20Man
Member
This is a copy of a photo shared by a local newspaper, what are peoples thoughts, personally I think it's wrong. Taken on a foot crossing on the line from Bourne End to Marlow
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Photo on a Foot Crossing, Thoughts.
- Thread starter 20Man
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
zwk500
Veteran Member
It's a long-standing problem, and no it shouldn't be taken without appropriate permission (and even then the risk of copycat should be considered when taking it at all) but it will continue nevertheless.
RailExplorer
Member
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 219
It's a photo. Not really worried in the slightest. Could be taken anywhere in the world, and in most countries walking along the tracks is fine. In fact, I've got hundreds of track photos from around the world just like this one. What we need to teach in the UK are the dangers of higher speed railways, blind bends etc. Or perhaps best let people crack on with being stupid and see what happens (need less of a blame culture though). Bottom line for me is that I don't quite understand how we have so many people who have no concept of risk in the UK and need to be told everything word for word.
I agree, it's a nice photo and I have plenty like it.
alxndr
Established Member
- Joined
- 3 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 1,694
In the comment section of the original Facebook post the photographer replied saying that it was taken at "vineyards crossing, Spade Oak, Little Marlow. It is a level crossing. The train had passed just before the shot."
In the case of this particular photograph it appears that the risk was fairly low. It's a single line, a train had recently passed, and the line speed is not particularly great. That's not to say I condone it at all, but if someone is insistent on getting such a photograph (and I do understand the temptation, it's a nice photograph and the leading lines of rails do make for an interesting photograph), then it's one of the safest ways to get it.
I do, however, believe that it is incredibly irresponsible for the paper to share the photograph (and indeed at the photographer for sending it in, although I appreciate that they might be proud of their work). The real risk in this case is for copycat photographers to do so in a more dangerous location and manner. As a teenager interested in photography that I really wouldn't have done now, but at the time I thought I was being safe enough. Seeing that would have probably given me ideas that I might not have had the sense to keep as just ideas. Fifteen year olds aren't known for their hazard perception and self-preservation. The responsible thing for the paper to do would have been to thank the photographer for his nice photograph, but say that they cannot accept submissions of that nature due to being seen to condone dangerous and illegal behaviours.
In the case of this particular photograph it appears that the risk was fairly low. It's a single line, a train had recently passed, and the line speed is not particularly great. That's not to say I condone it at all, but if someone is insistent on getting such a photograph (and I do understand the temptation, it's a nice photograph and the leading lines of rails do make for an interesting photograph), then it's one of the safest ways to get it.
I do, however, believe that it is incredibly irresponsible for the paper to share the photograph (and indeed at the photographer for sending it in, although I appreciate that they might be proud of their work). The real risk in this case is for copycat photographers to do so in a more dangerous location and manner. As a teenager interested in photography that I really wouldn't have done now, but at the time I thought I was being safe enough. Seeing that would have probably given me ideas that I might not have had the sense to keep as just ideas. Fifteen year olds aren't known for their hazard perception and self-preservation. The responsible thing for the paper to do would have been to thank the photographer for his nice photograph, but say that they cannot accept submissions of that nature due to being seen to condone dangerous and illegal behaviours.
It's not just the person being stupid that suffers the consequences though.
zwk500
Veteran Member
It's not the lack of concept of risk that is the problem but the societal demand for somebody else to be liable for everything.
RailExplorer
Member
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 219
Where do we draw the line at what's acceptable? All TOCs regularly publish photos from a location that isn't accessible to the public. Should these be banned in case a 15 year old decides to try and access that site for a similar photo? There are all sorts of photos published in newspapers, magazines, social media platforms and photography shows that could be deemed dangerous for a copycat 15 year old. But that's were parents need to teach what's right and what's wrong. By banning something or by making it harder to achieve, you will just make a teenager more likely to want it.
National Geographic (I believe) did an episode on the Iron Ore Freight train in Mauritania. Would a copycat 15 year old attempt that in the UK if they saw that programme.
I'm aware that others also suffer the consequences (I've had near misses as a driver). But I've also had several cab rides around the world too (with hundreds of near misses) and the drivers in these countries couldn't care less if people walk across the tracks right in front of them - they just shout out the window and call them stupid. To be honest, my biggest worry in the UK with trespassers is giving accurate information to the signaller and ensuring I've made everything safe (because of our blame culture) - something which drivers from other countries don't need to do for a simple trespasser incident.
National Geographic (I believe) did an episode on the Iron Ore Freight train in Mauritania. Would a copycat 15 year old attempt that in the UK if they saw that programme.
I'm aware that others also suffer the consequences (I've had near misses as a driver). But I've also had several cab rides around the world too (with hundreds of near misses) and the drivers in these countries couldn't care less if people walk across the tracks right in front of them - they just shout out the window and call them stupid. To be honest, my biggest worry in the UK with trespassers is giving accurate information to the signaller and ensuring I've made everything safe (because of our blame culture) - something which drivers from other countries don't need to do for a simple trespasser incident.
It’s a nice enough photo but probably a bit underexposed.
If you are on social media on the internet you will see photos every day of people doing silly or dangerous things. Getting po-faced about all of it would be tiresome.
If you are on social media on the internet you will see photos every day of people doing silly or dangerous things. Getting po-faced about all of it would be tiresome.
