As I have done for almost 30 years, I come out to enjoy the Faire and all it has to offer. I enjoy the color, sounds, sights and food, and relish the good times. Through this forum, I have had the opportunity to meet and talk with a few of you and find the friendship most welcoming. I also come to photograph the same as my way to relax. I've gladly given out prints to those that come before my lens and asked for copy, and have never sought out anything that would not be shown in church. As yet, I've not posted anything online, one, because I don't have an online account to do that, and two, I'm leery of having images stolen. I do belong to a camera club associated with TCACCC and have entered some images in our monthly competitions, but everything stays within the confines of the club and are not published. I also know about releases and since I don't want to publish anything, I don't carry around release forms.
To that end, I was completely disenchanted when security came up to me, and politely asked that I not take pictures without asking permission first. In talking with DB(who was also approached) I was told that photogs with long lenses where being asked that they seek permission first. Someone needs to educate somebody(security in particular) as to what big lenses are for and that someone with much small cameras and lenses could do much more harm if they desired. I for one have absolutly no inclination to exploit anyone in any way, but as a photographer, I do seek out images that emote a feeling and when I spot the looks on children, I try to capture it. The way I see it, those looks of joy and utter astonishment(have you seen the look on a child face when they're in front of Twig!) are gems. There is no way that can be posed. If a parent came to me and asked to see the image and wanted a copy, I would never say no, and just ask for their info so I can send them a copy. And if you ask if I make any money, let's just say that I spend more on a ticket than I've been paid in all those years. As I said, I have no desire to exploit anyone and only do this to relax(shooting the Vikings for over 30 years is enough of a grind. ::)). I just think it's a sad state of affair when peoples paranoia overshadows everything, especially at a venue such as the Faire. Not everyone is out to make a buck, or exploit anyone. I hope to make it out again this year, but I don't know if I'll be able to enjoy it the same way knowing that any at any time, someone might tap me on the shoulder and ask me if I have permission to look and enjoy myself....
End of rant!
Would this not be considered a public place and that you have a right to take photographs in a public place?
This just sounds silly
Legally, it is not a public place since you pay to get on private(leased)property.
yes, I guess that is true. Should they not then post signs saying no pictures allowed - where do they draw the line. :-\
I was very surprised two years ago when I was taking a snap shot (I am not a photographer, just using reg camera) of the little children who do song/motions/dances at the meade booth. One lil girl said to me (after I took the pic) "We can not have our pictures taken and they can not be put on the internet." Now this was obviously what her parents had preplanned for her to say but it kinda threw me for a loop cuz I thought, how many times do think this happens without your parents even knowing?? If kids are put out there to perform or even adults performing are people really gonna ask to take a photo in the middle of a performance? And how is a photographer different than Joe with a camera?? For some reason this interests me cuz at my old job I had to call family members (of adults) to have permission (after the initial signed release) every quarter and document their permission to have pics taken.
I for one will never complain about having my picture taken. I only complain about not getting to see them to show them off! ;D I am sorry to hear that there is paranoia over photos. There's always something to freak out about.
Don't the tickets say something about how if you're on grounds you're granting permission for your photo to be taken? I haven't been yet so don't have that stub to look at.
:o I know there are many afraid of their images to end up on the internet and all heck breaking lose with all the id thefts and everything. My hubby is included in this bunch as to the fact that he doesn't want any photos of him up on my face book pages at all. There are also the people who read and believe every urban legend that they hear about what can happen if you put a photo up on line. With that being said... In my case, I take pictures to remember the moment, I post very few online and if I do they are of me or of performers. A good example, I just went to the Randy Travis concert in Walker last night and posted a few pics of him and his band on facebook. If, and this is a big IF someone is planning on selling the images, then you should have a model release.
Leyla is right, the ticket does say you are giving them permission to take and use photos of you.
I noticed we have a lot of new security people this year. In fact, I haven't seen any that I knew from other years. I also heard of them roughing up some people that were participants, but I don't know what happened.
Hi Keith, thought I would chime in here as well. Forgive my long winded post, but this is a universal issue for photographers everywhere, not just at fest. But this is what happened this weekend;
Apparently a parent(s) complained that a photographer was taking pictures of children, so safety services were out harassing anyone with a "big camera". I say harassing because I was approached by safety services and in so many words accused of being a pedophile because I had a "big camera". I understand why they were doing this, but the way they were going about this was quite poor in my opinion. Basically it was "guilty before proven innocent" for anyone with a "big camera". If they are going to follow through on something like this, they need to do it with EVERYONE who has a camera. You can't discriminate. Yes, there are creeps out there who prey on children, that may have "big cameras", but statistically, there are far more pedophiles out there with smaller concealable cameras that allow them to disguise or hide their activities so they don't get caught. This is a very sore subject with me, as well as many other professional and enthusiast photographers, who have been constantly harassed for doing things that are completely normal and legal when a small group of criminals like pedophiles and terrorists have been caught using cameras. We get lumped into one big group of "they have a big camera, they must being doing something sinister". I haven't done anything wrong, but because I have a nice camera I'm now being profiled as a potential criminal. Again, there's a word for that; discrimination.
