NYC Bridge Photography

[papaT10932]

After 9-11, all photography on all NYC crossings (bridges and tunnels) was banned. Signs are posted clearly banning photography at each crossing. I have two questions.... is photography REALLY a security threat? and is this ban legal/enforceable?

[Truvelo]

I've taken many pictures of bridges in the area whilst inside the car and I expect many people on this forum have as well. As pictures are readily available on Google Earth I don't see what the fuss is all about.

[Roadgeek Adam]

I have taken photos, and almost got caught by a toll security guard too

[papaT10932]

I have taken photos, and almost got caught by a toll security guard too

Did the security guard stop or question you?

[Chris]

I've taken many pictures of bridges in the area whilst inside the car and I expect many people on this forum have as well. As pictures are readily available on Google Earth I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Last time I checked Street View didn't cover the main spans of several NYC area bridges.

[mightyace]

This has been an issue in the railfan community too.

Photographers have been hassled by local and railroad police even when shooting from public property.

Now, if you're on the property of a private-sector railroad, you're trespassing and that's another story.

Last year, a battle with New Jersey Transit was finally won after much public pressure.  Before their "ban" was lifted, NJT police would harass or arrest you for shooting from a train station platform which is considered both public property and a public place.

That's gone, but if you go down to an Amtrak platform, say at Penn Station in New York and try and take photos, don't be surprised if Amtrak police try to take you or your camera away.

Whether it's trains, planes or automobiles, if you shoot photos from public property or with the permission of the property owner, you're constitutionally in the right.  (But, as many of us have noted, not everyone cares about the constitution.)

[Roadgeek Adam]

This has been an issue in the railfan community too.

Photographers have been hassled by local and railroad police even when shooting from public property.

Now, if you're on the property of a private-sector railroad, you're trespassing and that's another story.

Last year, a battle with New Jersey Transit was finally won after much public pressure.  Before their "ban" was lifted, NJT police would harass or arrest you for shooting from a train station platform which is considered both public property and a public place.

That's gone, but if you go down to an Amtrak platform, say at Penn Station in New York and try and take photos, don't be surprised if Amtrak police try to take you or your camera away.

Whether it's trains, planes or automobiles, if you shoot photos from public property or with the permission of the property owner, you're constitutionally in the right.  (But, as many of us have noted, not everyone cares about the constitution.)

Yeah, I photograph from NJ Transit platforms all the time (see my Flickr page). I still hide my camera when conductors are on the platform though.

I have taken photos, and almost got caught by a toll security guard too

Did the security guard stop or question you?

No, but the look on her face was classic upset.

[Scott5114]

I got harassed by an ISTHA toll collector for taking a photo of her toll booth during the Chicago meet.

[rickmastfan67]

That is why when they have an open house for a toll highway, go crazy on pictures.   I took pictures of almost everything when they had the open house on PA Turnpike 576.   I even walked accross the ramps over I-376 (Then PA-60) to get the end shields.

And here's a shot that you wouldn't be able to get normally.

[Alex]

I have photographed all of the bridges in NYC I have crossed during the daylight (still have only posted about half of them on the site). Google Street View had pics of the bridges at one point, but those were since removed. Ironically pics of all tunnels but the Battery Tunnel are still online!

[Alps]

I have photos of most of the bridges and tunnels... I thought the ban was on the Port Authority side only, though.  It's all the city owned bridges?  I don't recall any signs to that effect.  Or is it just the TBTA bridges/tunnels?

[agentsteel53]

screw 'em

[Roadgeek Adam]

Ironically, the Verrazanno was the bridge where that incident happened - but I saw the sign on the Staten Island side

[mgk920]

I don't know, but just a quick check, the Queensboro, Williamsburg, Manhattan and Brooklyn bridges and the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels are up on GE.

I don't really know what they are trying to achieve by doing that, anyways, as copious images of all of the crossings already exist and ANYONE with any knowledge of engineering will know everything about their structures and their major 'weak spots'.

Mike

[papaT10932]

I have photos of most of the bridges and tunnels... I thought the ban was on the Port Authority side only, though.  It's all the city owned bridges?  I don't recall any signs to that effect.  Or is it just the TBTA bridges/tunnels?

I have never seen signs banning photography on the city owned bridges... only the TBTA crossings and NY-NJ crossings. The Brooklyn Bridge gets so much foot traffic that banning photography from being taken on the span would be impossible, otherwise they probably would ban it there too.

[Scott5114]

The Brooklyn Bridge gets so much foot traffic that banning photography from being taken on the span would be impossible, otherwise they probably would ban it there too.

Plus it's widely regarded as an architectural landmark. Banning photography of it would probably bring much more scorn upon the public authorities than any of the other "forbidden" bridges would.

[agentsteel53]

Plus it's widely regarded as an architectural landmark. Banning photography of it would probably bring much more scorn upon the public authorities than any of the other "forbidden" bridges would.

apparently, the Verrazano is chopped liver.

[Chris]

Geez, such "no photos" signs remember me of the communist era in Eastern Europe. You wasn't supposed to take pics of bridges, border stations, railway stations, subway stations, etc.

[Truvelo]

It reminds me of when I took this picture of the stone between Hungary and Croatia with the border guard shouting NO PHOTO. Is this picture really helpful in helping terrorists blow up Croatia?

[Dougtone]

After 9-11, all photography on all NYC crossings (bridges and tunnels) was banned. Signs are posted clearly banning photography at each crossing. I have two questions.... is photography REALLY a security threat? and is this ban legal/enforceable?

I believe that at the MTA bridge and tunnel crossings, there was a rule about taking pictures at the crossings before 9-11 happened, but it wasn't really enforced or really even mentioned until after 9-11.  The NYSBA also had a photography ban in place for a while, but that has since been repealed.

[agentsteel53]

that's an old boundary marker.  MNK is Magyar Nepkoztarsasag, aka "People's Republic of Hungary".  The commie title was used from the late 1940s (I forget the exact year? 1947? 1949?) to 1989/90 or so.

[HalifaxTravaler]

Thats too bad,i am traveling from Nova Scotia to North Carolina in a few weeks,i was hoping maybe i could get some pic of some bridges in the NYC area.Might try to sneak a few though.Strange law though,just go read the book called six bridges,it talks about the 6 major bridges in NYC also has a lot of details about their design.

[Duke87]

I talked to someone working for the Port Authority at the George Washington Bridge about this once. Basically, they aren't worried about tourists snapping photos, but they apparently have caught people obviously intentionally taking closeups of the steel framework and whatnot, and that is cause for concern.
But, since it's impractical to write or enforce a selective ban on certain things, they just blanketly ban the whole bridge.

...although, they did let us whip out the cameras to snap the view from the top of the tower:





Also, yes, it's MTA Bridges and Tunnels and the Port Authority that have bans. NYCDOT and NYSDOT bridges are perfectly legal to take pictures on.

[xcellntbuy]

Terrific photos!

[corco]

I talked to someone working for the Port Authority at the George Washington Bridge about this once. Basically, they aren't worried about tourists snapping photos, but they apparently have caught people obviously intentionally taking closeups of the steel framework and whatnot, and that is cause for concern.
But, since it's impractical to write or enforce a selective ban on certain things, they just blanketly ban the whole bridge.

It seems to me that while the actual law can be a blanket ban, actual enforcement only needs to occur when people are taking closeups of steel framework. This country selectively enforces laws all the time. Why not this one?