No video cameras allowed so what about super 8?

Post by **Patrick** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:27 pm

Once in a while I come across events with a sign in bold lettering saying: "No video cameras allowed." One such 'event' was a Romanian circus visiting my city. This circus had no problem with still photography and one of the ushers there said that I could basically go wherever I wanted to get a good position for photos. Though at the beginning of the show, the announcer reminded the crowd of the 'no video cameras' policy.

So I'm wondering if a super 8 camera would be allowed. Obviously, a super 8 camera bears some resemblance to a video camera however if one of the personell taps you on the shoulder and tells you to stop filming, you can tell him or her that it's a movie camera, not a video camera! If the person persists, you can tell them that the sign specifically says 'no video cameras' and this is not a video camera. Do you think that would actually work? I really wonder.

Out of curiosity, has anyone here ever brought along a super 8 camera to some event that allowed still photography but banned video recording? If so, were you able to film without too many hassles?

Post by **Angus** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:33 pm

Back when the CART (Indycar/Champcar) series first visited the Rockingham track in England I was considering going...this would be around 2001 I guess.

I asked about photography and they replied "obviously we would discourage video cameras"...so I asked "what about cine cameras?" and they declined to respond.

Legally, if they only ban video then you can take some other form of motion capture device in!

Post by **downix** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:33 pm

Depends on the event, I suppose. I'd ask them.

Post by **Scotness** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:34 pm

Depends on how anal the security people are -- the concern could be that digital images could be emailed etc - at least you could say that that's very hard to do with it being shot on film.

Just out of interest do you know if there are any restrictions filming at the cricket?

Scot

Post by **mattias** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:54 pm

i've yet to see a digital still camera that doesn't shoot video...

no, obviously you can't take a super 8 camera if they don't allow video; any other interpretation is playing stupid. of course it doesn't hurt to ask, since the person you talk to may very well be just that. :-)

/matt

Post by **audadvnc** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:28 pm

It's not video, it's a movie camera. True, but its function is similar. Hair-splitting arguments like this are like telling the traffic court judge "I wasn't speeding in a car, it's a pickup!" It probably won't help your case.

Apparently the show producers don't want to be seeing bad copies of last night's show on the Internet this morning. Or maybe they just want the audience to see their performance, rather than a bunch of LED viewfinders. Too many photo buffs experience secondhand lives because they were busy fiddling with their toys first time around.

Post by **vidwerk** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:53 pm

You could always bring along one of those Zeiss icon 8mm cameras that look like a 1940's still camera.

vidwerk.

Post by **Blue Audio Visual** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:12 pm

Angus wrote: Legally, if they only ban video then you can take some other form of motion capture device in!

Angus - Legally (at least here in the UK) if you are on private property people can pretty much do as they like when it comes to whether or not they choose to let you in. They could refuse entry if they don't like the colour of your trousers. If you took them to a small claims court to try to get your entry fee/ticket price back on the grounds that they only mentioned banning video rather than film cameras, your case would be thrown out pretty sharpish. That kind of law is interpreted by a 'common-sense' stance: e.g. it performs the same task as a video camera, so the answer is no, you can't bring it in.

It is normally a foolish course of action to argue the toss with security people at these sorts of events!

Post by **Angus** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:14 pm

Blue,

"within reason".

If they specifically ban video camears and not MP cameras...legally you may take in a MP camera.

I was at a Genesis concert Sunday night, the tickets stated boldly "No Cameara's" (sic)...not even still cameras....yet a third of the audience had still cameras and many were videoing clips on their phones and digital stills cameras.

Mind you, Genesis have always had a view that bootlegs are fair do's....

Post by **Blue Audio Visual** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:26 pm

Angus wrote: If they specifically ban video camears and not MP cameras...legally you may take in a MP camera.

In the case of the Genesis gig then it was probably all the people who had brought alongs their Cameara's (sic) who were refused entry, and everyone who brought cameras were OK.

Angus, English law isn't as literalistic as you are suggesting. But this bit of the thread is going way OT, and I don't want to get into an argument about it anyway!

Bart

Post by **mattias** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:32 pm

Blue Audio Visual wrote:English law isn't as literalistic as you are suggesting.

i don't think it is anywhere. in sweden it's even stated in the constitution that it's the "intent of the legislator" that should be the basis for any court decisions, not the law text.

/matt

Post by **Patrick** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:03 pm

"Just out of interest do you know if there are any restrictions filming at the cricket?"

Good question, Scott. Ive never enquired about that. Speaking of which, some very interesting amatuer colour 16mm film footage was recently discovered of a cricket game featuring Richie Benno (can't recall if he was bowling or batting.)

Back to the topic at hand, I wonder why some events ban video recording but allow still photography. I went to see this Romanian circus (that had such a policy) in the early to mid 90s in the days before the Internet was well established.

Post by **MIKI-814** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:27 pm

Patrick wrote:No video cameras allowed So I'm wondering if a super 8 camera would be allowed.

Super 8 cameras ARE videocameras 8) . A video camera is anything capable of taking moving images, no mater what format.

Why is it common to refer to "video" as something which is only contained in a magnetic band or digital format, is another question and error which comes from the '70's...

Post by **Patrick** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:37 pm

"Super 8 cameras ARE videocameras"

Not really!

Post by **Muckymuck** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:50 pm

Perhaps I can shed some light on the law in the UK. Basically there's no criminal offence at risk of being committed if you take a camera somewhere it says "no cameras" (unless it's government property.)

What the issue IS that it could be trespass if entry is conditional upon something such as not bringing in a camera or taking photos. Once on the property, if you take pictures in breach of a sign, then it can be trespass and the property owner or their employees are legally entitled to remove you, but not confiscate your images.

There doesn't even need to be a sign. The owner can decide randomly and arbitrarily that they don't want pictures taken, and if you don't comply there and then, that's trespass and you can be removed.

I don't think any of this is actually written down in statute. In England we have this funny concept called the "common law" which is unwritten and is just stated by judges on a case-by-case basis. That's where these rules are found as far as I know.

Filmshooting

No video cameras allowed so what about super 8?

No video cameras allowed so what about super 8?

Re: No video cameras allowed so what about super 8?