But, even going on those assumptions, according to the wording on the ticket, photographers DO NOT need permission to take photos of anyone at fest. And I quote:
"Ticket Holder further assumes for himself/herself, as well as for each minor in the charge of ticket holder....consents to the use of ticket holder likeness incidental or primary to any promotion, display, transmissions, or reproductions of the event."
This means that when someone pays to enter this private event, they are agreeing to allow anyone to take their picture/video without needing a release form. I don't believe safety services has the authority to change that in any way. Many large events use this type of legalese wording for concerts and such, and when necessary, they post "no photography/recording devices allowed" on the tickets and/or on site when it's not allowed. If fest is going to change their policy, fine, but they need to change it on the ticket, because that is essentially a contract for entry and is legal binding should anything happen. You either allow it or you don't. You can't pick and choose among a group of individuals who all entered under the same conditions who is or isn't subject to the agreed upon terms.
From another angle, I think in the not too far past there was rumored to have been someone taking photos on site that later may have been associated with taking pictures of underage girls and who later may have connected to potential a molestation, or questionable photos charge, so part of this may be in part an over-reaction to a actual real issue that MAF may have had to deal with.
It sounds to me like the situation was poorly handled by those on Safety Services that were doing the leg work. There are quite a few newbies there over the past two years.
I think the best way to approach this issues is for someone (or more than one) to go to the head of safety services (or Marketing) and bring up the concern of how you were treated as a photographer. Perhaps DB and/or Majik.
And yes, Groomporter is correct in the fact that this was an actual incident that occurred several years ago.
Quote from: KeithR on August 30, 2009, 02:31:18 PM
Legally, it is not a public place since you pay to get on private(leased)property.
It is kind of both. Being open to the public, fee or not, makes it a public place. Much like a mall. Privately owned, but open to the public.
That said, the First Ammendment allows anyone to take pictures of anyone or anything that is in general view from a public place. You can NOT, however, sell pics of characters in certain ways. Example: You cannot follow Twig around and then make a calendar of her. Flowers? Patrons? Wood chips? Sure.
I support SS 100% in all things. Even when I generally don't agree. So, if they ask you to stop, it would be best that you do. Maybe ask to speak with someone in management. Just for clarification.
I get the kid thing, and I really try not to take pics of kids (with my little point and shoot). Or if I do, I never post pictures of strangers' kids on the internet. That said, harassing people with "big cameras" is just ridiculous. If someone is following a particular child around snapping MANY pictures, that's one thing and maybe cause to investigate further. But snapping a photo or two of a cute child moment? That should not illicit harassment or accusations of pedophilia!
In reading this topic, this is the first I've heard of it. I wasn't aware that the SS was doing this or there was a concern. I haven't had word one said to me by any SS staff 'or otherwise' this year and have been in their presence many times over the first 2 weeks.
Now... in reading the comment of SS accusing someone of pedophile, they better think twice before saying that to me as I won't take that crap from anyone. Even though I live with a disability, I'll be sticking my foot up someone's weed puller if that accusation is made to me about me. Chances are... if something like that is said to me, I'll be in phone contact with their higher-ups before the offending person can even finish their scentence.
Majik, I think they are leaving you alone because you are an on staff photographer and a known person. Other people are just "potential criminals" with cameras.
It's good to be aware, it's not good to be a jerk about it. Perhaps some sensitivity training for the SS folks? LOL They have a difficult job out there so there needs to be some education.
Hmm, and I was thinking about bringing the 500mm out just to use up the 35mm film I was gifted with.
::)
Quote from: Rafe on August 31, 2009, 08:40:00 AM
It sounds to me like the situation was poorly handled by those on Safety Services that were doing the leg work. There are quite a few newbies there over the past two years.
In my specific instance, it was a safety service person who has been there several years, so there shouldn't be an excuse for that.
Let me state that I do support safety services and know several of them (hi Nessa! :D) , but it's instances like this that I wanted to say to this particular person "c'mon, really? I thought you were trained professionals." I think a little PR instruction is in order.
I coulda sworn this same issue was being discussed in another fair thread here very recently, but I couldn't find it again.
I think the other thing to remind SS is that there is a photography contest that has been specifically promoted on the MNRF Facebook page.
Quote from: groomporter on August 31, 2009, 11:40:35 AM
I think the other thing to remind SS is that there is a photography contest that has been specifically promoted on the MNRF Facebook page.
A perfect example of "the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing"... ::)
Quote from: groomporter on August 31, 2009, 11:40:35 AM
I think the other thing to remind SS is that there is a photography contest that has been specifically promoted on the MNRF Facebook page.
At first I was willing to give the "other side" a chance to 'splain themselves...but this is just beyond belief!..."We have a contest with prizes! But if you are stupid enough to try and win we'll kick your can off site"!
Maybe not their intent but certainly the way it appears.
Let's talk about something a bit more positive about 'fest...how 'bout parking? ;D
Quote from: Noble Dreg on August 31, 2009, 12:55:48 PM
Quote from: groomporter on August 31, 2009, 11:40:35 AM
I think the other thing to remind SS is that there is a photography contest that has been specifically promoted on the MNRF Facebook page.
