Olympics photo crackdown !

[Norma Desmond]

<p><<<<em>No. Everyone here wondered what it was supposed to be as soon as it was revealed.</em>>>></p>

<p>Well, many are wondering. Some in England seem to think it <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/artblog/2007/jun/05/howlisasimpsontooktheolym">BLOWS!</a></p>

[daverhaas]

<p>I've seen several larger lens at various events - up in the stands. Yesterday - Women's tennis final - saw at least one Canon 70-200 or larger right behind Serena's family. No credentials visible. Last night -Large Nikon lens- Men's 400 relay - right in front of Michael's family - but I think he was credentialed, as he also had a tripod. </p>

[eric merrill]

<p>I remember when I was a kid, I watched the Olympics as much as I could. We had cable, but cable was the local broadcast channels, plus other broadcast channels like PBS for which we got poor reception, and stations like TBS and WGN. (In fact, my parents got cable for PBS, so we could watch Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers. :)</p>

<p>The Olympics were fun to watch. They were inspiring. I always thought that when I grew up, I'd want to attend at least one each of summer and winter.</p>

<p>I no longer think that. Heck, I can't really watch them. Whenever I have time to tune into NBC, seems like only 20% of the time is showing actual events, with 40% commercials and another 40% on non-event, Olympic-related stories. I thought that's ok. I have fast internet. I can view actual events online. Nope. Because I don't subscribe to MSNBC via cable, I can't legally view the Olympics online.</p>

<p>If I go the expense and trouble of going to the Olympics in person, not only do I have to battle crowds, but I also have to take my chances with what security will and will not allow.</p>

<p>My kids aren't growing up with the magic of the Olympics. I suspect they'll be even less inclined to care about them as they get older.</p>

<p>It's a shame. It's a good thing the photos and videos are being kept almost under lock-and-key. Would really be a bad thing if people were able to see the games.</p>

[colin carron]

<p>That's a pity, Eric, here in the UK there are 2 or 3 BBC channels with continuous coverage and another 2 rolling news channels. And that is just the Freeview channels. </p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>The only problem I see with the rules, is that they are leaving it to individual event interpretation. I'd prefer to see them say "The limit is 30 cm and ONE Lens (attached) " instead of leaving things up to the venues.</em></p>

<p>Well the idea is that in a stadium with very dense seating, big cameras are not allowed at all, whereas at venues where there is a lot of space, the security may impose less stringent restrictions on big lenses than the 300mm overall rule. I think this makes sense to make sure that all paying spectators get a decent view.</p>

<p>However, the other motivation for banning "professional" equipment i.e. to prevent people from distributing their images (commercially?) is just annoying and unnecessary. Most people cannot get good images from their positions in the crowd anyway, but those people who manage to get good a position and have the equipment should be allowed to make images because the accredited shooters cannot be everywhere and sometimes it can be that chance favours the prepared spectator rather than the accredited pro.</p>

<p>My reason for not going to London this summer is because I've been there at another big event (the royal wedding in 2011) and I completely underestimated the crowds and security measures which limited movement and I just felt the Olympics would be far worse, and on top of things are the ticket prices. However, now that I've seen some events on TV I think it would have been nice to be on the roadside for some events, where a 70-200 or even shorter lens such as 85mm would have been perfectly useful for some nice shots, provided that one can get first row position. I enjoy the crowd reactions to big events in London and the only drawbacks are the cost and difficulty (impossibility) of moving about.</p>

<p>I think a better way to enjoy event photography is to be there at smaller events rather than those which gather millions of spectators. But I kind of enjoy the feeling of the big events also. Just that they're not so practical or productive from the photography point of view, unless you're really experienced and well prepared.</p>

[denniswms]

<p>I rarely attend events unless I am working and when I do I do not take a camera. While emotionally I may want to be shooting, experience shows without control and complete access I am never satisfied with the images created when compared to work product. Plus, I don't shoot strangers.</p>

<p>Photos which are not going to be used professionally or at the very least be included on the web site perform no service. I am sure if I had been shooting for only a few years or was not accustomed to free range wandering at events I might draw different conclusions. A candid shot of one more swimmer or volleyball player holds no allure for me especially since the quality of people I already have access to is top shelf.</p>

