Is there something scary about big cameras?

A few weeks ago, I went to see Radiohead playing at Victoria Park in London. As I tend to do when I go to see something that I think might be interesting, I took my camera along.

As I went through the security check, I was told that I wouldn't be allowed to take my camera out once I was inside the arena- especially with my zoom lens. Apparently "small" cameras and mobile phones with built-in cameras are fine, but "big" cameras are forbidden.

Sure enough, there on the back of the ticket it did say that photography equipment- along with video cameras and recording equipment- were not allowed in the arena. (Although there was nothing about some compact, multifunctional devices being permitted.) Also forbidden were knives, guns, explosives, under-16s etc. etc. Food and drink (especially alcohol) were on the list as well- although they were on sale once you were inside.

The tickets also said that smoking was also expressly ("strictly") forbidden in the arena, yet there was a kiosk selling cigarettes and tobacco inside as well. (Unsurprisingly, I didn't see anyone trying to stop anyone from smoking either.)

This wasn't the first time I'd been asked not to take photos in a public place before. Flash photography is forbidden by London Transport, but I was asked not to take photos (without flash) in Paddington Station once. (I love the arches, and the way the light through the roof shines through the clouds of diesel smoke.) So, have digital cameras become dangerous weapons? Do terrorists prefer using SLRs to compact cameras or cameraphones to plan their attacks? Is there something threatening about having your photograph taken in public?

The front page article on the Metro yesterday (which is about as far as I usually read it these days) was a story about a man who was arrested for taking a photograph of a police van, which reversed the wrong way down a one-way street to get to a chip shop. Apparently they were on police business (going there to examine CCTV footage), which is presumably why the policeman shouted through the window "F**k off, this is police business''.

When the man took a photo of them, the policeman apparently came running out, battered the camera from his hand on to the floor and arrested him for three crimes (drunk and disorderly, assault and resisting arrest.) All charges were subsequently dropped, and an apology was apparently received.

I came across a post on Thomas Hawk's blog recently, about getting kicked out of the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. His crime? As you've probably guessed, it was simply taking a photograph.

"Fair enough", you might say. "If photography isn't allowed somewhere then you shouldn't take photographs." Except he'd been personally told that photography was allowed

Apparently, the reason was the need to "protect employees" who might appear in photographs. (Maybe from suffering a similar fate to the policeman visiting the chip shop?)

There were plenty of people taking photographs of the atrium using point and shoots that Simon did not target, but I think that it was the fact that I was using a larger DSLR that made me a target.

Another example of the kind of photograph that you might not want to appear in was seen earlier this month when Google's streetview cameras captured an Aussie man who had passed out drunk outside his own home. There's an interesting question here about how much privacy you can expect when in a public place, but maybe a more interesting aspect to his story is that, if he had passed out drunk anywhere else, the chances are that he would never have seen the photo, and anyone who did wouldn't have been able to identify him.

Personally, I'm not really bothered about the photos that people might take of me. However, I am regularly bothered by the distractions of other people's cameras and phones; at the cinema, when someone a few rows in front spends the film trying to discreetly have a text converstaion, presumably unaware of how distracting an illuminated screen in a darkened room can be for the rows of people behind them. Or at concerts, when a string of flash photographs are taken from the balconies, far farther from the stage than any built-in flash on a consumer camera could hope to light up, meaning they are doing nothing other than bothering the people around them.

Ironically, these are the kinds of photos that would be much less distracting when taken on a proper SLR camera with something like a 50mm prime lens with a 1.8D (or wider) aperture— if you don't know what all that means, it's those "big cameras" that are most likely to get picked up on by security…