At first I was willing to give the "other side" a chance to 'splain themselves...but this is just beyond belief!..."We have a contest with prizes! But if you are stupid enough to try and win we'll kick your can off site"!
Maybe not their intent but certainly the way it appears.
Let's talk about something a bit more positive about 'fest...how 'bout parking? ;D
Oh we're already talking about parking... see the What's New thread!
I'll also put in a note 'should of before' that I highly respect the SS and the job they do.
I was intending on getting clarification from the SS big man but didn't get around to it, just too much going on. I will look into it next week. Or if my internets are working at home, sometime this week.
I see both sides of this and I wasn't there, we had gotten reports of a man with a large camera lens taking pictures of children that was making people uncomfortable. There was a vague discription. Therefore ALL people seen meeting the requirements of a person with a larger camera lens were asked to desist.
Whatever implications were made towards pedophelia I don't know. I don't think DB was exaggerating but I can't see that coming from the SS person in question at least not to that tone. Probably more of a "we've had problems with this in the past" etc but not so blatently expressing their opinion of you as a pedophile.
I would also like to note that we are NOT trained professionals. We are a group of people that probably knew someone on the team that didn't mind getting yelled at and abused for 13 hours a day for minimum wage. Yes some of us are security professionals in our real life (I am not one of them) but a majority of them are just friends of existing crew that were willing to work for what was provided to them. We go through some basic scenario training and do have an SOP to follow from but that just doesn't cover everything. We do our best based on the situation and what we have available to us.
Now, as I said I will talk to the big cheese and get clarification on the photography rule. My best suggestion for everyone would be to stick with people and subject you actually know. If approached by SS please don't get defensive and be cooperative, there are a lot of prudish people that come out to fest who make complaints about EVERYTHING, be willing to display the pictures you have taken either on your own or after being prompted.
That's all I've got on this one. I'll give you a better answer when I get one.
Quote from: majikboxman on August 31, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
Oh... B/T/W Keith, I've met you a-couple of times in Mankato @ training camp. Love your work.
Thanks for the kindness! I know we met and talked last season at the first P&S show(with the new guy). I ended up getting a lot of really nice pics and after talking with him before a performance, I thought I'd give him a couple pics from that. Think he'd like it?
Anyway, I find the this discussion interesting. While I have never followed a kid around, I have waited for a moment to repeat itself, or I'll move to get better light. But never would I
stalk a kid just to get a shot. If anyone where to follow me, they'd quickly learn that I have no set plan to follow. I did that one year, as I wanted to see a lot of the shows and ended up not taking as many pics as I like. So, for the past few years I just meander. And there is absolutely no way I hide or disguise what I do.
As for what happened this past weekend, like I said, I was spoken to in a very polite manor, but had I known what's printed on the ticket, or thought about any contest, I would have brought that to their attention. And while this may have been about a parent and a child, what if an adult just didn't want their pic snapped? Where is the line to be drawn? I have to agree with DB as the intent as to what is on the ticket. If someone has a compaint, it should be pointed out to them that photography is allowed, and even encouraged by way of a contest. And security should have been aware of this. As I stated before, if anyone wanted to see what I shot, all they had to do was to ask. Heck, I've offered to show people what I just shot if they looked like they'd like to see it.
As an aside, I do find the fact that(what I perceive as) security personnel are referred to here as "SS" and given the actions, I find it nervously amusing.
Quote from: Deadbishop on August 30, 2009, 11:41:40 PM
But, even going on those assumptions, according to the wording on the ticket, photographers DO NOT need permission to take photos of anyone at fest. And I quote:
"Ticket Holder further assumes for himself/herself, as well as for each minor in the charge of ticket holder....consents to the use of ticket holder likeness incidental or primary to any promotion, display, transmissions, or reproductions of the event."
The problem is I think that clause is probably intended to only apply to usage by Mid-America Festivals. It gives
MAF the right to use any photos or video they take for the promotion of MNRF
I suspect that it does not actually give any usage rights to outside photographers who are not promoting MNRF. Non-MNRF usage is probably only protected by the normal right to take pictures at a public event.
I suspect that the major reason I'm able to have Lightning Scooter-Horse is that it provides a photo op. The release that's included in our participant agreement is, I suspect, intended to allow use of photographs by the event but it's sufficiently broad that you'd have a difficult time arguing that it doesn't permit pictures by the public, too.
That being said, we unfortunately live in a time when innocent intentions can be distorted into something else. My 13 year old grandson has a second degree junior black belt in karate and I've threatened to get him a T-shirt that says "Predator Bane". But I don't think many children would be so able to defend themselves. I don't have a problem with people taking random photos of adults, but I think permission should be given for taking pictures of children.
I also find it interesting that many people ask me for permission If nothing else, it is a courtesy.
The only problem with stopping someone to ask permission to photograph them before snapping a photo or two is that it means you wind up with mostly posed photos, which are decidedly less interesting to look at. Any professional or enthusiast photographer would agree with that point...
