alright, i have a question. basically, i've read about how The Terminal needed its own terminal built because they weren't allowed to film in an airport.

so...

the Garden State trailer has a shot in an airport. it's independent and reasonably low-budget, and i really doubt they built one. my guess was that The Terminal was filmed right after 9/11, whereas Garden State was filmed more recently, and that airports have been more lax about it lately. but they still dont seem lax enough that they'd allow filming in an airport...

i know that personally, i flew to DC a couple weeks ago from San Jose and both airports had to not just scan the GL-2, but go dust it for bomb residue, weigh it, and do a bunch of other things to it, moreso than they had to do to my laptop...

anyone know anything about how security is with things like this right now?

Daniel,

Things are still pretty tight. While I haven't tried filming in one, I have watched "Matchstick Men" just this week. (Does that count?)

In the "Making of" featurette they discussed this problem. There was no way they would be allowed to film an airport, so they scouted locations for their own. What they found was a convention center. They turned it into an airport with the addition of signs that they made up and the use of adding background audio in post ("There is no parking in the red zone, the white zone is for ...")

As an aside, I found this featurette one of the most detailed "making of" extras on a recent DVD. Well worth a rent or purchase (can be found for under $10 at a video store in the 'pre-viewed' section).

Regarding travelling, it's like that everywhere I've flown. Even in the little Kansas City terminal they did a residue wipe on all my belongings (except my carry-ons and myself).

Hope this helps.

Scott

It really depends what you're doing and which airport you go to. My friend shot a bit of his short film in Vancouver Int'l - he even got an airline employee at a ticket booth to "act" for one of the shots! He did all this carrying a Bolex in a mysterious silver case. No problems. But I guess that's a testament to how cool Canada is :)

Shooting at an airport is a hassle, but it is possible to get permission to do it, from some airports.

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Taylor : It really depends what you're doing and which airport you go to. My friend shot a bit of his short film in Vancouver Int'l - he even got an airline employee at a ticket booth to "act" for one of the shots! He did all this carrying a Bolex in a mysterious silver case. No problems. But I guess that's a testament to how cool Canada is :) -->>>

On the other hand, I nearly got kicked off the subway (TTC) in Toronto for taking a still picture with my digital camera.

And there you have it, the two sides of the spectrum, completely defined, I suspect, by the authority complex (or lack thereof) of the guards.

http://www.airhollywood.com/

wow Thomas, this is incredible. i never knew this existed.

thanks for the replies, everyone. i don't think i'll be needing an airport for a film yet, and by the looks of things, that's probably a good thing. i was just very curious as to how high security really is. thanks a lot!

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : On the other hand, I nearly got kicked off the subway (TTC) in Toronto for taking a still picture with my digital camera. -->>>

A disgruntled passenger, or some TTC official?...

TTC security!

I would have laughed at a disgruntled passenger.

What could video of an airport reveal that someone walking through couldn't? In other words, is there any (real) reason for this rule?

People can still get through security with "banned" items but at least there won't be any video of the family having lunch at a restaurant.

Dennis Vogel

Generally, airports are run by the city, and they have people at the terminal whose job it is to say no to anything anybody wants to do. Some cities are creative and want to make life easy for filmmakers of any type because it shows off their city, while others are much more obstructionist.
As an example of that, I shot in Albuquerque, N.M., last summer. It didn't involve the airport. I contacted the local film commission via email, got a very prompt reply, told the person what I was after, and she sent me all sorts of photos and even arranged to meet me and my colleague at our hotel (which she got us a discount on). She then spent about 5 hours driving us around looking at locations. I was very upfront with her and told her from the beginning that we were just 2 guys with a camera, tripod and jib and one actor and were not gonna spend over a thousand bucks or so in 3 days. Didn't matter--everybody gets top notch treatment out there.
I'm sure that if we had wanted to shot at the airport, she would have worked to help get it approved.
Other cities are not so friendly, and others charge a lot of money for just about anything.
Here in KC it's mostly about who you know. If you have the right connections you can get into shoot at most places (except malls--they're the worst...we paid 500 bucks to stand out of the traffic for 20 minutes and shoot available light). At our airport they have an unused area for government flights, and we managed to get permission to shoot there because we knew somebody who knew the right person to talk to. We ended up not doing the shoot there because it didn't look all that good, but we did manage to get permission.

However, it is difficult to get permission at airports, and it was even before 911. Back in the '80s I did brochures and slide shows for TWA (when they were in existence), and even the TWA person I worked with had a difficult time getting permission for me to shoot stills there, and they assigned a person to stand there and watch me the whole time. When I wanted to go out on the runway to get a low wide angle shot of a jet parked, they gave me exactly 10 minutes.

Well, I'm not surprised that airports are so strict and I'm actually happy they are. Not to be paranoid but it would be easy for a terrorist to pose as a videographer to sneak a bomb into the terminal. Makes me feel a little be safer in an unsafe area. As for Canada's security...or lack thereof, it is troublesome. There have been several warnings that terroist attacks could come from other countries due to the less strick security methods. The previous post about the easy access at one Canadian airport is a case in point.

Aside from the security issues, there is also the problem of insurance. I suppose that the rates are astronomical and having non-employee personel in restricted areas is a big no-no and could cause the airport to lose their policy or cause the premium to go up if found out.

