Pixiq

Is “Downtown Disney” part of the amusement park, a separate shopping area, or a corporate-controlled area within a city like these other “outdoor malls” we’ve been seeing?
Michaelk42´s last blog ..Oh snap, Courteous Mass

It’s outside the Magic Kingdom, which is what many of us think of when we say Disney World, but it’s on Disney property because they practically own the whole town.

I guess they could ask him to leave but he doesn’t have to provide them any information. I don’t understand why they had a problem. The park is a tourist spot, photography is a given. So what if he had a tripod?

Here’s an interesting personal note.

I used to work for an A/V rental company and we had a delivery to Disney Land in Anaheim, CA. They had the strangest security protocol. Before we were able to park in the hotel docks, they made us go through a security checkpoint that was about half a mile away from the hotel. They checked the underside of the truck for explosives supposedly. After they checked the truck, the inspector wrote us a note saying we had cleared inspection.

I thought it was dumb. I’ve never seen anyone do this in all of the Las Vegas hotels I serviced. Not only that but what was to prevent us from passing inspection and then placing a bomb in the truck?

Sometimes these sorts of companies design security protocols that are unrealistic…it happens.

I would’ve waited for the deputies to show up, but I understand why he left. No one deserves this kind of harassment for something so innocuous.

In his blog he couldn’t understand why he, of all the people with cameras had been singled out for “interest.” Is he stupid? One word….TRIPOD

Carlos, thanks for the post. The shot referenced above is actually part of Universal Studios, not Downtown Disney. I showed it as an example of a place that was very friendly and cooperative with me. In fact, some of the employees at Universal commented on their own photography and we had a nice discussion.

Jack: – I try not to be entirely stupid, but sometimes it sneaks up on me. Yes, I had a tripod. I’ve seen others in the Disney parks with tripods, but just didn’t imagine that it would cause that much of a fuss.

My only guess right now is that I stood out, not as much because of the tripod, but because I wasn’t just taking a shot and moving. I was taking multiple exposures as the light changed and from different angles of the building. Partly because of the light, partly because of ebbs & flow of the crowd, and also because I never really know which shot will come out the way I like.

The sad part is that I’m not overly thrilled with the results from the night, but I’ll post one on my blog today.

My thanks to everyone who shared their concerns and is annoyed by people who harass photographers out of some mistaken concept of security.
William Beem´s last blog ..Disney Thinks Photographers Are Terrorists

Thus ensuring I never visit Disney World. Thanks for your dumb policies, Disney!
Steph´s last blog ..links for 2010-04-13

IANAL, so somebody tell me: what’s the law for public access to these types of spaces – privately owned, but open to the public? Would it apply to places like Temple Square, in downtown Salt Lake City? (It was given to the Mormons in exchange for a piece of property elsewhere in SLC, with public easement granted to the city for the sidewalks.)

Downtown Disney and Disney World is private property, but it’s open to the public to visit. It’s a business. I could’ve been taking pictures of the Red Lobster at a local mall and been in the same legal position.

They never asked me to leave, though. That was my idea.
William Beem´s last blog ..Disney Thinks Photographers Are Terrorists

Do you really need a tripod to construct an HDR *in full sun*? It can be really hard to set a tripod up in crowded places. If you take one shot and build pseudoexposures, then you don’t need the tripod.

Its crazy – I hope people will find out about it and decide against visiting Desney

John that doesnt work nearly as well as 3 or more exposures. You can’t get more dynamic range out of one file that isn’t already there.

I think you have to have a camera that shoots RAW and pull some shenanigans to get an HDR out of a single exposure.

Don’t have that capability so I haven’t been able to try.
Michaelk42´s last blog ..Oh snap, Courteous Mass

I wasn’t in full sun. I arrived about sunset and it was cloudy & overcast, and typically find the best light is just after sunset.

