Archive for July, 2011

PhNAT History Launch

Monday, July 4th, 2011

By the start of 2008, photographers who covered protests on the street were getting pretty fed up of being harassed by police photographers.  On one occasion I’d found myself covering an event in Parliament Square with a police photographer around 10 feet away photographing me time after time for around 5 minutes as I kept my camera to my face, waiting for me to lower it.  On an earlier occasion I’d been engaged in conversation by an officer only to look up after a minute or so to find myself staring into the  large lens of another member of the same FIT team around 5 feet away.

There were other little tensions too – the officers who would look at my press card and say flatly “That’s not a real press card” or others who would simply say “I don’t care if you’re the effing press” or words to that effect. The odd stop and search. Various threats of arrest unless I got off the road – or once if I continued to stand on a wide empty pavement, forcing me to stand in a road with fast-moving traffic.

In fact I got treated better than most, if only because I usually decided life was too short to argue and the best response was often just to walk a few yards away and get on with my job. And for the sake of balance there were plenty of occasions too when police helped me, gave me good advice and occasionally protected me from harm. One officer came up to talk to me at a demonstration and as we chatted told me that he had been given a firm telling off for talking to me at an earlier event. Others would come up and ask me questions that let me know that they were keeping an eye on me – and in some cases reading this blog.

Around Christmas 2007, a series of posters started to appear outside police stations aimed at getting people to report suspicious activities, and one of these included a camera. Then we got one all to ourselves, with the caption ‘Thousands of people take photos every day. What if one of them seems odd?’ and it was a kind of last straw.

On March 28, 2008, along with 20 or so other photographers, mainly NUJ members, I was outside New Scotland Yard to photograph NUJ general secretary Jeremy Dear in a one-person protest for press freedom which centred around this campaign.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

You can read about that event and see more pictures in my post here, Photographers by the Yard. The protest was followed up by a letter from the NUJ to the Home Secretary calling on the government to “stamp out the routine and deliberate targeting of photographers and other journalists by the Forward Intelligence Team ” and at the TUC Congress in September 2008, the NUJ showed a short film by Jason N Parkinson with evidence of police targeting and obstruction.

I’d first met Jason a couple of years earlier outside Harmondsworth Detention centre, when I was standing on a grass bank photographing a group of demonstrators who had been surrounded by police – the term kettled had yet to enter our vocabulary. He was showing them his press card and they were refusing to recognise it as a real press card.

© 2006, Peter Marshall

Jason called up to the three of us who were standing on the bank and asked if we could come and show a press card to confirm his was the real thing. I’d walked past the police earlier carefully holding my thumb over the date on mine – it had run out 8 days earlier and I hadn’t noticed until too late to ask for a replacement, so I didn’t volunteer, but fortunately one of the other photographers did.

Other events followed, both through the union and through other organisations, and in February 2009 there was another protest, a flashmob called by the NUJ and backed by the BPPA and the BJP, and given publicity in Amateur Photographer and on Facebook and elsewhere on the web – including here. Around 400 photographers turned up to make their protest.

© 2009 Peter Marshall

You can read my report and see more pictures at Media Protest at Terror Law on My London Diary.

Our protests were beginning to have some effect, and by July 2009 police were certainly being more careful about photographing the press. Outside the French Embassy I confronted a FIT officer who had pointed his camera with a very long lens straight at me from around 20 metres and he squirmed and made excuses, saying he hadn’t been photographing me and wouldn’t dream of photographing the press. Though of course he had.

But there were still too many instances of harassment of photographers, and a group of them, mainly NUJ members, decided to set up the organisation ‘I’m a Photographer Not a Terrorist’ which had its launch party – one of the few events I didn’t get to as I was in Glasgow , but 300 others made it – at the late-lamented Foundry pub in Shoreditch

You can find more on the Phnat web site where you can download the pamphlet with a history of the campaign to date. It was actually launched earlier in Manchester, but we re-floated it on a plentiful supply of wine at the AoP gallery just a short walk from the former Foundry.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

More on the ‘launch’ and a few more pictures at Not A Terrorist History Launch on My London Diary.

Giz Us A Job

Monday, July 4th, 2011

This was the third protest outside the Triton Square offices of Atos Healthcare, the company that run computer-based fitness for work tests for the government, who have caused huge distress to many disabled people.

There is something of a Catch-22 about the whole situation. If you can get to the job centre to attend for the test, then clearly you could also get to work, and if you don’t manage to get there you will be penalised for not attending….  Never mind that it might have needed you to organise friends to help you to get there or that it may take you several days to recover.

The tests that Atos don’t really look at the capabilities of the individuals but use a series of stock questions and force the person conducting the test to choose a stock answer, when there may really be nothing that really matches the person in front of them. Rather than a proper medically based test it is a matter of ticking boxes on a computer screen, and although some kind of medical experience is demanded of those carrying them out it may not be in an appropriate area to the person being tested. Someone who has worked with sports injuries may well be assessing people with mental health problems.

You can read more about these tests and the drastic effects they have had on some of those who have been failed by them on My London Diary in Atos, Giz A Job!  and my earlier posts.

At one of the previous demonstrations here, one of those who spoke was the sister of a man who had committed suicide when the tests failed to recognise his mental health issues, and one of the protesters at this event carried a placard about a woman with terminal cancer who was given zero points – no disability – at an Atos test. 70% of those who appeal the decisions have their appeals upheld, an alarming failure rate.

The lighting outside the offices, with bright sun in  the canyon between tall glass-faced buildings was in places fairly dramatic, with patches of bright sun and reflected sunlight in otherwise quite deep shadow.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

You get some idea of the problem in this picture, where fill flash and considerable Lightroom magic has managed to bring the RAW file down to the output range of an image, with just a little loss of highlight detail at top centre.  I quite like the challenges of tricky lighting, which tend to result in more interesting images, but at times it was difficult to avoid excessive flare.

As usual, some of this time I was shooting with my personal extended lens hood, otherwise known as my left hand, held above the lens. The built in hood on the 16-35 is as would be expected, almost useless, having to cope with such a wide angle of view, and that on the 18-105, although better is still not very effective.

It’s in this situation that you notice that the optical viewfinder has a slightly smaller view than the camera actually takes (I think according to the manual, which I can’t be bothered to find, showing around 95% of the images. So quite a few of the actual images taken in this way – looking through the viewfinder to see the increase in contrast when you are shading the lens from the sun – turn out to need a little cropping along the top edge where my fingers show in the image but not in the viewfinder.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

As you can see there is still some flare in this and some other images. Occasionally things like this green spot can add to images, but usually they just look odd. I’ve toned this down to some extent, but perhaps might also have desaturated it a little more.  I wouldn’t want to remove it completely, as it and its less obvious near neighbour perhaps do give a little of the impression of the light conditions (along with the greatly toned down bright area of pavement at bottom right.)  But I would see no ethical problem in removing flare spots which are generally not apparent in the actual view you are photographing.

Most of the protest was taking place in the shadows, and there was little excitement about the event, though things became more interesting when the protesters decided to go for a ‘walk’, making their way around the barriers provided by the police into the passageway through the building past the office  reception area.  Light was lower here, provided by lighting in the ceiling and coming through the glass windows of the offices, and was also of varying colour, greener from the overhead lighting and rather orange from that indoors.

I wasn’t entirely happy with the pictures I was getting in this fairly confined space from the 16-35mm with the D700,  and when the protesters went back later I decided to try using the 10.5mm fisheye on the D300. As always it was a strange beast to use, but I think it did the job pretty well.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

I got very close to Clare as she raised her camera at arms length in front of her to take this image, trying hard to keep the camera more or less upright. The picture is very slightly cropped at the right and top, and also I’ve corrected the curvature slightly – perhaps around 10-20% in Lightroom. The horizontal angle of view is around 140 degrees and I’ve managed to include both the faces of the group of demonstrators on the right and the police and security outside the revolving door at left.

It doesn’t include all the protesters – they continued in a rough circle behind me , and in a perfect world perhaps the placards at the right would have been about this event and not for other protests, but that’s how things were.  But there is something here about the curving lines that brings this image together for me, whereas the rectilinear distortion you get with the 16-35 at 16mm as in the image below seems to sweep things away at the edges.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

Naked Bike Ride

Sunday, July 3rd, 2011

The annual Naked Bike Ride through central London is to my mind a rather peculiar event, with some very mixed motives among participants, viewers and certainly photographers.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

I don’t have a particular hangup about nudity, but generally given our English weather I think clothes are a pretty good idea, and given the lack of ozone to cut down the UV, even on those hot days they make sense. It’s certainly more pleasant to wear a shirt than to keep having to smear nasty oily sunblock oils over your body, and melanomas (like Melanie Phillips which Google came up with when I was checking out that word) are certainly best avoided.

