Well, the Constitution of the US says those parks belong to the people.
That's what gives us the right to make pictures 'at will.' It is, in the
finaly analysis, cheaper to simply print more money than employ watch guards
and suffer retorical court challenges. In that way, we'd all live a happier
life.
S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Talbot" <BobTalbot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2005 6:26 AM
Subject: Re: conspiacy talk talk talk
What's wrong with charging to take pictures of national monuments?
Cameras could have a chip in them...
Alan
Quite right too.
Where in the constitution does it say you have the right to take
photos?
It would certainly help pay for the upkeep of the National Treasures.
But what would the "thought police" do about dinosaurs using manual
film cameras? I guess they could install image recognion software at
the local D&P and a cent per monument to the bill (maybe with a
discount for crappy out-of-focus frames?
In the UK it's becoming more and more common to have photo
restrictions in "National Trust" and other properties. They claim
it's to prevent crime - but as we all know the standard of image from
a hidden camera is more than good enough to plan which window you will
be climbing in. Of course, the real reason (speculation) is to make
you buy the guide books and post cards :o)
As with all these silly restrictions, it's honest people that suffer.
Criminals just find a way around it.
Bob
