Commercial Canyoneering Video's

[Scott Card]

Wait, you mean my government won't let me take cool pictures and videos on forest/park land and post it? Or is it if I post it with the intent to make money. What if I want to make money but my video gets 10 hits? What if I just want to post it and show people cool stuff and it get a billion hits and I am rich? Or what if I post it and sell tickets....

[spinesnaper]

Wait, you mean my government won't let me take cool pictures and videos on forest/park land and post it? Or is it if I post it with the intent to make money. What if I want to make money but my video gets 10 hits? What if I just want to post is and show people cool stuff and it get a billion hits and I am rich? Or what if I post is and sell tickets....

Oh they will. They just want their use fee.

[ratagonia]

Wait, you mean my government won't let me take cool pictures and videos on forest/park land and post it? Or is it if I post it with the intent to make money. What if I want to make money but my video gets 10 hits? What if I just want to post is and show people cool stuff and it get a billion hits and I am rich? Or what if I post is and sell tickets....

Actually, if you TAKE the picture with the intent to make money, then that is a commercial activity. Rules vary widely by jurisdiction and interpretation.

Mens rae.

T

[Iceaxe]

Actually, if you TAKE the picture with the intent to make money, then that is a commercial activity. Rules vary widely by jurisdiction and interpretation.

Sounds like you are a lot more up-to-date on this than me.... I've never even considered a picture being an issue.... so what is the deal with taking a picture and using it in a guide book? Say a picture in imlay or heaps and using it in a canyoneering guide book? Or perhaps a picture elsewhere inside Zion and using it in your sales promotions?

[Scott Card]

Sounds like you are a lot more up-to-date on this than me.... I've never even considered a picture being an issue.... so what is the deal with taking a picture and using it in a guide book? Say a picture in imlay or heaps and using it in a canyoneering guide book? Or perhaps a picture elsewhere inside Zion and using it in your sales promotions?

OK, now that is just hittin' below the belt. Keep that kinda talk to yourself.

[Iceaxe]

I'm serious about wanting to know the rules. I was also thinking about the Canon PowerShot - Your Second Shot "Zion" Commercial...



I notice a lot of the still images are actually inside Zion, but much of the video, particularlly the slot canyon video appears to be slots just outside of the actual National Park (some of it looks a lot like Red Cave).

FYI: I just bought one of these camera's, the Canon Powershot ELPH 100 HS and it is awesome. The camera was $100 and takes great pictures and HD video. I love the camera for a point-n-shot. It's my understanding that the entire commerical was shot on one of the Canon HS cameras.

[spinesnaper]

Here is a great summary on this subject for those interested. I guess the big answer is: It depends. Frankly this rubs me the wrong way. Public lands. However, I guess it is one thing for Dan Ransom to shoot a picture of a thunderstorm over the Grand Canyon and quite another for a movie production company to build a movie set in Blue John Canyon. Here's the link:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/photo-permits/

Ken

[CarpeyBiggs]

I'm serious about wanting to know the rules. I was also thinking about the Canon PowerShot - Your Second Shot "Zion" Commercial...



I notice a lot of the still images are actually inside Zion, but much of the video, particularlly the slot canyon video appears to be slots just outside of the actual National Park (some of it looks a lot like Red Cave).

FYI: I just bought one of these camera's, the Canon Powershot ELPH 100 HS and it is awesome. The camera was $100 and takes great pictures and HD video. I love the camera for a point-n-shot. It's my understanding that the entire commerical was shot on one of the Canon HS cameras.

Video is a whole other animal from stills. Off the top of my head (and I could be wrong...) you are technically supposed to get commercial permits for any still photography too. Hell, if you even have a tripod it used to be that way. These policies were set up before most people became enthusiast photographers though. Everyone carries a camera and tripod nowadays. So it's hardly impacting other's experience, when most people are doing the exact same thing.

Based on my very long process of securing permits for shooting in the grand canyon, their policy was unofficially that they can't monitor or patrol youtube or vimeo, so if that is where it's posted, it's no big deal. We were given permission to post anything we want in those locations. However, if you intend to directly sell it, you have to secure the proper permits.

It took us a very long time to finally convince the park we were not going to impact any other visitor's experience. That is the biggest issue with "filming." We shot very small footprint, leave no trace. But the park isn't used to that. They are used to hollywood showing up and shooting with tons of people and gear for days and days, and it makes a huge impact, so it require massive amounts of monitoring from park personnel. After a ranger accompanied us for a week, they basically gave us permission to shoot on permit, without supervision. That is rare though, based on my limited experience.

My gut tells me this - if you are selling video footage from in the parks or on federal land, you should have the proper permit. However, if it is small footprint, you probably have very little to worry about. And if it is still photos, you probably have even less to worry about. High profile videos are probably subject to more scrutiny, however.

And fyi - when I shot the lightning photo at Grand Canyon, I did have a commercial permit. Even though I doubt it matters in this case.

Another side note - That commercial you linked above is most certainly not filmed on that ELPH camera. You can tell simply by looking at the depth of field in most of the images. That is impossible on a tiny camera. My guess is canon secured the proper permits for everything, and they probably shot it on their high end C300 camera, or maybe a RED. They also may have purchased some of the footage from someone else. But yes, I don't see any images in that commercial that look anything like would be produced by the tiny ELPH camera. Tough to say from a youtube link though.

[Iceaxe]

Thanks for the input...

Another side note - That commercial you linked above is most certainly not filmed on that ELPH camera.

Somewhere in Canon's literature it says the commerical was shot with a "Canon HS series" camera. The ELPH is the bottom tier of the HS line, I'm sure the commerical was shot with something from the high end of the line. When the commerial first came out I tried to find out exactly which camera it was filmed with and never could find an answer.