But I’m not that worried about ‘decency’, other than not getting arrested for indecent exposure.  After all, around 50% of the population have similar equipment to me and it isn’t something I feel any particular need to flaunt or hide.   Actually the ride reveals some pretty wide differences between people though I don’t find any great interest in this at least so far as the males are concerned. Women are of course different, and I can’t deny that looking at them unclothed has a certain attraction.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

But as an environmental protest, the NBR seems to me rather lacking, not least in that so few of those taking part show any great sign of viewing it in this way. In taking pictures I try hard to find ways in which people are trying to express some particular view – so anyone who paints a slogan or design on their body, or has some kind of placard or flag on the cycle is likely to get their photograph taken by me. But there are not a great many who do.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

The NBR also now suffers from being listed as a tourist attraction on various web sites, resulting this year in a very large crowd of viewers inside Hyde Park where the riders were preparing.  Perhaps this was part of the reason why this year there seemed to be many more clothed riders than on previous occasions that I’ve photographed the event.

Although I think it is clear that there are no privacy issues involved in photographing this event where people have clearly chosen exactly how much of their bodies they want to put in the public sphere, there are pictures that I have taken on this and previous occasions that I have decided not to publish, or at least not on the public pages on the web.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

There are various reasons for this. I have no wish to offend people, and have put a warning message on the links to these pages on my site as well as at the top of each page with pictures from the ride, and tried to chose carefully the images pictures people will see without scrolling down the page.

I also have no wish to attract some people to view my site, although I do want to make it available to a wider audience around the world. There are countries where the images I have used – including those in this post – would be considered illegal.

Shortly after I published the pictures from the first London NBR I photographed I had an e-mail from the director of a large educational project saying they would like to include ‘My London Diary’ in the links from their project – and would I please remove these pictures which made it an unsuitable site!  I replied saying that there were no pictures on my site unsuitable for children.

© 2011, Peter Marshall

However it isn’t coincidence that in many of the pictures I have published in My London Diary of the Naked Bike Ride* are carefully framed or that handlebars, bags, arms etc are rather conveniently placed to hide certain areas.  In some pictures I made these decisions as I was taking them, but more came at the editing stage.  I think it helps to make these images more about the event and less about the personal peculiarities of the participants.


* But there are still pictures that might offend the particularly straight-laced or might cause some embarrasment if you view them in the office, so only click on the link if you want to see photographs of people without their togs on.

The Battle of Byker

Sunday, July 3rd, 2011

I missed the Radio 4 broadcast of The Battle of Byker about Finnish photographer Sirkka-Liisa Konttinen’s work in this inner-city area of Newcastle on Friday morning (1 July 2011) where she talks about her work there since 1969 as a part of the Amber Films collective, and some of the people she photographed over the 40 or so years she has worked there talk about the area, but only because I was going out to take pictures, and this morning found time to listen to it (for the first time, although the BBC keep calling it ‘listen again’.)

Konttinen’s work in Byker is a unique record of an area most of which has now disappeared; sub-standard housing which has been largely demolished, replaced by a motorway and the Byker Wall estate. Although housing conditions were certainly improved, some of those in what had been a close-knit community were scattered across the city in order for the new Byker to be born. But this was in some ways a pioneering project that was a new vision of redevelopment, with a rolling programme that so far as possible did keep people in the area and also a scheme that actually consulted with the people of Byker, involving them in the design process of what was to be their new home – exactly the kind of thing I had been involved in pressing for in Manchester a couple of years earlier but we had failed to acheive.

Byker supplied a model which unfortunately has now largely been abandoned – as my recent post on the Heygate estate showed.  Ideas about community and people have been superseded in the rush for profit for developers. Even the current government recognise the importance of Byker, seeing it as the embodiment of the Big Society.

The Battle of Byker is well worth listening to, and remains available on the BBC iPlayer only for a week after the transmission, so don’t delay. It should have been much greater publicity by Radio 4, but they seem to have devoted all of their attention over the past few weeks to plugging Wimbledon. Though given our lack of tennis players it is hard to see why we still bother to watch this (and I’ve avoided doing so.)

While you are listening to the programme (or if you read this too late to listen to it) look at the work from Konttinen‘s  book and show Byker(1983)  in black and white and a smaller selection from her recent Byker Revisted in colour.

On the Amber Films web site you can read some recent news:

The photographs of Sirkka-Liisa Konttinen and Amber’s films – an intertwined collective narrative of works between 1968 and 2010, documenting working class and marginalised communities in the North East of England – have been inscribed in the UNESCO UK Memory of the World Register as an archive of national cultural significance!

The fight against the Arts Council’s inexplicable decision to axe Side Gallery as a revenue client in its ‘National Portfolio’ is continuing, although there is no recent news about it on the site – in April they did note that “The Arts Council has registered the strength of feeling and has indicated a desire to find other ways of supporting the gallery.” The petition which many of us signed was delivered to the AC in May, and you can read more about what I thought of their decision in my post written in March, Arts Council Cuts Side Off. But unfortunately there seems as yet to be no sign that the AC has truly recognised the value of what they should regard as the jewel in their photographic crown.