Sean Reiser
An Open Letter Regarding NYC's Proposed Changes To Permit Requirements for Photography
July 23rd, 2007 Edit4 8/1/2007 - There is a protest in Union square tomorrow 8/2/2007 from 11:30 AM til 2PM. Look here for more info.
Edit3: Followup article here (http://seanreiser.com/node/112)
Edit2: 7/30/2007 Obviously I cut and paste my rough draft in here (I know I corrected the affect / effect thing before sending the final draft). When I get home I'll replace it with the final draft (there were some other changes in there I want to include).
Edit: 7/30/2007 I have made this sticky for the rest of the week to bring attention to the issue.
Recently, the Mayor's Office of Film and Broadcasting proposed new rules regarding photographers. The proposed rules would require a permit for "activity involving a tripod and a crew of 5 or more people at one site for 10 minutes or more" (the 10 minutes include the time to set up the tripod) or or the same activity among two people at a single site for more than 30 minutes. The permit process also requires the photographer to carry 1 million dollars in liability insurance. Although the city believes that this is rare for "recreational" photographers, most amateurs I know would require a permit a good percentage of the time.
Sources:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/film/html/news/080107_proposed_permit_rules.shtml http://gothamist.com/2007/06/29/city_proposes_l.php
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/nyregion/29camera.html?ex=1185336000&e...
I know this has been floating around for a while. I have intentionally held back on this, knowing that the cutoff for feed back was August 3, 2007. If you know about this and was planning on writing, this is a friendly reminder. If you are new to this, get involved. Write Katherine Oliver, Commissioner, Mayor's Office of Film and Broadcasting here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mailfilmcom.html tell her your personal stories where this will effect you. Here is the letter that I am posting on this subject.
An Open Letter To Katherine Oliver, Commissioner, Mayor's Office of Film and Broadcasting, Regarding The Proposed Changes To Permit Requirements for Photography
Ms. Oliver:
I am writing in reference to the proposed changes to permit requirements for photography on public property. The proposed rules, as I understand them, would require a permit for "activity involving a tripod and a crew of 5 or more people at one site for 10 minutes or more" (the 10 minutes include the time to set up the tripod) or or the same activity among two people at a single site for more than 30 minutes. The permit process also requires the photographer to carry 1 million dollars in liability insurance.
I understand that it is important for the city to draw a line between amateur and professional photographers. I have often been mistaken for a "professional" solely because I use a low-end SLR camera. However this rule does little to make that separation and effects a good number of New Yorkers (as well as tourists). Let me tell you some of the ways this will affect me.
About once or twice a month, myself and a few friends will get together, walk through the Central Park and photograph the sights. We often wind up taking photos of some of the musicians and sporting events that one runs across in the park, sometimes spending up to an hour shooting these spontaneous events.
I am involved with a number of groups through the photography / social networking website flickr (http://www.flickr.com). Often we'll get together to shoot areas and events in the city. Now these informal gatherings will require permits and insurance, something that will probably limit participation.
My family has a tradition. Sometime in the fall, near my mother's birthday, we go out to a city park and take an annual family photo. As the family has grown, this has become more of a production (each of my brother's has a family of his own, the grandchildren all get individual pictures taken, etc). Of course, as I want to be in some of the photos there is a tripod involved.
I understand that none of this is what you intended when this rule was proposed; however the rule as written effects each of these activities. Even if you do not intend to enforce this rule this way, there's no guarantee that future administrations won't enforce it this way. I implore you to take another look at this rule and find a way so that it doesn't affect the amateur photographers.
I will be posting a copy of this letter on my website, http://www.seanreiser.com
Thank You for Your Time,
Sean P Reiser
8/1/2007 - There is a protest in Union square tomorrow 8/2/2007 from 11:30 AM til 2PM. Look here for more info.
Sean Reiser, 40, is a developer, technologist, and amateur photographer. Sean has spent the past 20 years as a programmer, system architect and development manager. He is a life long New York resident.
Sean currently serves as the President and Chief Geek Officer of Repair Sense, Inc.. Please go to that site with any professional inquiries.
