Jump to content

Monopods are Prohibited


bryan_quattlebaum

Recommended Posts

I have been to the Monterey Aquarium a number of times. A monopod would never have been an issue any of the those

times. It wasn't that crowded. I am sure that it is mostly due to laziness on the part of the owners. Ban anything that

might possibly cause a problem under the most inconceivable of circumstance. It doesn't matter if it reduces the value

of the experience to the person attending, so long as it makes the lawyers happy.

 

I think it is sad that places are pushing serious photographers out. I think the motivations are a bit spurious if not down

right suspicious (forced to buy official images). Of course a monopod could be used as a club, but it is just not a

serious issue. I am not aware of any gangs of monopod brandishing thugs canvassing the streets for unsuspecting victims. A camera could be used to beat someone, so should they ban cameras? How about heavy shoes? Those

little glass breaking hammers could easily fit in your pocket. What about pocket knives? Clearly, we must enter all

museums and, well, any public spaces completely naked... which would be amusing. Hey, it would probably make for a

good photo. Doh... no camera.

 

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If you haven't seen any crowds at the Monterey Aquarium, through multiple visits, then your experience has been unique.

You are making some unfounded comments here, there is NO movement or attitude at the Aquarium that is hostile toward

photographers. In fact, if you bothered to inquire, you'd find that they offer suggestions on getting good shots.

 

You're acting like some little kid that doesn't like following rules by coming in here an whining about them. Nobody is forcing

you to even go there, so if you don't like it, stay away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did contact the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Press Office, and Karen was good to get right back to me and explain their rationale for the "no camera support" policy. Here it is:

 

"Thank you for your inquiry. There are three reasons we prohibit the use of tripods and monopods:

 

 

 

1) Visitor safety. I agree monopods are easier to control than tripods, but we can’t make exceptions for monopods for the following two reasons.

 

2) Visitor access to exhibits. We’ve found that photographers using monopods and tripods often take up a prime spot in front of an exhibit and stay there a long time, regardless of how many people are around. We’re trying to be fair to the other visitors.

 

3) Proprietary issues. We prohibit private sales of images of our exhibits and animals, especially as stock images. We state on the visitor maps that people are welcome to take photos for their private use, but any commercial photography must be licensed and falls under location fees. With the advancement of digital cameras and camcorders, we are finding more and more people selling images taken here – a private business that receives no public funds – without a license. We find these regularly and contact the sites to remove the images, and take further action if needed. We’re a non-profit organization, and feel strongly that any sales of images should benefit our education and conservation research programs – whether they’re taken by our photographers or outside photographers under contract."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"more and more people selling images taken here – a private business that receives no public funds – without a license.

We find these regularly and contact the sites to remove the images, and take further action if needed."

 

I'm curious as to what this means. If I took a picture of a jellyfish at the Monterey Bay Aquarium and sold it as a stock

image they could force me to take it down? How could they distinguish it from one I took if say I were scuba diving?

Note: I am an amateur and have no interest in selling stock photos the preceding was just a "what if scenario".

 

Sort of reminds me of the Lone Cypress. You can photograph it but not sell the picture of the tree. Like all slippery

slopes where will it stop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's that about the Lone Cypress?

 

I think, like many others, that banning tripods and monopods in the aquarium is a safety issue. As stupid as the rule may be, if someone does trip and hurt him/herself, the aquarium may be sued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MBA has the right to control the usage of images shot within it confines. The reserve that right in published material and have for quite some time. At one time I knew one of their contract staff shooters, he had to share all rights with them. They allow you to shoot for your own use but not for stock.

 

I don't think it can get any simplier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is in fact a 501C so it is not able to make a profit. I don't like the no tripod rule either. But I have been there many times and I can tell you on an even moderatly crowded day a monopod or worse a tripod would be a real issue to free movement.

 

Now for my gripe!! Those freakin huge baby carriages that some numskulls use. These are the size of small SUV's and have a whole host of crap in them just to support a few kids. Does Jr and Suzie really need every toy in the box and 6 changes of clothes for every conceivable weather pattern?

 

Talk about a hazard to traffic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking more like the small little umbrella stroller I have that takes up about as much ground space as a somewhat overweight person, not the very large stroller I have that really does take up a huge amount of space (and my wife and I rarely use). Its rather tiring carrying a 20lb baby in your arms or on your back for several hours (on the back wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for the fact that my son likes to writhe around sometimes). I can understand it is hard to say ban large strollers and keep smaller ones, but heck airlines ban large carry-ons. Just set a size limit and say use a tapped off box on the floor to measure the stroller size, if it is bigger then the floor space, no go.

 

Only time strollers really bother me is when I see parents pushing around a stroller with say a 3 or 4 year old either in it or running around with the parent. Why the heck do they need a stroller once they hit about 2? They are certainly capable of walking around by then and maybe you shouldn't have the child out during their nap time if that is the rationale for having it along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ali,

 

Here is a excerpt from a 1990 NY Times article about the dispute over the image of the Lone Cypress.

