Verrazano-Narrows bridge

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Cynicor, Nov 13, 2005.

  1. Cynicor

    Cynicor Guest

    Cynicor, Nov 13, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Cynicor

    Mike Warren Guest

    Mike Warren, Nov 13, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Cynicor

    Shawn Hirn Guest

    In article
    <4376b68e$0$23370$
    om.au>,
    "Mike Warren" <> wrote:

    > Cynicor wrote:
    > > NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    > > there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I
    > > took this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat
    > > between my tripod and my car door on the way back!
    > >
    > > http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    > > http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725

    >
    > I like the first one. Not a rat in sight.


    I agree. I have some great photos of that bridge in daylight from a
    small plane, but they are on 35mm prints.
     
    Shawn Hirn, Nov 13, 2005
    #3
  4. Cynicor

    freightcar Guest

    > NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge


    what this means?
     
    freightcar, Nov 13, 2005
    #4
  5. Cynicor

    Cynicor Guest

    freightcar wrote:
    >>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge

    >
    > what this means?


    Since 9/11, all the bridges have had prominent signs stating that
    photography from the bridge is expressly forbidden. I think the idea is
    that if you take a photo, you're a terrorist who is looking for the best
    spot to weaken the span with a bomb. But it's perfectly OK to go to a
    pull-off a quarter mile away and take photos of the bridge (or at least
    there are no signs about it).
     
    Cynicor, Nov 13, 2005
    #5
  6. Cynicor

    Dogfart Guest

    On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, at 06:42:57 [GMT -0500] (22:42:57 Sunday, 13 November
    2005 where I live) "Cynicor" wrote:

    > I think the idea is that if you take a photo, you're a terrorist who is
    > looking for the best spot to weaken the span with a bomb.


    Or maybe you are looking for the best spot to jump from?
     
    Dogfart, Nov 13, 2005
    #6
  7. Cynicor

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    Cynicor <> wrote:
    >freightcar wrote:
    >>>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge

    >>
    >> what this means?

    >
    >Since 9/11, all the bridges have had prominent signs stating that
    >photography from the bridge is expressly forbidden. I think the idea is
    >that if you take a photo, you're a terrorist who is looking for the best
    >spot to weaken the span with a bomb.


    No, no. If they wanted to do that, they'd just buy a postcard with a picture
    of the bridge on it. The real reason, as everyone knows, is that cameras
    emit bridge-corroding death rays from their lenses, and so anyone using one
    on a bridge is obviously a terst. I'll bet you just thought it was silly
    authorties overreacting as well, eh? Just goes to show...

    It's a good job that the Soviets never figured this out during the cold-war,
    or we'd be bridgeless by now.
     
    Chris Brown, Nov 13, 2005
    #7
  8. Cynicor

    Kinon O'cann Guest

    I believe you, but that is the stupidest God-damn thing I've ever heard of.
    I find it hard to imagine that anyone in any field of security could dupe
    themselves into believing that preventing people from taking pictures *from*
    a bridge can somehow prevent an attack by terrorists. If they are, then we
    (the USA) have employed the biggest pack of morons on the planet in our
    security and intelligence industry.

    "Cynicor" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > freightcar wrote:
    >>>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge

    >>
    >> what this means?

    >
    > Since 9/11, all the bridges have had prominent signs stating that
    > photography from the bridge is expressly forbidden. I think the idea is
    > that if you take a photo, you're a terrorist who is looking for the best
    > spot to weaken the span with a bomb. But it's perfectly OK to go to a
    > pull-off a quarter mile away and take photos of the bridge (or at least
    > there are no signs about it).
     
    Kinon O'cann, Nov 13, 2005
    #8
  9. On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:46:04 -0500, "Kinon O'cann"
    <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:

    >I believe you, but that is the stupidest God-damn thing I've ever heard of.
    >I find it hard to imagine that anyone in any field of security could dupe
    >themselves into believing that preventing people from taking pictures *from*
    >a bridge can somehow prevent an attack by terrorists. If they are, then we
    >(the USA) have employed the biggest pack of morons on the planet in our
    >security and intelligence industry.
    >


    They will stop you or follow you if you carry professional gear but if
    you use a P&S they ignore you. Do you suppose the bad guys don't know
    this? Do you suppose they would use a Canon 1D Mark II or would they
    use a P&S?

    They are spending so much time and money on things that don't improve
    security that we are less secure because of it!

    Mind you, I fully expect the bad guys to be using cameras, mostly
    digital, to scout locations and nothing the security folks have been
    doing will stop that. We need a different approach to the protection
    of high valued assets...


    Brian
     
    Brian Stirling, Nov 14, 2005
    #9
  10. Cynicor

    Father Kodak Guest

    On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:46:04 -0500, "Kinon O'cann"
    <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:

    >I believe you, but that is the stupidest God-damn thing I've ever heard of.
    >I find it hard to imagine that anyone in any field of security could dupe
    >themselves into believing that preventing people from taking pictures *from*
    >a bridge can somehow prevent an attack by terrorists. If they are, then we
    >(the USA) have employed the biggest pack of morons on the planet in our
    >security and intelligence industry.


