# Professional / DSLR Cameras forbidden at events



## Tijn (Jan 27, 2012)

Hi,

Having read the recent topic "Shooting professional sports (NHL) with a DSLR - access denied!" (http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2900.0.html), I started wondering about events that do or do not allow such cameras, in general.

The previous topic mostly focused on the different measures that sports events take for (not) allowing such equipment. It was said that the rules differ for each event.

I'm not so much interested in the exact different guidelines that different events have, i.e. what the maximum lens length would be etcetera to be allowed. They differ for each event, and the events that do make such distinctions do so because they do not allow professional camera equipment. Also, I'm curious about more than just arena sports events.

My questions are:
- _What kind of_ events are likely to disallow professional photography equipment? Big sports events were already mentioned in the previous topic, but I've also read of several commercial festivals with a similar policy. What is the scope of such policies, event-wise?
- _Why_ do many big events not allow such cameras? I.e. what is the actual risk for them? Naturally, you'd be able to take great pictures with such equipment. What's the real problem for them? Again, in the previous topic, one of the things mentioned was that larger cameras would be of more annoyance to other people. I find it unlikely that that is the biggest reason _for events_ to not allow those things.

Any thoughts?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 27, 2012)

In general, I suppose that the reason event organizers restrict high-end cameras is that they have contracted with professional photographers to shoot the event, and that restriction is either because of language in the contract with the photographer (i.e. the pro wants to increase revenues from image sales, and doensn't want to compete with attendees bringing in high end gear) and/or the event organizers also have a financial stake in image sales by the hired photographer.

In short, the reason is money.


----------



## bycostello (Jan 27, 2012)

Tijn said:


> - _Why_ do many big events not allow such cameras? I.e. what is the actual risk for them? Naturally, you'd be able to take great pictures with such equipment. What's the real problem for them? Again, in the previous topic, one of the things mentioned was that larger cameras would be of more annoyance to other people. I find it unlikely that that is the biggest reason _for events_ to not allow those things.
> 
> Any thoughts?



they sell the rights to photograph and so want to protect the revenue stream


----------



## Tijn (Jan 27, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> In general, I suppose that the reason event organizers restrict high-end cameras is that they have contracted with professional photographers to shoot the event, and that restriction is either because of language in the contract with the photographer (i.e. the pro wants to increase revenues from image sales, and doensn't want to compete with attendees bringing in high end gear) and/or the event organizers also have a financial stake in image sales by the hired photographer.


Thanks a bunch for clarifying! I was thinking in the direction of commercial risks as well, but just couldn't fit the entire picture together. It makes a lot of sense when remembering that those permitted photographers are indeed contracted, and their pictures are their income.

Could I please ask: what is the 'shape' of such contracts normally, i.e. who receives or pays money? I assume that the allowed photographers work for news agencies, and they pay the event organisation to get the rights to publish footage of the game that they shoot, is that correct?

It would be nice if it were possible as an 'amateur' photographer to "enlist" yourself as such for events, with some kind of no-cost contract that will allow you to take pictures, granting that you will not use your pictures to make a commercial profit.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 27, 2012)

This is a rapidly changing area and there are no standard operating procedures for smaller events and venues. 

Let me try to add some context though, as I think people often portray event or venue organizers as "greedy." 

We, the public, are no longer satisfied with simple entertainment. We are now programmed to expect everything to be a spectacle. If you go listen to your favorite band, they have to put on a "show" and not just play a bunch of songs. Even when we go to tourist sites, we often expect sophisticated presentation and entertainment. Museums can't just display rare objects anymore, they have to have a multi-media presentation.

All of this costs money and as a result, event organizers and venue operators have to maximize every revenue stream. 

