Picture taking at Events - discussion - Page 3

I'm with Molly on this, when I go to a show I always take my camera. I take pictures of my own dogs or if someone asks I will capture some of their dogs. I also like to take the pictures to learn how to use all the features on my camera (it's not point and click anymore on these new camera's). Yes I could always take some out in parks and such but you can only take pictures of dogs in motion at club training or at dog shows. Afterall I didn't pay $1,000.00 on a camera (purchased specifically for the dogs)  just to be told I can't take pictures of my own dogs. So far I have never had any problems or had anyone come and tell me "No Picture Taking".

Debbie

BabyIndy,

Here is my point.  If a club or Judge doesn't want pictures taken then IMHO it would be their responsibility to post NO Pictures.  At most events I have attended the people running the event are busy and it is just a bother to have people trying to track down someone to ASK if they can take pictures or not. 

If you are allowing people on to come on Private Property then it becomes less private and more open to the public, so some of the rules change there.

schHbabe:

because every once in a while some doofus will post an ad touting puppies, stud fees, or training skills, etc that are clearly not merited. In such rare cases I will call out the dog handler and remind him/her of the OTHER photos that I have on hand

If I was selling a dog, I'd only post the BEST picture of them.  Who made you the "policeman "of someone else's advertising?   Holy cow, how small minded and mean spirited.   That's ridiculous - it isn't your job to ensure others post bad photos of their dogs. 

animules:

yup.  Private place, private function, need permission. 

Molly, I agree. If the taking of photographs is not allowed, then there must be a sign clearly proclaiming this rule in order to avoid any confusion. For simplicity it can be at the table near the sign-in sheet. To me it matters not if it is a "world class" event or a club trial/practice.
 
But there is the flip side. People who are taking pictures can be distracting; especially if they are moving to a position for that "money shot" while a dog is working and causing distraction. Or if they use a flash for their camera and distract the dog/helper/handler/judge. That is where good judgement and manners must prevail. If people from outside the club are allowed to enter and not allowed to take photographs, then this should be mentioned as they enter the venue.

I have never seen a sign proclaiming "No Photographs" at a club trial or practice, but if I did I would silently ask why but would choose to obey the rule while I was there. But, such a practice would make me extremely suspicious and force me to discreetly make a lot of notes - just my nature. Most venues; dog sport or otherwise;  that do not allow photography either have an agreement with a professional photographer or have attendees whose whereabouts for certain times and days need not be known. Or perhaps there is something else to hide.

It is a schutzhund outing for Pete's sake - not a get-together at the MC clubhouse!

Best Regards,
Bob-O

WiscTiger,

Having guests on private property in no way makes it less private property or a public place.  Guests need to have manners. At least that is what I was taught as a child.

Let me chime in here. Molly, At the 2002(?) North American in Seattle the host club prohibited ANY videotaping. In fact, Laura Sanborn was approached by the event chair (?) in the stands, as she was filming her husband on the field, and was ordered to stop. The club did have an "official videographer," but, by all accounts what film was taken was poor and frankly, I don't know that anyone got any DVDs,other than the rough cut Laura was able to get. Some clubs DO have a rule against videotaping or photographing the event. One SV judge was taped years ago and, although a judge's decision is final, the SV took exception to what was on that tape and the judge was suspended for a while. Some people object to certain individuals taking photos of private club training on private property because such individuals have turned around and used photos they took without permission or knowledge to make money. I have had people make money off photos they took of my dog that won them prize money, payment for a foreign schutzhund mag cover and t-shirts that sold.

Well that is the problem with society today, most people don't have manners.

There is a difference in having "Guests", guest are people you invite.  If you allow people to just show up, people you don't know then it becomes more of a public event on Private property and isn't a Private event on Private property.  A lot of events are held on private property.  The event or club needs to set the rules.

Mystere, in your case of some one selling the pictures they were dead wrong.  Yes they had a right to take them for their own viewing.  Yes the person who takes the picture holds the copyright, BUT once they publish it or sell it without getting consent - Model release they are in violation of the copyright laws, unless it was a photographer hired by the club then it depends on how the contract is written.

Val

As I said, the instances I referenced were entirely private and it was club members doing the unpermitted photography they then used for profit.