    Did you write this before or after Katrina happened?

    Don't you know the answer to your own implied question.

    Father Kodak
     
    Father Kodak, Nov 14, 2005
    #10
  11. Cynicor

    Guest

    On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:43:49 +0100, "freightcar"
    <.> wrote:

    >> NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge

    >
    >
    >what this means?
    >


    More meaningless feel-good shit from the throbbing brains at
    DHS. Taking pictures of the water and the boats makes them feel
    creepy, so they've forbidden it.
     
    , Nov 15, 2005
    #11
  12. Cynicor

    Guest

    On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:46:04 -0500, "Kinon O'cann"
    <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:

    >I believe you, but that is the stupidest God-damn thing I've ever heard of.
    >I find it hard to imagine that anyone in any field of security could dupe
    >themselves into believing that preventing people from taking pictures *from*
    >a bridge can somehow prevent an attack by terrorists. If they are, then we
    >(the USA) have employed the biggest pack of morons on the planet in our
    >security and intelligence industry.


    Oh cut it out -- next thing you'll be having us believe the
    guys in charge are just a bunch of horse show jud ........

    >
    >"Cynicor" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> freightcar wrote:
    >>>>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge
    >>>
    >>> what this means?

    >>
    >> Since 9/11, all the bridges have had prominent signs stating that
    >> photography from the bridge is expressly forbidden. I think the idea is
    >> that if you take a photo, you're a terrorist who is looking for the best
    >> spot to weaken the span with a bomb. But it's perfectly OK to go to a
    >> pull-off a quarter mile away and take photos of the bridge (or at least
    >> there are no signs about it).

    >
     
    , Nov 15, 2005
    #12
  13. Cynicor

    Paul J Gans Guest

    wrote:
    >On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:43:49 +0100, "freightcar"
    ><.> wrote:


    >>> NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge

    >>
    >>
    >>what this means?
    >>


    > More meaningless feel-good shit from the throbbing brains at
    >DHS. Taking pictures of the water and the boats makes them feel
    >creepy, so they've forbidden it.


    It is NOT illegal to use a cell phone while walking on a bridge.

    The law is silly, useless, and only punishes those who take
    pictures with cameras and not cell phones.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
     
    Paul J Gans, Nov 15, 2005
    #13
  14. Cynicor

    Scotius Guest

    On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    <> wrote:

    >NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    >there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I took
    >this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between my
    >tripod and my car door on the way back!
    >
    >http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    >http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725


    Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    I'm sure.
    Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.
     
    Scotius, Aug 6, 2010
    #14
  15. Cynicor

    Peter Guest

    "Scotius" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    >>there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I took
    >>this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between my
    >>tripod and my car door on the way back!
    >>
    >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725

    >
    > Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    > could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    > I'm sure.
    > Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    > from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.



    NYC has no rule prohibiting photos from or of bridges. The MTA has such a
    rule as to their bridges, but it is rarely enforced. Also their is no MTA
    bridge that has a walkway..


    --
    Peter
     
    Peter, Aug 6, 2010
    #15
  16. Cynicor

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:59:33 -0400, Scotius <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    >>there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I took
    >>this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between my
    >>tripod and my car door on the way back!
    >>
    >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725

    >
    > Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    >could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    >I'm sure.
    > Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    >from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.


    I'm not of the opinion that the bad guys take pictures of bridges in
    order to blow them up, but your comment is not particularly logical as
    a reason a photograph would not be needed to blow up a bridge.

    The bad guy explosive expert could take a photograph of the bridge in
    order to provide a diagram for his underlings to use as a map in
    placing the charges. The guys actually placing the charges may not be
    explosives experts.

    If I'm running a terrorist group, I'm not sending my explosive expert
    out on the bridge. I'm going send more expendable troops out with
    just enough training to know how, but not necessarily where, to place
    the charges.



    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Aug 6, 2010
    #16
  17. Cynicor

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:59:33 -0400, Scotius <> wrote:
    : On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    : <> wrote:
    :
    : >NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    : >there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I took
    : >this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between my
    : >tripod and my car door on the way back!
    : >
    : >http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    : >http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725
    :
    : Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    : could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    : I'm sure.
    : Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    : from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.

    Of course they're not. Undoubtedly they're so that the photographer can't show
    the public how poorly the bridges are maintained.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Aug 6, 2010
    #17
  18. Cynicor

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 17:09:03 -0400, "Peter" <>
    wrote:
    : "Scotius" <> wrote in message
    : news:...
    : > On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    : > <> wrote:
    : >
    : >>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    : >>there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I took
    : >>this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between my
    : >>tripod and my car door on the way back!
    : >>
    : >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    : >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725
    : >
    : > Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    : > could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    : > I'm sure.
    : > Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    : > from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.
    :
    :
    : NYC has no rule prohibiting photos from or of bridges. The MTA has such a
    : rule as to their bridges, but it is rarely enforced. Also their is no MTA
    : bridge that has a walkway..

