| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
What do you think of these photo rules?
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 9:13 AM on 07.23.10 |
->> These rules are pulled directly from the New York Racing Association for shooting any race during the 2010 season. The full guide is four pages long, but I pulled this general section. Anyone notice any rules which might conflict directly with journalistic ethics? I will refrain from comment.
-----
GROUND RULES FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
Stay to the horse’s left: In this country, most of the work done on a thoroughbred is done from its left side. Naturally, if you are far away, this doesn’t matter. Do not put yourself in the dangerous position of being close to a horse and being on its right side. You will get kicked.
Use extreme care when crouching: Horses can also be frightened by photographers/videographers crouching or lying down, especially under the rail. Large video cameras are particularly frightening to horses. Use extreme care in such situations.
No shorts, sweatpants, or T-shirts are allowed in the clubhouse: The paddock and winners’ circle are considered part of the clubhouse and proper attire is required.
No flash or any other artificial lighting is allowed in the paddock, winners’ circle or at any time while shooting horses: This is necessary to protect humans and horses.
Shooting is prohibited at the betting windows: This is to protect the privacy of our patrons.
There is no shooting allowed in the jockeys’ changing area: To shoot in the jockeys’ lounge, scale room or color room, you must first check with the Press Office and then with Tim Kelly, Clerk of Scales, or Assistant Clerk of Scales, Eddie Brown.
Shooting from roof: No one may shoot from the roof unless granted advance permission by the NYRA Press Office.
Horses and their handlers always have the right of way: Horses have two primary defenses – kicking and flight. Photographers are granted access to the paddock area, but should not be intrusive and should give horses and their handlers plenty of space. Running and/or sudden movements are not allowed in the paddock.
Horse injuries: If a horse is injured on the racetrack, and a photographer leaves their position and goes onto the track to take photos, or later has photos of an injured horse published, their credentials will be permanently revoked.
----- |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 9:40 AM on 07.23.10 |
| ->> These rules rules look pretty sensible to me and seem more concerned with safety than anything else. They also explain WHY the rule is in force ("most of the work done on a thoroughbred is done from its left side") which is unusual and very welcome. |
|
Ron Manfredi, Photographer
 |
Merrick (Long Island) | NY | | Posted: 9:56 AM on 07.23.10 |
->> I agree with Jim.
The only thing that bothers me is the last paragraph. What I think is unclear is whether a published photo of an injured horse that was taken without the photog leaving his position and going onto the track would still result in loss of credentials. |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 10:50 AM on 07.23.10 |
->> " Horse injuries: ... later has photos of an injured horse published, their credentials will be permanently revoked."
Is THIS what you are talking about Scott? |
|
Amy Wallot, Photographer
|
Frankfort | KY | USA | Posted: 11:02 AM on 07.23.10 |
->> I shoot a lot of horse racing around here (Kentucky, go figure) and most of that is standard, with the exception of the last paragraph. Although you are not allowed to go ONTO the track, I have not heard about not being able to publish an injury. Scott, do you know if anyone has asked the NYRA about this?
See Jamie Rhodes' SportsShooter award winner here:
(It will make you cringe, but he did a great job of getting the moment)
http://www.sportsshooter.com/2007_contest_winners/index.html
Or do an image search for Eight Belles. |
|
Sean D. Elliot, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Norwich | CT | USA | Posted: 11:08 AM on 07.23.10 |
->> any sort of prior restraint like that is a non-starter for me.
Guess you'd have to decide before publishing if it was worth losing your credential? |
|
Ray Anderson, Photographer
|
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 11:19 AM on 07.23.10 |
->> Having worked around thoroughbreds and seen someone sitting down and not paying attention have his head kicked in from the right side of the horse I agree with all of the safety issues.
The only issue I have a minor problem with is them being upset if an injured horse photo is published but I understand and would follow their guidelines. |
|
Ray Anderson, Photographer
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 12:14 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> The last paragraph is the point. I am very picky about photos where there is a fall. I know horse people are even more picky. Many do not want any images that might "hurt" the sport or give PETA ammunition.
That being said, there are images of falls/injured animals that just should never see the light of day. Not because of censorship, but because they just add nothing to a story. On the other hand, sometimes there are images that are just that transcendent, that storytelling and that amazing, they should be published. They should not gratuitously show carnage just to show carnage. They should tell a story.
