freshjetblast
New Member
post moved to a new thread, sorry if I did offend the TS!
Last edited:
Avril Lavigne -best Damn Tour Concert
- Thread starter Shutt3rbug
- Start date
- Status
here are some more from me
l"]here[/URL].
please C&C and be lenient because this is my first attempt at concert photography!
nice shoot! for first timer...it's best start a thread on ur own...coz u dunno if u offend the TS by joining his thread.
Last edited:
freshjetblast
New Member
thank you. the issue it appears hasn't been resolved as they still insist that I was using a DSLR and not a camera.. :dunno: am now lost about what to do next.
done, thank you for the heads up! hope I didn't offend anyone.
vonlichenstein
New Member
thank you. the issue it appears hasn't been resolved as they still insist that I was using a DSLR and not a camera.. :dunno: am now lost about what to do next.
done, thank you for the heads up! hope I didn't offend anyone.
dslr not a camera meh? haha ask them, why dslr isn't considered a camera, and why can people use a "camera" and not a dslr? aren't the functions similar? so next time they want to ban say Nikon from concerts and only allow canons? or Olympus?
terryansimon
New Member
ask them where did they get their definition of what a camera is. tell them that, unlike them, you belong to the population who obtain their definitions from books called dictionaries, and in a dictionary it states that a camera is an instrument used for the recording of visual images in the form of photographs, movie film, or video signals. nothing in there about distinction between point and shoots, SLRs, medium formats, etc.
don't settle for anything LESS than a formal apology.
vonlichenstein
New Member
she looks a *bit* more mature though.
freshjetblast
New Member
For the benefit of everyone and those with DSLRs who were kicked out or asked to stop shooting, here's my email and the reply they provided:
My email:
From: Jeffrey
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 6:47 PM
To: catherine@sis.gov.sg
Cc: michael@midaspromotions.com; stephen@midaspromotions.com
Subject: Unpleasent experience at the best damn tour concert
Hi,
I spoke with your security manager/IC Mr. Raymond this morning regarding a rather unpleasent experience I had at last evening's best damn tour. I find it appropriate that I send a formal email, stating clearly the dismissal of my friend and I from the above mentioned venue.
As soon as the concert start, we decided to move forward and were thus standing on the aisle throughout the duration of the concert. During the interval before the start of the final few songs at about 2215 hrs, we were approached by a male usher of large build and were told to follow him immediately. At no point of time were we given the opportunity to seek clarification as to why we were dismissed from the concert when we obviously did not break any of the stated rules and regulations. The manner in which we were escorted out was also unpleasent and hasty; we chose not to speak to the usher anymore after he ignored our questions. He then told the cisco guard at the premier entrance to deny entry to us if we tried to re-enter.
I am sorely disappointed and feel rather cheated because it is clearly stated on the sistic website that non-flash photography is allowed but videography is not allowed. Having been to several concerts at the indoor stadium before, I understand that SIS takes a strict stance on photography at any event. However, given that the organisers have decided to allow cameras in for this event, I don't see why we were dismissed for taking photographs. For the record, we were using a DSLR, but to dismiss us based on the fact that we were not using prosumer point and shoot cameras is totally ridiculous and discriminatory. To me, a camera is a camera, and if DSLRs are not allowed, why wasn't it clearly stated? Unless a DSLR isn't classified as a camera anymore, kindly enlighten me and I might just comply. If it was stated beforehand that DSLRs are not allowed, I wouldn't have brought my DSLR to the concert and risk being thrown out. FYI, my take is that almost everyone else with a point and shoot camera was in clear breach of the rules and regulations of the concert as the entire venue was marred by the continuous triggering of flash. In addition, just in case you guys do not already know, DSLRs do not have videography capabilities unlike most prosumer point and shoot cameras, so maybe it would've been only fair if the guilty parties of flash photography and videography be thrown out as well.
I feel that the points I mentioned need to be addressed and a favourable reply furnished to me as soon as possible. We paid good money for the premier seats and to be unjustifiably thrown out of the concert to me, is unacceptable.