Edit: Reading the Canon ad disclaimer carefully... it might only be the still photo's used in the video that were shot with a Canon HS, and not the entire commercial....

[CarpeyBiggs]

As far as I know, the HS series refers only to a line of powershot models (i.e. cheap point and shoots). It doesn't refer to any cameras that have professional video quality, or even cameras that have substantial manual controls for video.

There are maybe 2-3 shots in that commercial that COULD be filmed with it (like the car driving in looking up at the sun), but the majority of shots are obviously not. There is no way to get that shallow DOF on a small camera. That commercial was almost certainly filmed on some much more expensive gear.

Not that it matters in the least...

[ratagonia]

Sounds like you are a lot more up-to-date on this than me.... I've never even considered a picture being an issue.... so what is the deal with taking a picture and using it in a guide book? Say a picture in imlay or heaps and using it in a canyoneering guide book? Or perhaps a picture elsewhere inside Zion and using it in your sales promotions?

I haven't looked it up in a while, but... in many federal jurisdictions, if you have people who are paid to be there (camera, sound, talent (models)) then you need a permit. If not, then generally you don't. In the video case, since the director is a professional videographer, the case can be made that he is defacto being paid.

For instance, if other people do canyon videos of canyons in Zion, it is probably OK. But if I do them, and Dan works on them, I think the Park would take objection. Also, I don't think I could shoot training videos (knot-tying, rappelling, etc) in the Park or or BLM land without a permit, but most other people could.

In the case of a guidebook, it helps that the guidebook supports the mission of the park, and that taking pictures is 'incidental' rather than the primary focus of some activity.

As I said, there is a lot of interpretation involved.

Tom

[spinesnaper]

It took us a very long time to finally convince the park we were not going to impact any other visitor's experience. That is the biggest issue with "filming." We shot very small footprint, leave no trace. But the park isn't used to that. They are used to hollywood showing up and shooting with tons of people and gear for days and days, and it makes a huge impact, so it require massive amounts of monitoring from park personnel. After a ranger accompanied us for a week, they basically gave us permission to shoot on permit, without supervision. That is rare though, based on my limited experience.

Dan

Just curious, so please pardon the question if it is inappropriate. Does the user pay for the ranger to monitor the activity of the permitted group, in which case, I am guessing that permit must be pretty expensive? Or does the ranger get supplied at tax payer expense, in which case, I guess we are all subsidizing commercial filming in these parks?

Ken

[ratagonia]

Thanks for the input...

Somewhere in Canon's literature it says the commerical was shot with a "Canon HS series" camera. The ELPH is the bottom tier of the HS line, I'm sure the commerical was shot with something from the high end of the line. When the commerial first came out I tried to find out exactly which camera it was filmed with and never could find an answer.

Edit: Reading the Canon ad disclaimer carefully... it might only be the still photo's used in the video that were shot with a Canon HS, and not the entire commercial....

We were up at Lamb's Knoll when they shot some of that. BLM land, commercial permit, professional crew numbering, no ordure, around 50 people, assuming you include the caterers. They were set up in the Parking lot when we came out, since they wanted the noonish light. The crew in the canyon was probably only 8. So no, they did not use an ELPH to shoot that video.

I know they also shot some other locations, but did not see anything from inside Zion NP that would have involved being off a paved road.

T

[ratagonia]

National Park Policy: http://www.nps.gov/applications/dige...rlarea=permits

[quote="nps"]
Commercial Filming and Still Photography Permits
Lands of the United States were set aside by Congress, Executive or otherwise acquired in order to conserve and protect areas of untold beauty and grandeur, historical importance, and uniqueness for future generations. This tradition started with explorers who traveled with paint and canvas or primitive photo apparatus before the areas were designated as a national park. The National Park Service permits commercial filming and still photography when it is consistent with the park

[CarpeyBiggs]

Dan

Just curious, so please pardon the question if it is inappropriate. Does the user pay for the ranger to monitor the activity of the permitted group, in which case, I am guessing that permit must be pretty expensive? Or does the ranger get supplied at tax payer expense, in which case, I guess we are all subsidizing commercial filming in these parks?

Ken

In our case, we paid the salary for the park ranger for the days he was with us. I am not sure if that is done on EVERY permit or not. My guess is in GCNP the producers cover all those expenses. And yes, the permits are expensive, prohibitively so.

[CarpeyBiggs]

You will be required to obtain liability insurance naming the United States as additionally insured in an amount commensurate with the risk posed to park resources by your proposed activity. You may also be asked to post a bond to ensure the payment of all charges and fees and the restoration of the area if necessary.

I can verify this as well. Can be expensive.

[spinesnaper]

CarpeyBiggs

I can verify this as well. Can be expensive.

That kind of specialized liability insurance just sounds expensive. Imagine sending an insurance company a bill for wrecking a National Park. Thanks for sharing.

Ken

[Iceaxe]

I know they also shot some other locations, but did not see anything from inside Zion NP that would have involved being off a paved road.

The short video clip at the 30 second mark is without doubt the Pine Creek cathedral. And it's video and not a still as you can see from the rope movement.

[ratagonia]

The short video clip at the 30 second mark is without doubt the Pine Creek cathedral. And it's video and not a still as you can see from the rope movement.

20 second mark, actually, and yes, I think it is the Cathedral. Most likely. T

[carspidey]

i guess public land is not really public huh?

this sucks...

i am a downhill mountain biker and they just shut down two of my favorite trails built on public land by the people... it sucks...