Comments on: The hazards of street photography

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 05:23:54 +0000

The Scandinavian countries have a high proportion of female politicians and the system works well: they are among the best governed countries in the world.
I wish the Americans (and the British) had learned this lesson when trying to re-build Iraq. The first decision after the ill-fated Iraq War of 2003 should have been that for a 5-year period only women should be allowed to hold senior political and government jobs. A similar problem might solve Africa’s problems – and every African I have put the idea to has been in 100% agreement!

By: Jerry

Jerry — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 04:30:15 +0000

Very cute! This crocodile of children,if the world is full of children and it may make less bad things happen! Or, if the world only have women and children, it also could be better!

By: Christine

Christine — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:51:09 +0000

ps. Although the science is important, it is the qualitative aspects on the liveability and sustainability of cities of the implications of streetscape design in urban design that is concerning me here.

By: Christine

Christine — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:48:15 +0000

I agree with the idea of a High Buildings Policy. It would be interesting to study different cities for example New York, Paris, Moscow, Berlin and Hong Kong to understand the relationship between street patterns, open space, climate, sun paths, weather patterns etc and the impact of the shape and height of buildings on the public realm.

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 07:05:06 +0000

In reply to Christine. Hey! That video clip of London 2012, commissioned by the London Development Agency, contains film of the very actual spot, in front of Canary Wharf Underground Station, where I was issued with a police ticket for taking an unauthorised photograph! Re the Britain from Above clip, one of the many things London needs is a well-considered High Buildings Policy. Paris has done this ever-so-much-better than London by restricting building heights within the Boulevard Périphérique (though I believe the policy is now being relaxed).

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 06:57:08 +0000

In reply to Christine.

I think society should hold to the principle that what takes place ‘in public’ is available for the public to see – and to photograph. The availability of recording technology should not affect the principle – though it should make people much more careful about what they do and say.

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 06:32:55 +0000

Grant, you can photograph anything from a public place but a landowner can stop you taking photographs on private land. I was once issued with a police ticket for taking photographs in front of Canary Wharf Underground Station. The police (they were not private security guards) told me that it was private land, with public access, and that photography was forbidden. I decided to buy a carbon copy recipt booklet so that I could issue them with tickets in return (but I did not do it!).

By: Christine

Christine — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:25:47 +0000

Are street photographers considered similarly to Paparazzi? [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paparazzi ] Are there any similarities between this current scandal involving journalists and the events surrounding Diana’s death?
[ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/diana/press0831.htm ]

In the late 1990s the intrusions into people’s privacy were mostly physical, with the increasing prevalence of digital technology intrusions into people’s privacy are increasingly virtual.

Is there a landscape or urban design solution to this problem as it exists in the physical environment? Perhaps.

By: Tom Turner

Tom Turner — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 04:34:32 +0000

Sir Paul Stephenson resigned from his job as head of the Metropolitan Police yesterday, presumably after being stung by the above sarcasm, but said nothing about regretting the harassment of street photographers during his time in the job.

By: Christine

Christine — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 03:15:26 +0000

The usual predictions in urban planning for the future include population increase, higher residential densities in inner city areas, better connections between activities and transport, containing urban growth by setting boundaries and the protection of open space. Yet if Edward Glaeser is correct pockets of population decline in cities is an equally important part of the equation. [ http://www.futureoflondon.org.uk/2011/03/14/edward-glaeser-the-triumph-of-the-city/ ]

If this is London 2012 [ http://vimeo.com/4204254 ]…

…and if this You tube clip is correct, it would seem that Parliament Square would be in deep shadow at least some of the time [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atPY78LiS9Q&feature=related ] because of the increasing height of skyscrapers,

…so what will 2030 bring?

Here are a few ideas.[ http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2010/jan/24/london-2030-future-predictions ] Boris Johnson would be interested to note that Ken Livingston features strongly in future predictions! Will it be back to the future for London?

Perhaps the task should be to imagine a happy future for London children rather than just trend predictions and projections to 2030?