Regards,
Jeffrey
Their reply:
From: Michael Hosking
To: 'Jeffrey' ; catherine@sis.gov.sg ; raymondtan@sis.gov.sg
Cc: stephen@midaspromotions.com ; 'Kossy Ng'
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:22 PM
Subject: RE: Unpleasent experience at the best damn tour concert
The use of any form of camera that can be considered ‘professional’ is never allowed for concerts, unless you are an official photographer and have signed an official artist waiver form. This protects a photographer as much as it does an artist.
As event organisers it matters not to me whether fans take photos of artists – these stipulations are laid down by the artist and management.
My understanding is that you were given an opportunity to surrender your camera and be allowed to watch the concert but you refused.
Raymond does not work for me nor my security – he works for the SIS.
Most people understand these issues – I am sorry if the message regarding photography equipment was not made clear on the Sistic web site. I am copying it to Sistic such that in future there will be no ambiguity with respect to recording equipment. Many artists in fact don’t allow ANY form of recording – but given that people pay no attention to this stipulation and use their phones to take pictures and video, some, such as Avril, allow such snaps to be taken as souvenirs. However, this does not apply to equipment capable of taking professional looking shots – since there is no telling where these might end up.
I trust this clarifies.
-----------------------------------------------------
I have yet to reply them. It seems as though their reply is blunt and doesn't address most, if not all of my points. If possible, you guys could help contribute towards my reply which I will be sending out tonight or tomorrow.
My email:
From: Jeffrey
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 6:47 PM
To: catherine@sis.gov.sg
Cc: michael@midaspromotions.com; stephen@midaspromotions.com
Subject: Unpleasent experience at the best damn tour concert
Hi,
I spoke with your security manager/IC Mr. Raymond this morning regarding a rather unpleasent experience I had at last evening's best damn tour. I find it appropriate that I send a formal email, stating clearly the dismissal of my friend and I from the above mentioned venue.
As soon as the concert start, we decided to move forward and were thus standing on the aisle throughout the duration of the concert. During the interval before the start of the final few songs at about 2215 hrs, we were approached by a male usher of large build and were told to follow him immediately. At no point of time were we given the opportunity to seek clarification as to why we were dismissed from the concert when we obviously did not break any of the stated rules and regulations. The manner in which we were escorted out was also unpleasent and hasty; we chose not to speak to the usher anymore after he ignored our questions. He then told the cisco guard at the premier entrance to deny entry to us if we tried to re-enter.
I am sorely disappointed and feel rather cheated because it is clearly stated on the sistic website that non-flash photography is allowed but videography is not allowed. Having been to several concerts at the indoor stadium before, I understand that SIS takes a strict stance on photography at any event. However, given that the organisers have decided to allow cameras in for this event, I don't see why we were dismissed for taking photographs. For the record, we were using a DSLR, but to dismiss us based on the fact that we were not using prosumer point and shoot cameras is totally ridiculous and discriminatory. To me, a camera is a camera, and if DSLRs are not allowed, why wasn't it clearly stated? Unless a DSLR isn't classified as a camera anymore, kindly enlighten me and I might just comply. If it was stated beforehand that DSLRs are not allowed, I wouldn't have brought my DSLR to the concert and risk being thrown out. FYI, my take is that almost everyone else with a point and shoot camera was in clear breach of the rules and regulations of the concert as the entire venue was marred by the continuous triggering of flash. In addition, just in case you guys do not already know, DSLRs do not have videography capabilities unlike most prosumer point and shoot cameras, so maybe it would've been only fair if the guilty parties of flash photography and videography be thrown out as well.
I feel that the points I mentioned need to be addressed and a favourable reply furnished to me as soon as possible. We paid good money for the premier seats and to be unjustifiably thrown out of the concert to me, is unacceptable.
Regards,
Jeffrey
Their reply:
From: Michael Hosking
To: 'Jeffrey' ; catherine@sis.gov.sg ; raymondtan@sis.gov.sg
Cc: stephen@midaspromotions.com ; 'Kossy Ng'
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:22 PM
Subject: RE: Unpleasent experience at the best damn tour concert
The use of any form of camera that can be considered ‘professional’ is never allowed for concerts, unless you are an official photographer and have signed an official artist waiver form. This protects a photographer as much as it does an artist.
As event organisers it matters not to me whether fans take photos of artists – these stipulations are laid down by the artist and management.
