LOG

If you read most of the media coverage the east end of Glasgow gets, chances are you will read about ill-health, short lifespan, and flooding due to neglected drains.

If you are watching a documentary, chances are it will be about rampaging gangs and endless street fights, forcing people to stay indoors after 6 pm.

Don’t believe all you see – when did a documentary maker ever make their name by reporting on happy people, or parks and gardens.

However, while wandering through one of those parks at the weekend, I was moved to wonder if there was new documentary subject on the way, intended to let the world know how thick residents of the east end of Glasgow are.

Lying by the side of one the paths I wander along was a log…

And some kind person had labelled it LOG, just in case some passing unfortunate didn’t realise what it was – well, it could easily be confused for a heavy-duty toothpick, couldn’t it?

Actually, I was quite pleased to see this oddity, as the place has been cleared over the past year, with little motivation for carrying a camera. Maybe 2011 will be better than 2012.

Much as I would like to have attributed this to some new initiative by Glasgow City Council, perhaps aimed at helping the local neds (maybe stopping them kicking the logs and hurting their poor wee feet if they did not know what they were), the reality is that Scottish Water is currently tearing up extensive sections of the nearby roads to renew buried fittings, and all the instructions for the diggers are sprayed on the road using blue paint

The Black Hand Gang

For one slightly worried moment, I wondered if the infamous Black Hand Gang was making a resurgence in the east end of Glasgow.

Wobbling home after a trip to the shops, I spotted a line of odd signs tied on to some temporary fencing around some works that had sprung up on some of the houses during the past week.

At first I thought some frustrated artist had decided it was an easy way to show of their works – apparently some sort of psychedelic tie-dyeing variation, as shown below.

On first sight, it was a black hand on rainbow background, neatly presented in a clear plastic laminated cover to protect it from the weather, and tied to the fence with the ubiquitous cable-tie. Like  most places, we are plagued with cheap and nasty adverts tied to just about anything that a cable-tie will reach around, and I was even trying to work out what this might be an ad for.

It’s worth pointing out that the camera sensor ruins the effect to some degree, as the wording that can be seen behind the colours was not evident to the naked eye (and it was a dull, grey, wet, evening too.

I walked along the fence, noting that apart from the black hand, all these signs had completely different coloured patterns on them.

Of course, it turned out to be something that was little more than a classic example of Sod’s Law, and had I happened to have walked along this fence beginning from the other end, then there would have been no mystery, as the very last sign provided the very mundane answer.

Unlike the others, it had been laminated properly, and the edges heat sealed.

All the others had been made without being sealed properly, so the rain had penetrated them, seeped in the paper, and filtered out the various component colours of the non-waterproof ink that the signs had been printed with.

Still, at least it made me smile, and  not just feel as if I had been made a mug of.

And another interesting photo-opportunity after months of drought – maybe things are getting better.

The Forth Bridge Experience – The view from 300 feet

I couldn’t let the idea of installing a viewing platform and lifts for visitors on to the Forth Bridge pass without comment.

At a time when millions are being poured down the drain to promote the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014, on the basis of some fantasy known as ‘Lasting Legacy’ (promised to follow all such events, but seldom delivered afterwards), this idea is just t0o sensible to ever see the light of day.

But, I hope my first thoughts on this are proved wrong.

Rather than the grand ideas that attract publicity, this is sort of thing we desperately need to see more of in Scotland if it is to profit from its role as a ‘tourist trap’ now that it has no industry to speak of.

There must be (and there are) many more ideas such as this floundering around out there, too expensive for inspired individuals to finance and turn into reality without backing, but still costing just a fraction of the huge money-pits like the 2014 Games, whose high-profile, but here-today-gone-tomorrow nature, sees grabbing all the investment.

We need more smaller projects which are sustainable and here to stay, spread across the country and keeping a steady drip of visitors moving around and parting with their tourist cash, rather than big-bang one-off events that cost more to stage than they can ultimately return.

Rail chiefs are looking at the idea of building a viewing platform for visitors to be hoisted more than 300ft to the top of the Forth Rail Bridge.

Network Rail, which manages the bridge, has confirmed it is examining the feasibility of establishing visitor access.

The platform would offer impressive views of all around the Firth of Forth.

via BBC News – Plan for viewing platform at top of Forth Rail Bridge.

Also Viewing platform could turn Forth Bridge into Scotland’s Eiffel Tower | News | Edinburgh | STV

Forth Bridge no scaffolding in 2011 © James Allan

Update

It seems the above idea made it into the news only a few days before the 122nd anniversary of the first train crossing the Forth Bridge.

