DSLRUsers.com

If you are planning to visit the Sydney Easter show, leave your camera at home.

See the below link for entry restrictions.
http://www.eastershow.com.au/legal/ConditionsofEntrytoSydneyShowground.pdf

When calling the organizers on the phone I was told that anybody with a camera will need some media accreditation or they will be refused entry.

After leaving several messages on the media relations voice mail and received no reply I have finally given up.

I guess this ban will only be enforced if you have a large SLR, I can't see them trying to ban mums and dads with camera's.

Anybody else have different information?

That is ridiculous what will they do next? Ban cameras in the streets and public parks?

I will put this as plainly as possible, are they fecking joking

But, I can at least go to the Easter Show buck naked

looks to me more like one of those generic documents which gives them the scope to stop people that are going too far. its impossible to ban cameras and video cameras from your regular punter.

i may be wrong...just saying...

Actually I’ve just had a thought

Why not take out a high court injunction to disallow all cameras from the Easter Show, especially TV cameras

I'm taking my camera to photograph my daughters performance, so is my wife.
She is one of 300 school kids performing in the main arena on Sunday night.

Lets see what happens when they try and stop 300 mums from photographing their daughters!!

On the basis of the T&C, they will be confiscating all mobile phones that contain cameras, all P&S cameras as well as SLRs? Given my photographic memory, am I likely to have my mind confiscated? (Of all the things I have lost...)

aim54x wrote:That is ridiculous what will they do next? Ban cameras in the streets and public parks?

Probably...

Hi everyone,

I cannot say what I would like to say - I'd probably get banned from this forum for life.
This is not true - is it ?
I would love to tell the organisers or managers how it would feel and actually demonstate how a 70-200mm f2.8 being 77mm in diameter would sit in their ... (please leve it to your imagination - we call the place in Germany HINTERN !)
This is just bloody rediculous - no, it is not, it is a major, major affront !

My 20 cents,
CD

Wow, and to think I was thinking only last week what a great opportunity it would be for me to practice my photography this easter.

Bloody muppets, not worth going anymore.

Would be interested to see whether they really enforce this. What with the financial crisis there may be a slightly smaller crowd anyways. If they turn away people at the door I would think they are very brave!

whitey wrote:not worth going anymore.

You say that as if it was worth going at some time.

According to the Ts&Cs, they're going to confiscate this stuff?

That's interesting.

Surely a bunch of open letters to the editor of decent Sydney newspapers, or the SMH asking, rhetorically:

1. Why the organisers are banning cameras?
2. Will this extend to mobile phone cameras and compact cameras?
3. If I have a camera on me which is not confiscated upon entry, will the hypo-intelligent security confiscate the camera on the spot within the grounds?
4. If so, what assurances do I have that I will get it back and in an undamaged form?


Or some other such questions. Let the general public know that they are doing this.

Doesn't change my intention to go, however.

Patrick, good questions and good idea to make the public aware

You have to wonder about things like this - how much longer can organisers foist these edicts upon their very own paying patrons?

It's poorly thought-out, and I'm sure the type of person who includes crap like this is quite proud of their efforts - "I shall make the Easter Show much safer, no one will bring cameras!"

Say I read their guidelines, and discover

RESTRICTED AND PROHIBITED ITEMS
The following restricted or prohibited items are not permitted into the Showground and
are subject to immediate confiscation:
(snip)
• Recording devices including cameras, audio and video;

I heed their advice. I need to leave my iPhone at home (camera and audio recording).

Which phone do I take?
I need to be on call.

Can I even take a phone? looking in the IT graveyard box suggests not!
Motorola V9 - er, no. Camera.
Nokia 6288 - that has a camera too.
Motorola V3X - camera.
Sony Ericsson T610 - still has a camera.
Ericsson T28 - oh yeah. No camera on this. Dead battery.

Guess I'll be taking my $32 and buying a few harbour-side pints instead

yeah like i said before daniel, its impossible to enforce. i wouldnt worry about it. i suppose if you turn up with a D3 and a 300/2.8 you may get the 3rd degree but otherwise i doubt this is a big deal.

Rooz wrote:yeah like i said before daniel, its impossible to enforce. i wouldnt worry about it. i suppose if you turn up with a D3 and a 300/2.8 you may get the 3rd degree but otherwise i doubt this is a big deal.

Morons can enforce what they like and let’s face it, most of the enforcers are morons

sirhc55 wrote:

Rooz wrote:yeah like i said before daniel, its impossible to enforce. i wouldnt worry about it. i suppose if you turn up with a D3 and a 300/2.8 you may get the 3rd degree but otherwise i doubt this is a big deal.

Morons can enforce what they like and let’s face it, most of the enforcers are morons

true, there are no shortages of em ! lol but this issue, imho this, is a storm in a teacup. i wont believe it until i hear someone refused entry. imo, the intent of this is that they wont allow massive lens' and full on movie productions unless you have credentials. they dont let you take big lens' to any multitude of events nowadays so its not anything particularly new.

think about it logically for a second, even if by some chance they ARE complete and utter morons, (ie: run by the NSW govt), what are they gonna do search every damn person in the joint and have camera police ? take away every single persons ixus P&S and phone ? every single person with a video camera filming their kids on a ride ? please. just not gonna happen. nothing to see here...move along...

pat, if you turn up and get thrown out, i apologise in advance.

Rooz wrote:but this issue, imho this, is a storm in a teacup.

You're probably right

i wont believe it until i hear someone refused entry. imo, the intent of this is that they wont allow massive lens' and full on movie productions unless you have credentials.

Really? Why? Why is a 300mm so much 'worse' than a 50mm?

think about it logically for a second, even if by some chance they ARE complete and utter morons, (ie: run by the NSW govt), what are they gonna do search every damn person in the joint [/quote]

I guess they will do bag searches of people going in - just like they do at every event (I assume).

pat, if you turn up and get thrown out, i apologise in advance.

Is this at me? If so, I have no intention of going, so no apology necessary.

sirhc55 wrote:

Rooz wrote:yeah like i said before daniel, its impossible to enforce. i wouldnt worry about it. i suppose if you turn up with a D3 and a 300/2.8 you may get the 3rd degree but otherwise i doubt this is a big deal.

Morons can enforce what they like and let’s face it, most of the enforcers are morons

And that, I'm afraid, is where the problem lies.

I sent an email off to John Stanley at 2UE yesterday. His staff called the RAS, and the answer they gave him was that you will be permitted to take cameras in, but you won't be permitted to take photos of a commercial nature, nor will you be able to make a nuisance of yourself, etc etc. They gave the politically correct answer.

They also mentioned the term "professional cameras". What in the world is a professional camera?

That's not good enough for me, for precisely the reason that Chris has mentioned.

If their intent is to permit the entry of cameras, then the Ts&Cs should say that.

They do not.

THAT is the problem.

Reschsmooth wrote:Really? Why? Why is a 300mm so much 'worse' than a 50mm?

never really thought about it. its just common practice. most events i;ve been to seem to have around 200mm as your max focal length for dslrs. maybe its size, maybe copyright, maybe intimidating chicks with an S3. i dunno.

I guess they will do bag searches of people going in - just like they do at every event (I assume).

and like i said...do a bag search for what ? every single piece of technology that can record an image ? gonna do full pat downs and body searhces aswell ? where are they gonna store all these things ? can you imagine the wiat and the queue times ? whos gonna be able to stop the moms and dads and grandmas ? not gonna happen mate.

Is this at me? If so, I have no intention of going, so no apology necessary.

sorry, lol i thought you seaid you were going !

I suspect the clause is there for "after the fact" type stuff rather than actually preventing someone from bringing a camera in. For example, if someone is being a nuisance with their camera, they can be grabbed and the clause used.

My understanding of the 200mm lens limit is along the lines of what the PTB believe could be used to get a good shot. e.g. if you were at the Rugby, how good a shot could you get with a 50mm lens versus a 400mm lens? Certainly, you could take a nice scenery shot with a 50mm lens, but it isn't going to show any action. Whether 200mm is the right cut-off is another matter. I'm sure some people could get some great shots with a 200mm lens, especially on a crop camera.

I finally got a reply from someone at the RAS as follows:

Please be assured it is not our intention for amateur photographers to
be restricted from taking photos around the Showground during the Sydney
Royal Easter Show.

I have advice from our Legal department that amateur photographers are
free to take photos at the Show, providing that:-

1) the photographer is not causing annoyance or inconvenience to other
show patrons;

2) that the photos subject is not one detailed in the Summary Offences
Act 1988 (NSW) ;

3) the subjects have given their consent (if under 18 then their parents
consent); and

4) that the photos are not to be sold for commercial gain.

For further reading, please refer to a publication called 'Street
Photographers Rights' - information published by the Arts Law Centre of
Australia in conjunction with the Federal Government. It covers many
issues that may be relevant to amateur photographers.

I hope this clears up any misunderstandings.

