Ansel Adams Act: Common sense prevails ?

paul_c5x4 · Jan 10, 2015

Maybe some good news for our American friends: http://petapixel.com/2015/01/07/ans...restore-first-amendment-rights-photographers/

Hopefully, common sense will prevail and this bill makes its way through to the end and the rest of the world follows suit.

Sirius Glass · Jan 10, 2015

I am sure that the do nothing Congress, nothing will be done. Congress and common sense parted company under partisan politics in the last decade and Dante's description of the sign over Hell applies well.

Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy: Inferno, "Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate", or "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dante_Alighieri

The terrorists have been complaining about being called photographers and that embarrasses them. However terrorists still suffer with the monicker of photographer. Politicians and legislators still cannot get it right, just Far Right.

ic-racer · Jan 10, 2015

Finally!

Terry Breedlove · Jan 10, 2015

90% of the time I prefer Congress to do nothing but I sure hope they get this one passed.

snapguy · Jan 10, 2015

read it

From what I have read about this bill it may do just the opposite of what it pretends to do. There is a section, #3 I think, which would give government the right to ban any photography anywhere and a photog would have to go to court in advance to take photos there.
Gert a copy of the bill and sit your behind down and read it and then write your congressperson and tell them what you think. Grazing the Internet will not cut it.

Christopher Walrath · Jan 10, 2015

I'm with Steve. Regardless of which side of the aisle your leanings might reside, nothing in general is being done within the eight miles squared. And this is just feel good legislation that will probably die before even making it to a committee.

On the other hand, I can finally be comfortable processing film in that bag of ammonium nitrate I have in the corner of the old garage.

SchwinnParamount · Jan 10, 2015

The findings section pays homage to the work Ansel did to insure that national parks were set aside. It feels good to give a photographer credit for something as important as that. Section 3 is almost useless. It describes the status quo except for the suggestion that a federal agency needs to have a court order before restricting photography on public lands. It also makes clear that the govt. can still prevent you from photographing if it thinks you may be scouting the grounds for terrorists.
This bill feels good but really does nothing to change the current state of affairs. It stinks of politics.

Sirius Glass · Jan 10, 2015

Christopher Walrath said:
I'm with Steve. Regardless of which side of the aisle your leanings might reside, nothing in general is being done within the eight miles squared. And this is just feel good legislation that will probably die before even making it to a committee.

On the other hand, I can finally be comfortable processing film in that bag of ammonium nitrate I have in the corner of the old garage.

Actually it was 10 square miles less the area given back to Virginia because the Congress in the nineteenth century never thought that the US Government would grow enough to need 10 square miles. Another example of Congress being unable to find its anal opening with both hands and a mirror.

ParkerSmithPhoto · Jan 10, 2015

It's spit and cry sad how we have capitulated our rights to the government. How in the hell can it be illegal to make a photograph? Bad enough here, even the UK has turned into a surveillance society: my neighbor was shooting professional video in London and was continually harassed. Of course, if he'd looked like Johnny Jihad, they would have left him alone.

This bill is most likely yet another Orwellian "Freedom" bill, the type of which generally does the exact opposite of what most normal, phone book Americans would expect. I'd love if it were otherwise, but I've been learned and burned too many times.

Sirius Glass · Jan 10, 2015

ParkerSmithPhoto said:
It's spit and cry sad how we have capitulated our rights to the government. How in the hell can it be illegal to make a photograph? Bad enough here, even the UK has turned into a surveillance society: my neighbor was shooting professional video in London and was continually harassed. Of course, if he'd looked like Johnny Jihad, they would have left him alone.

This bill is most likely yet another Orwellian "Freedom" bill, the type of which generally does the exact opposite of what most normal, phone book Americans would expect. I'd love if it were otherwise, but I've been learned and burned too many times.

I can see restricting photographing a sensitive site such as a Strategic Air Force base but extending the hysteria to trees in a National Park is a bit of a reach.

480sparky · Jan 10, 2015

Restore our rights? When were they ever taken away?

Ignored? Yes. Violated? Yes. But taken away? Nope... it's still there. If somehow it was gone, NONE of us would be out taking photos and we'd all have very expensive door stops and paperweights.