If you want a clear image with, in my case, five exposures, you use a tripod. I have done some HDR in full sunlight before. It can work, but it’s not always that great.
William Beem´s last blog ..Disney Thinks Photographers Are Terrorists

Photography on public property and photography on someone else s land are two different issues.IM not referning to anyone here when I say YOU.Just expressing a opinion.
A general rant to the world.
I have a right to my private property and to control who and what goes on my property. IF you don’t like Disney Do not buy or go on there land. Get your own theme park. If you go on my private property im going to ask you for ID im going to call you an A HOLE if I don’t like you. and I have a constitutional right to do it. Because your on my land. If you don’t like it Leave.IF you stand there and argue im gonna throw your whiny little ass off my land. Private property is private property. Dont buy there products if you dont like there business but dont act like you have a right to do whatever you want on another persons property you dont. You should expect a PUBLIC servant to treat you with respect because You are paying Taxes. A private person can treat you any dam way he pleases complain to his employer but he DOES NOT WORK FOR YOU His employer can tell him to call you a whiney little terd he has a right to do it. ITs Private Property. Within the law. THAT security guard is not Responsible for Knowing what your rights are You are supposed to know what your rights are.

Oh and What a really nice photograph ITs disneys loss. Sorry for being So rude.However Even a dismebodied head attached to a super computer has a right to be Rude on his OWN land.

I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak. I am Dr. Remulak.

Oops – insufficient arbitrary capitalization and spelling errors. Let me try again.

I Am DR. RemulaK. I Am DR. RemulaK. I Am DR. RemulaK. I Am DR. RemulaK. I Am DR. REMULAKK. I aN Dr. RemulaKK.

But hey, you get the idea.

And we can spread the word and embarrass the business. It probably won’t affect business much, but at least other photographers will be spared hassle and some other more deserving businesses will get the money.

Rich,

There is private and there is private property. Just read the trespassing laws in any state and you’ll see there are different levels of crime for different places. Entering an occupied house is much different from entering unoccupied land with no fence or signs.

This gets even more confusing when it comes to something like Disney World. There are a couple of layers here as well. Obviously photography is implicitly or explicitly allowed at Disney World or none of the visitors would be allowed to have cameras. While most buildings can’t be copyrighted, this is more like a movie set. So there is a possibility the buildings are copyrighted and if they can be, you can be sure they are. The costumes and characters are without a doubt copyrighted. I don’t know if you pay an admission to enter the area but that adds a layer as well.

What I’m saying is that Disney World and your private property aren’t the same thing and can’t be compared.

I think the guards handled this wrong. I haven’t bought anything from Disney in a long time and will now certainly avoid buying anything from them in the future.

Rich, even on your own property, there are limits. You cannot force someone to do something against their will on your own property. You cannot confiscate someone else’s property on your own property. To be honest, all you can really do is ask them to leave. If they don’t leave, you may use “reasonable force” to get them to leave.

Just because you own the land does not mean you may do whatever you please.
William Beem´s last blog ..Disney Thinks Photographers Are Terrorists

Thank you and I see your point about making something look like a public road and then finding our the whole thing is private. IT is deceiving. My point is however it is still private property and they do have a right to make rules within the law. My other point is that not being public servants they are not obligated to be nice to you. I have a constitutional right to be a A hole and OFTEN exercise it in fact probably daily but hey its America.

Yes, you are correct. I think. I do thank the owner of this sight for making me even more aware of what my rights are.Thank you too.
Ultimately however. The Servants are not required to tell there master what there masters rights are. We are the masters of our public servants it is our Duty to KNOW our rights and flex them.

My point was not that it was deceiving.

My point was that once they INVITED you on to their property your property wasn’t totally private any more. Also that once they allowed some to engage in photography on their property they had to allow others to engage in photography. That the privacy of a given piece of private property changes based on if it’s a house, a shopping center, a field, if there is a fence or not, if there are trespassing signs and if those signs have been previously enforced.

It’s obvious that this was private property just like it is obvious that a mall is private property, there is no deception. It is also obvious that you are allowed to enter upon the property without fear of trespassing. The only thing deceptive here is the behaviour of the ‘security guards’ and why they behaved in the manner in which they did. It is not a copyright infringement to take a photograph of a copyrighted work. It is an infringement to make money from the derived work, to interfere in the copyright owner from making money from the work or to represent it as your work. So if Disney is making money photographing visitors (customers) with works (the costumes) they own and you start taking photos of the customers and selling them to the customers you are interfering with Disney making money from the use of their works and making money from the use of Disney’s works and they can make you stop.