At the other end, technology has made it incredibly easy for individuals to produce and market products independently. (As well as to take great pictures) Today, you can go someplace, take a photo you like and then take it to your local Walgreen's and have them slap it on a coffee mug, 

That's a coffee mug that the venue operator didn't sell you and therefore, that's revenue they've lost. Seems like small potatoes, but look at it this way: maybe you only intend to take pictures of your favorite band in concert and use them as wallpaper on your computer. But, maybe the guy next to you plans to have 25,000 t-shirts printed up in China and sell them on the streets in every city the band visits. The event organizers can't know which is the case and losing those T-shirt sales could mean the difference between making a profit and losing money on the tour. 

So, more and more, event and venue operators are trying to protect those revenue streams. Hence, the restrictions on photography are getting more stringent in some areas. 

There is an unrelated thread elsewhere here about copyright infringement of a double-decker London bus. At the heart of the case was the potential for lost revenue from an image that had become extremely popular for marketing the city. The case may seem overreaching to us, but the financial loss was a real financial threat to those who owned the rights to the original image.


----------



## Taemobig (Jan 27, 2012)

Tijn said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > In general, I suppose that the reason event organizers restrict high-end cameras is that they have contracted with professional photographers to shoot the event, and that restriction is either because of language in the contract with the photographer (i.e. the pro wants to increase revenues from image sales, and doensn't want to compete with attendees bringing in high end gear) and/or the event organizers also have a financial stake in image sales by the hired photographer.
> ...



I have an example that's very recent. I don't know how it is for other events but this is one that I know. I just got recruited a couple months ago with a photography crew that shoots for the Miss California USA pageant and other regional pageants in California. There's some, but not alot, of pay coming from the owners of the pageants themselves. Sometimes we actually shoot for the regional pageants for free but most of the money the photo crew makes come from selling photos we took at the event to the pageant contestants/parents directly. And more than half the time, the contestants want or need head shots/modeling shots as well. So the crew makes a deal to give their PR company/event organizers free photos for their marketing/program books/website for us to have exclusive rights to shoot their pageant/event.

Here's one small advice to getting in events without getting stopped. Go through the backdoor. If you go through the front entrance, there's a big chance you won't be able to bring your gear in. But if you go through the back door, just bring a big backpack and big camera and everyone will assume you're the official photographer. I've done this numerous times for pageants/events, even though I was supposed to be there anyway, nobody stopped or questioned me. (I'm the new guy in the crew so the event people and sponsors didn't knew who I was then.)

Its a bit of a tangent but I love being part of the crew. Being the youngest (I'm 24 and the others are in late 30s, early 40s) and not married...I get to flirt with the contestants and not get in trouble


----------



## WillShootPhotos (Jan 27, 2012)

*Event/Sport specific, a few other thoughts...*

I've shot a number of NHL games in Dallas from the stands. The confusing thing to me was the difference in the rules printed in the program distributed at the venue and the rules on the Dallas Stars website. I'll be honest and will say I can't remember which said what, but one said it was okay, the other not.

I ended up figuring that the worst that could happen is that I'd have to schlep my backpack out to the car, so I showed up with a 1D something and a 70-200 2.8 and a 100-400. The security guy had me open my backpack, looked in, and let me through. So I think this varies by venue/organization.

While I know that organizations like the PGA (which I've read has one of the most stringent/protective rulesets about usage of images of PGA Pros) are at one extreme, I figure the NHL was sort of at the other end - looking to rebuild fan support after the lockout a few years back - so if folks show up and take some pics to post online - more power to em... I think the main issue would be what would happen if I had tried to sell those images, especially for commercial (non editorial) usage.

As a photographer that does quite a bit of work with Professional Cycling, I know more about what that "environment" is like. Yes, the advent of dslrs, cell phones w/ good quality cameras, etc - has broadened the number of photogs who can get scenics and other venue shots - there is still a premium paid to those who can get on a motorcycle as a part of the race. At most large races (Tour of California or USA Pro Cycling Challenge in Colorado) the race organization provides about 10 motorcycles w/ drivers who have been "vetted" and know the rules as to where and when they can be in a race. Then, media submit requests for time on the motos and it usually turns out that 4 or 5 get rides for the full week. These are photographers who have "agency" or big cycling publication contracts. The rest of the motos are apportioned by need and by city. So local media get a shot for a day, while other freelance shooters who have other agreements with teams or sponsors can get a day or more on a moto.

