New Rule Threatens Photographers

teotwaki

Excelsior!
Another way to tax us for the use of public land! In addition to the "Adventure" Pass we'll be saddled with a "Recreational Photography Pass".
 
Last edited:

DaktariEd

2005, 2006 Tech Course Champion: Expedition Trophy
More Big Brother intrusion....more equine excrement....
:ar15:
 
What I've found interesting about the current rules (pertaining to BLM) is that if I were a "professional still photographer" and took a photo of some natural monument and then sold it as stock imagery for example, I don't need a permit.

But if I setup my "professional" HD video camera and shoot the same natural monument and sell it as stock video then I need a permit.

To me it doesn't seem fair for the independent video producer who is more than likely working by them self with minimal gear is treated the same as that of a movie production that requires a large crew.
 

Desertdude

Expedition Leader
I'l take a wild guess and add that when these rules were written, the independent filmmaker, with no crew and the latest HD cameras, were not even on the horizon.

Its no wonder why many film projects have been heading to Canada.
 

Michael Slade

Untitled
It doesn't bother me at all. I'm not a photographer. I'm a cultural anthropologist.

Freakin' gub'mint. Don't they know size doesn't matter?
 

Lost Canadian

Expedition Leader
Desertdude said:
Its no wonder why many film projects have been heading to Canada.

Trust me it's no better here. This is a letter that was sent to the Canadian Minister of the environment in response to our lovely park fees. It's all a bunch of poo poo.

We are writing to express our concerns with the current policy pertaining to photographers in Canada’s mountain national parks. The policy provides guidelines for all commercial and still photography in the mountain national parks; however, upon reading this policy, we were dismayed by the requirements expected of individual, freelance photographers. Most of our colleagues and friends enter the parks to shoot on speculation of a return down the road. We pay the park entrance fee and thereafter bear all the risk and cost associated with our venture. Our field is extremely competitive, and very few photographers survive off proceeds of their images. As freelancer’s we simply cannot afford to pay the fees listed in the policy. As an example, to shoot one day in Jasper National Park, we are expected to:


apply with at least 10 days’ notice of our intended location in the park;

complete forms and provide proof that we have $2,000,000 liability insurance;

pay a permit application fee of $148.60; and

pay a location fee of $495.30 per day!


For us to venture into the park to shoot for one day could cost us $643.90 and to shoot for a weekend would cost $1,634.50! In addition to these sums, we have to pay the usual park fee. Obviously, these fees and the insurance requirement are tailored toward larger commercial projects. While we fully understand that larger projects in film or commercial photography involving film crews, large parties, sets, equipment or models necessitate regulation, we do not believe individual freelance photographers shooting for themselves fall in the same category. When we shoot, we fit all of our equipment in a small pack on our backs. The nature of our activities in the park is fundamentally different from larger projects; in fact, the only similarity we can find is that we carry a camera. We have no more impact on the park, the wildlife or on other visitors than a regular tourist does - so why should a permit be required for our activities?


Finally, lest you feel this is a problem for a select few, consider how many great photographs are made and distributed around the world advertising our incredible mountain national parks and our great country. Many of these are made by freelance photographers who would not be able to promote tourism were they required to pay such prohibitive fees. Also many photographers from other countries will no longer visit Canada's National Parks if they are rquired to get costly permits in advance of their visit.


We are writing to request that you change the current policy to exclude individual freelance photographers from the current policy. Just as other artists such as painters and writers are not required to pay permit fees and undergo an application process to create their work, freelance photographers should also be exempt. The current policy is not well advertised and is arbitrarily enforced causing confusion among park staff and freelance photographers alike. It is time that relevance and proportion be restored to the policy. In consultation with freelance photographers, we look to you to effect this change.
 

sinuhexavier

Explorer
Desertdude said:
Its no wonder why many film projects have been heading to Canada.

Not anymore... With the weak dollar we have been keeping a lot of production here. Canada has also unionized much of it's production labor, so the benefits of shooting there are being slimmed down tremendously.

As far as the NP permit policy, where do they draw the line?

If it is, in fact, a commercial endeavor, permits and insurance should be included in your budget and transferred to your client with a 20% mark up. It's the cost of doing business. If you can't recoup $500 from a day of shooting, then something is wrong.
 

haven

Expedition Leader
It's an issue outside USA and Canada. I've had problems carrying a video camera mounted on a tripod into national parks in Venezuela. If you look semi-pro, then they assume you're planning to make money selling the images.

The park personnel tend to equate big, expensive-looking gear with professional use. You attract less attention at the entrance station by using smaller gear, broken down into components.

Chip Haven
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,712
Messages
2,909,412
Members
230,892
Latest member
jesus m anderson
Top