CCTV rules.

I used a studio a lot (many times a month) a few years back where CCTV was installed in all the studios complete with prominent signage saying that "CCTV was installed but not actively monitored, for everyone's safety". I knew the studio owner very well and I know the reason that he had it installed was because of another regular tog being accused of rape while in the studio (if you are thinking "why didn't she shout/scream ... don't go there). The system came to the rescue of another tog a couple of years later when he was similarly accused.  A side effect was when the studio owner was visited by plod, accusing him of running a brothel (disgruntled neighbour assumed). Full 24/7 footage easily came to his defense.

K.M. someome recording a shoot on their own PERSONAL device is a whole different ball game to a studio having cctv survailence.

K.M. nothing wrong with your quote, but requires a little expanding.

Current legal time requirement for businesses is 40 days for a FOI request, so deleting after 30 days is problematic although you could argue that footage no longer remains after 30 days! £10 charge is for a still image. Most of our requests start off with the customer requesting the whole footage (72 cameras) for the whole night - so imagine the possible editing bill to mask identities. Plus they are usually requesting footage to identify someone else which is not possible under data protection regulations (they can only see footage of themselves). As already mentioned, police can request timed unmasked footage of incidents for evidence, but not individuals.

CCTV coverage is governed by the ICO. They produce a code of practice advising businesses on the use of CCTV. This includes a photographic studio. A link to the code of practice is here. https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/consultations/2044/draft-cctv-cop.pdf

I have quickly read through it and produced a summary pertinent the topic of photographic studios as it is the topic of this thread. I have also linked to the actual document on the ICO website, so anyone can make their own personal interpretation. 

As part of my interpretation, I have suggested actions that could be taken by a studio to ensure a model/photographer’s confidence are satisfied. These are highlighted inbold and italics. Anything not in bold or italics is Code of Practice. A Code of Practice is not law. It is guidance. It is the role of Lawyers and the courts to decide on matters of the law.

Code of Practice 

The CCTV code of practice has a greater coverage than the SC code as the Data Protection Act is applicable to all organisations that process personal data irrespective of sector and across the whole of the UK. Any organisation using cameras to process personal data should follow the recommendations of this code.

As the owner of the cctv system........ you should carefully consider whether or not to use a surveillance system. The fact that it is possible, affordable or has public support should not be the primary motivating factor. You should also take into account the nature of the problem you are seeking to address; whether a surveillance system would be a justified and effective solution, whether better solutions exist, what effect its use may have on individuals, and whether in the light of this, its use is a proportionate response to the problem. If you are already using a surveillance system, you should evaluate whether it is necessary and proportionate to continue using it.

You should consider these matters objectively as part of an assessment of the scheme’s impact on people’s privacy. The best way to do this is to conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA).

.......anyone concerned about the cctv system should be able to view the PIA to satisfy themselves of the legitimacy of the system. Failure of a studio to do this would be a cause for concern.

A PIA should look at the pressing need that the surveillance system is intended to address and whether its proposed use has a lawful basis and is justified, necessary and proportionate. Where the system is already in use, the same issues should be considered or considerations should be made as to whether a less privacy intrusive method could be used to address the pressing need.

You should regularly review whether the use of surveillance systems continues to be justified. It is necessary to renew your notification with the ICO yearly, so this would be an appropriate time to consider the ongoing use of such systems.

...... The studio should be happy to show a copy of their notification to the ICO. It should be current within a year. Failure to do so would be a cause for concern.

Individuals whose information is recorded have a right to view this information and unless they agree otherwise, to be provided with a copy of that information. This must be provided promptly and within no longer than 40 calendar days of receiving a request.

Once you have followed the guidance in this code and set up the surveillance system you need to ensure that it continues to comply with the DPA and the code’s requirements in practice. You should:

*Tell people how they can make a subject access request,

*who it should be sent to and what information needs to be supplied with their request;

*give them a copy of this code or details of the ICO website; and tell them how to complain about either the operation of the system or failure to comply with the requirements of this code.

If a studio with cctv isn’t doing this it should be a cause for concern

You must let people know that they are in an area where a surveillance system is being operated. The most effective way of doing this is by using prominently placed signs at the entrance to the surveillance system’s zone and reinforcing this with further signs inside the area. Clear and prominent signs are particularly important where the surveillance systems themselves are very discreet, or in locations where people might not expect to be under surveillance. As a general rule, signs should be more prominent and frequent where it would otherwise be less obvious to people that they are being monitored by a surveillance system.

Holly Alexander said

K.M. someome recording a shoot on their own PERSONAL device is a whole different ball game to a studio having cctv survailence.