I’ll give you another example. Lets say I live near you and cross your property every day to get to my mail box. I’ve been doing this for years with your consent. They we have an argument and you decide to punish my by not allowing me to cross your property anymore. Guess what, most of the time you can’t. I have acquired an easement by adverse possession and can continue use that same path to cross your property forever.

Just what Article of the Constitution of the USA gives you a right to be an asshole? I’ve looked and can’t find it.
duane kerzic´s last blog ..2010-03-09 Yahoo Hard At Work

I believe it is the first amendment. What is not in the constitution is a right to not be offended by other peoples speech. I hope to continue to get pissed off by what people say. IT means I’m in a free country. Hey I could be wrong. I’m just a peasant on the lower rung of the class system that is not supposed to exist.

Oh and thank you for clearing that up for me. It was very helpful.

In Disney’s case though, what is corporate and what is public property? They “own” the “municipal corporation” of Reedy Creek Improvement District. So while the Disney company controls everything, it would seem that they actually have less control due to it being a municipal corporation rather than privately owned land. It seems as though Disney has created a sticky situation for itself and the law in general…

There are, however, a couple cameras that let you record three bracketed exposures in one shot. I think a few Pentax dslr models and that weird f-mount Sony contraption from a few years back had such a bracket feature.

Disney is a cancer on Florida. It needs to be bulldozed and replaced with casinos, strip clubs, brothels, and 24/7 nightclubs. One Disney in the country should be enough. Let Anaheim worry about it.

My pet peeve is the “think about the children” mentality of this country. If enjoying drinking, whores, pornography, and loud music is wrong, I don’t want to be right.

I bet this guy could do some cool HDR photos involving all of the above.
pod´s last blog ..WMC 2009

I wouldn’t bulldoze Disney because I do have some great childhood memories from the place. However, I agree that we need more adult entertainment around here.

I’ve ranted before that the reason our crime rate keeps climbing from murder, robbery, drug/thug gangs is because the local community is quashing all of the places where adults could legally blow off a little steam. Those needs don’t go away, so they’ve replaced them with stronger, illegal ways of doing it. The drug dealers are basically at war with each other to control that turf. We never had problems like that when SOBT was full of nudie bars.

True. I just want to see this guy do HDR work with the above, haha.

I’ve never understood the whole terrorism/photography premise. Like, how does taking a photo of a building aid a terrorist?
pod´s last blog ..WMC 2009

As a professional photographer myself, I agree with most of the sentiments here regarding Disney’s gestapo-like security practices. People SHOULD be able to take photos of their experiences unhindered, and without harassment from rent-a-cops.

To be perfectly fair though, this comes directly from Downtown Disney’s FAQ on prohibited items. (Keep in mind, a professional camera is only professional if the person using it is a professional photographer – but that doesn’t matter when it comes to corporate greed.)

“•Suitcases, backpacks or similar bags with wheels
•Suitcases, backpacks or similar bags larger than 18″w x 25″h x 37″d (which mirrors the large locker sizes). Lockers are available on a first-come, first-served basis.
•Professional cameras and recording equipment. (Reporters must make prior arrangements with Disneyland® Resort Media Relations.) Folding tripod stands that can fit inside a standard backpack are permitted.”

I did find their FAQ to be one giant contradiction though. In a nutshell Disney purposefully blurs the line on what is permitted, and what is not, in case they get into legal issues such as this one.

“Folding tripod stands that can fit inside a standard backpack are permitted” – Yet interestingly backpacks aren’t permitted. (Neither are baby strollers that are similar in size or larger than their RENTAL strollers).

I walked though Downtown Disney in May with two bodies and four lenses. Two bodies/lenses were always visible. Did the same last May.

I also did Magic Kingdom with the same stuff, plus a tripod for the fireworks.

I was only there for my five year old daughter. Disney flat out sucks.

Disney property is PRIVATE property, so they can do whatever they want. If they want to destroy their public image, they can go right ahead.

I was at MCO (Orlando International Airport) and DHS came out for a couple of visits. I hate Florida in the first place, so I’ll be spending my money somewhere else in the future.