Sean can be found using a number of social networks. These are the ones he's most active on:
- I think you have to contain a
16 hours 35 min ago - Well said, sir.
8 weeks 6 days ago - Thank you for the scripts!
26 weeks 21 hours ago - Sean, I couldn't agree more!
26 weeks 1 day ago - Just a quick follow-up: the
26 weeks 6 days ago - Awesome. Thanks!
26 weeks 6 days ago - If you have the development
26 weeks 6 days ago - Thanks for this snippet - it
26 weeks 6 days ago - well, I think partial SSNs
26 weeks 6 days ago - Check out
27 weeks 5 days ago
- iSeanReiser (198) - Geek Blog
- The Early Reiser (32) - Mainstream Blog
- Livejournal (171) - Old Livejournal Blog
- Great Existence (149) - Photo of the Day
- Photosets (135) - Photos on Flickr
- January 2010 (2)
- September 2009 (1)
- August 2009 (30)
- July 2009 (55)
- June 2009 (49)
Tue, 2010-03-09 13:14
seanreiser tweeted "definitely not the best news in the world, but not the worst news either. Think I'll lay down for bit and then work out what's next" 1:14pm#- seanreiser tweeted "up early for some medical tests. uggh..." 6:00am#
Mon, 2010-03-08 10:13
- seanreiser tweeted "I've been clean shaven for 2 weeks which is the longest I've been clean shaven since high school" 10:13am#
- seanreiser tweeted "@meganhibner for the same reason i am.. stupidity" 5:32am#
Mon, 2010-03-08 01:49
- seanreiser tweeted "@notgoth007 yup midshipman alonzo frame and george from being human" 1:49am#
- seanreiser tweeted "@penguininja good that's what RTD was going for" 1:47am#
- seanreiser tweeted "@Scobleizer I know I'm in the minority, but I don't think of her as a film actress, if she isn't in the Emmy memorial I'd be upset" 12:11am#
- seanreiser tweeted "I just ousted Tom Hanks as Governor of the Academy" 11:59pm#
- seanreiser tweeted "I wonder if a Klingon Language version of Shakespeare can win best Foreign Language film" 11:18pm#
- seanreiser tweeted "so Quentin spends all his money on his productions and none on a comb" 11:17pm#
Heh, there's a really easy way to get around this one,
just get a camera mount with 4 legs. It's not a tripod, its a quadrapod!
Or when you don't want to be in the pictures, use a monopod...
I just used firefox with block pop-ups on to try and enter my complaint at http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mailfilmcom.html and not only did the "type these letters to prove you're not a robot" picture not show up, but upon hitting submit I was taken to blank page.
Yeah, they really want to hear what you have to say.
Interesting, I didn't have any issues. Perhaps it's the /. effect, one degree removed? Although it would be rather ironic if NYC's servers had issues and my shared hosted account didn't (although it's been a little slower).
I also sent a copy in the mail (to the Mayor's Office as well as Ms. Oliver's).
I think your comment was well written and insightful; but here is the problem as I see it:
Some may disagree, but it is clear to me (and to others I have spoken with) that the intent of this law is likely political. The intent is to make it difficult for people to take pictures that capture things which may be controversial or might show something that that powers that be don't want captured for posterity; the reason being that pictures truly are worth 1000 words; even more because words can be disbelieved or denied, pictures really can't (at least not as easily).
Often (and sometimes without setting out to) people end up capturing sbuses of position, corporate malfeasance, police brutality, public protests - Once you have a good picture of something that shouldn't be there, or should not be occurring, it is very difficult for those it affects to put a spin on it.....and, of course - it's about money.
"Often (and sometimes without setting out to) people end up capturing sbuses of position, corporate malfeasance, police brutality, public protests - Once you have a good picture of something that shouldn't be there," With a tripod? Really? I think people are more likely to capture such things with a cell phone. I don't think there is anything at all political about this. Certainly it is a contraction of yet another freedom or liberty and perhaps the city could make an exception for political shutterbugging or time lapse studies of all the wage slaves killing themselves to live. But really I just think the city is trying to get a bigger piece of the action. I can't fault them for that. I also can't fault professionals (who in my mind are the only ones who will actually be impacted by this) for doing all they can to try to stop it. There is only so much action to go around. My suggestions: Use the term "camera/lens support system weighing more than 4 lbs" instead of tripod and give the amateurs/tourists/guerrilla shooters 15 minutes from discovery to get their shot before penalties are applicable. Unfortunately liability and liability insurance is just a part of modern life. If I am orchestrating a simple photo shoot for a personal art project and everyone is working for free and one of my models falls down a flight of stairs and breaks his or her neck is the city more liable than I am?
