Photography problems at my daughters Ballet Recital

Lostgear

Lostgear

Suspended / Banned
Messages
402
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
My daughter had her first Ballet/Dance recital in Derby last night. She is only 4 and did really well. I turned up with all my tog kit ready to be a proud parent on the front row and capture the moment. However just before the curtain went up, an announcement came over the speakers that no "flash photography" was to be allowed on child protection grounds and anyone "taking photos" would be ushered out!

The requirements I think were unclear, is it usual to ban flash, allowing one to take photos with a fast lens, or just to ban photography full stop.

The former seems more likely, as the whole performance was recorded on a pro video camera, the DVD by the way is on sale for a tenner.

I found the vagueness of the announcement very annoying, but didn't want to risk getting thrown out, so put my kit away and now have no record of her first big performance.

Just wondered what your thoughts/experience was. BTW the ages were from about 3 years upto about 65.
 
The usual politically correct paranoia involving children & photography.
I think any unofficial togs would have had problems - flash or not.

"Sledgehammer to crack a nut"?
 
to be honest , if it was my daughter - i'd be looking for some where else for her to dance.
 
No flash is usual to prevent spoiling video recording or the comfort of the performers and audience.

No photography is becasue everyone with cameras are paedophiles aparently there getting their rocks off with photos of kids to spread accross the internet.

In reality it is becasue there was someone there recording a video of the performance in the hope to make some cash from selling coppies of the DVD either personally or for the dance school.
 
Whats the difference between you taking 1 or 2 photos a minute and camcorder recording 30frames a second, it's still picking up images of children so with regards to that... its just crap
 
It's all about kids who may have some kind of social care order on them. It does seem funny but that is how the local government sees the issue and the centre/hall managers WILL not run the risk of upsetting the local council so they adhere to their own interpretation of very strict rules on photography.

It is also a sales gimmick but that is me being uber cynical, as usual.
 
davidbridges said:
Whats the difference between you taking 1 or 2 photos a minute and camcorder recording 30frames a second, it's still picking up images of children so with regards to that... its just crap
Click to expand...

The difference is they are selling the DVD for £10, no one would buy it if every one was taking pics.
So only way to do this is ban photography and then if you want to see your kid you buy the DVD

Oh and the pro vid is supposed to be a company and will have been checked out police report etc etc

spike
 
This is standard practice for events of this type. Every proud parent in the audience will want a photo of their child on stage but only about 1% would have the knowledge and equipment to be able to take a photo without flash - most would use compacts set to auto or mobile phone cameras. The kids would be stood there like rabbits in the headlamps and it would not make a good show.

Secondly, as I understand it, the laws around photographing children allow photography in public but if any parent objects then a blanket ban is enforced. This is certainly the case for my childs Nativity play and her dance performances. It must be a nightmare for the organiser to arrange and enforce.

Personally, I just buy the DVD's as I have sympathy with the organisers and accept that it's annoying for the audience and distracting for the kids if flashes are going off and people are moving around for a good shot.
 
gheesom said:
I can understand no flash as it can distract the kids, but schools are so scared of everyone being dodgy that they kinda don't trust anyone.
Click to expand...

Schools I can understand, but this was the Derby Assembly Rooms! 200 performers and over 750 in the Audience. I would have thought a professional outfit would have known better.
 
fenderstrat said:
Secondly, as I understand it, the laws around photographing children allow photography in public but if any parent objects then a blanket ban is enforced. This is certainly the case for my childs Nativity play and her dance performances. It must be a nightmare for the organiser to arrange and enforce.
Click to expand...

so what happens if one of the parents object to the official person taking pictures etc?
 
With a school if one parent objects to photos being taken then there is a blanket ban on photos by anyone.
 
SpikeK6 said:
The difference is they are selling the DVD for £10, no one would buy it if every one was taking pics.
So only way to do this is ban photography and then if you want to see your kid you buy the DVD

Oh and the pro vid is supposed to be a company and will have been checked out police report etc etc
Click to expand...

As someone who does both photography and the DVDs for these kinds of events... (and not the 'one bloke with a camcorder' DVDs, we use 2 camera operators and 3 professional HD cameras, the 'quality' of some of the very highly priced DVDs out there is shocking! - that said, £10 is pretty damn low for this kind of thing...)

