Murphy SidingVideo dude comes off as wanting a confrontation, so he has something exciting to film. That’s apparent because that’s exactly what he did. He filmed something so he could bring attention to his YouTube videos.
Classic example of "Man with camera, seeks confrontation"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r55BFO9ZVaM
Euclid NittanyLion Euclid If a photographer is on public property is he legally allowed to photograph anything in sight? What law would prohibit a photographer on public property from photographing a railroader at work? It all falls down to the oft-forgotten maxim of "don't be a jerk." There's nothing illegal about me keeping pace with you as you drive down the street, with a camera pointed at you the whole time. Would you consider me a jerk for doing that? Would you question my morality and ethics? In this case, I think both thought the other was being a jerk. So how do they decide?
NittanyLion Euclid If a photographer is on public property is he legally allowed to photograph anything in sight? What law would prohibit a photographer on public property from photographing a railroader at work? It all falls down to the oft-forgotten maxim of "don't be a jerk." There's nothing illegal about me keeping pace with you as you drive down the street, with a camera pointed at you the whole time. Would you consider me a jerk for doing that? Would you question my morality and ethics?
Euclid If a photographer is on public property is he legally allowed to photograph anything in sight? What law would prohibit a photographer on public property from photographing a railroader at work?
If a photographer is on public property is he legally allowed to photograph anything in sight? What law would prohibit a photographer on public property from photographing a railroader at work?
It all falls down to the oft-forgotten maxim of "don't be a jerk." There's nothing illegal about me keeping pace with you as you drive down the street, with a camera pointed at you the whole time. Would you consider me a jerk for doing that? Would you question my morality and ethics?
In this case, I think both thought the other was being a jerk. So how do they decide?
I disagree. The railroader was politely asking the video dude not to film the workers. Video dude comes off as wanting a confrontation, so he has something exciting to film. That’s apparent because that’s exactly what he did. He filmed something so he could bring attention to his YouTube videos. The police were called, maybe? Do we really know that? For extra attention, wouldn’t video dude at least have shown the cop car pulling up? If the police were called, the officer would have been sent out to check on someone suspected of trespassing. The officer would check it out and go from there. If you don’t want to be treated like a problem, don’t act like a problem.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
adkrr64I can't imagine a crew member would even notice a random person that far away from the track, on a public sidewalk, especially if that was the first time they were there
The camera is a red flag. So much so that the mere display of one often serves as a deterrant.
In fact, frequently when I observe some ne'r do well acting out their ambition, all I have to do is hold up my cell phone and act like I'm recording, at it's amazing how quickly they notice and disperse.
These days, if you are a cop, it's probably twice as bad.
So I sympathize with the railroader in this video. He's just trying to get his job done, and really SHOULDN'T HAVE TO take time out from that to wonder if the filmer has a motive.
Convicted One Euclid How is it governed by morals and ethics? What did the photographer do that was ethically wrong? Who was right and who was wrong from an ethical or moral basis? I don't want to get in a nit-pick about semantics with you. But.... while the crew working in a public place has no "reasonable expectation of privacy", when the videographer approached the crew man, he (the videographer) was inviting a response...and he got one. Not everbody wants to be his back-slapping buddy, so why act surprised?
Euclid How is it governed by morals and ethics? What did the photographer do that was ethically wrong? Who was right and who was wrong from an ethical or moral basis?
I don't want to get in a nit-pick about semantics with you. But.... while the crew working in a public place has no "reasonable expectation of privacy", when the videographer approached the crew man, he (the videographer) was inviting a response...and he got one. Not everbody wants to be his back-slapping buddy, so why act surprised?
Don’t misunderstand me. I am not taking sides on this matter. Here is what I see in the video. It gives me a feeling that they have had confrontations in the past, maybe on the same day before he starts this video. They both seem too confrontational for this issue to have just popped up in this video.
The railroader confronts the video guy and says he would like the video guy to not film him, but it would be okay to film the equipment. The video guy is filming the railroader as he approaches at that point. In response to the request by the railroader, the video guy stands his ground by citing his right to video from public property. The railroader says he is only asking to not be videoed. Then he walks back to the train and the video guy says he will be trying not to film the trainman, but he remarks that it is somewhat essential to include the trainman (or something like that).