That gives us a better opportunity to get more shots from a day's racing, giving us the "critical" images that others just can't get. We're still fairly limited as to what we do with them. We've a fairly wide berth on usage in editorial situations - media outlets, websites, blogs focused on racing; the teams buy some, etc. The athletes themselves have varying levels of sensitivity to sale of their image for commercial usage. They are also fairly okay with sale to fans for personal display/use... so some money can come in from print sales via a website. Usually they are okay with a team or personal sponsor paying for images, but random other products who want to insinuate that say Lance Armstrong has endorsed their product, not so much. Having shot for a number of top teams, I'm sure that I've received repeat business because I've not abused the privelege... 

I think I'd sum this up as follows - it can never hurt to ask a team/venue/whatever about getting access. The worst they can say is "no" - but I'd just also be cognisent of what you want to do with the images and be up front with said venue. They'll let you know if there is an existing contract, etc. As another example, there is a velodrome near my old house in Dallas, TX. I was the "track photographer" out there for about 3 years or so. The track organizers and officials were nice enough to chat with other photogs who showed up to shoot. If they were on "assignment" for a rider or a sponsor or local news - no worries; but they asked that the shooters respect that I was there for every race and to not post images for general sale. Could the shooters still sell? sure - but I think all of them didn't - as there is a bit of a code of ethics between shooters. I did see a few post images for sale and I never emailed or called anyone about it. I guess part of it was that there wasn't that much money in velodrome sales... <chuckle> I was doing it to support the sport and the venue.

Hope that helps - sorry if I rambled a bit.

- Will


----------



## Tijn (Jan 27, 2012)

Thanks a bunch all, it helps understand how events would go about these things, and why.


----------



## NormanBates (Jan 27, 2012)

*Re: Event/Sport specific, a few other thoughts...*



WillShootPhotos said:


> I ended up figuring that the worst that could happen is that I'd have to schlep my backpack out to the car, so I showed up with a 1D something and a 70-200 2.8 and a 100-400.



"1D something"

that should teach us gear-headed livings of the rumor sites!!

(it's just a tool, you can have a better one, but it will still be just a tool - I want a better one, though, that's why I'm spending my time here)


----------



## dr croubie (Jan 27, 2012)

And for another example, I was in Poland in July of '08 backpacking, and randomly when I was on the train to Gdansk I met a bunch of teenagers going to a festival down the road. Sweet lineup on the last day, headliners were Goldfrapp, Massive Attack, Chemical Brothers, all for about $50, so a bunch of guys and I from the hostel all headed down there.
Bought our tickets online, and one of the conditions written on it (in big bold letters, so it was noticeable in the fineprint), along the lines of "You will be denied entry with a camera over 6MP". I loved my little 8MP P&S I had at the time, so I didn't chance it and left it in the hostel. Another guy brought along his 10MP lumix or otherwise superzoom thingy, he got in fine.
Then once we're in there, I see a bunch of people walking around with 500D and 50Ds, not pros, some were probably barely old enough to get into the concert themselves.

So despite all the rules and clauses and whatever they write, it's always going to depend on being able to sweet-talk the individual security-guard at the time. What the gear looks like will also help, I'd guess you've got a lot better chance of making it in with a 7D and 70-300 DO than a 1D and 70-300L, or a 200 f/2.8 has more chance than a 70-200 f/2.8 (80-200 f/2.8L magic drainpipe anyone?). Being able to talk it past saying "it's not a pro camera" also probably depends on how much of a camera-nut the SG is, in my experience, not many are...