You can see hundred of images of this iconic bridge, dating from its very beginnings to the present day, here:

Site Record for Forth Bridge Forth Rail Bridge; Forth Railway Bridge; River Forth; Inner Forth Estuary; Queensferry Narrows; South Queensferry; Dalmeny Digital_images

Port Bannatyne – the view from above

It’s not often you can find something good in something bad, and while the Isle of Bute might have suffered somewhat at the hands of the recent high winds, one of the consequences was the need to ship over some seldom seen hardware to the island, in order to effect repairs.

Clearly not put off by the idea of hanging around in an open platform dangled from a hook on a crane – haven’t these guys discovered ‘cherry pickers’ – Zak took to the air and provided a set of pics taken from the sky above Port Bannatyne.

I wonder if I would jumped at the offer? I don’t have a problem with heights, but hate being on anything at height that’s not secure.

Click on the pic below to be taken to the full gallery for this little adventure – views I suspect have not been seen before, and won’t be seen again, for a while at least:

Port Bannatyne aerial collection © Zak

Photo Bombed!

It could almost have been the last photograph I ever took.

But it wasn’t, thanks to standing in the right place at the right time, and one of those strange days we have in Scotland where everyone panics and goes mad, as stories of a ‘Big yellow ball of light in the sky’ spread, and everyone heads for cover to try to escape the ‘End of the World.

Well, maybe not.

But it was fortunate I stopped where and when I did, and spotted this little piece of graffito vandalism when I looked through the viewfinder. It was too far away to make out by eye alone.

Have to say, it’s better than the sad tagging seen all over the place, and the spraying of slogans and names which has to be cleaned regularly off the walls of the nearby community centre.

Wonder what might have been seen if I had looked up?

Apparently Scottish wildcats are not wild about snow

We mentioned the project earlier, and it seems that photo-traps installed to monitor the behaviour of Scottish wildcats within the area of the Cairngorms National Park are producing useful results – even when they record nothing.

In this case, the absence of images of Scottish wildcats captured by the traps suggests they have some issues with getting around when there is snow on the ground – assuming at least part of their brain is wired up anything like a domestic cat, then there shouldn’t be much surprise in this finding, as the response to a garden full of snow over a foot deep (taller than  the cat), hardly comes as a surprise once the novelty wears off. And you only have to think of your own response to a few days of having to survive and feed if you were dropped into snow 3 metres deep, even of you did have a nice fur coat attached.

More seriously, it’s suggested that snow at higher levels forces wildcats down hills and closer to humans, which they really don’t like, and the same is true of their prey, which they are forced to follow down in order to survive

In a report on the project’s findings , the scientists said further research was needed to determine whether any significant seasonal differences affected the success of camera traps set for wildcats.

The report said: “It should also be noted that no cat photos were taken when the snow was greater than four inches deep, despite photographs of pine marten and prey species being captured.

“The European wildcat is known to have trouble moving around in snow and it is likely that the Scottish wildcat has a similar problem.

“Therefore, it is recommended that camera trapping for this species is not carried out in heavy snow at is unlikely to yield good results.”

via BBC News – Scottish wildcats ‘not wild’ about snow, says SNH report.

Update

Looks as if the almost complete absence of Scottish wildcats from the twenty camera traps set up in the Cairngorms might lead to more detailed research into their winter habits.

I liked the observation by one biologist that cats have small feet in relation to their body weight – so they sink into snow rather than move across it (must’ve been watching the funny ‘cats in snow’ videos on YouTube).

More interesting was the idea that while the cats have trouble on deep snow (and might prefer to stay in sheltered areas beneath trees), their prey would be able to move around under the snow if it was a small burrowing creature such as a vole.

BBC News – Further Scottish wildcats snow studies possible

Abandoned Christmas

It’s a funny thing I had not noticed until recently, but some people seem to want to get Christmas over and done with as fast as possible, presumably to move onto something else they can use to provide some sort of public display with.

Although I didn’t consciously notice – or take many pics unfortunately – I’ve come to notice that there are often carelessly discarded items of Christmasy ephemera to be found lying around verges, behind hedges, or around bins. It seems that few people hang on to anything to re-use it next year. Perhaps they think it will show they cannot afford something new every years, or are just mean.

Then again, maybe it’s just evidence of some kid dropping something, not being noticed by the grown-ups while out for a walk, and unaware that when they get home and realise that something has been lost, will have a little kid crying a river because the last thing they got attached to has gone, and they don’t know why.

This year’s find was just lying by the roadside, all on its own, but still smiling (on the outside, at least).

Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 arrives in Scotland (MAYBE!!!)

(I originally picked up on this story because I had noted a number of previous accounts which had largely taken place down south, or were local and seemed ridiculous.

This story seems to be developing the smell of bull, with so many accusations of persecution and victimisation of the man concerned, and his own highlighting of past mental problems – and adding that as yet another issue for which he is being victimised, that I have serious concerns about the original claims.)

