Mass sell my photos I can shoot just about anythng ......... But I cant EVER sell the photo as a STOCK photo. I can only sell it once to a paper .

 

as a ART photograher I shoot for fun . !

 

this is a photo of some freelance work for my college paper.

PHOTO

 

This is a for Hire photoshoot ( granted I did that band Pro Bono as I got in free and the dummer is a Old friend. )

PHOTO

 

[TimePeace]

Here's Amtrak's photography policy.

Thanks for this.

 

[user 1215]

Realistically, a professional setup would probably be more identified by the lighting accessories than the camera or even lens itself. At that point, it's probably likely that the crew may ask for evidence of your professional credentials and/or permission from Amtrak.

 

[rusty spike]

I'm not sure what the OP inferred by the question of using a "professional type" Canon EOS DSLR. My wife has one of those and she is hardly a "professional".

 

If the concern is because of a heightened security issues and fear of being a suspected terrorist, one has to wonder if a terrorist would be so intrusive as to carry a large, "professional" camera and lenses. I would not think that would be part of their "profile". I could be wrong.

 

If the concern is because Amtrak, or other officials, might suspect him or her of being a professional, commercial photographer, I suppose they would every right to questioned that person.

 

But for the most of us amateurs, none of this applies. In this day of digital photography with instantaneous uploads to the internet it is obvious that some unsuspecting individuals will be in a photo that will appear on the internet. That person can be walking down the streets of any city, riding on any train, bus or plane, attending any sporting event. In other words if you don't want your photo to appear somewhere, some time on the internet, don't go out of your house, or let anyone in with a camera.

 

A person's right-to-privacy has it limitations.Just use common sense.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

According to what I've read it sounds like Amtrak won't allow the use a tripod on a passenger platform, even when you're in possession of a valid ticket.

From the link above...

Ticketed Passengers on platforms may photograph or video record during the time they are preparing to board or immediately after alighting from a train. Equipment is limited to hand-held devices. Such photography, including equipment set-up will be done in a reasonable, safe and timely manner.

I'm thinking of moving into video but without a tripod I don't see how you could make a video from a platform area look smooth and crisp. Have any of you tried using a tripod anyway and did Amtrak hassle you about it? There are thousands of careless herky-jerky video cliops of Amtrak all over the web. I'd really like to make something that doesn't look like an amateur hour fuzz fest, but I'm not sure how to go about it.

 

[Ryan]

Use something like this?

http://www.yb2normal.com/DIYsteadicam.html

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Use something like this? http://www.yb2normal.com/DIYsteadicam.html

I don't know if I'd be cool carrying that thing around, but I guess it's quite a bit cheaper than the $1,000 special order prosumer devices or $10,000+ professional stabilizers.

All to replace a $100 tripod that already solves the problem quickly and easily and is sold at thousands of stores all over the country.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

I've used a mono pod at the royal oak station a few times and was not a ticketed passenger thoughts times and nothing was ever said though the station is unstaffed but the crew on the train never got off the train to yell at me. I got scolded by a CN cop though when I was ticketed back in may. I didn't see him parked down by the crossing looking for people to run the gates and I walked onto the wood that they use to extend platforms when theres 2 tracks. When I explained I was waiting on the 2:30 train to Pontiac he let me go with a warning and a lecture saying to stay behind the yellow line.I was not filming I had set my stuff in the shelter and walked onto the tracks while using my phone to check the arrival time and got busted.

 

[lthanlon]

A friend of mine built this steadying rig for small video cameras. I believe it mostly uses PVC pipe.

 

[Texan Eagle]

I use a very cheap device to take decently shake-free videos- it is called Hands.

For example, here is one video I had taken on a trip to India (ignore the first few seconds where I am still adjusting)-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFEj6sE8Tnw

 

[amtrakwolverine]

Most of my videos on youtube are filmed free handed are mostly shake free unless I'm moving with the camera or using the zoom. some people don't know how to hold the camera you get everything but the train and then they can't figure out why people tell them to hold the camera still.

here's

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I use a very cheap device to take decently shake-free videos- it is called Hands. For example, here is one video I had taken on a trip to India (ignore the first few seconds where I am still adjusting).

Yeah, that video is exactly what I'm trying to avoid. I'm not trying to be rude and I'm not trying to say I'm better than you, I just have a lower tolerance for shaky video. While conventional cameras and video cameras have slowly merged over time, in my view shooting video is still a whole other animal from shooting still images. For instance, try comparing Flickr and Youtube. Half of what's on Flickr looks damn near professional grade even though many of those users are rank amateurs. Half of what's on youtube is completely unwatchable because many people can't be bothered to respect the fact that quality video requires a little more forethought and effort than creating static images. Personally I cannot stand jerky video. Many consumer cameras have some sort of image stabilization function, but in my experience it's still not that smooth and certainly won't ever be confused with professional work.