My understanding is that you were given an opportunity to surrender your camera and be allowed to watch the concert but you refused.
Raymond does not work for me nor my security – he works for the SIS.
Most people understand these issues – I am sorry if the message regarding photography equipment was not made clear on the Sistic web site. I am copying it to Sistic such that in future there will be no ambiguity with respect to recording equipment. Many artists in fact don’t allow ANY form of recording – but given that people pay no attention to this stipulation and use their phones to take pictures and video, some, such as Avril, allow such snaps to be taken as souvenirs. However, this does not apply to equipment capable of taking professional looking shots – since there is no telling where these might end up.
I trust this clarifies.
-----------------------------------------------------
I have yet to reply them. It seems as though their reply is blunt and doesn't address most, if not all of my points. If possible, you guys could help contribute towards my reply which I will be sending out tonight or tomorrow.
Last edited:
freshjetblast
New Member
They claimed that I was kicked out because I "refused to surrender my camera". The last thing I would want to do is to hand my camera over to a COMPLETE STRANGER. We weren't given the option of stopping to shoot or have the camera kept in a locker until the end of the concert.
Well in the case for me, i wasnt caught for this concert ,
But for some others i was, and wat the usher did to me was dat they told me nicely to keep my DSLR in the bag before some others catch me and ask me to keep it in the lockers, which i wouldnt feel safe doing for a 1k+ piece of equipment, in the WORSE scenario ever to occur to me, i was juz asked to follow them and they had stern words with me, which after i was allowed back to my seat, NEVER EVER my camera left me NOR i was thrown out.
wat happened this time to freshjetblast really shocked me as BY RIGHT, its not right to be told to leave juz because of possessing a DSLR, which is A CAMERA. (WAKE UP SIS ppl, handphone cam is oso a camera, DSLR is ALSO a cam , get the facts right pls. :thumbsd: ) , and u guys stated NO FLASH PHOTOGRAPHY ALLOWED , which we complied
The email the I/C replied u, its true and crap to a certain extend. :angry:
Sometimes the way SIS ppl do things really dampens and spoils mood before the concert even starts
I would juz need to ask u to be strong on the ground of WHY WERE U THROWN OUT WITHOUT ANY WARNINGS or watsoever? reply them and demand for this answer.
But for some others i was, and wat the usher did to me was dat they told me nicely to keep my DSLR in the bag before some others catch me and ask me to keep it in the lockers, which i wouldnt feel safe doing for a 1k+ piece of equipment, in the WORSE scenario ever to occur to me, i was juz asked to follow them and they had stern words with me, which after i was allowed back to my seat, NEVER EVER my camera left me NOR i was thrown out.
wat happened this time to freshjetblast really shocked me as BY RIGHT, its not right to be told to leave juz because of possessing a DSLR, which is A CAMERA. (WAKE UP SIS ppl, handphone cam is oso a camera, DSLR is ALSO a cam , get the facts right pls. :thumbsd: ) , and u guys stated NO FLASH PHOTOGRAPHY ALLOWED , which we complied
The email the I/C replied u, its true and crap to a certain extend. :angry:
Sometimes the way SIS ppl do things really dampens and spoils mood before the concert even starts
I would juz need to ask u to be strong on the ground of WHY WERE U THROWN OUT WITHOUT ANY WARNINGS or watsoever? reply them and demand for this answer.
Last edited:
Shutt3rbug
Member
"The use of any form of camera that can be considered professional is never allowed for concerts, unless you are an official photographer and have signed an official artist waiver form."
Anyone knows is there any law or written rule that any form of camera that can be considered professional is never allowed ??
Anyone knows is there any law or written rule that any form of camera that can be considered professional is never allowed ??
absoluthal
New Member
i feel the security is really damn at fault for kicking you out w/o giving any explaination.
In my Opinion, the reason from why no PROFESSIONAL camera is allowed is maybe because they are somehow ''afraid'' dat our pictures might turn out better than the official's one, or either that we might sell the pictures or use it illegally for other purposes. so even though the rules are not written, they already agree within the company dat no pro equips are never allowed
sya-hysteria
New Member
Let me help Mr. Hosking on this bit, to let everyone understand why no professional cameras are allowed, and why camera phones are SOMEWHAT allowed. This is going to be a long one, obviously.