So if I create a Studio account on Purpleport and mount the GoPro onto the wall you'd be fine with it?

Frameworks Media said

K.M. nothing wrong with your quote, but requires a little expanding.

Current legal time requirement for businesses is 40 days for a FOI request, so deleting after 30 days is problematic although you could argue that footage no longer remains after 30 days!

IANAL, but this does intesect with interests of mine.

You could indeed respond to soemone who asked 31 days after they might have been recorded that no record of them (the time and place they enquired of) exists and that seems to be a complete answer.  You might reasonably or even laudably go on to amplify that you don't keep surveillance data for longer than it is needed, and that if you had it you've not needed it and deleted it according to routine.

I think that carries the opposite of a problem with it.

K.M. said

Holly Alexander said

K.M. someome recording a shoot on their own PERSONAL device is a whole different ball game to a studio having cctv survailence.

So if I create a Studio account on Purpleport and mount the GoPro onto the wall you'd be fine with it?

Oh C'mon! You know she meant if a photographer physically wore a GoPro like the police wear body cams. Big, bright, bold & obvious.

The only downside is if the wearer commits a crime on camera they can delete it. An independent party is less likely too. 

interesting topic today

Edited by StubbsPhotography

Frameworks Media said

K.M. nothing wrong with your quote, but requires a little expanding.

Current legal time requirement for businesses is 40 days for a FOI request, so deleting after 30 days is problematic although you could argue that footage no longer remains after 30 days! £10 charge is for a still image. Most of our requests start off with the customer requesting the whole footage (72 cameras) for the whole night - so imagine the possible editing bill to mask identities. Plus they are usually requesting footage to identify someone else which is not possible under data protection regulations (they can only see footage of themselves). As already mentioned, police can request timed unmasked footage of incidents for evidence, but not individuals.

FOI - Freedom of Information - I thought this only applied to Government Departments and public bodies.  I don't think it has any relevance to individuals, commercial enterprises, charities, businesses etc etc.  Please feel free to correct me.  The Data Protection Act on the other hand may be relevant to individuals and businesses holding data (images/video) of individuals and there's a whole new ball game about the need to retain the data?

All households that have CCTV that look onto public roads and/or pavements should be registered with the ICO and it is mandatory for all businesses to register with the ICO if you use CCTV for crime prevention.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-cctv-using-cctv-systems-on-your-property/domestic-cctv-using-cctv-systems-on-your-property

GSC4X you can wrap it up in any number of names, GDPR, FOI, Data Protection Act, Surveillance Camera Code of Practice 2013 (the ‘SCCOP’),The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. There is quite a bit to it and I'm sure if someone had a sufficient unscrupulous lawyer they could probably find loopholes when offences have been committed.

On a day to day basis, clear CCTV footage is invaluable to help resolve a number of incidents including theft, criminal damage, altercations, drug abuse and lost items etc.

Frameworks Media said

GSC4X you can wrap it up in any number of names, GDPR, FOI, Data Protection Act, Surveillance Camera Code of Practice 2013 (the ‘SCCOP’),The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. There is quite a bit to it and I'm sure if someone had a sufficient unscrupulous lawyer they could probably find loopholes when offences have been committed.

On a day to day basis, clear CCTV footage is invaluable to help resolve a number of incidents including theft, criminal damage, altercations, drug abuse and lost items etc.

No, they are separate acts and have different requirements and purposes.  While you can request data/stats from a Government organisation, or publicly funded organisation, you can't do the same in your local convenience store or photography studio...... for possible criminal activity it would require a warrant (GDPR/DPA etc etc could be legitimately refused).

It's an evolving minefield, but lets not muddy the water by confusing what is applicable under which act......

GLR exactly! It's totally different. Your own personal go pro device is NOT cctv surveillence.

Anyway, sure film me for the whole shoot I wouldn't acytually care if you want silly footage of me laughing and changing poses lol

 Holly Alexander GoPro's can be used as CCTV cameras: https://actiongadgetsreviews.com/how-to-use-a-gopro-as-a-security-camera

Most models wouldn't want multiple cameras pointing at them while they change poses. It could be used as an opportunity to get crotch shots. It's actually ineviatble if the model isn't wearing underwear. That's why some models would charge extra for the privelage of recording their more intimate areas.

K.M. it's a little creepy how obsessed you are with your go pro and catching sneaky shots tbh.... Why would that even be a thing? Why would a photographer ask to record that?

Your experience at photoshoots seems to be a world away from mine so I think we can agree to disagree.

The original topic is of cctv in public areas.