I am enhanced CRB checked through my employer for DVD production work with children.

Flashes really do look terrible on video, will distract the child performers, and also for the people attending, the lighting engineer has spent a long time making it look good, flashes take away from this. So the same reasons there as for no flashes during gig photography really.

For child protection issues...imho it is not much of an issue, however I could see how the daily mail reading population could think otherwise. I do not do online sales of photos from events like this, but if I were to, I would probably use a passworded album and display the password at the event / in letters to parents through the school.

Certainly from my work with the Scout Association the standard policy is that web published images shouldn't feature the child recognisably AND their name / specific location - most images are captioned along the lines of 'a cub scout climbing a rope ladder'.

As for the marketing side... if it's a cave, which this kinda stuff usually is, I have no issues really with randoms rocking up with SLRs - I know that my photos will probably be better than theirs (I had more stage access and more experience and better equipment than most of the uncles coming along 'with a big camera' etcetcetc), and end of the day I'm offering a high quality souvenir print, and also that one negative comment from myself will likely result in at least some bad gossip my way, much in the same way of the OP, possibly reducing sales....so I'll leave them to it...I have even been known to give people a hand with settings - and then have them buy a photo later because although their photos were good, it's not the shiny print for the grandparents to take home that night ;)

I also can't see how having a few photos will make people not want a DVD, so again, non issue there, as long as they don't start flashing away!
 
Little John said:
With a school if one parent objects to photos being taken then there is a blanket ban on photos by anyone.
Click to expand...

what should happen is, their child should be removed from the play/dance etc.
 
I had exactly the same problem last year, my daugthters 1st ballet show and she was 4yrs old to, i made my opinion's very clear to the show organiser's and ballet school after the show, to which some people didnt agree......:annoyed:
 
It is hard to accept the child protection excuse as anyone there with or without a camera can buy the dvd and see... what ever you are trying to protect. I agree though that flash is a nuisance.
 
Tight Fart said:
Surley on this basis you should have a CRB check to purchase the video!
Worlds gone mad.
Click to expand...

you do not need a crb check even to work with children, it is however part of an employer's requirements to check you if you are to be working alone with children. Not looking at pictures of them, taking photos of them or anything like that - only if you are going to be alone with them.
 
Lostgear said:
The former seems more likely, as the whole performance was recorded on a pro video camera, the DVD by the way is on sale for a tenner.
Click to expand...
How about you tell then you refuse them the rights to sale any images of your girl.......
 
Chaz Photos said:
How about you tell then you refuse them the rights to sale any images of your girl.......
Click to expand...

they'll laugh at you....?

you don't have any expectation of tight privacy at a _public_ dance _show_, and certainly not one that would be breached by anyone (who was probably there, in the audience) buying a dvd...therefore they are perfectly in their rights, and chances are that when you signed your daughter up to the dance show you signed something along those lines anyway.

oooor just sit back and enjoy the show, high blood pressure free...don't like it, don't buy a DVD, and take a photo of your daughter at home in her dance outfit?
 
itsdavedotnet said:
they'll laugh at you....?

you don't have any expectation of tight privacy at a _public_ dance _show_, and certainly not one that would be breached by anyone (who was probably there, in the audience) buying a dvd...therefore they are perfectly in their rights, and chances are that when you signed your daughter up to the dance show you signed something along those lines anyway.

oooor just sit back and enjoy the show, high blood pressure free...don't like it, don't buy a DVD, and take a photo of your daughter at home in her dance outfit?
Click to expand...

Why should we have to sit back and let it become a nanny state ?
 
How about demanding to see a CRB check on every person connected with the pro video company?, I bet they wont have one, then invoke human rights law against the school regarding your right to take photos, get on the PTA or similar and get up a cunsure of the rule, most of all do something about it, the more crap you eat the more they will feed you. GOOD LUCK
 
frankcanon said:
How about demanding to see a CRB check on every person connected with the pro video company?, I bet they wont have one
Click to expand...

