Kentucky Derby Bans cameras WTF?

[redisburning]

well, Id put it mostly to the resistance of Americans, especially a certain half of them, to adopt evidence based perspectives of events.

you either have people who outright deny the validity of evidence or are willing to except anything that confirms their pre-existing world view as evidence, both demonstrating the same predisposition to take a limited, narrowed view.

why else would people in this thread claim that the government is taking away their freedoms when a private company is telling them they can't bring their cameras to an event?

p.s. skin color falls under equal protection under the law, if you prohibit cameras from ALL non-credentialed press it applies the same to everyone entering the event. that is a false analogy and people who bring it up should be ridiculed rather than engaged seriously.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . p.s. skin color falls under equal protection under the law, if you prohibit cameras from ALL non-credentialed press it applies the same to everyone entering the event. that is a false analogy and people who bring it up should be ridiculed rather than engaged seriously.

If that was aimed at my post, I'd point out that it wasn't an analogy. It was a simple statement of truth: support for the unassailable argument that you don't leave all your civil rights at the door when you walk into a concert, horse race, etc. Or have I missed your point?

Cheers,

R.

 

[redisburning]

If that was aimed at my post, I'd point out that it wasn't an analogy.

Cheers,

R.

Roger,

it was not.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger,

it was not.

Thanks. I assumed it had to be my fault, not yours. My apologies for misunderstanding.

Cheers,

R.

 

[zuiko85]

I have a notion they won't ban anything without a hump on it. They are in the mindset that any interchangeable lens camera will have a prism hump. An old E-PL-1 with a longish but compact zoom, held in the 'stinky diaper' hold would be mistaken a point & shoot.

 

[Harry Caul]

The Streisand Effect in this case might be a surge in sales of fixed lens Fujis just to f with security and the organizers 🙂

 

[cosmonaut]

Well growing up on rock concerts I know that recorders and cameras have been banned for years. It is more a copyright issue than security issue but even that seems to have fallen to the wayside as at most concerts now the place is full of smartphones and tablets recording away.
I do understand security issues but I just don't see a camera being a security risk. I don't guess I have ever seen a camera bomb.
There is going to come a point in time where all of the fun of going to an event is going to be gone. So many rules and restrictions that staying at home is a better option. Horse racing is as much about the people, their hats, cars ect as much as the race itself. Banning camers will be a big mistake.

 

[frank-grumman]

I just think death itself needs to be banned 😀 😀 😀 Then everyone can feel safe. LOL

 

[user237428934]

I stopped going to concerts because it's almost impossible to enjoy it when you have hundreds of shiny camera monitors in front of you. Hate this, it's so distracting. Banning all cameras would be a great benefit (at least for me).

Don't know why someone would ban a camera at a horse race. Protecting professional photographers? Can someone make money with photos from a horse race? I visit one of the big horse racing events here every year but I never noticed a person that could be a professional photographer.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Churchill Downs Communications

See: "Banned Items on Kentucky Derby and Oaks Days"

http://www.kentuckyderby.com/visit/security-information

Interesting: thanks. I assume that "6" applies to the physical length, not the focal length, but where are they measuring from? The back of the camera, or the lens?

Why would anyone who'd read that lot bother to go? But at least they warn you in advance. What gets me are the arseholes who invent new rules when you arrive, or who have old but generally ignored rules in tiny print at the entrance when you've taken the trouble to get there.

Something I've done sometimes, especially in shops who want you to hand over your camera bag, is to say, "Yes, I'll leave my cameras with you, if you w¡ll sign a receipt accepting full responsibility for $10,000 worth of cameras." Strangely enough, no-one has ever taken me up on that...

Cheers,

R.

 

[jsrockit]

Well, do you guys still feel they are attacking photographers by using terrorism as an excuse?

 

[jsrockit]

Something I've done sometimes, especially in shops who want you to hand over your camera bag, is to say, "Yes, I'll leave my cameras with you, if you w¡ll sign a receipt accepting full responsibility for $10,000 worth of cameras." Strangely enough, no-one has ever taken me up on that....

Yeah Roger, I've done this as well... and it is a sure fire way to keep the camera with you.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, do you guys still feel they are attacking photographers by using terrorism as an excuse?

Well, I'd not use the word 'attacking' but if you substitute 'trying to make life difficult for...' then I find it hard to come to any other conclusion. 'Excuse' is the magic word: it certainly can't qualify as a reason, and as they apparently attempt to give no other reason...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yeah Roger, I've done this as well... and it is a sure fire way to keep the camera with you.

Strange, that, isn't it? I wonder why they react that way.

(I was tempted for the first time in my life to use a smiley).

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger-

See the additional link: "Media".. Added to my post after yours.

pkr

Phew! Thanks. A lot of grief to photograph a few colonial gee-gees. Makes me glad I've never had to do that sort of thing, with that sort of organization, for a living. thanks for the extra link.

As for I generally offer to allow the shop owner to inspect my bag before I leave. Most are happy with this option. They rarely want to look. Just giving the option is enough for most, yes, quite.

See also Trainer admits injecting horses with herbs and spices: http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2013/04/23/trainer-admits-injecting-horses-with-herbs-and-spices/

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Cheating.. at horse racing - Now who would do a thing like that.. must be MONEY involved .. Maybe that's why the C-D folks don't want long lenses looking into paddocks? Who knows what might show up on some web page..

Gosh. I hadn't even thought of that. I am utterly shocked that you have stooped so low as even to raise the suspicion, which hitherto I am sure had not crossed anyone's mind.

Cheers,

R.

 

[DougFord]

It's gettin' so a businessman can't expect no return
from a fixed fight. Now, if you can't trust a fix,
what can you trust?
For a good return,you gotta go bettin'on chance,
and then you're back with anarchy.
Right back in the jungle.

That's why ethics is important--what separates us
from the animals, the beasts of burden, the beasts of prey.
Ethics. - m. crossing

 

[frank-grumman]

good grief!!!!! Pressure cookers appear to be allowed 😀 What an utter crock, so to speak 🙂

 

[Al Patterson]

Red is quite right. Voting with one's wallet is guaranteed to preserve both your sanity and your wealth.

😀

This year I won't even watch the race. And I usually place a bet, and won't do that either. I still think these restrictions are idiotic though. Maybe they could require all attendees arrive naked, so we can see for sure that they have nothing hidden?

 

[Al Patterson]

As a matter of fact, they can't. A public event is a public event, even in a private location, and you don't leave all your civil rights at the gates.

Someone who actually gets it... May still be some hope left...