In my case, I have props that can come into play when someone wants to stage a picture. I have a number of hand puppets with me so that if folks want a picture with their children, I can use a pony finger puppet. If folks want their picture taken with their lady, I can use the lecherous colt. Sometimes posed can be more interesting.
Posed shots can be interesting but I love some of the photos I've seen that were taken as they were happening. They always seem more real to me.
Quote from: harem_pants on August 31, 2009, 03:31:05 PM
Whatever implications were made towards pedophelia I don't know. I don't think DB was exaggerating but I can't see that coming from the SS person in question at least not to that tone. Probably more of a "we've had problems with this in the past" etc but not so blatently expressing their opinion of you as a pedophile.
No, it wasn't blatantly stated, but as I said, it was stated as such in so many words. There was no mention of past problems, just something to the effect of "a man fitting your description has been following children and taking their pictures." But I simply stated that no, I have not been doing anything of that nature. I was a little surprised when the approached me, as I noticed them hovering around me for about 5 minutes beforehand, but I thought it was just because we were near First Aid. I'm more puzzled that they didn't say anything about my hard pass hanging in the open off my belt, now hearing that they didn't say anything to MBM because he's a "behind the scenes guys" as well.
Quote
I would also like to note that we are NOT trained professionals. We are a group of people that probably knew someone on the team that didn't mind getting yelled at and abused for 13 hours a day for minimum wage. Yes some of us are security professionals in our real life (I am not one of them) but a majority of them are just friends of existing crew that were willing to work for what was provided to them. We go through some basic scenario training and do have an SOP to follow from but that just doesn't cover everything. We do our best based on the situation and what we have available to us.
I'm a little surprised and disconcerted to hear this as well. That being said, SS does a great job for a group of untrained people, but at the same time that explains the inconsistency in how things are handled and why communication isn't spot on. There's only so much you can do given the resources available (or more likely unavailable) to you.
Quote from: tcindie on August 31, 2009, 05:27:53 PM
The only problem with stopping someone to ask permission to photograph them before snapping a photo or two is that it means you wind up with mostly posed photos, which are decidedly less interesting to look at. Any professional or enthusiast photographer would agree with that point...
Stopping to ask permission will most likely kill the mood of the image trying to be captured. Defeats the whole purpose of photo journalistic photography. There are times when posing a subject is necessary, but at an event such as a renaissance festival, it's undesirable for what I'm trying to achieve with my photography.
In my case, unless I see you trying to take a picture, you're more likely to get a picture from the side or rear. I generally keep rolling so that I don't interrupt the flow unless I'm trying to direct attention to something specific like a booth. I've seen several YouTube shots of Lightning's rear.
Quote from: Deadbishop on September 01, 2009, 12:05:31 AM
Quote from: tcindie on August 31, 2009, 05:27:53 PM
The only problem with stopping someone to ask permission to photograph them before snapping a photo or two is that it means you wind up with mostly posed photos, which are decidedly less interesting to look at. Any professional or enthusiast photographer would agree with that point...
Stopping to ask permission will most likely kill the mood of the image trying to be captured. Defeats the whole purpose of photo journalistic photography. There are times when posing a subject is necessary, but at an event such as a renaissance festival, it's undesirable for what I'm trying to achieve with my photography.
What's that they say, it's better to ask forgiveness than permission?? ;D
But seriously, in this case maybe it would be helpful to approach the parents after the photo is taken, explain that you caught a great candid moment of their child on camera and offer to show it to them and send them a copy? I don't know. Just an idea. Maybe it's better to just try not to be seen, but for those especially *careful* parents, maybe something like this would put them more at ease?
On a limb here... I think nothing may have been said to me as I may not have fit the description.?.?.? Like mentioned... SS was in my close quarters a few times. Since I'm not taking pics of kids, they could of noticed that and decided to leave this plump guy alone.
Stopping the action / flow, asking permission, then photoing... ... ... that blows. Won't do it. Many reasons for this. Mainly... galleries like that suck. I expect a gallery like that from my 13 y/o daughter while she learns photography. You'll probably see a few frames of posed in my galleries as that's just the nature of the beast. I'm sure many out there with cameritas have people say 'ohhhh... take my pic' and then pose it up.
Quote from: KeithR on August 31, 2009, 04:33:25 PM
Quote from: majikboxman on August 31, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
Oh... B/T/W Keith, I've met you a-couple of times in Mankato @ training camp. Love your work.
As an aside, I do find the fact that(what I perceive as) security personnel are referred to here as "SS" and given the actions, I find it nervously amusing.
I personally find that incredibly offensive. SS stands for SAFETY SERVICES not raging gastapo nazis no matter how crabby we get about something that is an incredibly unfair comparison. I would hope that I never hear myself or my team referred to as such in jest or otherwise again.
Quote from: harem_pants on September 01, 2009, 09:10:44 AM
I personally find that incredibly offensive.
It was never my intent to offend anyone and am truly sorry if it has and offer my apology.
Quote from: harem_pants on September 01, 2009, 09:10:44 AM
SS stands for SAFETY SERVICES not raging gastapo nazis no matter how crabby we get about something that is an incredibly unfair comparison. I would hope that I never hear myself or my team referred to as such in jest or otherwise again.