----------



## WillShootPhotos (Jan 27, 2012)

*Re: Event/Sport specific, a few other thoughts...*



NormanBates said:


> "1D something"
> 
> that should teach us gear-headed livings of the rumor sites!!
> 
> (it's just a tool, you can have a better one, but it will still be just a tool - I want a better one, though, that's why I'm spending my time here)



Ha - good point re: the "tool" - I wasn't trying to start a rumor with the 1D something... I just can't recall if that was when I had my 1D2n or if it was with my 1D3. I've been back with my 1D4 since, but am looking to get on the glass in the corner with access to using the arena strobes... we'll see... ;D

- Will


----------



## Jules (Jan 27, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> And for another example, I was in Poland in July of '08 backpacking, and randomly when I was on the train to Gdansk I met a bunch of teenagers going to a festival down the road. Sweet lineup on the last day, headliners were Goldfrapp, Massive Attack, Chemical Brothers, all for about $50, so a bunch of guys and I from the hostel all headed down there.
> Bought our tickets online, and one of the conditions written on it (in big bold letters, so it was noticeable in the fineprint), along the lines of "You will be denied entry with a camera over 6MP". I loved my little 8MP P&S I had at the time, so I didn't chance it and left it in the hostel. Another guy brought along his 10MP lumix or otherwise superzoom thingy, he got in fine.
> Then once we're in there, I see a bunch of people walking around with 500D and 50Ds, not pros, some were probably barely old enough to get into the concert themselves.
> 
> So despite all the rules and clauses and whatever they write, it's always going to depend on being able to sweet-talk the individual security-guard at the time. What the gear looks like will also help, I'd guess you've got a lot better chance of making it in with a 7D and 70-300 DO than a 1D and 70-300L, or a 200 f/2.8 has more chance than a 70-200 f/2.8 (80-200 f/2.8L magic drainpipe anyone?). Being able to talk it past saying "it's not a pro camera" also probably depends on how much of a camera-nut the SG is, in my experience, not many are...


Hi,
My 2 cents (euro cents), is related to concerts here in France...
Been to multiple ones in stadiums (Paris stadium, or the larger world cup Stade de France) as well as sports arenas hosting concerts ... Sting, Santana, Rolling Stones, Genesis, Sade ...
Always the same rules on the tickets : NO cameras ... then at the stadium / arenas, the SG usually let people in with compact cameras ... for arenas, pretty tough and sometimes the guards pick up the cameras inside during the concert when they spot a DSLR, but otherwise for stadiums it is quite easy as it is bigger, especially if you are on the field section that can be crowded ... for the Rolling Stones I managed to get in with a 70-300 IS nonL wrapped in aluminum foil among the sandwiches and cookies in my backpack, and i thought myself lucky, when i spotted couple of L whites on the field (at least a 100-400 for the one closest to me): no ideas how they made it, but it seemed possible ...


----------



## gmrza (Jan 27, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> In general, I suppose that the reason event organizers restrict high-end cameras is that they have contracted with professional photographers to shoot the event, and that restriction is either because of language in the contract with the photographer (i.e. the pro wants to increase revenues from image sales, and doensn't want to compete with attendees bringing in high end gear) and/or the event organizers also have a financial stake in image sales by the hired photographer.
> 
> In short, the reason is money.



There is that, plus the disruption caused by every Tom, Dick and Harry running around with a DSLR trying to get the best angles - that can often ruin it for the other guests/spectators. The way seating is arranged in a stadium it would just not be possible, in many cases, to shoot with a long lens without sticking it into the neck of the person in front of you - spectators are packed in like sardines. You will have a very irritated person in front of you if you are continually sticking your big white lens into his/her neck.

This is probably even more of an issue at theatre events, where the producers don't want idiots' flashes disrupting the production. - That problem probably applies more to owners of P&S cameras, who actually don't know how to turn their flashes off!


----------



## dr croubie (Jan 27, 2012)

gmrza said:


> This is probably even more of an issue at theatre events, where the producers don't want idiots' flashes disrupting the production. - That problem probably applies more to owners of P&S cameras, who actually don't know how to turn their flashes off!



Exactly, let in DSLRs and ban the P&S! (or even inspect the cameras to see if they know how to use a camera without the flash turning on automatically. If the dial is turned to "P" or the green square, stop them, if it's on Av, Tv, or M, let them in, 5D and 1D owners can just walk straight in...)