Unfortunately any power hungry person with a flouro vest that doesn't like the way you look will wave a copy of the T & C in your face and try to take your camera off you. When you resist the nearest policeman will arrest you for an affray.
Anyone seen Anger Management at the movies, it's not so far from the truth. Also any parent who assumes that you might possibly inadvertently include their children in the tiniest corner of a photo will scream peadophile and holler for the nearest policeman.

I guess it's the definition of an 'Amateur Photographer' that is open to interpretation. Even though I don't shoot professionally any more, when I try to walk through the gate with a Nikon D3 hanging off the back of a Sigma 300-800 I wouldn't even get in. I would probably get arrested as a potential terrorist (everyone knows that terrorists always use big obvious camera's).
You should also be considered professional with a medium format camera but it has been my observation that only people with digital camera's and fast lenses get targeted.

You need at least a 400mm at the wood chop to get anything decent. It will probably be one of the last few years that David and Stephen Foster compete together with a chance to take out the titles.

If you go for a walk through any museum, most of the photo's have been donated by amateur photographers or their families.

Oh, and by the way, don't talk to anyone who may be a outlaw bikie as you may get arrested too. Will this one day be the case for camera clubs when the government decides that some member took an embarrassing photo of a politician.

Some interesting reading here.
http://www.4020.net/words/photorights.php

ATJ wrote:I suspect the clause is there for "after the fact" type stuff rather than actually preventing someone from bringing a camera in. For example, if someone is being a nuisance with their camera, they can be grabbed and the clause used.

My understanding of the 200mm lens limit is along the lines of what the PTB believe could be used to get a good shot. e.g. if you were at the Rugby, how good a shot could you get with a 50mm lens versus a 400mm lens? Certainly, you could take a nice scenery shot with a 50mm lens, but it isn't going to show any action. Whether 200mm is the right cut-off is another matter. I'm sure some people could get some great shots with a 200mm lens, especially on a crop camera.

The RAS have not specified any focal lengths but you can be sure that the Flouro-Nazi's will be all over you if your kit looks impressive.
I have a 500mm Cat that often gets ignored because it looks too small. It has recently got a lot more useful withe auto-iso function of some cameras.
At the end of the day it would spoil the family outing to be constantly harassed so it's probably better to spend a day at Sydney Harbour. OH NO, thats right the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority and the Opera House Rent-A-Cop will spoil that too.

Rooz wrote:never really thought about it. its just common practice. most events i;ve been to seem to have around 200mm as your max focal length for dslrs. maybe its size, maybe copyright, maybe intimidating chicks with an S3. i dunno.

I can see the relevance of lens size at events such as sport or performances where there is a specific gaggle of press photographers who have paid (or their agencies have paid) for the right to be there - this is not my area of expertise. At the RAS, I would assume that a person may take photos of exhibits with a wider lens for 'commercial purposes'.

and like i said...do a bag search for what ? every single piece of technology that can record an image ? gonna do full pat downs and body searhces aswell ? where are they gonna store all these things ? can you imagine the wiat and the queue times ? whos gonna be able to stop the moms and dads and grandmas ? not gonna happen mate.

No, but as Gary said, they will be able to discriminate against those with "professional cameras" and use the T&C as their defence. For what reason?

Is this at me? If so, I have no intention of going, so no apology necessary.

sorry, lol i thought you seaid you were going !

No, I was being deliberately vague (or smart-arsish to be precise ) - I said it wouldn't change my intention to go, of which there was none.

Listen, at the end of the day, your arguments about the practice of this will probably be correct, I just yell into my weetbix about the potential implications of these rules, whilst acknowledging that it is their event and they can impose whatever rules they want.

Rikphoto wrote:The RAS have not specified any focal lengths but you can be sure that the Flouro-Nazi's will be all over you if your kit looks impressive.

My comments were not specific to RAS but rather to the general question that was posed about a 200mm limit.

gstark wrote:

sirhc55 wrote:

Rooz wrote:yeah like i said before daniel, its impossible to enforce. i wouldnt worry about it. i suppose if you turn up with a D3 and a 300/2.8 you may get the 3rd degree but otherwise i doubt this is a big deal.

Morons can enforce what they like and let’s face it, most of the enforcers are morons

And that, I'm afraid, is where the problem lies.

I sent an email off to John Stanley at 2UE yesterday. His staff called the RAS, and the answer they gave him was that you will be permitted to take cameras in, but you won't be permitted to take photos of a commercial nature, nor will you be able to make a nuisance of yourself, etc etc. They gave the politically correct answer.