Back in the day, Security enjoyed the name of "Goon Squad". They were large guys with white shirts and black pants who kept the "Goons" under control. Things are much more civilized now, but I'm not sure if that's a good thing. They were much more easy to identify when needed.
I have two points in which I wish to comment upon.
The First is Nessa's remark:
Quote from: harem_pants on August 31, 2009, 03:31:05 PM
I would also like to note that we are NOT trained professionals.
This is not a correction of your statement Nessa, but rather a clarification and further explanation. While a good number of the staff is not trained specifically in security, there are many that are. Many of the staff is also trained in other areas. EMT's, First Responders, First Aid, & CPR.
The management team of Safety Services is in fact trained professionals. One is a security professional, the other is P.O.S.T. certified in the state of Minnesota. Others are security officers (full-time or part-time) or bouncers.
The point I wish to make on this subject is this. I am a registered Protective Agent (armed security) in the state of Minnesota. While I no longer actively work as a professional in the security field, I am the head of event security for a non-profit organization. Even with all my training and background in the field, this did not make me the best Safety Services personnel. Some of the best we have are people who have lived, breathed and worked at Renaissance Festivals. It is a different place to work than any other. A good number of the people we deal with are people who work at the faire. Anything from acquaintances, friends, to people we consider family. It is a difficult and hard line to try and draw, but one that anyone working SS has to draw.
Second:In regards to the main issue of this thread, when I was on SS, I didn't know Majik personally, but knew of him. I had no clue who DB was. Any other photogs were completely off my radar as known people. Pass or not, if you fit the general description, I would have watched you and approached you.
Is it"paranoia"? Perhaps for some people it is. In the eyes of Safety Services and many other's who work the festival, it is something many are very over protective about. As stated before, this was an issue in the past. Only just two runs ago. I was walking site in colors that day.
I am not saying in any way, shape or form that the photogs need to change their attitude or that Safety Services needs to change their tactics. I was not present to see any of it. I will say that if anyone feels they were mistreated, a letter (of complaint) to the appropriate people is in order.
Quote from: KeithR on September 01, 2009, 09:36:21 AM
Quote from: harem_pants on September 01, 2009, 09:10:44 AM
I personally find that incredibly offensive.
It was never my intent to offend anyone and am truly sorry if it has and offer my apology.
I'm all for offensive humor, but it's not cool when it's made personal. I appreciate the apology however.
Quote from: Carl Heinz on September 01, 2009, 09:40:14 AM
Quote from: harem_pants on September 01, 2009, 09:10:44 AM
SS stands for SAFETY SERVICES not raging gastapo nazis no matter how crabby we get about something that is an incredibly unfair comparison. I would hope that I never hear myself or my team referred to as such in jest or otherwise again.
Back in the day, Security enjoyed the name of "Goon Squad". They were large guys with white shirts and black pants who kept the "Goons" under control. Things are much more civilized now, but I'm not sure if that's a good thing. They were much more easy to identify when needed.
Safety Services has been taken over by women in recent years. We have an unusually high concentration of us, it's pretty fantastic. During the day it's rather obvious who is Safety Services. At night, 99% of us wear all black, and have radios with boom mics. Most of us wear a hat of some kind. Mine is a black conductor hat that has the red SS cross on it in rhinestones. I totally found it that way too for $5. We all wear silver security officer badges on us somewhere and our passes are typically worn around our necks. So effectively we look like the Goth Squad instead of the Goon Squad. We don't like wearing bright colors, it deters our sneakiness. We are like neeeeenja!
Quote from: Rafe on September 01, 2009, 10:19:00 AM
I have two points in which I wish to comment upon.
The First is Nessa's remark:
Quote from: harem_pants on August 31, 2009, 03:31:05 PM
I would also like to note that we are NOT trained professionals.
This is not a correction of your statement Nessa, but rather a clarification and further explanation. While a good number of the staff is not trained specifically in security, there are many that are. Many of the staff is also trained in other areas. EMT's, First Responders, First Aid, & CPR.
The management team of Safety Services is in fact trained professionals. One is a security professional, the other is P.O.S.T. certified in the state of Minnesota. Others are security officers (full-time or part-time) or bouncers.
You are correct and I should have clarified that. I had a lot of points to cover on that one and my brain moved faster than my typing.
I'll chime in here.
Being what some at CoRF consider the faire photographer (I'm not as I buy my tickets and do not get paid to shoot photos) I carry with me a HUG stack of my business cards In most cases if at all possible I go tot he person I am shooting adult or child with an adult and hand them my business card after I took the shot. If they didn't want it posted they will tell me. Also in some cases (very rare) Some people will tell me they do not want they poto taken... so I don't.
Now as for discussion it may have been us at CoRF as I was tired of everyone going to my site and using the photos I took on facebook or myspace without asking permission first. In all cases I would say Sure, just give me credit. The exception to this is someone who wanted it for money making self promotion. Then I would expect something for the use of my photos.
As far as children go, there are MANY Teens under the age of 18 that work at faires. Most in the food service. There are many photographers that do shoot these people and you have no way of knowing as many teens these days do look older than they really are. So technically you could exploting them also.