    How do you account for the prohibition of photography on the George Washington
    Bridge?

    My wife is afraid to drive on the bridge, so we have an understood division of
    labor: I drive, and she takes the obligatory pictures of the "no photography"
    signs. ;^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Aug 6, 2010
    #18
  19. Cynicor

    Peter Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 17:09:03 -0400, "Peter" <>
    > wrote:
    > : "Scotius" <> wrote in message
    > : news:...
    > : > On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    > : > <> wrote:
    > : >
    > : >>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    > : >>there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I
    > took
    > : >>this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between
    > my
    > : >>tripod and my car door on the way back!
    > : >>
    > : >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    > : >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725
    > : >
    > : > Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    > : > could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    > : > I'm sure.
    > : > Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    > : > from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.
    > :
    > :
    > : NYC has no rule prohibiting photos from or of bridges. The MTA has such
    > a
    > : rule as to their bridges, but it is rarely enforced. Also their is no
    > MTA
    > : bridge that has a walkway..
    >
    > How do you account for the prohibition of photography on the George
    > Washington
    > Bridge?
    >
    > My wife is afraid to drive on the bridge, so we have an understood
    > division of
    > labor: I drive, and she takes the obligatory pictures of the "no
    > photography"
    > signs. ;^)




    It is not a NYC bridge. It comes under the jurisdiction of the Port
    Authority. Although they have lots of no photography signs, the rule is not
    usually enforced. Also taking pictures of the bridge itself is not
    prohibited., but may be restricted. the non-stated reason is revenue
    generation.

    http://www.panynj.gov/press-room/media-access.html

    Correction:
    In my prior message I typed referred to "MTA." I should have stated that
    Photography is not addressed directly in the regulations, however signs are
    posted that prohibit photography. (You figure that one out.)

    Any inconvenience that may have been caused by this error is deeply
    regretted.

    --
    Peter
     
    Peter, Aug 7, 2010
    #19
  20. Cynicor

    Peter Guest

    "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:4c5c9c73$0$5492$-secrets.com...
    > "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 17:09:03 -0400, "Peter" <>
    >> wrote:
    >> : "Scotius" <> wrote in message
    >> : news:...
    >> : > On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:38:16 -0500, Cynicor
    >> : > <> wrote:
    >> : >
    >> : >>NYC has rules now that you can't photograph from a bridge. However,
    >> : >>there are no rules saying you can't photograph the bridge itself. I
    >> took
    >> : >>this just off the Belt Parkway tonight, and fought off a rat between
    >> my
    >> : >>tripod and my car door on the way back!
    >> : >>
    >> : >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44216856
    >> : >>http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/954699/1/44220725
    >> : >
    >> : > Anyone trained to place explosives in even the most basic way
    >> : > could take one look at a bridge and know exactly where to put them,
    >> : > I'm sure.
    >> : > Therefore, the rules regarding not being able to take pictures
    >> : > from bridges are not for the reasons they claim they are.
    >> :
    >> :
    >> : NYC has no rule prohibiting photos from or of bridges. The MTA has such
    >> a
    >> : rule as to their bridges, but it is rarely enforced. Also their is no
    >> MTA
    >> : bridge that has a walkway..
    >>
    >> How do you account for the prohibition of photography on the George
    >> Washington
    >> Bridge?
    >>
    >> My wife is afraid to drive on the bridge, so we have an understood
    >> division of
    >> labor: I drive, and she takes the obligatory pictures of the "no
    >> photography"
    >> signs. ;^)

    >
    >
    >
    > It is not a NYC bridge. It comes under the jurisdiction of the Port
    > Authority. Although they have lots of no photography signs, the rule is
    > not usually enforced. Also taking pictures of the bridge itself is not
    > prohibited., but may be restricted. the non-stated reason is revenue
    > generation.
    >
    > http://www.panynj.gov/press-room/media-access.html
    >
    > Correction:
    > In my prior message I typed referred to "MTA." I should have stated that
    > Photography is not addressed directly in the regulations, however signs
    > are posted that prohibit photography. (You figure that one out.)
    >
    > Any inconvenience that may have been caused by this error is deeply
    > regretted.
    >




    I also left off this link, which summarizes the rule in NYC
    http://www.nycphotorights.com/laws/



    --
    Peter
     
    Peter, Aug 7, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Penis Kolada

    Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge

    Penis Kolada, Jun 29, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    341
    Vince
    Jun 30, 2008
  2. Chris H

    Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge

    Chris H, Jun 29, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    937
    Eugene Miya
    Jul 2, 2008
  3. Paul Furman

    Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge

    Paul Furman, Jun 29, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    402
    Sancho Panza
    Jul 1, 2008
  4. Cynicor

    Re: Photographing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge

    Cynicor, Jun 29, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    42
    Views:
    1,819
  5. GK
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    448
    John Turco
    Jul 4, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page