They also mentioned the term "professional cameras". What in the world is a professional camera?

That's not good enough for me, for precisely the reason that Chris has mentioned.

If their intent is to permit the entry of cameras, then the Ts&Cs should say that.

They do not.

THAT is the problem.

I agree Gary, THAT is the problem. If I take a large prime or zoom on a monopod that takes up much less room than the average pram or stroller I am shuffled out of any event. Even at the free flight Bird Show at Taronga Zoo I have been photographed by staff for some unknown reason. As a keen amateur I want to take the best photo's I can.

i sent this email off to them...
http://www.eastershow.com.au/contact/index.html

"Dear sir,
I notice that you have banned cameras from the Easter Show this year. As an amateur photographer I am wondering if this is going to be a blanket ban on all cameras including compact point and shoot and mobile phones ?

Your site states that you will be videoing and photographing the general public and can use these images in any way you see fit so that should cover anyone taking pics in the showgrounds should it not?

I am curious how your staff will be searching people for their cameras at the entry points to ensure compliance? Should I expect to be put through a metal scan and physical security inspection of my person and bags on entry ?


May I ask what are your concerns about cameras at the show? Given that both state and federal laws allow photography in any public area including any area that may be accessed by the general public it does seem strange to me.

I am more than happy to comply with a no camera policy as long as it is comprehensive and I can report anyone using a camera phone or camera and have them immediately removed when they are reported to a security person.

Shane Gerrish"

looks like we have had a partial win...

original rules...
http://www.eastershow.com.au/legal/Cond ... ground.pdf

the new rules...
http://www.eastershow.com.au/documents/ ... 7apr09.pdf

Big Red wrote:looks like we have had a partial win...

I think that's a pretty comprehensive win.

That is a much more reasonable, and workable, policy.

Well done, all.

And who thought bitching and moaning was just for fun?

Nice!

It would have been their loss anyway.

Condition #3 could be difficult to enforce

Extract from the below url:
http://www.eastershow.com.au/documents/ConditionsofEntry2009v27apr09.pdf

3) the subjects have given their consent (if under 18 then their parents consent);
and

This is not a requirement for street photographers as per the the Arts Law Website.
http://www.artslaw.com.au/LegalInformation/StreetPhotographersRights.asp
If they do allow photography at the event the above restrictions are really the only constraints on a photographer. RAS would have to use the nuisance rule to eject the photographer.

In fact provided that the photograph does not breach the summary offences act you could even sell prints of the person provided that the conditions for moral and non-commercial use etc. are observed

I have several photo's of Willie G Davidson (son of Harley Davidson Founder) that I could probably sell as long as I didn't use them to sell something else. If I did sell a print the most that they could do is to threaten legal action to prevent me selling any more prints by making it too expensive to bother. As an aside when I took the portraits of Willie G. his over-zealous minder tried to eject me from the event until Willie G. noticed what was going on and told the security guard to let me continue shooting.

In closing I would also mention the final note in the conditions above is that the RAS can make up any rules on a whim. So it may seem to be a win but to me it is still smoke and mirrors.

Rikphoto wrote: the RAS can make up any rules on a whim.

'twas always thusly.

But we have moved from a situation where one's camera would have been confiscated upon entry, to one where they clearly state that photography is permitted, subject to certain conditions being met.

While some of those conditions may be difficult to enforce, I believe that we have moved to a place where reason has prevailed.

On with the show!

nice work guys, and a definite win.

I have to laugh though - it reminds me of when they got upset at ACER Arena with my D70 and its 70-300G lens. The bouncer wanted me out as he said I was a professional !!! I argued the point aggressively (but not physically) and got a concession of changing lens to the 16-85mm which was much less professional...

fancy calling the 70-300 a pro lense - i couldnt even give that away !!

scott s wrote:nice work guys, and a definite win.

I have to laugh though - it reminds me of when they got upset at ACER Arena with my D70 and its 70-300G lens. The bouncer wanted me out as he said I was a professional !!! I argued the point aggressively (but not physically) and got a concession of changing lens to the 16-85mm which was much less professional...

fancy calling the 70-300 a pro lense - i couldnt even give that away !!

Funny that I had no problems getting my D300 + a borrowed 70-300mm VR into Origin I last year, but when I tried to get my D300 and a borrowed Tokina 80-400 into Origin III I was held back by security until they eventually realised that they could not ensure the safety of my gear so they let me in, and sitting right behind me two rows back was a guy with a 1D and a MASSIVE BIGMA...

For the record the 70-300VR is a much nicer lens, even with the 100mm disadvantage.