Not a good time to be in the airport travel business and I don't blame them for being so anal. Even if that creates a hardship for legitimate film/video productions.

Sorry, you're wrong. Canada implements the same airport security as the US except with better trained people. Please try to be more informed, thank you. And don't mistake helpfull friendly airport employees for a lack of security. I shot some footage in and around Orlando airport (MCO) last time I was there with a Canon XL1 that could have been a small rocket launcher. No one said boo to me.

BTW, security measures everywhere are really a joke if someone seriously wanted to get on the plane with a bomb. What is REALLY frightening is the ignorance of the common public about the reality of any security.

Public building security is much worse though. I actually went through a security checkpoint where they were searching for weapons with a tactical knife that I actually forgot (honest officer!) was in my pocket. They missed it but they did take the small multitool off my keychain. I could have taken in a 9mm and they would have missed it. I'm not going to mention where it was (Buffalo NY). What is the point of having security if it doesn't work? Oh, right, to make voters like you think that you are safe....

Sorry to rant, back to airports....

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : Sorry, you're wrong. Canada implements the same airport security as the US except with better trained people. Please try to be more informed, thank you. -->>>


Don't say I'm wrong when I'm only relaying what is common knowledge. It was announced several months ago that terrorists may try to use airports in other countries (including Canada) to attack the US. I didn't mean to imply that the US has better security than Canada and I certainly don't want to get into a silly pissing match with you about who's country is the best. I was mainly referring to the comment another poster made and the announcement made from US Homeland Security. It is you who needs to be more informed! OK eh?

You didn't need to get all defensive...I happen to like Canada and think the US has a lot it could learn from it. Other than that, I could care less and am wondering why I bothered posting in the first place.

<<<-- Originally posted by Al Wilson : <<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : Sorry, you're wrong. Canada implements the same airport security as the US except with better trained people. Please try to be more informed, thank you. -->>>

I was mainly referring to the comment another poster made and the announcement made from US Homeland Security. It is you who needs to be more informed! OK eh?
-->>>

Sorry, just because the public believes it doesn't make it true. Common knowledge once held that the world was flat. And as far as what your government telling you being true.... I think most half intelligent people could cite examples from recent US history to prove which one of us is informed, but this violates the DVinfo policy of not discussing politics.

Look, feel free to believe whatever you want if it makes you sleep better at night... but keep your propoganda to yourself, or at least somewhere else.

I'm not sure why you posted your previous statement either. This thread was not about government security, and this is a forum for video related discussion, not anti-terrorism. You are more than welcome as a member, but lets please keep it on a business level.

<<<-- Originally posted by Al Wilson : Well, I'm not surprised that airports are so strict and I'm actually happy they are. Not to be paranoid but it would be easy for a terrorist to pose as a videographer to sneak a bomb into the terminal. Makes me feel a little be safer in an unsafe area. -->>>

I thought we were talking about taking photos in airports, not issues around searches. I still don't know what a photo would reveal that walking through would. Besides, what are they going to do about pictures taken before the new rules? Plenty of people have photos, inside and out, of plenty of airports already. So why prevent them now?

Dennis Vogel

I've had discussions with employees and security officers at airports, custom/border crossings and banks and they all seem to have the same reasons for not allowing photography/videos. An image of the area can record a lot more than you will see at first glance. being able to look over video and pictures at leaisure alows you to locate a number of security features such as gaurd placement, security cameras, and with video can be used to track gaurd rotations and shifts. The major amount of security is the stuff you don't normally see. If you have the ability to look over the area for hours on end you will learn a lot more about the security.
Just try and go to a bank and sit and watch things for an hour. Gauranteed someone will ask you what you are in need of. (pleasant way to say what the heck are you doing here)
However if you approach these types of institutions with respect to the security they have in place; and let them know up front that you don't intend on jeopordizing it; they can be a ot more helpful.

Or even easier, just come down here to the Tex/Mex border and use any of our airports. Gonna be shooting a short film on one of the runways next week, lol.

If they ban cameras in airports, they must ban cell phones too. Mine takes photo and video, which I could then send out anywhere in the world, before security had a chance to come seize it....

Plus, if I was a terrorist, I'd hide a microscopic camera in a broach or something and take surveillance photos that way. That's the guy to worry about, not the fellow with the SLR taking pictures freely.

It is not what you are taking a picture of in most cases, it is why you are taking pictures. If you start taking pictures of doors, hallways, and security checkpoints, you can expect someone will be talking to you. They will know what you were taking pictures of, and will want to know why. ;)

The best route for doing any project at the airport is through the airport manager's office. Small projects may not get the attention that they want or deserve, but the manager's office can get you going. In this time, do expect that they are going to want to know detail and may actually request a background check. Anything from the security checkpoints is controlled. If you need access to the aircraft operations area, it will be even a bigger hassle. Expect that you will have a minder and escort. You may have to pay for that. But to start, you need to call the airport manager's office.

Oh, and do not expect to do anything in the aircraft operations area. The FAA controls what can and cannot go on and the rules are very strict. You basically have to shutdown the airport. The CART race in Cleveland has some really tight rules about how they operate and the airport is closed (duh, but even after the race is over and cleanup is being done, it is still tightly controlled.)