1. I'll quote Mr. Hosking on this.
"The use of any form of camera that can be considered professional is never allowed for concerts, unless you are an official photographer and have signed an official artist waiver form. This protects a photographer as much as it does an artist."
It IS already stated on SISTIC that "no photography or any recording device is allowed" for the show. We should all know, that this means that by right, camera phones are not allowed either, but since we live in a fast moving technological country, camera phones are beyond controlled, and therefore, "allowed."
Clearly understood, if you have a media/photographer pass, only then you can take photos of the performing artist. Else, it's a no go. It's not that hard to understand. Legal actions can be taken on you. I will elaborate in my next point.
2. Again I quote Mr. Hosking,
"As event organisers it matters not to me whether fans take photos of artists these stipulations are laid down by the artist and management."
which means that Mr. Hosking and his team has got NOTHING to do with this argument about professional photography or whatnot. Plus, there IS a law that states that even if you own the copyright for the photos that you have taken, action can be taken against you if the person/management for the person does not want their photo taken. I am not kidding you when it comes to the law, I take law module in school, and I have the link for this paragraph I just typed.
"Ownership of Copyright
12.1.5 The general rule is that the person who created a work is the owner of the copyright in the work. However, another person is the owner if
the copyright was assigned to that person; or
the work was created by the creator in the course of his employment by that person.
12.1.6 Additionally, if the person who created the work
was doing so in the course of his employment as a journalist or a writer for a newspaper, magazine or periodical or under a contract of service or apprenticeship, the proprietor of the newspaper, magazine or periodical would be the owner of the copyright, but only for the purpose of publishing or reproducing the work in the newspaper, magazine or periodical;
is a photographer or artist engaged to take a photograph of a person or to draw the portrait of a person, the person would be the copyright owner and he has the right to prevent the photographer or artist from using the photograph or painting for any purpose that he has not agreed to."
Taken from: http://www.singaporelaw.sg/content/iplaw2.html
In the first place, refer to my point number 1. I get it that the security was harsh and that you do not want to surrender your camera to a stranger, but hun, they do NOT just take away your camera without taking your details down.
Plus, whatever the security did and all, it's a good thing for you in a long run. Somehow I suggest you take down the photos you have taken, if you do not want any legal actions taken on you. Let me remind you, Mr. Hosking is not responsible for any legal actions taken (if any), it will be between you and the artist management.
I do NOT understand why the argument became a comparison of professional cameras or camera phones. Upon purchasing the ticket, you SHOULD know what you should do or not do as an audience.
Because of you, Sir/Miss (i don't know who you are, and yay, this is my first post), we don't want all of our audiences to be casualties, in the sense that no photos are to be taken at all for all MIDAS shows. Imagine SingFest, or any shows at Fort Canning and you can't bring your DSLR because of this incident.
I hope this helps BOTH parties. Take a chill pill before we attack ANYONE at all. :nono::angel:
1. I'll quote Mr. Hosking on this.
"The use of any form of camera that can be considered professional is never allowed for concerts, unless you are an official photographer and have signed an official artist waiver form. This protects a photographer as much as it does an artist."
It IS already stated on SISTIC that "no photography or any recording device is allowed" for the show. We should all know, that this means that by right, camera phones are not allowed either, but since we live in a fast moving technological country, camera phones are beyond controlled, and therefore, "allowed."
Clearly understood, if you have a media/photographer pass, only then you can take photos of the performing artist. Else, it's a no go. It's not that hard to understand. Legal actions can be taken on you. I will elaborate in my next point.
2. Again I quote Mr. Hosking,
"As event organisers it matters not to me whether fans take photos of artists these stipulations are laid down by the artist and management."
which means that Mr. Hosking and his team has got NOTHING to do with this argument about professional photography or whatnot. Plus, there IS a law that states that even if you own the copyright for the photos that you have taken, action can be taken against you if the person/management for the person does not want their photo taken. I am not kidding you when it comes to the law, I take law module in school, and I have the link for this paragraph I just typed.