----------



## Halfrack (Jan 27, 2012)

I'm a huge fan of the 200/2.8 with a set of tele adapters. I've shot a lot of soccer using that with any body - mostly because it's under the 6" rule they have here. I'm going to push it a bit this season and per their website, as long as it's not greater than 200mm I'll be fine. Then again, that's with a full frame camera without tele's attached 

Now I've had a camera pass a few times and taken in more than enough camera gear, and I'll say that I like some of the higher shots looking down on a pitch - which no shooter who's making a living will catch. I'm fine with standing at the back with big glass.


----------



## awinphoto (Jan 27, 2012)

It really depends on the venue, the event, and the access... For instance, I have been denied access going to my local universities NCAA division 1 football games with my 7D... BUT, i have heard of others who have gone to final four basketball games and get in as long as the lens is 6" or less... I have been gone to music venues and been hired by the band and still had to go through strict security just to get into the knitting factory, but if you have any doubts, always contact the venue before hand before you get turned down, or request a press pass. 

p.s. The first time I turned away from the NCAA football game I got the response that due to all the unauthorized photos that has been taken (by everybody) it's been impossible to manage/track so they have to limit who can photograph at the events... Of course a powershot such would be let in just fine...


----------



## gmrza (Jan 28, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> gmrza said:
> 
> 
> > This is probably even more of an issue at theatre events, where the producers don't want idiots' flashes disrupting the production. - That problem probably applies more to owners of P&S cameras, who actually don't know how to turn their flashes off!
> ...



We make jokes about this - when I was at the Platypus House and Seahorse World in Tasmania last year, the staff there were more concerned about the people with P&S cameras turning off their flashes, than they were about me and my wife armed with big white lenses. - I still had to throw away 3/4 of my frames because they were spoiled by other people's AF assist lights.


----------



## Tijn (Jan 28, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> It really depends on the venue, the event, and the access... For instance, I have been denied access going to my local universities NCAA division 1 football games with my 7D... BUT, i have heard of others who have gone to final four basketball games and get in as long as the lens is 6" or less... I have been gone to music venues and been hired by the band and still had to go through strict security just to get into the knitting factory, but if you have any doubts, always contact the venue before hand before you get turned down, or request a press pass.



That was going to be my next question. How are the chances of succes requesting a press pass? Does that cost you anything, and how likely are they to supply you with one if you're not actually a press photographer?

Also, do those press passes commonly come with (contractual) limitations on what you're allowed to do with your pictures?

Thanks everyone for all your input thus far, it's all very valuable and interesting material to me!


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 28, 2012)

The 70-300L is under 6 inches if that is of any use?


----------



## celliottuk (Jan 28, 2012)

I've given up taking anything that looks vaguely pro to the many rock concerts that I go to. The spurious, ever changing rules, and the "Conversations" with security staff have just worn me down.
So I bought a panasonic G3. It looks like a P/S, but with a long lens on it, I can get the shots without arguments.
The best excuse that I ever heard as to why they have the non-pro camera rule is that in the event of a fire, a long lens could hurt someone. Oh well, at least it's a creative load of BS!


----------



## ferdi (Jan 28, 2012)

Sometimes it's no problem if you ask for the event or press manager on site, even if you're not a pro. Just be patient and friendly, and if they are hesitant you might be able to persuade them with a promise that you will send them some pictures ("some" being the keyword, don't say "all" or "full-res"). Or be bold and directly ask for their e-mail address as indirect approval. Keep business cards at hand (get them free or really cheap on the internet).
For closed (i.e. not public and/or not free) events you should contact the organisation at least 2 weeks beforehand, the earlier the better chance of getting a guest photographer's spot. For example, I already booked an event in August last September.






