Park Permit

[SoulfulRecover]

The local park now has hand made signs posted up stating that you have to have permit in order to shoot at the park. They specifically state "Commercial Use/Photography"

Since I do not have a legal business nor do I shoot for money, would I still fall into the Commercial Use category? I'd be using my 4x5 and a model.

Id rather not spend ~100 bucks just for one image.

 

[Designer]

Talk to them. No money means "non-commercial" in my book.

 

[ronlane]

I would agree with Designer. I wouldn't think that it would be considered that but that doesn't mean that someone (park ranger/security) will be in the same mindset.

A couple of our local parks have went to where you need a permit to shoot there but it is more for big productions and commercial photographers. I've never once been stopped or asked about it. I've often been tempted to walk around the same parks asking other photographers that you can tell are getting paid if they have a permit.

 

[tirediron]

...would I still fall into the Commercial Use category? I'd be using my 4x5 and a model...

In the legal sense, no, but I would definitely get clearance ahead of time, since many (most?) organizations consider "commercial" photography anything more than a point and shoot. "Big cameras" or extra equipment would definitely attract attention, and while you wouldn't be in violation of the rule, it could cause enough fuss to ruin the whole day.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

ill see if I can find a number to call then.

Last time I was out there with the 4x5, they thought I was a news crew and didn't understand that it was a still image camera haha

 

[Gary A.]

I agree with the above to get a clearance. Park authorities are not paid to interpret but enforce rules and regulations.

Remember that the new permit is most likely based upon two points:

1) Commercial photography, typically, interferes with the full enjoyment of the park by others; and
2) If an enterprise is making money off a city facility, then the city should also share in those revenues.

I've run into this all the time and usually the park employees are given instructions by their supervisors that the size and type of camera is a qualifier in the determination of 'commercial photography'.

When/if you contact the city, make sure you get the name of the person providing you with a detailed definition of the regulation. When/if you get clearance to proceed with no permit, it would be good to back your words, (should you be confronted), with the name of the city employee/manager providing you said clearance. An email would be even better. In your discussions with the city, be prepared to clarify that 'commercial' photography is a legal/accounting/tax definition and has no bearing on camera size.

This shouldn't be a big deal ... until you run into a city/park employee who is just following instructions based upon their supervisor telling them that size and type of camera dicates if it is 'commercial' or not. Reading the city ordinance regarding the permitting process should/could reveal what the city considers as commercial photography.

 

[Dave442]

A lot of places note that the use of equipment that impends the movement of other users of the facilities requires a permit. You and the model standing there is not an impediment, but a large tripod, box, stool, etc might set off some alarms with a ranger. I agree with the others on obtaining clearance ahead of time.

I used to have a similar issue with US Customs all the time. I would bring back a few sample product from overseas and if I did not declare then the officer would tell me I needed to declare, if I did declare then the officer would tell me that for such a small amount it was not required and I did not need to declare. In general I had better experiences when I did declare, in those cases they would give a quick check and then send me on my way. If I didn't declare then they would send me off to the scan/search area about 50% of the time and there I would tell them that the last time they told me not to declare when they asked why I did not declare.

 

[SoulfulRecover]

I sent an email so that way if I am allowed to shoot without a permit, if someone stops me I can show proof.

The park is completely open. HUGE pecan trees then just open grass/field and a pond. Even if I setup and entire studio, it wouldn't block anyone

berry springs park and preserve georgetown texas - Google Search

 

[waday]

just for one image.

Then take more than one

 

[SoulfulRecover]

Already heard back and because there is no exchange of money, I do not need a permit.

 

[jcdeboever]

Already heard back and because there is no exchange of money, I do not need a permit.

Print that email out and bring it with you

 

[vintagesnaps]

This has been happening in my area for some time; I think these days it's part of the cost of doing business and is figured into the contract. Photographers used to have/rent studio space, now photo shoots are in parks, etc. (And all the craigslist type people with cameras etc. have added to the number of people doing this.) So that seems to have prompted shared public recreational places to do this.

I'd think the current policy might change at some point because how would park staff know if a photographer is being paid or not? In my area it's more about the equipment being set up and doing a 'shoot' that requires a permit or fee.