"Ownership of Copyright
12.1.5 The general rule is that the person who created a work is the owner of the copyright in the work. However, another person is the owner if
the copyright was assigned to that person; or
the work was created by the creator in the course of his employment by that person.
12.1.6 Additionally, if the person who created the work
was doing so in the course of his employment as a journalist or a writer for a newspaper, magazine or periodical or under a contract of service or apprenticeship, the proprietor of the newspaper, magazine or periodical would be the owner of the copyright, but only for the purpose of publishing or reproducing the work in the newspaper, magazine or periodical;
is a photographer or artist engaged to take a photograph of a person or to draw the portrait of a person, the person would be the copyright owner and he has the right to prevent the photographer or artist from using the photograph or painting for any purpose that he has not agreed to."
Taken from: http://www.singaporelaw.sg/content/iplaw2.html
In the first place, refer to my point number 1. I get it that the security was harsh and that you do not want to surrender your camera to a stranger, but hun, they do NOT just take away your camera without taking your details down.
Plus, whatever the security did and all, it's a good thing for you in a long run. Somehow I suggest you take down the photos you have taken, if you do not want any legal actions taken on you. Let me remind you, Mr. Hosking is not responsible for any legal actions taken (if any), it will be between you and the artist management.
I do NOT understand why the argument became a comparison of professional cameras or camera phones. Upon purchasing the ticket, you SHOULD know what you should do or not do as an audience.
Because of you, Sir/Miss (i don't know who you are, and yay, this is my first post), we don't want all of our audiences to be casualties, in the sense that no photos are to be taken at all for all MIDAS shows. Imagine SingFest, or any shows at Fort Canning and you can't bring your DSLR because of this incident.
I hope this helps BOTH parties. Take a chill pill before we attack ANYONE at all. :nono::angel:
vonlichenstein
New Member
:thumbsup: to sya-hysteria for his effort to type such a detailed post explaining the law and his stand (no sarcasm in the sentence, i know it sounds slightly sarcastic but its unintended)
While i do agree with your point on photography not being allowed and yet the "allow" camera phones, but what i cannot agree with is that they allow everything but dslrs, and they disallow dslrs on the basis that they are "professional" equipment. haha i guess thats a pet peeve of us photographers.
anyway i'm at work so i shan't type a long post. freshjetblast, any new develoments?
While i do agree with your point on photography not being allowed and yet the "allow" camera phones, but what i cannot agree with is that they allow everything but dslrs, and they disallow dslrs on the basis that they are "professional" equipment. haha i guess thats a pet peeve of us photographers.
anyway i'm at work so i shan't type a long post. freshjetblast, any new develoments?
sya-hysteria
New Member
hahaha, no worries.
first, I'm a girl HAHAHAHA.
second, technically, when DSLR cameras are used, it is much likely for one to publish them photos, for professional use. I am not saying that other form of cameras are not capable for professional use, but we all know, stereotype or not, DSLR cameras are usually for professional use.
Simple. It's for the protection of BOTH photographer (without the media/photographer pass) and the artist. This whole topic is very debatable, but in concert photographer, THERE ARE dos and don't that we MUST abide.
Why make a fuss over a concert where you actually WANT to see the artist on stage, instead of enjoying the show?
first, I'm a girl HAHAHAHA.
second, technically, when DSLR cameras are used, it is much likely for one to publish them photos, for professional use. I am not saying that other form of cameras are not capable for professional use, but we all know, stereotype or not, DSLR cameras are usually for professional use.
Simple. It's for the protection of BOTH photographer (without the media/photographer pass) and the artist. This whole topic is very debatable, but in concert photographer, THERE ARE dos and don't that we MUST abide.
Why make a fuss over a concert where you actually WANT to see the artist on stage, instead of enjoying the show?
vonlichenstein
New Member
oooh solly solly. i was too lazy to type his/her. :bsmilie:
Your second point, that "when DSLR cameras are used, it is much likely for one to publish them photos, for professional use." It's a generalisation, and in Singapore, largely untrue. (Every man and his pet donkey seems to have a dslr nowadays. i went to Clark quay over the weekend and if i had a dollar for every dslr i saw, you could stone me to death with money.)