They don't need one at all...

invoke human rights law against the school regarding your right to take photos, get on the PTA or similar and get up a cunsure of the rule, most of all do something about it, the more crap you eat the more they will feed you. GOOD LUCK
Click to expand...

it's private property, can dictate what they want, if you don't obey it's trespass.

Politely asking is far more likely to get a positive resolution... hell, maybe they're after some rehersal shots or similar to put in the program for the next show, or a whole group photo, etcetcetc... hold the blood pressure and turn it into a networking opportunity instead of ****ing everyone (including yourself!) off :)
 
itsdavedotnet said:
They don't need one at all...



it's private property, can dictate what they want, if you don't obey it's trespass.

Politely asking is far more likely to get a positive resolution... hell, maybe they're after some rehersal shots or similar to put in the program for the next show, or a whole group photo, etcetcetc... hold the blood pressure and turn it into a networking opportunity instead of ****ing everyone (including yourself!) off :)
Click to expand...

Quite right! Criminal Record Bureau checks are only needed for people who are going to supervise peoples considered at risk (the mentally ill, elderly and young etc). In fact, I am surprised that the umbrella group or CRB themselves provided the check for someone who has listed their occupation as photographer or videographer, as only posts listed under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 should be granted a CRB. The full list of posts which would require or an employer can apply for a CRB can be found at: http://www.crb.homeoffice.gov.uk/guidance/rb_guidance/eligible_posts.aspx

As for no flash, this is quite common, normally one would use a fast lens and high ISO to counter the issue of not being able to use a flash, also the lighting should be of sufficient quality to capture images on a decent camera.

A blanket ban could be imposed as an arena is private property and the agents/owners of the property may put a condition on entry to the property, if that condition is broken, you are then trespassing and may be removed from the premiss with reasonable force.

Public property on the other hand does not have such limitations except in certain areas such as power stations, military bases and ports.

The entire thing currently raging about child protection from photographers is a farce. I was told by a local government employee that for them to publish images they take in a public place or own their own property, they must have a consent form signed by the parent or the subject themselves if 18+ which just shows a complete ignorance to the law. The consent form has really come about from America and people believing that they require one because some website has told some middle level manager that they require a model release and so they have told their employer.
 
itsdavedotnet said:
Politely asking is far more likely to get a positive resolution... hell, maybe they're after some rehersal shots or similar to put in the program for the next show, or a whole group photo, etcetcetc... hold the blood pressure and turn it into a networking opportunity instead of ****ing everyone (including yourself!) off :)
Click to expand...

the man speaks sense :thumbs:
 
I think there's 3 reasons...

1 - sales!
2 - paranoia (of being sued for not being responsible for the children)
3 - other peoples paranoia! (think along the lines of "my daughter is wearing a ballet tutu, you can see all of her legs and her leotard, to a numpty, could look like underwear, I don't want someone taking a photo of her like that, you don't know whose hands it may fall in! By the way, when is the concert and how much are the tickets?")
 
SpikeK6 said:
The difference is they are selling the DVD for £10, no one would buy it if every one was taking pics.
So only way to do this is ban photography and then if you want to see your kid you buy the DVD

Oh and the pro vid is supposed to be a company and will have been checked out police report etc etc

spike
Click to expand...

so the (possible)perv that works for them ,hasn't been caught yet:eek:
 
MagicMynx said:
CRB Checks are pointless IMHO anyway - a good criminal doesn't get caught - d'oh!
Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely agree.

I have a CRB with the FA because I coach children's football but wonder about the following:

There is nothing (apart from adhering to morally correct behaviour, of course) preventing anybody from offending the moment they have their CRB clearance.

And in line with your comment, there are two classes of people with CRB clearance:
Those who have never offended and those who have not been caught.
 
We had the same problem at my daughter's dance recital at college. No photography at all! A serious annoyance!!
 
We had a similar thing at our daugters performance a few years back. Not only is it the photography bit that winds me up, this is no disrespect to david who is in the profession, and i understand about overheads but we had to pay for my daughter to be in the show then went costume off dance school and pay to have it cleaned then pay to see the show and pay for the dvd upfront at £25 and then prints at £15 iirc dvd we waited 8 weeks for but they cashed the cheque as soon as they received some 2-3 months before the Show, cost me a good £400 with everyting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top