When I was a little more active in photography in places where, shall we say ‘care’ had to be taken, I started to pay attention to cases involving the use of Sections 43 and 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Although neither section refers in any way to any aspect of photography, their wording is sufficiently general that almost anything can be construed to be covered by the act.

Section 43 refers to the search of persons, and begins:

(1) A constable may stop and search a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist to discover whether he has in his possession anything which may constitute evidence that he is a terrorist.

Section 44 refers to the relevant Authorisations, stating where and when a constable in uniform may stop and search a vehicle or person.

The Act may be viewed online here:

Terrorism Act 2000

Father allegedly questioned under Terrorism Act after taking photographs of his own daughter in Braehead Shopping Centre

A story has been reported regarding the case of a father who photographed his four-year old daughter in the Braehead Shopping Centre near Glasgow.

After taking two photographs of his daughter enjoying an ice-cream treat on Friday afternoon (which he said were specifically framed to avoid including anyone else in their view), he has claimed that a security guard approached him, asked him to delete the photographs, and said they were ‘illegal’. However, as the images had been taken using a mobile phone, and been posted on Facebook, this was pointless.

At this point, the guard told him to “Remain right there” while he called the police, which the father chose to do.

He was subsequently questioned by two uniformed police officers who informed him there had been a complaint about his photography, and that the Braehead centre had “Clear signs” which stated that photography was forbidden.

He went on to state that he felt intimidated by the officers throughout the interview, and that when he tried to calm his daughter, who had been reduced to tears, one of the officers intervened, stating that he was not listening to him.

He says he was also told that under the terms of the Terrorism Act 2000 the police could confiscate his mobile phone and delete the images, but that in this occasion would not do so – provided he supplied his full details.

Since the incident, the father has lodged complaints with both Braehead Shopping Centre and Strathclyde Police.

STV Glasgow and West has published their initial response:

Superintendent George Nedley of Renfrewshire and Inverclyde Division said: “I can confirm that police were asked to speak to this gentleman by security staff at Braehead on Friday October 7.

“My officers attended and gave advice and no further action was taken by the police officers.

“I can confirm we have received a complaint regarding this incident and one of my senior officers has spoken to Mr White regarding this. As a result a full review of the circumstances surrounding the incident and the allegations made is under way.”

A spokesman for Braehead said: “Staff at an ice cream stall in Braehead became suspicious and alerted a member of the centre’s security staff after they saw a male shopper taking photographs at their counter.

“The member of security staff approached the man and politely asked if he had been taking photographs. Because of the nature of the incident, police became involved and also spoke to the man.

“Our priority is always to maintain a safe and enjoyable environment for all of our shoppers and retailers. The member of our security staff acted in good faith.

“We have a ‘no photography’ policy in the centre to protect the privacy of staff and shoppers and to have a legitimate opportunity to challenge suspicious behaviour if required. However, it is not our intention to – and we do not – stop innocent family members taking pictures.”

Shopping centre guard calls police over father taking ‘illegal’ photographs of his daughter | Glasgow and West | STV News.

Comment

I don’t really want to comment on the circumstance around the incident itself (and I was not there in any case), as there may be further reports to come, for example, a review by the police is mentioned.

However, I do think it is worth pointing out that the response made by Braehead seems to fall into the category of “Making it up as we go along”. Specifically, if they really do have a ‘no photography’ policy in the centre, then they cannot state that it is not their intention to “stop innocent family members taking pictures.”

This is inconsistent, and simply does not make any sense.

Clearly, if this was not little more than a lie, then the centre’s own security would have seen that the father had only taken two pictures of his own daughter alone, which would appear to meet their own basic requirement of “innocent family members taking pictures”, and the matter of the police being called would simply never have arisen.

You can also search this Blog to find some recent articles on this subject in relation to abuse of photographers by the police, including numbers of incidents as revealed by a Freedom of Information request: Stop and Search under the Terrorism Act 2000.

There is also an article which covers a statement issued by the police stating that they had listened to criticisms of heavy-handedness with regard to the treatment photographers under this Act, and that procedures were being modified accordingly: Section 44 abuse of photographers continues despite warnings to police.

Maybe that memo still has to be issued north of the border.

Follow-up controversy and dispute

When I first posted on this report, I didn’t like the ‘smell’ of the story – something didn’t quite gel, or sound ‘right’, although I couldn’t put my finger on it from the available information in the media.

Accordingly, I wrote relatively carefully, and avoided endorsing it, so was careful to use words like ‘allegedly’ liberally, and added an initial comment distancing even this from the circumstances of the incident, and referred to my past notes regarding Section 43/44 and the wider issues previously covered largely down south.

