Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t622892-re-photographing-the-verrazano-narrows-bridge.html)

Penis Kolada 06-29-2008 02:37 PM

Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge
 
Shawn Hirn wrote:
> Yesterday, a friend and I drove from central NJ to Coney Island just to
> check out the area for the day. Our route took us across the
> Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.
>
> My buddy and I couldn't help but notice numerous signs on both ends of
> the bridge warning people not to video tape or photograph it. The signs
> said something along the lines of ...
>
> "No photography or video. Strickly enforced."
>
> I drove, but had my friend been so inclined, he could have easily taken
> out his digital camera from his pocket and snapped a few photos or used
> its video recording feature to shoot some video as we traveled over the
> bridge.
>
> What's the bid deal about photographing that bridge. I have several
> photos that I shot of that bridge from a friend's small plane a few
> weeks prior to 9/11/2001 and I imagine if I was still in touch with that
> friend, we could go up and shoot some more photos. I also don't see why
> this ban exists; it can't possibly be for security, can it? I could
> easily shoot photos of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge from several vantage
> points and the authorities would never know.
>
> I have also shot many photos of the Brooklyn Bridge, even about two
> weeks after 9/11 occurred, and I have spent some enjoyable afternoons
> walking across that bridge photographing it on foot, so why the
> prohibition about shooting photos of the "Verrazano-Narrows Bridge" but
> not the Brooklyn Bridge? It makes no sense.
>
> I am wondering if anyone has actually been caught shooting such photos
> and hassled by the cops? Actually, a few years ago, I was asked not to
> shoot photos of the Tacony-Palmyra bridge near where I live. That bridge
> spans the Delaware River. I was standing on the New Jersey side of the
> bridge, in front of a police station, when a cop walked over to me and
> asked me to put my camera away, which I did. Despite that, I have
> subsequently shot numerous photos of that bridge, from the park that's
> adjacent to that bridge, no problem.


It was probably to prevent people from stopping to take a photo -
creating a traffic hazard - more than a photographic restriction. I have
seen bridges with similar signs.

PK

Vince 06-29-2008 07:25 PM

Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge
 


Penis Kolada wrote:
> Shawn Hirn wrote:
>
>> Yesterday, a friend and I drove from central NJ to Coney Island just
>> to check out the area for the day. Our route took us across the
>> Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.
>> My buddy and I couldn't help but notice numerous signs on both ends of
>> the bridge warning people not to video tape or photograph it. The
>> signs said something along the lines of ...
>>
>> "No photography or video. Strickly enforced."
>> I drove, but had my friend been so inclined, he could have easily
>> taken out his digital camera from his pocket and snapped a few photos
>> or used its video recording feature to shoot some video as we traveled
>> over the bridge.
>> What's the bid deal about photographing that bridge. I have several
>> photos that I shot of that bridge from a friend's small plane a few
>> weeks prior to 9/11/2001 and I imagine if I was still in touch with
>> that friend, we could go up and shoot some more photos. I also don't
>> see why this ban exists; it can't possibly be for security, can it? I
>> could easily shoot photos of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge from several
>> vantage points and the authorities would never know.
>> I have also shot many photos of the Brooklyn Bridge, even about two
>> weeks after 9/11 occurred, and I have spent some enjoyable afternoons
>> walking across that bridge photographing it on foot, so why the
>> prohibition about shooting photos of the "Verrazano-Narrows Bridge"
>> but not the Brooklyn Bridge? It makes no sense.
>>
>> I am wondering if anyone has actually been caught shooting such photos
>> and hassled by the cops? Actually, a few years ago, I was asked not to
>> shoot photos of the Tacony-Palmyra bridge near where I live. That
>> bridge spans the Delaware River. I was standing on the New Jersey side
>> of the bridge, in front of a police station, when a cop walked over to
>> me and asked me to put my camera away, which I did. Despite that, I
>> have subsequently shot numerous photos of that bridge, from the park
>> that's adjacent to that bridge, no problem.

>
>
> It was probably to prevent people from stopping to take a photo -
> creating a traffic hazard - more than a photographic restriction. I have
> seen bridges with similar signs.
>
> PK


Bull it based on 9/11 period.

Kind of ridiculous seeing as the plans for every bridge in the world are
a matter of public record.
--












*********************Less than 210 days to go**************************


Chris H 06-29-2008 09:19 PM

Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge
 
In message <4867E18D.4060706@optonline.net>, Vince
<vpilutis@optonline.net> writes
>
>> It was probably to prevent people from stopping to take a photo -
>>creating a traffic hazard - more than a photographic restriction. I
>>have seen bridges with similar signs.
>> PK

>
>Bull it based on 9/11 period.


The US had gone into panic mode since 9/11

>Kind of ridiculous seeing as the plans for every bridge in the world
>are a matter of public record.


Absolutely not. They are in many countries but not in all.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/




Vince 06-30-2008 03:30 AM

Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge
 


Chris H wrote:
> In message <4867E18D.4060706@optonline.net>, Vince
> <vpilutis@optonline.net> writes
>
>>
>>> It was probably to prevent people from stopping to take a photo -
>>> creating a traffic hazard - more than a photographic restriction. I
>>> have seen bridges with similar signs.
>>> PK

>>
>>
>> Bull it based on 9/11 period.

>
>
> The US had gone into panic mode since 9/11
>
>> Kind of ridiculous seeing as the plans for every bridge in the world
>> are a matter of public record.

>
>
> Absolutely not. They are in many countries but not in all.
>
>


Bottom line a terrorist dosn't need photos to blow up a bridge
--












*********************Less than 210 days to go**************************



All times are GMT. The time now is 08:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.