Jerk "pro" photographers

RonFrank wrote:
In Washington D.C., anyone using a
TRIPOD needs a permit...ANYONE!! It's the most annoying rule I've run
across. A permit runs about $15 a week (or did a while back.

So, if you are using a monopod, you only have to get one third of a permit?

---Bob Gross---

RonFrank wrote:
In Washington D.C., anyone using a
TRIPOD needs a permit...ANYONE!! It's the most annoying rule I've run
across. A permit runs about $15 a week (or did a while back.

So, if you are using a monopod, you only have to get one third of a permit?

---Bob Gross---

In article , Robertwgross
wrote:
So, if you are using a monopod, you only have to get one third of a permit?

Yep, a pe. 8-)

Roger

In article , Robertwgross
wrote:
So, if you are using a monopod, you only have to get one third of a permit?

Yep, a pe. 8-)

Roger

In article , Robertwgross
wrote:
So, if you are using a monopod, you only have to get one third of a permit?

Yep, a pe. 8-)

Roger

RonFrank wrote:
Interesting point though, you should check with the parks department, in
some places professionals need a permit, in order to take photos. This
is because it is public property, for which maintenance and upkeep is
paid by the tax payer, and professionals making money on it, need to
share their profits.


What? I've never heard of this line of reasoning. Professional photographers
are taxpayers, and have as much right as anyone to do photography in a
National Park, BLM, or wilderness area. RU just making things up that sound
good, or do you have examples of parks that require professional
photographers to get a permit?

I know of no National park that requires professional photographers to get
permits. I've recently been to some of the most expensive in the nation
with the MOST rules and fees I've ever seen (Yosemite, GrandCanyon to name a
couple) and NONE required a photograhy permit.

Your making an assumption, that all photography that is done in parks,
takes place in Federally operated parks within the United States of
America, there are over 200 other countries on this planet, and each one
of those countries has it's own laws, and in many places there are State
or Provincially and Municipally operated park lands, also there are
privately owned park areas, there are different regulations for every
one of those.

Case in point, Edwards Gardens, is operated by the City of Toronto,
Ontario, Canada, at one point it was THE place to go, for wedding
photos, until it got to the point where you couldn't enter the park
without tripping over a train. They then started requiring a permit,
and they only issue so many permits for a given day.

If professional photographers require special handling, such as
exclusive access to a specific area, then you can bet they will require
some kind of permission to get that. If they take their chances with
everybody else, then no problem.

Keep in mind it would be VERY difficult to determine WHO is a professional
photographer, and how to enforce such a permit. A guy with a 4x5 on a
tripod would certainly smell more like a professional vs. a woman with a
handheld 35mm..yes?


The OP's enjoyment of the park was disrupted by a so called "Pro", and
in that case,
the park operator might not be happy with that particular "Pro".

W

I ran into something similar last week at the shore. So I went across
the street bought a box of croutons and a bag of bread crumbs and
scattered them all over the rocky area that the 'Pro' was working in.

Within 30 seconds the area was coated in seagull and pigeon.

I ran into something similar last week at the shore. So I went across
the street bought a box of croutons and a bag of bread crumbs and
scattered them all over the rocky area that the 'Pro' was working in.

Within 30 seconds the area was coated in seagull and pigeon.