Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

So people who take pictures should pay - but people sightseeing or walking dogs shouldn't? Dogs and kids do more damage than a photographer.

In the Uk we have people paid to maintain parks and their wages - as the councils - come from the mega taxes we have to pay.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Ran across this a couple of years ago doing some engagement shots for a friend at no charge. According to the regs, if you are doing portraits in the historic area either free or for pay, you are considered a pro and must have a permit. One story was some years back a commercial company brought in a truck loaded with props including costumes and furniture which include a couch, lights, etc. As story goes, along with complaints from other wedding photographers there, city decided impact to land was beyond normal, and a permit fee soon followed. This particular park is very popular for engagement and wedding shots. In my opinion the permit fee was justified in this particular case.

stan0301 Loc: Colorado

People make rules--people can change rules--use your ballot box, and this might be a good time--in the NSA professes a right to see and record everything you do (probably including your underwear size) the people are pretty fed up and hence getting governmental interference out of each of our lives might attract followers--the guide line should probably be movies--real movies and any project involving more than 3 "doers"
Stan

Dick Z. Loc: Downers Grove IL

For the last part of your question:

What I know of my many years of picture taking is: anyone making at least half of his income on photography is classed as a professional no matter how good or bad at picture taking they may be. I class my self as a amateur, however when I was a photographer for 19 months in the US army in the signal corp , I was a professional. You may get the best answer if you Google it.

:) :-)

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

It's been interpreted as anyone with more than just a camera. No tripods, no flash/strobes/reflectors. Or makes *any* money off the shoot.

clh3RD

I was up in the headwaters of the Pecos River when I stopped to chat with a New Mexico game warden. After a while he mentioned that the fee for photographing in the river canyon was $5 per day. He wasn't pushy about it and left it up to me to pay the fee, which I did each day I was there. It is not unreasonable, in my opinion.

XKaliber

A few months ago there was a contest topic here on UHH centered around museums and what could be photographed therein.

There is a wonderful small museum in Springville, Utah I try to visit a couple of times each year and I uploaded one of my captured images from there for the contest. I used one camera, one lens, and a tripod. I was also only interested in capturing an acceptable image of ONE exhibit.

Although it is free to visit the entire museum and anything within the confines of all three floors of exhibits, I was approached by the museum curator and asked to pay a fee for taking pictures. Even though I had enquired at the front entrance and was told by the person at the front desk it would be ok for me to go photograph the exhibit in question, the curator wanted to extract a fee from me. It was only after I explained it was for uploading to a photography forum and NOT for personal gain that I was allowed to leave without forking over a hefty fee.

Dick Z. Loc: Downers Grove IL

from Wikipedia

Photographer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A photographer (the Greek φῶς (phos), meaning "light", and γραφή (graphê), meaning "drawing, writing", together meaning "drawing with light")[1] is a person who takes photographs. A professional photographer uses photography to earn money; amateur photographers take photographs for pleasure and to record an event, emotion, place, or person.

A professional photographer may be an employee, for example of a newspaper, or may contract to cover a particular event such as a wedding or graduation, or to illustrate an advertisement. Others, including paparazzi and fine art photographers, are freelancers, first making a picture and then offering it for sale or display. Some workers, such as policemen, estate agents, journalists and scientists, make photographs as part of other work. Photographers who produce moving rather than still pictures are often called cinematographers, videographers or camera operators, depending on the commercial context.

Underwaterant

[quote=Wall-E]Amateur stops at P&S and phone cameras.
MAYBE a bridge.

The major cities have done this for a long time.
If you make money doing it, we need our cut.

And, if you think that's bad, there are parks where you need the permit whether you're a pro or not.
http://www.glendaleaz.com/ParksandRecreation/SRPHAphotopermit.cfm

I wonder if they ask others to pick up
their rubbish.
Obviously we litter and no one else.

amehta Loc: Boston

Most parks do have signs asking people to pick up their litter. Having it in this condition list means that they can revoke the permit if the person leaves the place a mess. And they're even implying that it's okay to move signs for photographs, just put them back.

Ralloh Loc: Ohio

So using a tripod makes you a pro? It looks like their definition of a pro is mighty broad. Besides, how would they know you are doing it for money? That's a huge assumption and is making you guilty until proven innocent. Welcome to the new and fundamentally changed America.

Underwaterant

But they don't have other visitors sign
to adhering to picking up litter.
They should just state
"Adhere to signposted rules and conditions
at entry" areas.

PlsFStopIt Loc: Kansas City

My photography club operates out of the Kansas city area of which Overland Park is a suburb. We were concerned about this and our free use of local parks in O.P. We did email the mayor and got this response from the mayor office of Overland Park KS

Mayor Carl Gerlach asked that I respond. He is out of town on a private business trip.

The most common misconception we have learned about is (as an example): "If I have a tripod with a camera will I be considered a professional and, therefore, required to pay a fee or acquire a five-day permit for city parks?"

The resolution states that commercial and professional photographers are those that take pictures for a fee or intend to sell the photo. Clearly, the equipment alone does not indicate a photographer’s status. Staff members may ask if the photos being taken are for personal or professional use.

The city wants to encourage amateur photographers, including families, to use public parks and amenities.

We merely require that amateur photographers, and others taking personal photos, to be courteous of others who want to use the amenity and not restrict or limit its use for others.

The link above will take you to the resolution outlining the City Council's intent with regard to fees as applied to commercial or professional photographers.

Understanding this issue has caused confusion, and that there is misinformation being distributed somewhere, I am glad to assist with getting answers to questions, as well as providing the most accurate information.

Let me know if you have any other questions. Anything we can do and that you can assist with in disseminating information to photographers is appreciated.

Thanks


We are still concerned because they just don't get it. Just because a few have abused this privilege, it does do right to abuse all

dickwilber Loc: Indiana (currently)

Some years back a similar policy was announced by the National Park System. Depending on the park and the particular ranger you encountered it was seldom enforced against individuals. If, however, you showed up with a film crew with all the attendant equipment, they were sure to jump all over you. Or if you made a pest of yourself, blocking access to areas with your tripod, etc; demanded others get out of your picture; were unsafe; or invaded restricted areas, you would probably (and should) be hassled and forced to obtain the requisite permits and abide by every rule they can find. I have heard of individual or small photographer groups being hassled, but believe it is pretty rare.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Well said!

I'm sure there are exceptions, but every park ranger I've met has displayed a very reasonable attitude toward park guests' activities.