Next thing is that the train crew apparently calls the company and reports the video guy to be trespassing. Apparently the cops are called, but the video omits the chapter of the cops responding and how that unfolded. I did not see any trespass in the video, but I have a feeling that there may have been some earlier before the video began.
diningcar Why in the hell would he be railfanning a switching move on an insignificant track that is so unimportent that there is no crossing signalling?
Why in the hell would he be railfanning a switching move on an insignificant track that is so unimportent that there is no crossing signalling?
All the more reason for the fan to back off.. he was clearly a distraction to the crew who had more important things to worry about.. i.e. clearing an unprotected crossing.
Railroader was polite about conveying that he didn't want to be filmed. The fan should have respected that and moved on..
n012944 This guy is on the same level that called in a CN crew for having the front door open.
This guy is on the same level that called in a CN crew for having the front door open.
That guy writes for the magazine:
http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2015/01/28/railroaders-railfans-and-the-letter.aspx
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
I don't have any objective evidence, but I suspect the guy filming has had some prior, not so good, interactions with train crews in the past, and that he has become known to them as a potential problem. I can't imagine a crew member would even notice a random person that far away from the track, on a public sidewalk, especially if that was the first time they were there. If it is someone who is constantly around, and has trespassed in the past, then I can see why there might be a more hostile reaction.
Euclid Harrison Euclid If a photographer is on public property is he legally allowed to photograph anything in sight? What law would prohibit a photographer on public property from photographing a railroader at work? At this point it isn't about the law, it's about morals and ethics. Legally JT didn't do anything wrong. Ethically? That's the question. How is it governed by morals and ethics? What did the photographer do that was ethically wrong? Who was right and who was wrong from an ethical or moral basis?
Harrison Euclid If a photographer is on public property is he legally allowed to photograph anything in sight? What law would prohibit a photographer on public property from photographing a railroader at work? At this point it isn't about the law, it's about morals and ethics. Legally JT didn't do anything wrong. Ethically? That's the question.
At this point it isn't about the law, it's about morals and ethics. Legally JT didn't do anything wrong. Ethically? That's the question.
How is it governed by morals and ethics? What did the photographer do that was ethically wrong? Who was right and who was wrong from an ethical or moral basis?
The conductor asked not to be filmed. The tuber then put a still shot of the conductor's face up at the end of the video. Not only is that eithically wrong, it is being a jerk.
I hope the tuber is given a hard time by crews from now on. It will be deserving. This guy is on the same level that called in a CN crew for having the front door open.
An "expensive model collector"
EuclidHow is it governed by morals and ethics? What did the photographer do that was ethically wrong? Who was right and who was wrong from an ethical or moral basis?
The general "feel" that I've gotten from watching the video, paying particular attention to the mannerisms and voice intonation of the videographer....he has gotten bored with his hobby and is trying to involve traincrews (in them) to distinguish his product from the thousands of others photographing trains.
He wanted to capture the essence of railroading, and he got his money's worth. Where is the problem?
Looking at the comments on You Tube, they quickly go to name calling, politics "you sound like a Biden voter" and such. I can relate to the railroad workers in a way. When I'm driving one of my classic cars I get photographed all the time. It goes with the territory. I still don't really like it as I've never liked being photographed myself. I have no interest in being on someone's Facebook thing. "Ooh, look at the funny old car I saw today!" Nope. When people had to pay for film, they always asked but today, no. Once in a while someone will ask permission, most times not. But when someone yells "Smile" at me when I'm driving that's when I wave at them and don't bother using all my fingers. (great line Tree68, by the way.)
Simple courtesy would seem to dictate that if you're asked not to film an individual, you don't.
CW
Harrison
Homeschooler living In upstate NY a.k.a Northern NY.
Modeling the D&H in 1978.
Route of the famous "Montreal Limited"
My YouTube
traisessive1There is no reason to be zoomed in or focused on a guy lining a switch or taking close up shots of crewmembers riding cars or in the locomotive cabs.
And that's permission, not forgiveness.
Note how the guy clearly says he can photograph the equipment all he wants... just not the people. I thought that was fair.