Freightmaster
Verified Rep
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 4,479
M&NEJ
Member
In my opinion it's a very good photograph. Did the newspaper comment on the conditions under which it was taken (public crossing; train just passed) and highlight the dangers of simply standing on railway tracks? - I assume not.
However I agree with the comments above, that there are plenty of places in the world where the public (and sometimes I) walk on tracks without let or hindrance. I think it's like a form of "political correctness" in the UK that we get over-excited about this issue.
However I agree with the comments above, that there are plenty of places in the world where the public (and sometimes I) walk on tracks without let or hindrance. I think it's like a form of "political correctness" in the UK that we get over-excited about this issue.
I noticed somebody with a pram using the staff only barrow crossing at Chester a few months ago. I immediately found the nearest member of station staff who went and had a word. He said she was Ukrainian and didn't think it was an issue at all for exactly the reasons you've mentioned!
I didn't know that.
If I take a photograph while walking over a level crossing am I breaking some regulation?
Islineclear3_1
Established Member
I can't see a problem here. Nice study with converging lines and sunset. I would probably have included more of the sky but I'm sure the photographer had his reasons
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 6,018
I believe that on any right of way (e.g. footpaths and bridleways as well as level crossings), your only "right" is to use them to get from one place to another. You don't have the right to stop on private land to take photos, or indeed pick flowers, watch birds or anything else.
Of course this is mostly unenforced and unenforceable. But strictly speaking the landowner could ask you to stop such activities and move on.
In the case of railway crossings, there may be additional specific regulations.
My understanding is that the right to "pass and repass" isn't quite as strict as that and "incidental" activities are OK.
E.g. if you stop to get a bottle of water out of your bag you don't suddenly become a trespasser, but sitting down and having a picnic is different.
On my facebook feed i get movies from India of trains. People and cattle walking over the railway, train doors open with people hanging out, people dicing with death on level crossings.
If anyone has an accident on the railway by not looking out for themselves they are not classed as railway accidents in Indian law so the railway has no liability.
The dtiving cab windows have metal grilles over the glass to protect the drivers.
Different culture...
If anyone has an accident on the railway by not looking out for themselves they are not classed as railway accidents in Indian law so the railway has no liability.
The dtiving cab windows have metal grilles over the glass to protect the drivers.
Different culture...
zwk500
Veteran Member
I don't know the strictly legal process, but my understanding is that you don't have right of way to stop on the railway, only to cross. Just as you could be prosecuted for obstructing the highway if you paused on a pedestrian crossing unnecessarily.
If you pause to take it, yes I suspect you are.
You have a right to cross, not to linger.
Perhaps I misinterpreted an earlier comment, but it seemed to be saying that taking any photograph on a crossing required permission and that's what I was referring to.
zwk500
Veteran Member
It's the stopping on the crossing to take the photograph that shouldn't be done without permission, regardless of the legal status.
Mikey C
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 8,271
But what counts as stopping? If someone got out a tripod, and spent 10 minutes composing a shot, which you could safely do on the Bourne End to Marlow line if the train had just passed on its way to Bourne End, I guess that counts as stopping on the crossing, whereas pausing for 2 seconds to take a quick photo with your phone is hardly the same thing.
Do we agree that our blame culture came from the USA? Because US railways are unfenced and they seem to have an alarming number of level crossing accidents (I read over 2,000 in 2022 alone). Do the rail companies sue road users, or vice versa?
zwk500
Veteran Member
I wouldn't say so, liability is quite an old concept here - the US has an interesting thing where basically they took a copy of everything we had in the 1750s and then it's developed in it's own way. Railways in the UK are fenced because of Landowners concerns about compensation for livestock, and litigation is not a new concept in UK law.
I don't know tbh. US railroads and level crossings are very different because they have far longer trains, they have street running and tracks in the middle of Main Street and their trains will just wait across the crossing for the tracks ahead to clear so the incentive to beat the train is much higher. It being the US I wouldn't be surprised if everybody sued everybody else and then it all got settled out of court.
Quite.
Although one shouldn't hang around on level crossings, a brief pause to take a photo is hardly lingering in my book.
zwk500
Veteran Member
The problem is one person takes 2 second, the next takes 5 seconds, then the next crouches down to get a steadier picture, and the 4th brings his tripod. A small proportion of railway photographers have also given people an unfortunate reputation for thinking that they know best, and then finding out they are wrong in circumstances that give the driver nightmares.
Best not to embed the correct behaviour in from the start - cross the railway smoothly and safely without stopping. There's hundreds of other things you can take a photo of to illustrate perspective, or you can find another vantage point like a platform or bridge.
I do my best to behave responsibly around the railway. For example, I'll try to make sure I'm not in the way when trains are being despatched and if that means I don't get a photo I'd like then so be it.
However, there are limits and I find it hard to see how by pausing briefly to take a photo on a level crossing I'm somehow responsible for starting a slippery slope that will one day lead to someone stopping to put a tripod down.
Agreed.
Also this would not be considered any sort of issue in most other countries; mainland Europe has a very different attitude to the UK in this area for example.
Over the past few days I have seen many people crossing and walking alongside active railway lines; no-one bats an eyelid!
- Status