Now CoRF is a different faire than Minnesota I do expect that if one faire makes changes others will follow. Just look at peace binding. That was never the case until issues started to arise.
Now with photography if one faire bans those of us who pay to shoot their faires, it will follow to other faires. I do in many ways expect this to happen to limit the images.
Quote from: Lady de Laney on September 01, 2009, 10:55:43 AM
Now with photography if one faire bans those of us who pay to shoot their faires, it will follow to other faires. I do in many ways expect this to happen to limit the images.
I would hope that this wouldn't arise unless the event has to respond to insurance/liability issues. There's something of a parallel with sharp pointies being peace tied.
I agree that posed shots might be less spontaneous, but I suspect that many shots are lost because the moment has passed before the camera is ready. Lord knows, I have problems getting pictures of the youngest dachshund burrowing in his toys. All too often, he's found the object of his search and moved on before I can get the shot off.
In addition to the teenagers at faire, there are a number of small children--usually those whose parents are participants or workers. My concern is with the latter. There is a well supervised participant child care area that does provide a good photo op.
As an aside to Nessa, I have to admit that I didn't always take the former security chief too seriously. (He was interim between the "Goon Squad" and the present security staff.) Even though he's moved on to such things as working security at the Olympics, I can still remember him as a teenager in Court servant blue with a water pistol in his cod piece.
Quote from: harem_pants on September 01, 2009, 09:10:44 AM
Quote from: KeithR on August 31, 2009, 04:33:25 PM
Quote from: majikboxman on August 31, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
Oh... B/T/W Keith, I've met you a-couple of times in Mankato @ training camp. Love your work.
As an aside, I do find the fact that(what I perceive as) security personnel are referred to here as "SS" and given the actions, I find it nervously amusing.
I personally find that incredibly offensive. SS stands for SAFETY SERVICES not raging gastapo nazis no matter how crabby we get about something that is an incredibly unfair comparison. I would hope that I never hear myself or my team referred to as such in jest or otherwise again.
Not sure if I owe it, but will offer a sorry for refering to Safety Services as SS. Was just following the flow as it seamed 'and typed prior in the topic' as most caught on as what the SS stood for. Sorry for any mishaps and can most assure you I was not trying to make any conncetions to the WW2 meaning. In the future I'll try to remember to type it out fully.
Quote from: majikboxman on August 31, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
Oh... B/T/W Keith, I've met you a-couple of times in Mankato @ training camp. Love your work.
Sorry for the double post.
I repent my kudos... your not the same Keith that I was thinking of. The vilkings have a staff photog named Keith. A different Keith. His work I have seen. I have not seen yours so can not offer a kudos at this time. Sorry. Will lok forward in seeing what you have photoed.
Quote from: majikboxman on September 01, 2009, 11:53:00 AM
Quote from: harem_pants on September 01, 2009, 09:10:44 AM
Quote from: KeithR on August 31, 2009, 04:33:25 PM
Quote from: majikboxman on August 31, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
Oh... B/T/W Keith, I've met you a-couple of times in Mankato @ training camp. Love your work.
As an aside, I do find the fact that(what I perceive as) security personnel are referred to here as "SS" and given the actions, I find it nervously amusing.
I personally find that incredibly offensive. SS stands for SAFETY SERVICES not raging gastapo nazis no matter how crabby we get about something that is an incredibly unfair comparison. I would hope that I never hear myself or my team referred to as such in jest or otherwise again.
Not sure if I owe it, but will offer a sorry for refering to Safety Services as SS. Was just following the flow as it seamed 'and typed prior in the topic' as most caught on as what the SS stood for. Sorry for any mishaps and can most assure you I was not trying to make any conncetions to the WW2 meaning. In the future I'll try to remember to type it out fully.
Calling us SS is fine, we call ourselves SS because it's quicker, emplying we are like
THAT SS isn't ok.
Guees I'm safe then as I didn't imply that. I repent my apology. :P
Quote from: majikboxman on September 01, 2009, 11:57:10 AM
Quote from: majikboxman on August 31, 2009, 09:59:12 AM
Oh... B/T/W Keith, I've met you a-couple of times in Mankato @ training camp. Love your work.
Sorry for the double post.
I repent my kudos... your not the same Keith that I was thinking of. The vikings have a staff photog named Keith. A different Keith. His work I have seen. I have not seen yours so can not offer a kudos at this time. Sorry. Will lok forward in seeing what you have photoed.
No problem, Didn't know if you had seen what I had done for PFW. I did get lucky a few years back and a few end up on trading cards through NFL properties.
But..
