User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  5
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: Sydney Harbour Bridge / Opera House Commercial Photos

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    24 Jul 2010
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Sydney Harbour Bridge / Opera House Commercial Photos

    Does anyone know if you're allowed to take photos of the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Opera House to use for commercial purposes?
    I was looking to use a photo of the bridge for use on a website and was told that it wasn't a good idea

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Sep 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    822
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yep it its not- lots lots of leg crap I'm afraid
    William

    www.longshots.com.au

    I am the PhotoWatchDog

  3. #3
    Ausphotography Veteran rwg717's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Jun 2009
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,570
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think these scenes might be the "property" of the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority, commercial use is prohibited without permission. There was a channel 9 (Sydney) story about that earlier this year I think
    Richard
    I've been wrong before!! Happy to have constructive criticism though.Gear used Canon 50D, 7D & 5DMkII plus expensive things hanging off their fronts and of course a "nifty fifty".

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    25 Mar 2010
    Location
    Toowoomba
    Posts
    315
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Looks like a big NO! A bit of an explanation here .. http://www.freedomtodiffer.com/freed...raphing_t.html
    Cheers, Keith
    Sony A300, Tamron 70-200 2.8, Kenko 2x Teleconverter, Tamron 17-50 2.8, Sony 50 1.4, Strobes - Sony F42AM x 2, radio triggers, plus some studio gear.

    www.keithsmithphotography.com.au | flickr

  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    24 Jul 2010
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith View Post
    Looks like a big NO! A bit of an explanation here .. http://www.freedomtodiffer.com/freed...raphing_t.html
    Kind of spells it out that using any images of the Opera House or Bridge for commercial purposes is fraught with danger.

    Looks like there is no so thing as a photographers copyright where these iconic structures are concerned.

    Thanks again for your help

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    24 Jul 2010
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The following comes from the:

    Australian Copyright Council Information Sheet G11 Photographers and copyright


    Photographs taken of the Sydney Harbour Foreshore
    The Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority Regulations 1999 (NSW) restrict the taking and subsequent use of photographs for commercial purposes.
    The Regulations prohibit any use of a camera for commercial purposes in a public area unless authorised by the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority.
    “Public areas” are defined as any part of the Sydney Harbour foreshore that the public is entitled to use and include Luna Park, the Rocks and
    Circular Quay, Darling Harbour, Woolloomoolloo, Pyrmont, White Bay, Rozelle Bay and the Australian Technology Park.
    For further information, contact the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority by phone 02 9240 8500
    or see the website: http://www.shfa.nsw.gov.au.
    Last edited by darkmerlin; 05-08-2010 at 11:20pm.

  7. #7
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    08 Nov 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by darkmerlin View Post
    Does anyone know if you're allowed to take photos of the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Opera House to use for commercial purposes?
    I was looking to use a photo of the bridge for use on a website and was told that it wasn't a good idea
    I wouldn't do so for two reasons.

    Firstly, there is an enormous amount of bureaucratic BS surrounding commercially-oriented images of public landmarks that are for everyone's enjoyment. Ironically in the eyes of the bureaucrats, a commercial opportunity to charge others for making/publishing of commercial images has been recognised and exploited.

    Secondly, the SHB/SOH have been shot to death, and these icons have become too cliché; there's far more to Sydney than those over-photographed structures, impressive as they are.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What a selfish law...
    Give them a taste of their greed.
    Give it all away, for FREE!
    "The greatest camera in the world is the one you hold in your hands when shit happens." ©2007 Raoul Isidro

  9. #9
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,641
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So... I'm on a boat with my camera ?

  10. #10
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,650
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kym View Post
    So... I'm on a boat with my camera ?
    Or in a plane or helicopter
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ricktas View Post
    Or in a plane or helicopter
    but on a serious note, does anyone know whether the SHF rules apply to taking shots from a boat and/or aerial work??

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by campo View Post
    but on a serious note, does anyone know whether the SHF rules apply to taking shots from a boat and/or aerial work??
    Google Earth has to pay a lot...
    They photographed practically the whole Earth.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    30 Jan 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    143
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    These types of laws are infuriating and fundamentally unfair. We paid for (and in some cases are still paying for) those structures. The Google comment is an interesting one.
    Last edited by wattsgallery; 09-08-2010 at 12:51pm.
    Check out my new site - www.wattsgallery.com - feedback welcome

    Gear - Canon 5D, 40D, 10-22, 24-70 2.8L, 200 2.8L, 50 1.8, 430EXII

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Dec 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,051
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ridiculous rules.
    Hi Im Darren

    www.darrengrayphotography.com

    SONY A850 (FF)] + GRIP | SONY A350 (APS-C) + GRIP | SONY NEX-5 +16 2.8 + 18-55 E-MOUNT LENSES | CZ 85 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 28-75 2.8 | 70-200 2.8 | 2 x 42AMs | 24" imac | LR | CS4 | + loads of other junk


  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Sep 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    822
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdazzler View Post
    Ridiculous rules.
    Go shoot the people who make them


    Unfortunately its the SHFA people you should tell that to

    Everyone here is probably on the same side.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    25 Jun 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by wattsgallery View Post
    These types of laws are infuriating and fundamentally unfair. We paid for (and in some cases are still paying for) those structures.
    Exactally this.

  17. #17
    Member achee's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hmmmmm... sounds silly!

    A paid wedding or portraiture shoot would constitute 'commercial photography,' wouldn't it? Do professionals who shoot with these locations in the background simply get away with it because they can?

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Sep 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    822
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by achee View Post
    Hmmmmm... sounds silly!

    A paid wedding or portraiture shoot would constitute 'commercial photography,' wouldn't it? Do professionals who shoot with these locations in the background simply get away with it because they can?

    Can I clarify whats silly about this ? The people who make the rules (because they can - and they do have an argument of sorts, for producing these rules), or are you saying its silly to oppose the rules ?

    And to answer you question in the last paragraph - yes they probably can get away with it while they can, but mainly its because of their ignorance, or they're ignoring the rules. I assure you that they're not getting away with it because of who they are, or what they are. If I choose a location to shoot in the first thing I do, is check to see if there is any reason why I cannot, and if there is a fee or application to shoot, then I go through the right channels.

    You dont know how many photographers have been turned away from places like this, and you wouldnt want to be the photographer who has organised their wedding party shots in an area which you're met with a security guard informing you that you would be breaking the law to continue your shoot there - that would be embarrasing and it would be IMHO unprofessional and doing your client a disservice.


    Silly, isnt a word I would use in any context when relating to this issue.

    Worrying is more applicable.

    I dont agree that its right though to have the rules/fees etc - so I would urge you to support the Ken Duncan AFA rally - which covers this and many areas of being to photograph in the open areas of Australia.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Feb 2009
    Location
    Newcastle, NSW
    Posts
    8,372
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I wonder if the TV stations pay a fee every time they include the harbour bridge/opera house/etc, in their news/current affairs programs. Commercial purposes.........what a stupid law this is.
    Graeme
    "May the good Lord look down and smile upon your face"......Norman Gunston___________________________________________________
    Nikon: D7000, D80, 12-24 f4, 17-55 f2.8, 18-135, 70-300VR, 35f2, SB 400, SB 600, TC-201 2x converter. Tamron: 90 macro 2.8 Kenko ext. tubes. Photoshop CS2.


  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    15 Dec 2009
    Location
    central west
    Posts
    933
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So where would you stand if you took a pic of Aunty Maud with an Icon in the background and uploaded it to your personal website. Not for sale but to show Uncle Fred?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •