Photography restrictions

I just returned from trip over Eastern India, had visited Hyderabad, Bhubaneswar and Puri, Kolkata, Darjeeling, Kalimpong and Sikkim, also spend some time in Lucknow, Haridwar, Rishikesh, Delhi and Amritsar. I found that since 3 years ago when I visited these regions many unjustified and justified restrictions for photography are sadly still in place. Many Hindu temples do not allow not only photography, but also foreigners on their premises, Himalayan gompas guard their fragile frescoes and there are many military sensitive objects and places where photo restrictions may be justified.

Still I can not comprehend many existing restrictions, just start with Kolkata bridges, Howrah and Vi Setu, what is purpose of hiding them from lenses? My another suggestions are Mysore palace and Safdar Jung museum in Hyderabad.

What do you think which objects and places are unjustifiedly hidden from our cameras?

I asked the relative officials/no so officals, this several times on my travels when I was told about it and was told it was due to terrorist possibilities.
I discovered however, that in a lot of places, you simply hand your camera to a 'western' woman and ask her to go take a photo of whatever it is, and no questions asked!
Maybe I should start shaving???

Yes in some cases possibility of making photos depends on who camera person is, but even then in far too many places in India photography simply impossible.

What if IndiaMikers will write a letter to Indian tourist ministry with their suggestions for removal of restrictions for photography? Probably it will not help immediately, but may be good for Indian tourism industry in long term and some places may change their policies.

I was thinking about increased photo restrictions when I was in India recently. It looks to me as if there are definitely more restrictions in place now.

I'm pretty sure that when I was in Cochin 8 years ago, we were allowed to photograph the synagogue. This year I found, to my disappointment, that photography is prohibited.

The Howrah Bridge photo ban is annoying but understandable. I just pointed my camera at people or markets, with the bridge conveniently situated behind. There are ways to get around these obstacles!

Outside the Marble Palace in Kolkata we didn't tip a security guard as much as he would have liked, so he decided to shout at me when I tried to photograph the building from the outside. I wasn't even on the premises; I was standing outside the gate, in the street! Boy, did that make me mad.

We were trying to be so sensitive in the Golden Temple and only photograph around the walkway as the signs said - the further we went, and even into the inner sanctum itself, the more we were jostled by Sikhs madly snapping photos of everything & everyone, getting us to take their photo etc etc.. in the end my husband just snapped away like everyone else - we got some great shots, there are some in my gallery, and no-one said a thing to us.

Railway stations are the thing aren't they? They are really on the lookout there, and also taking out your mobile in the airport security area...!!!! Nearly started an incident!

Don't even get me started on the Republc day Parade - no bags, no cameras, no phones, no cigarettes or lighters, no water bottles, no food, no sunblock... We had a complete drama as we didn't know, not to mention we had tickets and none of the police could tell us where to go... you know!!! 'Just up there madam'.. wave of the hand, wobble of the head...

We ended up leaving our bags with the police superintendent who was manfully still hanging onto them when we went back to get them!!!!

Yes, I photographed inside the synagogue a few years back.

I really don't know about this, as I don't go round photographing stuff much --- but I understood that some restrictions, like photography at airports, has been lifted.

It seems that Photo-paranoia in UK has now become so extreme, with security, and even police, inventing laws on the spot to stop people, that an MP has taken up the issue. But then, the UK has the ever-present danger of being taken over by terrorists and paedophiles, of course.

(Actually, I read recently that India, sadly, ranks number one in the world for deaths by "terrorist" attacks)

Number one or not, India has been a victim of terrorism for decades.

And many of the terrorist organisations often had tacit support of some of the most prominent anti-terrorist crusading countries today.

I find it sad that, at a time when photography is more accessible, cheap and popular than it's ever been, photo restrictions are becoming tighter than ever. I've been stopped from using a tripod in Trafalgar Square... it's frustrating when you are restricted like that in your own city.

At the same time, it's absolutely fine to have CCTV cameras filming people and intruding on their daily lives.

Keep an eye on the news. Most of the time the people who are stopping you have no right whatsoever to prevent you taking pics.

Unfortunately they are often larger, and fighting for one's rights can hurt .

oh yes, completely agree, sikhs in the temple are so nice, golden temple is so beautiful and for many Sikh NRIs of course pilgrimage is so important that they want to have pics of these moments. So administration tries to look the other way at least till some incident happens or complain lodged. Fortunately so far visitors were sensitive about maintaining peaceful atmosphere in the complex.

I don't think that Kolkata's bridges photo ban is understandable. It is simply ....

Many Kolkatans are ready to prevent tourists from making any photographs of their city, and not only bridges but even Writer's building because prime minister of Kolkata lives or works in this magnificent building (I was waiting for the red tram to cross the road). So sad.

But most absurd ban I think is in Mysore palace. In Kochi's synagogue photo restriction was in place when I visited it 2 years ago, but happily at that time nobody seemed to care about ban.

In 2006 I took several photos inside Kochi's synagogue - no problem whatsoever. I agree that the paranoia around prohibition of photography is growing. A sign of the times. Not good.

of course !!

its bcoz if you will click the pic of temple you could sell those pics and make money whereas the temple authority sell the pics by themselfs to fund temple's smooth working ,

Many temples do not let chrishtians as most of them are missioniers trying to convert poor hindu's by giving them money

.....

I once took a pic of a beautiful old tree within a military camp.
Probably a stupid thing.
I think it generally makes them feel important, when there is a photograph
restriction!