I don't doubt that you may have met someone that covered the Vikes, and there may have been someone on the staff named Keith, but in the thirty plus years that I've had season photo creds,(and I've met everyone that took pics) I've only known the two guys that have been or are the Viking photogs. Fred Anderson was the guy I first met back in '75 who supplied all but the team photo. The stoic shot of Bud Grant in the parka and headset is his. When the team moved into the Dome, Fred was replaced(he actually moved to Bemidji) by Rick Kolodjziej(pronounced coll-laa-gee)who is still doing work with the team(including the team photo). I'll see him friday at the game along with his assistant, Steve Rohlf. Once in a great while when they show a past highlight footage on NFL Network, that includes a locker room shot of coach Green handing out a game ball or such, you'll see Rick trying to get out of the shot. But for him it's hard because he's like 6-2 and doesn't blend in too well. He was the only photog that had those creds(mine is limited to field sideline only), not even his assistant was allowed in. He also does the team photo. The Wilfs brought in some new people a couple of years ago and this may be Rick's final year. The team also contracts out a different photog to do the official cheerleader pics.
As for seeing what I shoot at the Faire, I hope to get something up so all can see. I don't consider my stuff in the same class as yours, but I hope some might enjoy them as much as I enjoy taking them.
okay...here's my rant on the rant or those that followed.
As far as Security asking people with "big cameras" to stop or ask people before you take the photo: If you are going to take pictures for the wrong reasons, would you do it with a "Big Camera?" Let's wear a sign that says..."hey look at me, I'm being bad!" If someone is going to do something nasty with photos, they are not going to dump the money into a "big camera" to do something they can do with a camera phone or a $20 wal mart point and shoot. Also, a small question... are they only asking men with "big cameras?"
Second... If you are a parent who has an issue with someone taking photos of their kid, this is what you do... you ask the person to delete the photos then and there, if they don't then alert security. You take care of the one photographer, instead of picking on all of them/us. All respectful photographers will trash the photos if asked. It is a very sad fact that there are people who take photos for the wrong reasons and all the shutterbugs have to pay the price.
now if the ticket fine print only applies to staff photographers... if you don't want your photo taken, I feel that you should be able to ask them not to use it in promotional materials. Which is the same as if any one else took your photo, you should feel free to ask them not to use it. I highly doubt that they state this because they plan on using random people on the web site. BUT this is the same thing that happens at sporting events or concerts. Do you honestly think they could get everyone in the Target center to agree to use photos taking during a sporting event or concert? It's a big loop hole so you can't turn around and say, "I was in seat aa24, that's me, I want my money." So if you think about it...how big is the crowd at the Joust?
Also if it only applies to staff photogs, what rules apply to the rest? I'm not too concerned due to the fact that I only would take a photo of a child by accident or if they were in the shot of a Twig. If the shot seemed to be really good (which I doubt since Im not the best) I would ask the parent if I get the chance if they want a copy sent to them. But as I said in a past post and now, I take pictures of performers and objects. If I happen to take photos of someone else, they are in some sort of costume or interacting with a performer. Example, last year, you may have seen this guy, someone in body armor with a dog in a tutu. But he stopped and posed for me and was on his way.
Okay, kinda all over the place with this post, but last thing... I am and will be considerate to anyone I take pictures of, IF security asks me to stop in a rude way, or in a way that is "in not so many words" I will be speaking with management. Nothing against anyone working at the festival, I have worked my fair share of carnivals and other jobs. There is a thing called tact, trained or not, you do not have to be rude when dealing with the public.
okay, one more thing...I'll be in garb at the festival when I go...if anyone wants to take my photo, go for it. ;) I have no problem!
Quote from: ladydiwinter on September 01, 2009, 10:56:47 PM
As far as Security asking people with "big cameras" to stop or ask people before you take the photo: If you are going to take pictures for the wrong reasons, would you do it with a "Big Camera?" Let's wear a sign that says..."hey look at me, I'm being bad!" If someone is going to do something nasty with photos, they are not going to dump the money into a "big camera" to do something they can do with a camera phone or a $20 wal mart point and shoot. Also, a small question... are they only asking men with "big cameras?"
In the previously mentioned issue from several years past, the person did have professional grade photography equipment. "big lense" and all. The person in question was in fact a pedophile and was in fact taking pictures of kids.
Quote
Okay, kinda all over the place with this post, but last thing... I am and will be considerate to anyone I take pictures of, IF security asks me to stop in a rude way, or in a way that is "in not so many words" I will be speaking with management. Nothing against anyone working at the festival, I have worked my fair share of carnivals and other jobs. There is a thing called tact, trained or not, you do not have to be rude when dealing with the public.
This is exactly what you should do, and I'm sure it would be encouraged by anyone out there. If you feel you have been wrongfully treated, please make a complaint
That doesn't mean that all photographers with pro gear(and BIG lenses)are pedophiles. One thing I see lacking in this is an education in what a "big" lens can and cannot do and what they're for. And while I would be happy to explain it(it could get long on boring), in reality, a smaller point and shoot camera has the ability to have a longer focal length(reach) than the "big" lenses and be a lot easier to conceal.
And I believe I mentioned that I was approached in a polite way. Then I believe they moved on to DB.
Which after reading DB's account of being told that someone matching his description..... While DB is much younger than I, has long dark hair and a long beard and(I think) was wearing a kilt, I on the other hand am about 20 years older, what's left of my hair and goatee is white(I was married and raised a daughter :o) and don't have the desire to wear a kilt. Other than having pro gear and "big" lenses and being male, I don't see how I fit the description if he did....