New Year 2012, Museumsquare Amsterdam, 1D IV + 70-200 f/2.8L IS II


----------



## willrobb (Jan 28, 2012)

Here in Japan it's all about controlling what gets out in the media. For events with celebrities/sports stars/models who are contracted to groups who financially contribute to events, everything has to look perfect just as the PR people want it to be, so photographers and their publications have back ground checks for each event they apply to cover and often have to sign legal contracts stating what they can and can't shoot, so if someone in the crowd takes a pic and that gets out there and can't be controlled peoplesee the truth see something they aren't supposed to and that can cause issues....


----------



## EOBeav (Jan 30, 2012)

I went to a concert summer '10, and the lady who denied me entrance with my 70-200mm said it "looks like a professional lens." Her words, not mine. So, I took that one off, put on a 50mm, and got in just fine. Gee, don't you know, that 70-200 managed to find its way back onto my camera before the end of the show. I wonder how that happened?


----------



## Terry Rogers (Jan 30, 2012)

I was at a rollerderby event last year and was ultimately told I could not use my camera. I had a rebel Xsi, 50mm 1.8 and a 70 - 300 4.5 - 5.6. At the gate, the attendant asked if I had any pro camera gear (as I had my camera bag on). Of course I said no and was let in. However, later that night a security guard saw me and said I couldn't take pictures with a pro camera. Point and shoots are okay, but apparently a DSLR (even Xsi) was not. To be fair, I would not expect a security guard at a local area to know the difference between pro gear and an entry level DSLR with cheap lenses.

If any of you have been to a roller derby match, they are typically very dark venues with fast action. My gear was not equipped for professional quality shots and I took no professional quality shots as I was shooting from the stands, through hockey arena plexiglass, with slow lenses and high iso.

I got one great shot that night, and it wasn't even during any of the action. It was before the match while introducing the ladies. You can check it out here if you like.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/terryrogersphotography/6056952989/#

Cheers


----------



## WillShootPhotos (Jan 31, 2012)

Tijn said:


> That was going to be my next question. How are the chances of succes requesting a press pass? Does that cost you anything, and how likely are they to supply you with one if you're not actually a press photographer?
> 
> Also, do those press passes commonly come with (contractual) limitations on what you're allowed to do with your pictures?



I've only really worked professional cycling w/ a press pass so can only comment on that. The press pass itself is free, the question is what level of access do you get. In cycling - the pre-race venues (where the team busses, cars, etc line up) are open to the public to encourage fan interaction with the teams/riders. The riders usually come out, sign a few autographs, head to the start line to sign in for the stage, come back, hang out on the bus, then roll over for the start. Pretty much anyone can walk around that area and get photos. 

The first level is a the press credential. You have to go to the press office and let them know who you are shooting for (team(s), publication(s), sponsor(s), etc.). The larger multi day races sometimes ask for a letter of asignment from the team/publication/sponsor if you're not a "regular" on the circuit. Sometimes they don't. Up in Canada when I shot a pro tour race (an international top level race) I had to also present credentials from a professional association (I'm a member of an international press writers/photographers association AIPS - and also the NSSA - the US version of the same association) to get my credential. It really varies between events. Most larger races have online signup where you can submit most/all of the above several weeks/months before the event and you'll get an email about a week or two before the event to let you know if you were approved or not.

The photo credential helps you get in behind the barriers before the start. It gets out inbetween the crowd and the sign in stage. At the finish, a photo credential will get you into the "photo area" near the finish. You'll just have a barrier between you and the course, you won't have to fight the crowds who have been waiting all day, but the placement of this area isn't always in the best photo spot for the finish.

The next level of access is also free - it is a "course vest" - it allows you out on the course itself, inside the barriers where allowed, etc - this is a bit harder to get as there are a fixed number that can be handed out - some are given for the week, others for the day, depending on the "assignment" length, etc. At the start, you can move around a bit more freely near the sign in table, etc. There isn't too much advantage at the start over just the photo credential. At the finish, this bears fruit. You can be on the road, beyond the finish line as the riders charge towards the line (if it is a pack finish) or as the rider on a mtn finish crosses the line. They tape out areas on the pavement at least 30 meters beyond the line - usually more - and varying by setup (narrow, etc). The photogs are held off the course till the course marshalls let you out, then all race to a spot in the taped out "pens" and you line up your shot.