Unfortunately, it seems my nasal radar was not mistaken, and the warning signs detected in the initial story have proven correct.

While it appears that the part played by Braehead is honourably concluded, and they have not apologised to the father for the incident, but gone on to change and clarify their policy on photography to make it clear that families can take photographs not only in Braehead, but in other centres owned by the group.

However, there is now an acrimonious dispute between the father and the police, with the father insisting he was interviewed with regard to photography and terrorism, while the police have issued a statement denying that this was the case, and that officers were called to speak to him about another issue.

Unlike those who have rallied around the father in response to the publicity he has sought online, I am not prepared to accept his account without question. Nor am I prepared to go with the ‘all police are liars’ brigade.

Rather, since I started this post, I will post links to the stories as the appear in the media, and hope they reach a conclusion, which I will accept in either party’s favour…

Strathclyde Police - Statement re incident at Braehead, 7 October 2011

Shopping centre guard calls police over father taking ‘illegal’ photographs of his daughter | Glasgow and West | STV News October 10, 2011

Braehead apologises to father at centre of ice-cream storm | Glasgow and West | STV NewsOctober 10, 2011

BBC News – Father’s anti-terror row over photoOctober 10, 2011

BBC News – Row over photo in shopping centreOctober 10, 2011

BBC News – Braehead centre issues apology over photo rowOctober 19, 2011

BBC News – Braehead shopping centre owner changes UK photographs policyOctober 11, 2011

BBC News – Police hit back at Braehead photo row dad Chris WhiteOctober 13, 2011

Police say Braehead photo row father complaint ‘has no basis’ | Glasgow and West | STV NewsOctober 13, 2011

Express.co.uk – Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Photo row father to sue policeOctober 14, 2011

Shopping trip father denies being drunk – Herald Scotland | News | Home NewsOctober 15, 2011

RCAHMS features US Navy aerial coastline obliques

News of an intriguing set of aerial images that could provide detail for anyone interested in the targeted areas during the 1960s:

Around 2,000 oblique aerial photographs of the coastline around Scotland and Cumbria, taken by the US Navy in the 1960s, are now accessible online thanks to an archivist on secondment from The US National Archives and Records Administration. Tom McAnear spent a month working in NCAP on an internship programme sponsored by the US Government.

The US Navy aerial photographs were taken to aid amphibious landing training, and show the port of Leith undergoing reclamation and expansion; the entire coastline of the North-East highlands from Duncansby Head to Inverness; and the shoreline of the Solway Firth from Whithorn to Barrow-in-Furness.

Tom, who is more accustomed to working with textual records in the US National Archives in Washington D.C., was trained by NCAP staff in a range of aerial photograph handling, preservation, digitisation and cataloguing techniques.

via News – US Navy Set.

View US Navy Aerial Photography Feature

View US Navy aerial photographs

View US Navy aerial photographs in Google Earth

The Google Earth view is particularly interesting, as it shows the location of every image pinned along the relevant coastal area.

‘Lost Edinburgh’ Facebook page falls foul of copyright

It’s worth having a read at this article, it explains why SeSco never uses such images on the occasions where the are ‘offered’ by helpful but ‘unaware’ contributors.

And it’s a shame, since it makes it impossible for many images to be shared, even if out of their original copyright period, this interpretation of copyright law means they cannot be reused, even for completely non-commercial use, and only further the spread of history.

I have to accept the description of Facebook’s T&Cs, since it’s still a thing I don’t like, and still won’t touch with a bargepole.

However, it would also not be fair to single Facebook out, as nearly all, if not all, online services apply the same condition in return for providing free online services where users can upload their own images – however, I emphasis that this applies to their own images, not those taken from another, such as RCAHMS, which they have no right to take, and then upload to Facebook anyway, as if they were the owners.

The popular Facebook page chronicling Edinburgh’s architectural past has been taken down by its creators after complaints it violated copyright and intellectual property laws.

Owners of imagery uploaded to the ‘Lost Edinburgh’ page requested their photos be removed. Under Facebook’s terms and conditions, the multinational corporation takes copyright for the snaps.

Many of the photographs collected into albums on the page were taken from the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS) online archive.

James Crawford from RCAHMS explained: “It is very simple. We cannot put our own images on Facebook and cannot give anyone else permission to do so because with Facebook’s terms and conditions you have to cede intellectual property to the company.

via ‘Lost Edinburgh’ Facebook page falls foul of copyright | Edinburgh News | STV Local.

More detailed explanation

Subsequent to the events described above, RCAHMS issued a more detailed explanation of the how copyright law applied to the reposting of imagery taken from its collection, and reused on Facebook, and how the T&Cs made their legitimate use impossible.

Use of RCAHMS Imagery on Facebook