Forum: Photography


Subject: NYC (might) restrict photography in public...

Radlafx opened this issue on Jun 28, 2007 · 10 posts


Radlafx posted Thu, 28 June 2007 at 11:22 PM

Attached Link: City May Seek Permit...

I understand that a tripod is somewhat of a hazard but this is insane. What are your thoughts?

Question the question. Answer the question. Question the answer...

I wish I knew what I was gonna say :oP


nongo posted Thu, 28 June 2007 at 11:48 PM

Absurd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


TwoPynts posted Fri, 29 June 2007 at 10:15 AM

:b_overwhelmed: Nutz!

Kort Kramer - Kramer Kreations


bobbystahr posted Fri, 29 June 2007 at 11:41 AM

Grrrr...yet another reason to not go to NY NY, sigh.. ...

 

Once in a while I look around,
I see a sound
and try to write it down
Sometimes they come out very soft
Tinkling light sound
The Sun comes up again



 

 

 

 

 


bclaytonphoto posted Fri, 29 June 2007 at 1:58 PM

Welcome to NY...................................

They won't be able to enforce that on the average person..

www.bclaytonphoto.com

bclaytonphoto on Facebook


3DGuy posted Fri, 29 June 2007 at 3:02 PM

More and more stupid rules are thought of every day (no, the US isn't the only one making up stupid rules/laws). Permits to shoot? Sounds like a money pot to me. What is the friggin point. And you need a $1m insurance? Why? Affraid you poke someones eye out with your zoomlens?

What is a friend? A single soul dwelling in two bodies. - Aristotle
-= Glass Eye Photography =- -= My Rendo Gallery =-


Nameless_Wildness posted Fri, 29 June 2007 at 3:43 PM

Whats a  tripod :-)



MGD posted Sun, 01 July 2007 at 7:48 AM

Greetings,

This sort of restriction (intrusion) is not limited to NYC, or the USA. 

I recall a trip to Athens in the 1980's.  While visitinga museum of ancient
sculpture, I was advised to obtain a permit for the use of my camera -- no
tripod, just a 35mm camera.  I seem to remember that the permit was more
expensive because I had a 'better' camera. 

By contrast, the Metropolitan Museum of Art does not place any restriction
or charge on the use of a camera.  OTOH, they don't allow the use of a
tripod.  That seems reasonable to me because a tripod could easily block
viewing access by another patron. 

As to the new NYC regulation, the thesholds (2 or more people) seem too
low ... the idea of liability insurance is probably reasonable for a film
company. 

--
Martin


mrsparky posted Sun, 01 July 2007 at 8:30 AM

I've encountered this restriction in many cathedrals (our local one does) and they all say the same thing that the rubber feet on tripods on monpods damage the floor. 

Bannning the use of flash I understand - that does upset the worshippers - but the tripod excuse is just silly. Moreos when you consider most cathedrals where built in the middle ages and often used as markets where cattle and sheep wandered around. 

Art gallerys will often refuse as well. They cite copyright reasons and flash damaging paintings. 
Again the flash issue is true there. But the real reason is money, if you take a few photos you're less likely to buy some postcards, guide books or  over priced art prints.    

One solution is a gorrila grip (just don't get caught using it - these things can chip and strip paintwork) or the Blue Peter option -  a bean bag and a very short girlfriend :)

Pinky - you left the lens cap of your mind on again.



TwoPynts posted Mon, 02 July 2007 at 10:16 AM

Quote - Blue Peter option -  a bean bag and a very short girlfriend :)

LOL, thanks for the injection of humor! ;']

Kort Kramer - Kramer Kreations