Bill Burk · Jan 10, 2015

This made my day AND restored my faith in Texas (a state of the US where I do not always admit I lived a year and a third).

480sparky · Jan 10, 2015

Bill Burk said:
This made my day AND restored my faith in Texas (a state of the US where I do not always admit I lived a year and a third).

Is this the same Texas that has trampled on my FA rights and prevents me from using a drone for photography?

Arklatexian · Jan 10, 2015

Ansel Adams Act: Common sense prevails?

Sirius Glass said:
I am sure that the do nothing Congress, nothing will be done. Congress and common sense parted company under partisan politics in the last decade and Dante's description of the sign over Hell applies well.

Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy: Inferno, "Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate", or "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dante_Alighieri

The terrorists have been complaining about being called photographers and that embarrasses them. However terrorists still suffer with the monicker of photographer. Politicians and legislators still cannot get it right, just Far Right.

So that's where that quotation comes from (Abandon all hope, ye who enter here). I have it posted on my darkroom door. Thank you Sirius Glass......Regards

Vaughn · Jan 10, 2015

It is a bill designed to do allow commercial work to be done in National Parks with less permitting and costs...allowing the movie industry and especially the ad industry cheaper access to public lands.

It changes nothing for non-commercial photographers (including professional photographers/artists).

I heard that the author of the bill is no longer in Congress.

Bruce Osgood · Jan 10, 2015

There was a Bill in the House that is called The Sportsman's Act which was a joint effort of both parties and expected pass without problem that addressed including a Duck Stamp to the existing Hunting License. It was not passed in order for an additional amendment sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz to be attached that will return all National Park Land to the States. They, in turn could do whatever they wished with it.

I would suggest a McDonald's rest stop every mile along the Applician Trail and water slides throughout Yosemite.

Sirius Glass · Jan 10, 2015

And elevators to replace long hikes both up and down.

SchwinnParamount · Jan 10, 2015

How about the State Farm Insurance Half Dome or maybe the IBM Yosemite Falls?

480sparky · Jan 11, 2015

That's it! I'm complaining to CitiHall!

Sirius Glass · Jan 11, 2015

Do you mean CitiBank*?

*www.citibank.com

480sparky · Jan 11, 2015

Nope. CitiHall.

SchwinnParamount · Jan 11, 2015

There have been many good congresses in the past that have done good work. Can't erase that. This congress however, has done nothing and therefore has nothing to erase.

pdeeh · Jan 11, 2015

ParkerSmithPhoto said:
Of course, if he'd looked like Johnny Jihad, they would have left him alone.
.

even putting aside the unpleasant veiled racism of your remark, you are rather seriously deluded about how the Metropolitan Police go about their business. The chances are anyone with a dark skin tone (which is what I presume you are alluding to) will get treated with significantly greater suspicion and harassment.

ME Super · Jan 11, 2015

I believe the District of Columbia was originally 10 miles square, not 10 square miles. What's the difference between 10 miles square and 10 square miles, you ask? About 90 square miles. A township in the Midwest is 36 square miles, but its also 6 miles square.

wiltw · Jan 11, 2015

The Ansel Adams act was initiated by a Republican. You can be sure the Democrats will force modifications that render the bill of far less value to the photographer than originally intended. After all, the Republicans did the same thing to the Democratic bill for medical coverage, even though it was initially modelled after Republican legislation at the state level, which rendered the federal bill of far less value to you and I than originally intended.
Neither side passes what is best for the citizenry...reminds me of the Communist party of the USSR, in that regard. That is because getting re-elected is what is tantamount.
We can be sure that the Republicans, now in control of both houses of Congress, will try to do their part to block Presidential desires, as long as they can figure out a way to make that happen without irritating the citizenry when it is reelection time. But the citizenry has poor memories, that is why they voted more Republicans in, to now control both houses, in spite of the fact the party line politics had already stopped significant progress in most areas. Now progress will be completely stopped, as the two houses fight the president.

I vote to get rid of them ALL, and get some guys that legislate for the good of the COUNTRY as a unit!...hmmm, that is likely to leave us without a government, wouldn't it?

Ansel Adams Act: Common sense prevails ?

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency