From C|Net: "Music industry bows to point-and-shoot cameras"

[jbernie]

An interesting article on C|Net regarding concert photography and the issues faced with so many people having (high resolution) still & video cameras in such portable devices these days. The basic rule seems to be DSLR = Pro and you need credentials. Anything else = ok.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10392935-52.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1

At last month's huge U2 show at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., how could you tell the difference between the professional photographers and your average amateurs?

Answer: the professionals were the ones whisked away after Bono and friends finished their third song, and the amateurs were still there, happily shooting to their heart's content.

Nearly every person at any show these days is going to have some form of camera with them, be it a point-and-shoot, an iPhone or some other camera phone, and it seems that there is almost no way to imagine keeping all those devices out.

That new reality is forcing an increasing number of bands to come to grips with the fact that they can't really control the images from their shows, and that, for the most part, they're better off letting fans cram Facebook and Flickr with such pictures anyway.

 

[thegoldenmackid]

My local sports team had a rule: any lens longer then 4 inches, not permitted.

 

[beaner454]

I never understood this type of rule. Isn't it in the band and labels best interest to let people take pictures at concerts? It just ends up being publicity for them. I mean I'm glad that they're bending on it now, but it shouldn't have been there in the first place.

 

[Edge100]

U2 has let cameras in for years; I have photos from the 2001 Elevation Tour that I took on a crappy disposible film camera. They were ahead of the game on this.

 

[joepunk]

This isn't something new, p&s cameras have been allowed at concerts for a long time

For the Seattle Sounders lenses no longer than 6 inches are ok iirc.

Back to topic, both the "pro" and amateur photos suck. Especially the "pro's." Notice it's just as blurry/not in focus.

Point and Shoots will not be able to capture high end images (and thats where the Pro comes in) of a performance. At least not for many years down the road and probably still not even then.

The reason for these kind of "no pro cameras allowed" rules are that most performers/managers don't want someone from the general public selling photos taken with a pro-dslr for money.

Most little p&s with their cramped sensors that produce horrible noise levels will not make for a great shot that could make money.

Most photogs in the photo pit are with a publication or some such media outlet. And they are getting (hopefully) paid to take the photos for their respected publications.

 

[M-5]

The last concert I went to about a month ago was in a relatively small venue, and I saw about 3 different people with DSLRs. I just purchased my own DSLR and wanted to take it to a different venue for a concert that I'm going to next week, but I'm not really sure if they'd let me in. That venue has a website and a FAQ page that states that they don't allow any cameras, but I looked at a flickr discussion that said that the FAQ page was outdated and that it mostly depended on the artist performing. So I'm not really sure what to do. If I call and ask, I'm more than positive they'll just tell me "no".

But seeing that many people with DSLRs at the last concert I went to got me curious. And I even saw someone in the concert before that with a relatively large video camera with a small boom microphone.