pay for use public venues

[zincprincess]

We have two gardens in Knoxville that are lovely this time of year (assuming you don’t have allergies). Both are always crawling with photographers – ameteur and professional. Both take donations to maintain the gardens. The one not affiliated with the university just put out a photography policy and it seems a little like extortion to me. Thoughts? Excerpt below.

PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHY POLICY
? For the purposes of this policy, a Professional Photographer is defined as someone who is being paid to take photographs on KBGA property.
? Those who wish to use the grounds of KBGA for their commercial use are required to join as members of The Garden at the Photographer level of $100 or more. These funds directly support the maintenance
and development of the KBGA grounds and gardens. As a benefit of this membership, the photographer?s website will be listed on the KBGA website. Membership must be current and renewed annually.
? Upon receipt of membership dues, an ID card with lanyard will be issued and should be worn at all times when working with clients in the gardens. The lost lanyard replacement fee is $10.00.
? Hourly photography rates are available for those who may need a one-time photo session.
? All photographers must sign in at the Visitor Center upon arrival. (The office is closed on weekends, however there is frequently staff on the grounds. You will be asked to display your ID card).

PHOTO CREDIT
? The KBGA requires the location credit Knoxville Botanical Garden and Arboretum, Knoxville, TN in all uses of Garden photos in print, on the web, in broadcast, and in any other public medium.

Full policy here
http://knoxgarden.org/home/professional-photography-policy.html

[nobigdeal]

Are they privately owned? If so I see no problem with it.

[zincprincess]

The one with the policy above (KBGA) is privately owned but open to the public. I get the feeling they would rather be paid for hosting weddings and events.

The other one is part of the university and should be considered public. They have a policy but it is generally an honor system. I don’t think they really enforce it.

[ravnostic]

I’ve lots of thoughts. My 2 cents compounded:

If you’re not there on assignment and being paid, you’re not a professional. If you’re there to get wedding shots, portraits, etc., and are using their grounds, why shouldn’t they be compensated? You don’t get space in a portrait studio for free–why should they be required to give it all away?

If you’re using the space often, build it into your fees (at whatever level breaks you even), and take the street cred of an ID card (which if you proudly display might get you some ‘street’ traffic while there on assignment or not by other visitors), and bonus: A free lanyard! That alone is worth $3 at most places.

If you don’t use it often, you can rent by the hour. And siting the location seems fair–you’d not want your art displayed without proper accreditation, and their garden sounds like it’s designed with the art of landscape in mind.

The astro shots I’ve been taking are from Tonto National Forest, at Bartlett Lake. They charge $6 a day, and I gladly pay it (I bought ahead, 5 lottery-style cards available at most every local merchant; when you arrive you scratch off the date/month/year, good for 24 hours and valid ahead of time to 2013. It’s $96 for a yearly, so had I bought one in January before I’d been there 4 times, by the end of the year I’d be paying $5.25; in the long run, I save. As it is, I’d break even. If it’s worth shooting as a background, it’s worth paying for. And that only makes it more exclusive to offer portraiture from.

[staplermofo]

The opposite end of the spectrum.

[zincprincess]

Read the fine print on using the Chicago Botanical Gardens for portraits – $125/day. Shit. Makes $100/year unlimited look like a bargain.

http://www.chicagobotanic.org/photography/photo_general_rules.php

[staplermofo]

I think that fee is just to cut down on the guys ruining the atmosphere of the garden. If you’re just using natural light or a single flash and a minute or two to pose and frame they don’t bother you. Tourists here have the delightful habit of taking 10 steps back on a relatively crowded walkway then clicking their tongues and bitching when someone walks between them. I was hoping mayor Rahm would make non-crippling assaults on them legal, but he still hasn’t.

The park district in Chicago charges something crazy like $35 + $35/hour for discounted STUDENT photography permits. Outrageous fees are the norm, enforcement is all over the place.
BUT IT’S STILL THE BEST CITY IN THE WORLD! WOOOOO!! CHICAGO!! WOOOOOOOOOOO!

[Kestrana]

I don’t see any problem with them charging a fee for people who are professionals to use their property. It’s easier than getting location releases from photographers every time they do something, and discourages those pros who might charge their client $100/hr but only donate $1 to the garden. When we were at the botanical gardens in DC the other day, everyone there seemed to have a am/pro camera and you had to wait your turn to photograph the most popular flowers. As a hobbyist just “snapping” I got some dirty looks from other “more pro” shooters who felt I was hogging their subject. If they’re there for a client job it would have been nice to distinguish from the other people so I could just stay away from them and not mutually annoy one another.

[ennuipoet]

The only problem in charging professionals is who decides if you are a professional. Clearly a photographer shooting wedding/engagement photos on the grounds is being paid for their time and should pay…but what if you are doing a favor for your best friends as a wedding present and you aren’t making a dime off the shots? Should you pay? In NYC most venues have a no tripods, not lights rule, which is actually a pretty good rule since the Pro Shooters (fashion industry by in large) use public parks as locations constantly and they must pay for taking the park away from use peons. A big fashion shoot on the High Line can have three photogs, six assistants and a dozen models, monolights, reflectors, computers and camera spread out over a huge amount of space.

But, this also makes an amateur shooter have to dance through hoops to set up a tripod at night. I was trying to shoot the Xmas tree a Lincoln Center at night last year and had to plead with security that not only was I NOT a professional (look! No Model!) but that I would only be two minutes if they would just give me a break. They did, but they weren’t thrilled.

A professional should always pay and factor those fees in their costs, because it is a cost of business. You can itemize on an invoice!

[linguine]

This seems like a great way for wedding photographers to scam some extra money, everytime a client wants to do a photoshoot there they can say theres a $100 fee to use the location that will have to be added to the cost and just not mention if theyve already payed their fee for the year.

[Kestrana]

The only problem in charging professionals is who decides if you are a professional.

I think in this case that’s pretty clearly spelled out. If you are being paid to take pictures on their property they want a cut.

[ennuipoet]

The only problem in charging professionals is who decides if you are a professional.

I think in this case that’s pretty clearly spelled out. If you are being paid to take pictures on their property they want a cut.

Relying on the Honor System is a great way to find out most people have no honor. 😀

[Author]

Posts