NYC Photo Permits

[marcie m]

I came across this headline today. I hope this doesn't spread to other cities. I

can't afford insurance like that.

 

Rules pressure shutterbugs in New York City:

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/ny-nypix315314273jul31,0,4071395.story?coll=ny-nynews-print

[nancy s.]

Well, I have been to NY a lot and taken a lot of pictures and spent a lot of money. Shot a couple of weddings there too.

 

Like the line says, "Guess I won't be doing that again.."

 

I guess NYC won't miss my tourism or my money or that of my clients. There are other cities.

[bobatkins]

Why would you need it? The rules exempt solo photographers for any need for a permit or insurance and only require a permit if you're in a group of two or more and shooting at one location for more than 30 minutes (or a group of 5 or more with a tripod shooting for more than 10 minutes).

 

Unless you are doing commercial photography on the street with models, assistants, lighting guys etc., you don't need a permit. If you are doing that, then getting a (free) permit doesn't sound unreasonable and you should have liability insurance anyway if you are doing commercial photography around people.

[victor_ho2]

Has anyone thought about the countless tourists who wander up and down the streets of Manhattan, through Central Park, the Bronx Zoo, and the Statue of Liberty to say nothing of the Empire State Building? There is no practical way to stop a tourist from shooting pictures. To do so would ruin NYC as a tourist destination. So lighten up already.

 

 

If you're doing business then you need a permit. The NYC police are busy enough. There will, I'm sure, be the odd person who will be hassled. Still the average visitor will not encounter problems. Post 9/11 there were some restrictions but none that affected the average citizen. Sensitivity and discretion are the order. I have never encountered the least amount of problems.

[belles]

We've done shoots in NY for brides. The permit is nothing, and as was said, it's free. As for the insurance, there are many venues that won't allow you on the grounds without $1 million in liability... so, for the pros, let it go - this won't affect you. It may even intimidate some of the soccer moms that are trying to charge $250 for weddings!

 

Now, on the political side of things - yeah, that's a whole 'nother story. So, if you're really upset about it, send a few bucks to the ACLU.

[vlad khavin]

Unless I am misunderstanding this, when they say that two people involved in the shoot can be at a location for at most 30 minutes, it means that the photographer (who is obviously involved) and the subject all count towards the 2 people.

 

While I agree that most pros will have the liability insurance, and can certainly apply for the permit if they plan to stay at the location for longer than 30 minutes (or 10 minutes if you have b&g, bm & mh and just the photog.) it's still a little bit of a radical move. These are restrictions that are, in my understanding, unprecedented.

 

The other thing to note is that the last time I read about this, there was a definition of what one location actually meant, which stated that one location was within 30 yards (I think this is accurate as of my last reading of it) of the starting point. So I guess that if you are REALLY troubled by it and can't / don't want to get a permit, you have a 31 yard walk ahead of you every 10 to 30 minutes.

 

I guess the only question I have is this; since the permit is applied for... could/would they ever deny it? Is it possible for me to apply for a permit and get declined?

[jacob_brown]

This law is really targeted against conjoined twins who move slowly as they photograph. I anticipate an Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuit....

[elnoralouisa]

While this whole thing sounds crazy, of course, the insurance part is not expensive. I have one million on my dog (he's a therapy dog), and it's only about $8 a month.

 

Debbie

[craig_gillette]

The ACLU (IIRC) brought or assisted in the action that prodded the bureaucrats to try to define/codify permit requirements. I'm not sure it's well put together but don't find it draconian for the most part either. Keep in mind that they may have gotten no small number of complaints about problems for the locals with commercial shooting as well.