 

 

 

 

"The tree in dispute is the Lone Cypress, a landmark on California's northern coast. For decades, tourists have paid a

fee to travel the private road known as the 17-Mile Drive to glimpse the famed Pebble Beach Golf Links and to pose for

photographs in front of the tree, one of a rare species native to this area, which stands in majestic beauty on a craggy

point of rock in the Pacific Ocean.

 

Besides the countless tourist snapshots, the tree has been photographed by Ansel Adams and Edward Weston and an

army of other commercial photographers. It has been captured in oils for canvases sold in dozens of art galleries in

neighboring Carmel. Merely to see a photograph or painting of it serves to place the viewer on this stunning stretch of

coastline between Monterey and Big Sur.

 

But now the Pebble Beach Company, which owns the property, is arguing that when people see a depiction of the Lone

Cypress, the association they make is not so much with the wild natural beauty of the area as with the company and its

resort complex here.

 

A drawing of the tree was registered as the company's trademark in 1919. Kerry C. Smith, a San Francisco lawyer who

represents the company, said the trademark protected not only the logo but also the tree itself.

 

Even though pictures of the tree have graced everything from postcards to hotel brochures for decades, the company

has begun warning photographers and galleries that it intends to control any depiction of the tree for commercial

purposes. ''The image of the tree has been trademarked by us,'' Mr. Smith said.

 

The issue recently came to light when Ed Young, a commercial photographer in Carmel, was denied permission to

photograph the tree for his business, which sells pictures of famous landmarks to advertising and corporate customers.

The company has warned Mr. Young and other photographers that they cannot even use existing pictures of the tree for

commercial purposes.

 

''It's like the Government saying no more photos of the Grand Canyon,'' Mr. Young said. The company, which allows

tourists to take snapshots of the tree, makes extensive use of its logo bearing a representation of the Lone Cypress on

everything from its brochures to its golf carts. And the logo is featured on a huge variety of products available for

purchase at its resorts."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting how many folks got upset about your looking for a legal workaround. There's nothing wrong with

that, as long as it's 'legal', respects the venue's wishes, and doesn't interfere with others' enjoyment of the

aquarium. Much better than sneaking in a monopod or other device to serve as one, like faking a disability and

resting the camera on a crutch.

 

One thing occurred to me...have you tried just asking an aquarium official for permission? Some places I've gone

have given it, often during off-hours, just for the asking. In August, weather permitting, I'll be shooting at

night from atop a swinging 'turntable' railroad bridge over a bay.

 

Here's what I do:

 

I try to get in to see a venue official with decision-making authority, explain my dedication to photography, and

ask if there's an acceptable way to get the images I want. In my case, I make it clear I intend no commercial

use, and that sometimes helps things.

 

Sometimes it takes more...like making an appointment to see the right person, and then coming back later to talk

to that person. Sometimes a letter sent in advance does the trick. Reference letter(s) can work wonders (imagine

having one from, say, a current equivalent of Jacques Cousteau). I always make certain to offer to share the

images with the official, either for their personal use or however they wish to use them. Bring a few sample

images, and offer to show them to the person.

 

Of course, be friendly and professional, and leave any attitude of arrogance or ego in the trunk of your car.

Whatever you do, DON'T debate the issue. Be prepared to graciously accept an answer of 'no'. Always be sure to

thank the person for their time. It helps to be open to understanding that there are reasons behind their rules,

remembering they usually have no obligation to explain it to you. At the very least, just nod your head and say

"Yes, I understand". Approach it from the standpoint of trying to understand and respect their policy (walk a

mile in their shoes, as it were). Sometimes it works, sometimes not. It IS amazing, though, what you can get if

you ask politely.

 

 

This is a good topic. Along with some other things, I've learned something useful...never though of stepping on a

string to steady the camera. Thanks to those that mentioned it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

''It's like the Government saying no more photos of the Grand Canyon,'' Mr. Young said. The company, which allows tourists to take

snapshots of the tree, makes extensive use of its logo bearing a representation of the Lone Cypress on everything from its brochures to

its golf carts. And the logo is featured on a huge variety of products available for purchase at its resorts."

 

That is pure spin, and Young knows it! The Grand Canyon is a National Park, and the Lone Cypress is private property.

 

Some photographers, amateur or pro, seem to think that they should be allowed special dispensation merely because they are

photographers! One issue, pointed out by the Aquarium is that many photogs set up shop with their gear for extended periods, blocking

the view and enjoyment of other Aquarium patrons. They act in complete indifference to others, as long as they are getting what they

want. That's plain rude, and why the Aquarium was forced to make rules concerning it. Then there's the safety issue, and if one has not

been there on a crowded day, then they just cannot understand what a danger tripods/monopods present.

 

A fast lens will really help in the Aquarium, and coupling that with faster ISOs will net good results. Patience is what really helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In getting back to the original poster, I will relate my own experience. I've inquired as to restrictions on tripods and monopods at several museums, including the very popular Udvar Hazy annex of the Air and Space museum here in the D.C. area. What I've found is that while this may be surprising to some it is possible to have the folks at these places accommodate requests to use either. My approach has been to show up without anything like a tripods or monopod and have a conversation with a guard -asking first about the restrictions and then after acknowledging them as valid, asking what the driving reason is for them. What I've been told invariably is that it has to do with interference with the volume of people and the potential hazard of them. Basically, from my experience it has to do with not wanting to inflict one person's desire to take a photo onto the rest of the visiting public's desire to see the exhibits.

 

What I do next is to agree that this makes sense, ask if there are any times when the museum is not crowded and ask if he thinks that if I were to show up at one of those times and ask if I could use one then that it might be okay *if it were in fact not crowded when I asked*. Note that I'm just asking if I could come back and ask nothing more. I found invariably that because I'm overtly acknowledging this person's authority I not only get agreement, but suggestions as to when to do it. Often I've had it suggested that I do so not only during one of those times (usually early morning during the week), but am told when he is there and then told to ask for him if I don't see him. If that doesn't happen, I will just ask whether or not he would be working and if I could ask for him.

 

I finish up by expressing my appreciation and stating flatly that I understand that if I come back there are no promises and if it can't be worked out I march back to my car and leave the offending object there without dissent.

 

The worst thing I've had happen is the I've found myself a "helper" while I'm trying to shoot who wants to point out some "interesting" shots. I just obliged and took a few shots as directed and tried to seem interested.

 

Note - I just saw D.B.'s response above this and see that it is generally the same idea. The rule is to be direct, polite, deferential and accept that one is making a request, not a demand.

 

By the way, this is an American thing. I've been in Germany in the Deutches Museum with full tripod without problem. In that case, I just did so while explicitly trying to avoid interfering with anyone's visit. And by that I do mean the I gave up on planting myself in the middle of high traffic areas. Instead, using walls, poles or balcony openings to set myself against in order to be "invisible" is the rule.

 

Good luck and happy shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" Basically, from my experience it has to do with not wanting to inflict

one person's desire to take a photo onto the rest of the visiting public's

desire to see the exhibits."

 

That is not always operative at the Monterey Aquarium. Many of the exhibits cannot be viewed from a distance, and in

fact are below waist level. When crowds block the exhibits, entirely, as in people 3-4 deep, surrounding an exhibit, then

one has to wait their turn at getting up close, in order to even see what's there. People are rubbing shoulders at many of

the exhibits. Some of the children are so excited as to be unruly, and this can go on from the minute the aquarium

opens, until closing time, if you go during the Summer, when the kids are out of school. There are times when it's not as

crowded as other times, and contacting the Aquarium will let one know the best times.

 

Personally, I would not take a toddler along, and expect to be able to enjoy all that Aquarium offers. Very young children

simply don't have the stamina to give adults all of the time required to take in all the Aquarium offers. Having raised 8

kids, and having several grandkids, I speak with some authority on the issue.

 

The Aquarium is a wonderful place to visit, but, it's a very popular attraction. Allowing plenty of time, and having an extra

helping of patience will enhance anyone's visit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would recommend using a "Walking Stick"... I have seen them for sale with camera connections but it might be

classified as a monopod if you buy one of those. So I would go to your local Outdoor Shop and see what they have.

Maybe they won't give you a hard time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Notre Dame, they considered you professional if you used a tripod, and would charge you a fee for a permit. They charged my friend because he leaned against a pillar.

 

Local Natural History Museum and the then associated Aquarium would grant you permission, for non commercial uses. As I worked photographing some of he exhibits in the Aquarium, I had no problem there.

 

At the Natural History Museum in Paris, no photos, but they offered to sell me a postcard, of a reproduction of a Placoderm, purchased from our Natural History Museum. I had sent all kinds of requests, on Geology Department Stationery, etc. and saw three different people, who said no.

 

You take what you can get. The Musee d'Orsay says no photos, but they do not say anything, and people snap away. Your milage will vary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of you have made some terrific and highly informative postings. Yes, by "legal" I meant exactly what D.B. Cooper so expertly worded -- an alternate technique that would satisfy all involved parties.

 

On a side note, I have shared your postings with the Monterey Bay Aquarium Press Office Staff. They have informed me that they are now considering hosting several "Photographers Only Events" that would happen after the Aquarium has officially closed (probably limited to non peak periods) throughout the year. We would have the full run of the place (with our equipment), but we would still have to honor the requirement to not use any images for commerical use.

 

If any of my colleagues would like to encourage the MBAQ to pursue this possibility, please go to their website and send an email to their Press Office/Media Relations!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll do that, even thought it might never benefit me personally. I think that it's important to get support for this so that it may

be available well into the future. Once something like this gets started, it would make it much easier for people to form

groups for periodical visits. Having the place to one's self, so to speak, is a fabulous idea!

 

I know a pro in Monterey who might carry some weight with the Aquarium, and I'll pass this info on to him. The more help

the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...