I agree with everything you're saying. However writing a letter saying those things would probably be negative. You get filed into the "wacky ACLU letter" folder that all politicians have.
By taking the "I'm just a regular guy who wants to take pictures of his friends and family" approach I show that this issue impacts a good deal of NYers and tourists.
How can you condone something so blatantly 1984? How about a million dollar insurance for walking down the street, or reading a paper, or using a mobile phone? Those are all VERY dangerous things, and who knows?
It is one thing to inconvenience others with a huge crew that converts the library steps to the hanging gardens of Babylon for a photo shoot - sure, make them get a permit. But this is depressing. It is brandishing govermental power with no real reason. It is about exerting control where none is required. You can't even take a picture of your own political institutions... WTF?
This day and age, I feel so good living in free Europe. Growing up in the eastern part, we had "idealist" views about how free people in the US used to be. It feels like absurd humour every time the US and freedom are mentioned together nowdays. It is a complete farce, and it seems like only the Americans fail to see it.
Do something about it now, or China will soon feel like a nice liberal place to you.
I wrote this to Ms. Oliver:
I am writing in reference to the proposed changes to permit requirements for photography on "public" property. I finally was able to visit NYC for the first time last December. I took many photos and short videos as a tourist of the wonders of the Big Apple. I would like to visit again. I know the proposed new rules shouldn't effect me, but we all know the slippery-slope effect. The rules seem to be very ambiguous and over-reaching. Have you seen the new Harry Potter by chance Ms. Umbridge? Sorry I mean Ms. Oliver. I kid, but I do see something being done for the supposed good in a bad way. Sincerely, (name removed), NYC Fan.
My comments appeared to have gone through. Tough to get your point across in 150 words or less.
located here http://seanreiser.com/node/112
This new law is against freedom of expression. I'm an individual with the love of photography, not a reach mogul, and I like to go out with other fellow photographers and photograph the city, with the new law I would not be allowed to do that because I can't afford fees and insurance.
Some may disagree, but it is clear to me (and to others I have spoken with) that the intent of this law is likely political. The intent is to make it difficult for people to take pictures that capture things which may be controversial or might show something that that powers that be don't want captured for posterity; the reason being that pictures truly are worth 1000 words; even more because words can be disbelieved or denied, pictures really can't (at least not as easily).
I am horrified that NY is thinking of bringing in such harsh requirements for photographers.
If you want to take some night photographs you will require a tripod and considerably longer than ten minutes more like 40 - 60 minutes.
Fine have people register but $1,000,000 thats just insane and is going to kill photography in NY for anyone other than the uber rich.
Glad I live in Europe. If this happened here in Ireland I would be protesting on the streets along with everyone else.
Jaqian (Ireland)
If this goes into effect, a legal challenge will have to be made to it. First there has to be a "setup" of the authorities.
It can't be "planned" since that would be "a crew of 5" or "2 or more people" (see proposed rules). What I envision is this: Many, many, shutterbugs gather in one spot for a photoshoot; fall foliage, Statute of Liberty at dusk, whatever. All bring tripods. All stay for longer than 30 minutes. When the police show up to issue tickets, your defense is that "I'm here alone, and therefore no subject to the law."
Since they will most likely fail to believe you, multiple tickets issued, and a class action suit can commence. Freedom of association, freedom of assembly, etc.
The result will be a law that is either thrown out or unenforceable.
I'm pretty sure that they will be enforcing the rule selectively. Someone at the protest today pointed out that the police aren't enforcing the parade rule yet either. I suspect they're waiting for some big (a la the RNC) to enforce it.
Another Test
I think you have to contain a sort of health insurance quotes or insurance in the session.