New rules for commercial photography in US forests

[KenS]

A "latest news" link was just posted to the pure-silver list... one that I believe may be of interest to many of the US members as well as those that might feel ready to follow St. Ansel's footsteps.

<http://www.esquire.com/_mobile/blogs/news/1000-dollar-fine-for-pictures-in-the-forest?src=soc_fcbks>

Time for another 'uprising'?

Ken

 

[removed-user-1]

They have revised their statement on this, apparently due to some pressure: Yahoo News (AP)

 

[JRoosa]

Well, sort of.

If you aren't selling your photos, you are off the hook.

I think the National Parks already have rules in place about the need for permits for commercial photography. Colorado State Parks do too.

Good thing I'm an amateur...nobody would buy my stuff. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to photograph my kid becoming a Junior Ranger for keeping his dog on a leash.

-J.


Nikon FM, 28mm F/2.8 series E, TMax100, Ilford RC paper

 

[snapguy]

Boy

I just knew something was up. Last year when I was in a National Forest I saw Smokey Bear reading "Mein Kampf."

 

[AgX]

Where is the original, legal text??

That article speaks of press photographers at one moment and of 34 mill. hikers the next moment. That is quite confusing.

In any case, banning just press photographers would really be weird as this would be limiting the freedom of the press, with press photographers typically being granted most widely access amongst photographers.

 

[F4user]

Yes, "The land of the free".
Waiting the time when China ( or worse North Korea ) will complain about infringement of " human right " in US.

 

[darkosaric]

"The land of the free".

I find that Mr. John Oliver is describing USA very accurate in every point - there is nothing like a British guy with good sense of humor living in the USA

One example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7hZjNO3I-Q

 

[analoguey]

Over at LFF, there was a different take, more or less saying it's old wine in new bottle (albeit 4 yr old wine) and that it was effective only at certain places, mostly for commercial shoots(meaning assistants, crew etc).

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[AgX]

Commercial photography in your meaning is different from press photography.
As I indicated that whole article seems doubtful to me.

 

[analoguey]

I was quoting what I heard over there - I don't have first hand knowledge either way - on the source article or on US forests.

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[AgX]

Yes, but limiting commercial photography (in contrast to press photography) at least would make sense...

 

[analoguey]

Hmm. In what sense do you mean? Press photography would be news?

Just a note, for anyone seriously considering this, I'd suggest reading the full thread on Lff.

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[AgX]

I differ betewen journalistic and commercial photography. (Though in a wider sense photo-journalists typically photograph for money too. But iin another context.)

 

[M.A.Longmore]

.
Luckily we are using film.
We can claim that we haven't taken any photographs while walking through the forest.

.

 

[Konical]

Good Morning,

One of the problems frequently encountered is that anyone using a tripod or anything beyond a simple digital point and shoot is somehow considered "professional" or acting in a commercial capacity. Beyond that of course, we all know that tripods are obviously terrorist weapons; think how easily they could conceal a grenade launcher.

Konical

 

[bvy]

Only you can prevent forest photography.

 

[M.A.Longmore]

Only you can prevent forest photography.

.
I see your point.

.

 

[bdial]

I hope I am not the only one to find the Esquire piece a little hard to follow.
Here is the text of the proposal;

https://www.federalregister.gov/art...m_medium=email&utm_source=federalregister.gov

As stated earlier, it's apparently directed at commercial work and not amateur photographers.
Hopefully, much ado about nothing.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

My questions are: 1) Are all Forrest Rangers going to take our word that we're not selling the images we take... while shooting with a "professional-looking" large format camera? 2) Who has the ultimate authority to stop us, fine us, or let us go about our merry way? 3) How can they prove a darned thing right there on the spot?

Even those intending to sell their images and are known to do that routinely can simply say they're not working at the moment... they're on vacation and these images are for their own personal use.

 

[benjiboy]

For photography for commercial purposes in national parks it's similar in the U.K.

 

[Steve Smith]

there is nothing like a British guy with good sense of humor living in the USA

That will be humour!


Steve.

 

[benjiboy]

The americans didn't think Piers Morgan was very funny.

 

[Steve Smith]

The Americans didn't think Piers Morgan was very funny.

I don't think we did either. Was he supposed to be?


Steve.

 

[JRoosa]

We were wondering if you might be interested in taking him back.

He just doesn't seem happy here. It makes us feel bad, you know.

J.

 

[pentaxuser]

We were wondering if you might be interested in taking him back.

He just doesn't seem happy here. It makes us feel bad, you know.

J.

Here's the deal, Jack. You keep Piers and I'll stop complaining about and just put up with the film and paper price differential between the U.S. and the U.K.

Good to know that you won't be charged for pictures of Aspens either

pentaxuser