<p>There are so many athletic events year round featuring each of these sports that anyone interested in shooting show jumping or rapids etc. can certainly fill their desires outside of the Olympic spotlight. Many sports that receive zero attention over the intervening four years would be thrilled to receive the attention.</p>

<p>As for some empty venues that is disappointing, I have never checked on pricing but money is tight all over. There could have been a contingency plan for bringing people in to fill the seats. Conversely, the natatorium was jam packed and I would not sit in the stands for gymnastics either. </p>

[Mankuthel]

<p>Although I've read incidents of people having trouble taking their cameras into a few Olympic venues, I didn't have any problems taking my camera and lenses into the Olympic stadium on Saturday night and the Horse Parade grounds last night. My gear was within the 30cm limit though (D3 + 24-70 + 70-200). </p>

<p>From what I've read, there only seem to be problems at Wembley stadium and the O2 - venues that are quite strict about cameras permitted during normal times! </p>

[andrew_gardiner]

<blockquote>

<p>Well, many are wondering. Some in England seem to think it <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/artblog/2007/jun/05/howlisasimpsontooktheolym" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">BLOWS!</a></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ha ha! - great link Fred.</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>However, a spokesman for Olympic organiser Locog this afternoon revealed a radical tightening of restrictions at venues nationwide.<br>

He told <em>Amateur Photographer (AP)</em>: ‘One [interchangeable-lens] camera with a <strong>35mm [focal length]</strong> lens [is acceptable] but anything more is considered professional equipment and too large for spectator seating.'</p>

<p>Locog has previously expressed concerns that camera gear <strong>interferes with spectators' view</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p><img src="http://reviews.photographyreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/canon-40mm-STM.jpg" alt="" width="675" height="450" /><br>

This is "interfering" with spectator views? Really? I have to attend US sports events and regularly encounter 300 lb women. But a pancake 40mm is going to ruin my day at the races?! How f'ing dumb do they think we are?</p>

[charles_wood]

<p>Shots of Olympic spectators revealed people with SLRs around their necks or in their hands. I would say the crackdown was more on paper than in reality.</p>

[colin carron]

<p>Charles is right. There have been a couple of statements by LOCOG spokespersons which seemed to be more restrictive than the '30cm rule'. But I have not (yet) heard of anyone having problems with getting cameras into the Olympic sites and, as noted in a few posts above, many SLRs and telephoto lenses have been seen in the audiences.</p>

[Mankuthel]

<p>Has anyone heard of any crackdown at Wembley stadium? I did contact Wembley stadium who asked me to check their official guideline which prohibits any SLRs, instead of the LOCOG guidelines.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>The 35mm thing was horribly confused - I assume someone meant to say 35mm cameras (although why exactly they'd block someone with a digital 'blad is another matter). Fortunately, at least some of the venues were reasonable. I'll have to see what happens at the paralympics.<br />

<br />

What I still fail to understand, watching all the compact camera flashes going off at the closing ceremony (along with wondering why Jessie J had suddenly become so famous that she deserved so much limelight with no appearance from Adele, or Duffy, or Pulp, or Elton John, or [heaven help us] Girls Aloud or Cliff Richards, or Spandau Ballet [surely Gold would have been worth a try, not that they got Queen to play We Are The Champions for some reason]; and wondering whether they were going to get the whole stadium singing Land Of Hope And Glory, and worrying about whether Boris was going to set the Olympic flag on fire before handing it over - <i>who</i> let him near the flame?)... is why events like this don't start with a brief disclaimer and an instruction on how to turn the flash off. Especially after flash guns got in the way of the divers. I've been to a lot of events that ban (supposedly) cameras, but very few actually tell people how to use them without irritating everyone and ruining their own shots. People are blissfully ignorant - I've had my heroically civil offers to help turned down at the 25th birthday of Les Mis, which frustrated me and annoyed everyone around me. I'm tempted to get instructions sprayed into my hair with retroreflective paint next time.<br />

<br />

Oh yes, and the logo. I saw the Lisa Simpson connection several years ago, and haven't been able to think of it in any other way since. Which makes it a bit disconcerting that, because my employers are a sponsor, it's on my business cards.<br />

<br />

Still, for all the British sense of cynicism, I thought it went surprisingly well. Especially after the locals started winning medals. Good luck to Brazil.</p>