We've had this type of discussion before. After 9/11 things got really touchy, and there were many self-appointed protectors of security - in and out of uniform, etc.
Photographing railroaders at work does get a widely varied response. Some crewmembers will wave, mug, you-name-it, for the fans. Some won't bother using all their fingers when they wave. If they acknowledge the fans at all.
Older forum members may remember "I don't wave..."
I haven't seen the program yet, but we were told this past weekend at rules class that there is a new program regarding use of horns at crossings. Could be interesting...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Well it is pretty obvious what he is doing with a camera in his hand. If he was smart he would buy a drone and then the train crew wouldn't probably have the faintest clue what he was doing or it would look unrelated to the train unless he followed the train with the drone.
SD70Dude But I do know that it is impossible to go through a workday without accidentally breaking a minor rule or procedure. And I did see one or two things that a trainmaster could seize on under our rules as an excuse to go after the crew.
But I do know that it is impossible to go through a workday without accidentally breaking a minor rule or procedure. And I did see one or two things that a trainmaster could seize on under our rules as an excuse to go after the crew.
At least 3 under CN Canadian Rules as he's coming up to talk to him at the beginning of the video:
-vest not done up
-improperly riding a tank car
-giving traffic a hand signal to proceed
There could be others in the video but I will just focus on that part.
This is my take.
Railroaders have to do their utmost best to follow the rules becuase they never know who is watching and what their intentions are.
That being said, any railfan who is focusing on a crew memeber or person doing their job instead of the equipment needs to cut it out. There is no reason to be zoomed in or focused on a guy lining a switch or taking close up shots of crewmembers riding cars or in the locomotive cabs.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
I'm going to break my previous statement to say this:
We are only hearing one side of the story and seeing an edited video clip made for shock value. We do not know if there is more to this story that was left out of the video.
I mean, we are told not to trust the media, not to trust the schools, not to trust the gov't, but the word of someone on youtube is solid gold?
I don't know. Seems a little too convenient and click-batey. But I could be wrong.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
This is a touchy subject. My opinion is that if a crew doesn't want a railfan in their face videotaping their faces and specifically what they're doing, railfans need to respect that. But Mr. Jaw Tooth was not too close to them, or intentionally shooting the crew (until the crew member came to talk to him). That is where things broke down, he should have either stopped the camera or pointed it away from the crew member. I've filmed my local crew as part of the train (not just taking video of them walking around) and I have not had a problem. I intentionally edit and shoot my video as to not include their movements more than necessary and so their faces do not show more than necessary. Here is a good article on the subject:
https://www.traingeek.ca/wp/ethics-and-rail-photography/
If a crew asks me to not film them on the ground, I will respect that. But if they're asking me to not film their train, that is where we will have a problem. And call me for trespassing? I will call the police myself...
SD70Dude... perhaps there is a history between him and the local railroaders.
Rule of Thumb - Don't argue with a operating video. You will only look like a fool.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
A few thoughts and generalizations.
I don't know NS's operating procedures. But I do know that it is impossible to go through a workday without accidentally breaking a minor rule or procedure. And I did see one or two things that a trainmaster could seize on under our rules as an excuse to go after the crew.
As we've discussed before, railroad management commonly harasses crews and issues harsh discipline for even those minor violations. And they watch social media for evidence.
Railroaders are people too. And some people just plain don't like being filmed, no matter where they are or what they are doing.
A lot of railroaders look down on all railfans because we only tend to see the obvious ones, like those 'foamers' who choose to trespass or do other stupid things. The rest of us then get painted with the same bad brush.
The only example of trespassing is in the final shot starting at 14:28 (he should have set up in the vacant space that can be seen after the camera swings around), and I am not sure if it was filmed before or after the street running or even on the same day. This guy does seem to be a bit of a goofball as railfans go, and perhaps there is a history between him and the local railroaders.
126,000 subscribers!? I picked the wrong career, he probably makes more money than us.
While we do not know property lines, the tuber might be tresspassing in that last going away shot. He is pretty close to the ballast line.
Sorry, I've taken parts in these discussions before and it never ends well.
I'll pass.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.