And no, DSLRs are not "usually used for professional use". At least, in my opinion it isn't. By professional I assume you mean earning money. Of all the photographers with DSLRs at the concert, those with media passes nonwithstanding, how many would have made a buck from it? How many "people with DSLRs" do you meet on the streets, who make money from their photos? I've not made a cent from photography over the past 3 years, because its my hobby and i don't want to mix it with work (not yet at least). Of course, citing myself as an example doesn't justify my point. I just believe that the stereotype that DSLR users are "professionals" is bull crap. A professional photographer (one with ethics) would not shoot and earn money from a concert without authorisation from the organisors/artiste, and not all DSLR users are professionals. Not even a majority.
I do agree that there are do's and don'ts that we must abide by, and if i was unsure i wouldn't shoot the concert since i know there might be trouble like this. But here, the do's and don'ts aren't clearly defined. The "fuss" he's making is simply to get an explanation as to why he was shown out in said manner due to the stereotype.
If anyone disagrees, please air your views. I may have missed some glaring point that renders my half-hearted arguement (its hard to focus when your boss keeps walking arnd near your cubicle heh) moot.
Last edited:
sya-hysteria
New Member
yes, yes, I agree about the stereotype.
I am a concert photographer, and I have been to quite a few shows with the media/photographer pass, and I am not making a buck out of it all. I have seen a few photographers in the photo pit taking photos with digicams, and they're the ones making the bucks.
The dos and don't are not that hard to abide. You just need to know which concerts that allows you to take photos, in the case that you don't have a pass.
I understand that many are upset with the stereotype of 'professionalism' and stuff like that, but on a concert basis, you have to understand that there are many parties you have to deal with, like security, organisers, and the artist management. If they feel like you are 'violating' their concert grounds, they DO have the right to lead you out. There is just a need for co-operation.
We need to understand the organiser's point, not just us as photographers. Sometimes it gets frustrating, but there isn't much we can do, right?
Get this, not only you as audience have restrictions, even us media/concert photographers have our own set of restrictions, even though we are given the leeway and freedom of taking photos at the show. Unless you're hired by Avril Lavigne and she wants you to photograph the whole show and be wherever you are, then you probably won't have restrictions. Then again, it means you need an authorized pass.
And vonlichenstein, you can always shoot concerts. There are many outdoor concerts, namely Baybeats, Tapestry and such that you can shoot. Attach yourself to bands who do a lot of show, and tell them you're going to shoot their set. THAT, there are no restrictions, because it is open to the public and the show is free. Restrictions and the dos and donts only come when it is a paid concert, and when organisers/artist management tell you otherwise. Whatever it is, ALWAYS approach organisers or anyone in the know and ask if there are any restrictions in taking photos for the artist/show.
I am a concert photographer, and I have been to quite a few shows with the media/photographer pass, and I am not making a buck out of it all. I have seen a few photographers in the photo pit taking photos with digicams, and they're the ones making the bucks.
The dos and don't are not that hard to abide. You just need to know which concerts that allows you to take photos, in the case that you don't have a pass.
I understand that many are upset with the stereotype of 'professionalism' and stuff like that, but on a concert basis, you have to understand that there are many parties you have to deal with, like security, organisers, and the artist management. If they feel like you are 'violating' their concert grounds, they DO have the right to lead you out. There is just a need for co-operation.
We need to understand the organiser's point, not just us as photographers. Sometimes it gets frustrating, but there isn't much we can do, right?
Get this, not only you as audience have restrictions, even us media/concert photographers have our own set of restrictions, even though we are given the leeway and freedom of taking photos at the show. Unless you're hired by Avril Lavigne and she wants you to photograph the whole show and be wherever you are, then you probably won't have restrictions. Then again, it means you need an authorized pass.
And vonlichenstein, you can always shoot concerts. There are many outdoor concerts, namely Baybeats, Tapestry and such that you can shoot. Attach yourself to bands who do a lot of show, and tell them you're going to shoot their set. THAT, there are no restrictions, because it is open to the public and the show is free. Restrictions and the dos and donts only come when it is a paid concert, and when organisers/artist management tell you otherwise. Whatever it is, ALWAYS approach organisers or anyone in the know and ask if there are any restrictions in taking photos for the artist/show.
- Status
Similar threads