If I do get the chance to get back out to Faire this(or any other) year, I will still be out there to shoot, but I will make every effort to not be intrusive. If I have the opportunity to capture any children, I will make an effort to inform the parents, that my endeavors are strictly for the art of photgraphy. Nothing more. The next time I do get the chance to come out, I hope to do some HDR photography which means I probably won't be shooting that many people.
And by shooting, I mean with a camera. Don't want people paraniod. ::)
Quote from: KeithR on September 02, 2009, 05:15:17 PM
That doesn't mean that all photographers with pro gear(and BIG lenses)are pedophiles. One thing I see lacking in this is an education in what a "big" lens can and cannot do and what they're for. And while I would be happy to explain it(it could get long on boring), in reality, a smaller point and shoot camera has the ability to have a longer focal length(reach) than the "big" lenses and be a lot easier to conceal.
It is not a matter of lacking in education. The equipment that someone has does not determine wether it is believed they are a pedophile. It is only in direct connection to a description given to Safety Services.
Quote
And I believe I mentioned that I was approached in a polite way. Then I believe they moved on to DB.
Which after reading DB's account of being told that someone matching his description..... While DB is much younger than I, has long dark hair and a long beard and(I think) was wearing a kilt, I on the other hand am about 20 years older, what's left of my hair and goatee is white(I was married and raised a daughter :o) and don't have the desire to wear a kilt. Other than having pro gear and "big" lenses and being male, I don't see how I fit the description if he did....
To expound upon my above comment. The description is only as good as the person who is giving it. Most people give a description that could fit more than just a handful of people out at fest. It's like finding a needle in a haystack.
Quote
And by shooting, I mean with a camera. Don't want people paraniod. ::)
;D
Even if every person on site was a pedophile, there are no laws against having any number of clothed pictures of children taken within view of a public space.
To prevent the taking of non-illegal photos could be viewed thru a First Ammendment filter.
That said, let's be real. Don't go following a cute kid around without talking to the parents. And parents need to be more proactive and less uptight about things. Try asking the photog wassup.
On the subject of pedophiles:
I have seen a LOT more baby butt on network TV than adult butt. Anyone else see something wrong with this?
And I like Vil's take on pedophile jokes: Those who complain about them are blocking the 'pedophiles are bad' message.
Quote from: William_MacKean on September 03, 2009, 09:31:25 AM
Even if every person on site was a pedophile, there are no laws against having any number of clothed pictures of children taken within view of a public space.
Yes, but this is a common & known tactic of pedophiles to chose a "victim". The last I will say about the previous issue, is that this is exactly what the person in question was found to be doing. Even being at the festival was a direct violation of their probation. Of coarse their is a paranoia with it. It involves kids. I'm sure we can all agree that we don't want our festival to be known as a pedophile hunting ground.
That being said, No, there is no excuse what-so-ever for any photographer to be alienated or mistreated for being at the festival and taking pictures of kids. I do not agree in any way with the manner in which DB was approached. It definately should have been handled differently.
Oh really this is just overgrown pishposh.
Given the people that I know , and who visit, any Ren Faire, I defy anyone to be able to get away with anything unseemly to a child. For that matter, I find the women also are in the utmost care by all men....this is the nature of the renfolk.
Best pictures ever taken of my kids was from some random photographer artist. I am very grateful for their artisitc insight.
Security needs to give it a rest with the fear factor.
Quote from: Rafe on September 03, 2009, 10:19:40 AM
I'm sure we can all agree that we don't want our festival to be known as a pedophile hunting ground.
I whole heartily agree. As I stated from the beginning, this was the first time in 30 years that this happened and I was just taken back by it. That said, in all those years I have come to feel extremely safe at the Faire(as compared to the State Fair) and this is, I feel, directly due to the hard work and dedication that Safety Services provide. They must be very good at what they do, because I have never seen an incident of any kind in all that time. To me that speaks volumes as to the professionalism of the staff. This was one incident that could have been more than it was but turned out to not be.
With the world being so Polically Correct these days I am not surprised at the overblowness of this. Is that even a word?
I don't understand why anyone would pick the faire to get uptight about this. Why not Disney Land, Valley fair, The State Fair or any other place kids are?
People take lots of pictures at the fest because the MN Ren Fest is a beautiful place with beautiful people in beautiful clothing. Kids especially.
As someone else mentioned I believe the Fest is a place to feel safe with your kids. Sure there are bad people everywhere but we can't live in a bubble. If there is someone doing anything wierd find them and kick their @$$.
Hopefully our thread is the most this is being talked about and it will just go away the rest of the season.
I'd agree that faire is a safe place for kids and also agree that it probably wouldn't be a safe place for a predator. Lots of folks grew up at faire. We've one example of fourth generation. Our lady guildmaster is a Faire Brat.
Quote from: winterland on September 03, 2009, 11:14:12 PM
Hopefully our thread is the most this is being talked about and it will just go away the rest of the season.
Not even a blip on the radar on the list serves. The parking situation has pretty much taken over those. ::)
I did drop a short note to the Marketing staff, but didn't say it was being discussed here, but haven't gotten a reply.