The premium access in a pro cycing race is to get a ride on one of the photography motorcycles. This can have an associated fee per day ridden to help offset the cost of the organization having to hire, feed, and house these drivers for the week. These motorcycle drivers are "vetted" and work their way up to these larger races. They know where they are allowed to take you, are briefed on road hazards on the day's stage, and know when they have to clear the course for the finish and will then drop you off at the finish line. There are usually 7-10 of these in a multi day race, and of these (like the course vests) some (3-4 depending) will get a ride for the week, others are doled out a day at a time to those with course vests (they get a temp "moto" vest for the day) based on assignment and need. You get to use the moto as transport along the course and while you're the lowest priority on the road (riders, safety/docs/medical/neutral support/officials, team cars, etc... ) you can go ahead and scout scenics, let the peloton pass and then work back up through the pack (the moto can only go the direction of the race on the road, no back tracking), can pace the head of a pack or breakaway to get shots so long as you're not providing aerodynamic benefit to the riders, etc. Tis a sort of "you're the director" type control. Tho you risk getting caught behind the riders if the road narrows, or if they are descending a steep mountain, etc... it is all about knowing the race, the options, the situation, where specific riders are, who's winning overall, who's gunning for a single day victory, etc... Then, at the finish, there are usually a few spots set aside for the moto photogs as they couldn't wait at the finish all day to get their best spot... 

As for restrictions - just those I mentioned in my earlier post in this thread (sorry - I'll save my fingers and won't bore you with a repeat... (chuckle)).

Folks can work the circuit for years to get a ride on a moto at all, let alone for a week. I'll admit it is the best seat in the house. Perhaps even better than sideline access at NFL - well, if you know how to position yourself to be where and when the decisive move is going to happen on any given stage... I've had days when I've "nailed it" and been at the right place all day and got shots that no other shooter got. Others I've gotten bubkis... just part of the territory.


----------



## eeek (Feb 1, 2012)

Really depends what you are shooting and who you are shooting for. If I shoot the NFL, it has to be for a written press. They won't let you shoot for just a website. If I shoot an arena concert, I can shoot for a magazine, newspaper, website or even the arena itself. The
key is press passes are free. But, you have to offer them something, too. You taking pictures generates publicitly locally and nationally and that is why they let you do it. I started shooting small concerts, high school sports and other small events. That allowed me to build a portfolio and apply to the newspaper. That opened a ton of doors for me to get to shoot sports and concerts. 

Many events and shows you are obligated to use their photos in certain ways. For example, wrestling will only allow you to shoot if you give them full copyrights. Some sports won't even let you post their pictures to your own website. Regardless, I spend a lot of time reading to see where my copyright will end up. It's pretty rare for me to give those away exclusively. Many musicians do not allow you to do anything with your pictures other than the paper/website/mag you are shooting for. It can be pretty bad a lot of times. You have to be careful with what they ask. For every rocker that wants to own every picture you take, there is a hip hop band that gives you 100% ownership and selling rights. Sadly, the latter is getting tougher to find.


----------



## awinphoto (Feb 1, 2012)

Tijn said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > It really depends on the venue, the event, and the access... For instance, I have been denied access going to my local universities NCAA division 1 football games with my 7D... BUT, i have heard of others who have gone to final four basketball games and get in as long as the lens is 6" or less... I have been gone to music venues and been hired by the band and still had to go through strict security just to get into the knitting factory, but if you have any doubts, always contact the venue before hand before you get turned down, or request a press pass.
> ...



Passes are generally free but require written requests with enough advanced notice for the venue to respond... some times that's a day, others could be months. For the college I was trying to get into to shoot for instance, preference goes to those who are shooting for newspapers, magazines, etc... then they trickle down to websites/blogs/etc assuming there isn't a high demand for the passes... Some may welcome you freely, others may be more stringent than others. Contact the venue you are wishing to shoot before hand to discuss their requirements and go from there.


----------

