kentucky derby bans large cameras

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

04/24/2013 02:35:38 PM · #2

Big zoom cameras are dangerous. They can catch security personnel in compromising, embarrassing situations.

Message edited by author 2013-04-24 14:36:17.

cowboy221977

Canon EOS-60D

04/24/2013 03:06:25 PM · #3

REALLY???????????? I swear it's getting more ignorant by the day. Solution to the security problem...x-rays...x-ray all bags and electronics.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/24/2013 03:13:21 PM · #4

Has anybody, in history, ever hidden something dangerous in an SLR? Shoes are more dangerous, ban them for the sake of safety. The annoying thing is that people try to say SLRs are dangerous when they really just don't want anybody taking good quality photos and making money from their content.

Message edited by author 2013-04-24 15:14:28.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

04/24/2013 03:16:30 PM · #5

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

Absolutely. That's what I always assume when I see a restriction like this. "Security" is just an excuse.

Devinder

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

04/24/2013 03:25:09 PM · #6

meh, their event- they get to call the shots. Its unfortunate, but i guess it gives the pros working there a bit more of an edge when it comes to making some dough off their pics.

As a spectator, i do think its a bad practice on their end though.

04/24/2013 03:44:19 PM · #7

Originally posted by Devinder:

I agree, their event, their call. I don't see why they (and other events) can't just be honest and say, "No professional cameras, photos are for sale at the gift shop." Why do events have to disguise this? They're in the business of making money, that's understandable. It's as if they're ashamed of it.

Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro Lens for Sony

04/24/2013 03:46:44 PM · #8

Screw em. I planning on shooting the festivities outside the track this year anyway.

bobnospum

Sony Alpha a99 II

04/24/2013 03:50:55 PM · #9

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Has anybody, in history, ever hidden something dangerous in an SLR? Shoes are more dangerous, ban them for the sake of safety. The annoying thing is that people try to say SLRs are dangerous when they really just don't want anybody taking good quality photos and making money from their content.

Absolutely. That's what I always assume when I see a restriction like this. "Security" is just an excuse.

Steve Buscemi built a camera-gun in the movie Delirious :)

He played a small-time celebrity photographer desperate to make it big, who grows jealous of a friend and then plots to kill him on the red carpet. He ruins a nice camera and lens making it into a gun. It was a stupid plot trick, as he could have used a handgun just as easily and in the end never fired the gun anyway!

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

04/24/2013 03:59:48 PM · #10

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

Originally posted by Devinder:
meh, their event- they get to call the shots. Its unfortunate, but i guess it gives the pros working there a bit more of an edge when it comes to making some dough off their pics.

As a spectator, i do think its a bad practice on their end though.

I agree, their event, their call. I don't see why they (and other events) can't just be honest and say, "No professional cameras, photos are for sale at the gift shop." Why do events have to disguise this? They're in the business of making money, that's understandable. It's as if they're ashamed of it.

because they want people to take pictures with their cellphone and Facebook how great the event is, but they dont anyone to have any hi-res images.

Message edited by author 2013-04-24 15:59:59.

04/24/2013 05:00:38 PM · #11

One of my partners worked his way in as an "official" event photographer.

Everything he produces goes through control. He owns nothing after the event.

Not sure its as much about revenue from print/media sales though. A significant component is simply controlling the imagery portrayed about the event that makes it into the marketplace.

04/24/2013 05:02:19 PM · #12

The Parte is in the streets anyway.

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

04/24/2013 06:59:08 PM · #13

So other than the FBI getting tons of better than cameraphone images to screen of potential suspects, what happened involving SLRs in Boston that led race officials to this plan to get rid of interchangable lens cameras. "Churchill Grounds says that the measures were developed after consulting with several law enforcement authorities following the Boston Marathon bombings last week. ". If the ban was on back packs, pressure cookers, black windbreakers, Chechen immigrants, or baseball caps, I could see a tie in. I worry about how bad security must be when this seems like the best approach to these nimrods. I can bring my lawnchair and my cooler into the infeild, but clearly an SLR is dangerous, why exactly can not be explained, but I feel safer knowing they are keeping me safe.

EL-ROI

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

04/24/2013 07:20:03 PM · #14

Someone needs to crump in their tea-pots!!

PapaBob

04/25/2013 12:46:03 AM · #15

I have to assume anyone with a detachable lens is now on a watch list!

Skip

Canon EOS-1D X

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM

04/25/2013 08:13:29 AM · #16

fwiw, there is a little more to it.

Originally posted by skip:

The check-in was interesting. We were instructed to put our bags on the ground, open them, remove all working gear, and turn everything on. The Secret Service fired every camera and every strobe, and looked through every lens. Then they had a dog sniff every bag. All this went on while we were each wanded, carefully and slowly. I can also only assume that I had passed some sort of background check between the time I had called that afternoon and nowâ�¦

full article here

the amount of time necessary to even do a rudimentary check would add substantial time to getting into the event - enough that it's easier to say "don't bring that". you can argue to the cows come home about how illogical it is and how easy it would be to subvert their efforts, but i don't think any amount of huffing and puffing will blow that house down...

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM for Nikon

04/25/2013 08:41:07 AM · #17

Originally posted by Skip:

fwiw, there is a little more to it.

Originally posted by skip:
The check-in was interesting. We were instructed to put our bags on the ground, open them, remove all working gear, and turn everything on. The Secret Service fired every camera and every strobe, and looked through every lens. Then they had a dog sniff every bag. All this went on while we were each wanded, carefully and slowly. I can also only assume that I had passed some sort of background check between the time I had called that afternoon and nowâ�¦

full article here

the amount of time necessary to even do a rudimentary check would add substantial time to getting into the event - enough that it's easier to say "don't bring that". you can argue to the cows come home about how illogical it is and how easy it would be to subvert their efforts, but i don't think any amount of huffing and puffing will blow that house down...

I think it would be interesting to just make everyone go naked. Someone could invent an automatic cavity checking machine, so the lines would move right along. Some people might even enjoy it so much they'd go through the line twice.

bohemka

Nikon D700

04/25/2013 09:46:42 AM · #18

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

I think it would be interesting to just make everyone go naked.

Except for the hats.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

04/25/2013 09:48:48 AM · #19

Originally posted by Skip:

When I did work inside a nuke plant, we had to get every case and piece of equipment inspected X-rayed and sniffed each time it went in OR out of the facility. We went through a similar process. One of the lenses had an element with enough low level radiation (probably from the rare earth glass in one of the lens elements or the electron beam used in the coating process) that it set off the detector every time. We had to be escorted at all times and to go through a door, first our escort had to scan his badge to open the door, each of us had to scan our badges as we went through, then our escort had to scan his badge again. When someone's scan didn't register, an armed security guard was dispatched to track down the group and account for everyone.

Kelli

Canon EOS-D60

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

04/25/2013 10:41:33 AM · #20

I'd like to see a link to even one actual, real terrorism case involving a camera.

bohemka

Nikon D700

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM for Nikon

04/25/2013 10:51:38 AM · #21

Originally posted by Kelli:

I'd like to see a link to even one actual, real terrorism case involving a camera.

Have a look at Slippy's portfolio.

cowboy221977

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

04/25/2013 10:57:31 AM · #22

Originally posted by Kelli:

I'd like to see a link to even one actual, real terrorism case involving a camera.

Camera no..but electronics have been used in the past..

failed plot