Flat out telling someone from AP or Getty or anywhere that they will not be allowed to shoot if they transmit a photo of an injured horse crosses the line for me. The problem is, most race tracks are private property, and so being, they can set their own set of rules and approve access for whomever they choose.
It is an interesting situation. I just hope we don't have a situation where the waters are tested. Also, I totally agree with the not entering the track part. That is a given. There may be loose horses, horse getting out of the way and human and equine medical personnel rushing to give someone aid. You should get bounced for running onto the track for that. The rest is still an interesting proposition. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Matthew Cavanah, Photographer
|
Columbia | MO | US | Posted: 12:29 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> Not that this would be my knee jerk reaction to the situation, but would that last paragraph hold up in a court?
Isn't an injured horse newsworthy, thus making it fall under the warm blanket of the first amendment? I remember a few years ago, ESPN cut away from march madness to show an injured horse. (Can't remember where the track was, and they never actually showed the horse, just the tent that was erected around it while vets tried to save it.)
It just seems to me like that's the kind of thing you can't really put constraints on. And what is the track trying to say by not allowing it? Horses don't get hurt at their track? |
|
Matthew Cavanah, Photographer
|
Columbia | MO | US | Posted: 12:33 PM on 07.23.10 |
| ->> Oh how I wish there was an "edit post" feature. Scott's posts weren't up when I started writing and I hadn't considered the private property or PETA angle. Makes a world more of sense now. |
|
Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 12:40 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> I completely agree with what Sean said about prior restraint.
Scott, I know you want to see your sport protected, but there are simply times when the injury IS the story, and putting a black and white rule in place ahead of time will only create as many problems as it is hoping to prevent (I get the feeling from your second paragraph that you might feel the same way). Barbaro, Eight Belles and Landseer immediately come to mind (Ruffian does too because her race essentially ended match racing).
I have a HUGE problem with the word "injured." The rule doesn't distinguish between a horse that is injured and one that has to be euthanized. I know what the intent of the rule is, but its wording is very vague.
Would you advocate permanently revoking the AP's credential over this: http://tinyurl.com/6no2l4
Everybody knows horse racing is a dangerous sport. Instituting a rule like this only serves to make people think that you are trying to sweep a dirty part of the sport under the rug, and will ultimately do more harm than good. |
|
Butch Miller, Photographer
|
Lock Haven | PA | USA | Posted: 12:44 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> I'm sure every NFL quarterback would love a restriction that precluded the publication of fumbles, sacks or interceptions they suffer ... but such restrictions are not likely to happen ... at least in the near future ...
The last graph can be a deal breaker ... but a single voice against the restriction, will likely not get it changed ... it would take an industry-wide boycott of PJ's to send a message that that type of restriction is unacceptable, and if the host wants the media present for it's events, the host can not pick and choose which content is worthy of publication ... that both good news ... and bad news are all a part of telling the story ....
OTOH ... if you accept the credential by agreeing to the restrictions ... I would think you would be bound by that agreement to honor the restrictions .... as in any contract ... |
|
Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 12:45 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> Scott....while I was writing, your second post and two from Matthew were posted, so I was referring to the second paragraph of your 12:14 post.
Because the New York Racing Association governs Belmont Park, are they going to revoke NBC's tv rights if they show an injured horse on the track? |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 1:16 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> @McNamara - Did you read my post? Where did you get I want to see the sport protected? I am picky about what we put out there, but those are editing decisions after the images have been made. I have always been of the mindset to take the photos and decide later if they are worthy of being out there. Editors make decisions like that all the time.
I can guarantee you, NBC isn't going to air footage. Not a chance. And I understand your point too. I am saying there is a level of newsworthiness and a level of "story" and you have to be cognizant of that. I don't support any censorship at all, personally. News is news, but there is also the market and the medium. Is it newsworthy? I set the bar pretty high, but at least it is my bar, not some pre-ordained bar set by someone else. |
|
Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 1:21 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> I did read your post. I intimated protection from "there are images of falls/injured animals that just should never see the light of day. Not because of censorship, but because they just add nothing to a story."
I'm sorry if I misunderstood. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 1:27 PM on 07.23.10 |
->> Whether or not an injury to a horse is newsworthy in a particular circumstance is the decision of an individual editor.
The welfare of animals (like the welfare of children) has long been held by most civilized societies to be in the interest of and the responsibility of the public. This is certainly the case in an industry that uses animals as the focus of its primary product.
Scott,
Major networks (including NBC) have aired sequences of injured thoroughbreds many many times.
--Mark |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|