EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 3044 posts, RR: 19 Reply 4, posted (2 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2548 times:
Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 2): Well the guy has got the guts to trespass and then post the shots here so he can be called on it publicly.
If everyone did this pretty soon we'd have no spots left at all
true but aren't you giving him more credit (meaning views) by posting his picture?
In any case I envy that you even have a relationship with authorities. If I were to report anything regarding aviation to the local authorities down here I'd probablt end up questioned myself, possibly lose my camera, and 100% certain that whatever I would report would have no consequence to whoever was at fault
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 2653 posts, RR: 13 Reply 5, posted (2 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2521 times:
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 3): How do you know he was trespassing?
The spot where he took the photo is clearly off limits, it's fenced off.
Yes, that is very bad behaviour. But only the photographer is responsible for his photos and it's obviously not Airliners.net's role to worry about the spots where they were taken from.
Obviously there are a few hundred thousands of photos on he site which were taken from spots where photography may not be entirely legal. Would you want to remove them all, CHabu?
Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 3044 posts, RR: 19 Reply 6, posted (2 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2486 times:
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 5): But only the photographer is responsible for his photos and it's obviously not Airliners.net's role to worry about the spots where they were taken from.
That's a valid point. There are thousands of photos taken from places where photography is not allowed. I've experienced authorities telling me it's not ok to take pictures @ AEP many times, so if a.net were to not accept shots from this location then most pictures from Argentina will stop coming in
Sovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 1670 posts, RR: 9 Reply 8, posted (2 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2477 times:
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 5): The spot where he took the photo is clearly off limits, it's fenced off.
Maybe he shot through the fence or had a ladder? Can you tell me which runway that is so I can look it up on google earth?
This discussion is interesting, there are hundreds of photos added daily which were photographed inside airports, yet nobody questions how the person got access but now we single out one person. Maybe the photographer has a connection which allows him access?
JRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 3346 posts, RR: 43 Reply 10, posted (2 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2463 times:
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 8): Maybe he shot through the fence or had a ladder? Can you tell me which runway that is so I can look it up on google earth?
Quoting Chukcha (Reply 9): The photographer's occupation indicated in his profile is Flight Attendant. Maybe he didn't need to jump fences after all Wink?
The location is outside the perimiter fence (36L line-up) so him being an F/A does not help. To get to the position you need to get over a +/- 1m high fence WITH a 'prohibited for pedestrians' sign and then walk 100m to the spot. He clearly was off limits.
EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 3044 posts, RR: 19 Reply 11, posted (2 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2418 times:
... on the other hand it's also forbidden to use (digital) cameras during take off and yet everyone does it all the time ...
Yes, we need to defend our hobby, but if one guy gets caught breaking the rules its his responsability, and his only IMO.
I don't know about AMS, but with the very limited spotting places we have at our local Intl airport (EZE), if I see a place where I can discretely get in to take pictures I'm not so sure I wouldn't go for it
INNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3409 posts, RR: 60 Reply 13, posted (2 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2409 times:
Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 11): ... on the other hand it's also forbidden to use (digital) cameras during take off and yet everyone does it all the time ...
It is not. That's airline regulations bull just for the sake of it. Would you think ANY pilot would use his camera during take off / landing if that would be true? Nope.
Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 11): I don't know about AMS, but with the very limited spotting places we have at our local Intl airport (EZE), if I see a place where I can discretely get in to take pictures I'm not so sure I wouldn't go for it
I have been athat spot with Tim and Eduard when it was still allowed back in 2006, and there's no way you could take pictures discretely. Clearly off limits.
AirTeamImages - take the high road and others will follow
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 2653 posts, RR: 13 Reply 14, posted (2 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2393 times:
Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 7): There's a difference between taking pictures at spots where it's not allowed to be it and jumping fences though
Completely agree.
Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 7): We do have a moral obligation to protect the hobby
Good. But since a.net cannot know the exact circumstances in which pictures were taken, singling out pictures on a.net is not a good idea I think, even though in this case I have no doubt the photographer was indeed viloating the law in a way that does hurt the hobby.
Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Dvincent From United States, joined Jan 2007, 771 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (2 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2387 times:
Quoting INNflight (Reply 13): I have been athat spot with Tim and Eduard when it was still allowed back in 2006, and there's no way you could take pictures discretely. Clearly off limits.
Sure, you could take pictures discretely, but being discreet, that's a whole other matter.
This is a matter between the individual and the law enforcement of the airport, IMO, it sounds like a dangerous slippery slope if we start policing that. I have images on a.net from BDL where I may have been less than welcome (fields by runway 24). While the police may move you along if you park there, you can often just stand on the hills and take photos. The trespassing signs are posted on the fence, not on the hill.
Also, a 1m tall fence will not deter anybody, it should be at least 4m tall with barbed wire if you want to keep people out.
The point is that people shouldn't trespass, but I foresee a dangerous precedent if we start deleting photos because we thought someone might be trespassing.
New England Airports! Sony Alpha a700, Sigma 50-500, Minolta 70-210 f/4, Tamron 17-50.
TopGun3 From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (2 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2346 times:
After reading this thread I definitely got a chuckle out of this whole thing. Taking pictures from spots that are "off limits" is a problem for the photographer (if he gets busted), but not for A.net.
I can imagine a paparazzi trying to take a picture of someone famous, but not doing it just because someone thinks you shouldn't be there.
Taking photos of aircraft will always involve some degree of possible trespassing. It is part of the hobby. You just have to be willing to live with the fact that you will be approached, questioned, maybe even detained if you overstay your welcome at some spots.
There are 2 airports I frequent in Canada and over the years I have learned what I can or can't get away with. My home base is CYXU where I have developed enough contacts that allow me to take photos from within the airport and with permission, inside the aircraft. I appreciate this privilege and plan not to abuse it.
Chukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 393 posts, RR: 3 Reply 18, posted (2 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2300 times:
This topic opens a whole new "can of worms". I'll bet there are lots of pictures here that have been taken in legally questionable circumstances; a great number of window shots, for instance, as many airlines do not allow using cameras in flight. I agree that:
Quoting TopGun3 (Reply 16): Taking pictures from spots that are "off limits" is a problem for the photographer (if he gets busted), but not for A.net.
Quoting Points (Reply 17): I would appreciate if i was approached personally if someone was worried.
Exactly right; matters of this nature should not be discussed publicly here. It is usually an individual case, and the person is "innocent until proven guilty", not the other way round. You can't judge by the photo alone whether the person was there legally or trespassing. Just for example - a photo like this could've been taken from an open cockpit window (if there was a taxiway there), or the photographer was accompanied by an airport official, being granted temporary access (believe it or not, that also sometimes happens).
Whappeh From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1241 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (2 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2296 times:
I really got to believe that calling the police straight up is a bit harsh. I mean, if we really want to split hairs, there has to be a ton of illegal photos on Airliners.net in terms of local laws.
Fast edit: Also, I seem to recall a thread a few months ago in which the majority of the community here applauded the Iranian photographers for risking them selfs to take photos of military aircraft, and we all agreed that it was great to see. So whats the difference in terms of legality?
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1429 posts, RR: 3 Reply 20, posted (2 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2278 times:
Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 11): if I see a place where I can discretely get in to take pictures I'm not so sure I wouldn't go for it
Indeed. How may of you can honestly say that, given the world's rarest 707 sitting aside the fence, you wouldn't try and 'discreetly' get a pic? I'm never supposed to be standing on ladders at the fence at EMA but some cops don't seem to mind. Others do of course but where do you draw the line? Whether we like it or not we are a form of paparazzi and we do what paparazzi do best - to a point.
I never knew Chinese law but I wandered into a field in all innocence and took a few pic's. When - and only when - I was told to get out, I got out.
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 14): the photographer was indeed viloating the law in a way that does hurt the hobby
Sometimes our kind can be seen as the law. If some nutter wants to hurt our hobby the authorities will be the first to know! In my opinion having a bunch of guys with the latest photo equipment is the ultimate deterent!
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 93 posts, 
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1416 posts, 
From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 1670 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 3044 posts, 
From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 393 posts, 
?
From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3409 posts, 
From United States, joined Jan 2007, 771 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 99 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1429 posts,