Universal Studios : NO Commercial Photography is permitted and note that NO production film cameras are not allowed into the park.
Sentosa rules
- Thread starter BBTM
- Start date
- Status
Nowadays a lot of camera capable of doing time lapse. Like go pro and sony action cam also can. The question is whether is for commercial or not and they assume a dslr n good tripod are.
Like that no one dare to buy dslr liao, every one thought we making $ when it's just for hobbies. I also been question by a shop owner when my time lapse machine turn camera and faces his shop at long island hk.
Like that no one dare to buy dslr liao, every one thought we making $ when it's just for hobbies. I also been question by a shop owner when my time lapse machine turn camera and faces his shop at long island hk.
Is filming or taking wedding photo shoots on the island allowed?
Filming and photo shoots for personal use is allowed on the island. A permit is only required if the footage is for commercial or corporate use. Please call us at 1800 - SENTOSA (736 8672) for further clarifications.
How do they classify me as commercial or not!? By gears that I owns or the way which I recording? I been told by that guy that graduation or wedding photos also not allow over there. If I take for friends also cannot meh? Too many rules nowadays till the fun isn't there.
Filming and photo shoots for personal use is allowed on the island. A permit is only required if the footage is for commercial or corporate use. Please call us at 1800 - SENTOSA (736 8672) for further clarifications.
How do they classify me as commercial or not!? By gears that I owns or the way which I recording? I been told by that guy that graduation or wedding photos also not allow over there. If I take for friends also cannot meh? Too many rules nowadays till the fun isn't there.
May I just add to this confusion :embrass: The Sentosa or Universal Studio are opened to public whether it is private or public space. They have all along allow photo taking, I don't see why a sudden change in decision to reverse that.
Of course if you are doing a commercial shoot, you should ask for permission if you are doing it within a private area. In your case, if it is just as a hobby, what they should do is to ask you to sign an 'undertaking letter' to state that your shoot is solely for private use and would not appear in any commercial article. It is also partly due to your prolong duration which may have caused some obstructions to others. That is why they have approached you.
Most times, security officers were given instructions but they don't really fully understand the rationale for stopping people. Instead of arguing, next time ask to speak to the higher management or someone who knows.
Hope that helps.
Of course if you are doing a commercial shoot, you should ask for permission if you are doing it within a private area. In your case, if it is just as a hobby, what they should do is to ask you to sign an 'undertaking letter' to state that your shoot is solely for private use and would not appear in any commercial article. It is also partly due to your prolong duration which may have caused some obstructions to others. That is why they have approached you.
Most times, security officers were given instructions but they don't really fully understand the rationale for stopping people. Instead of arguing, next time ask to speak to the higher management or someone who knows.
Hope that helps.
if you read all the Do and Don't that can be found on those commercial property management websites, all of them say the same thing. Commercial Photography and Filming are NOT allowed unless written permission obtained prior the shoot. FYI, that also means photographers/vidographers need to pay a fee to use their places for filming or shooting stills.
simply put it, your set up does not looks like shooting for personal enjoyment to them. so they will ask you to go away. since you have no permission and not pay for venue rental. Yes, they have the rights to do so, because you are standing on their property or the areas that they have the rights of usage.
so you want to look pro? this is what you will get.
simply put it, your set up does not looks like shooting for personal enjoyment to them. so they will ask you to go away. since you have no permission and not pay for venue rental. Yes, they have the rights to do so, because you are standing on their property or the areas that they have the rights of usage.
so you want to look pro? this is what you will get.
rubbish
SMU had their convocation in RWS before. So no one allowed to take graduation photos in RWS lah?
Every time those authority over there always tell you the rubbish stuffs. When tell you the truth before? Always use management to cover their butt but mostly it's their own rules if no sign been put up. Like my case at big box, police come, they also quiet like a rat. Really, if it's a pirvate area, then totally no photography at all, be one or many. Btw, HDR also required a tripod and consider one or many photo? Ha ha!
Yes and no, in my opinion. If that establishment has a blanket rule on no photography, example a departmental store, this is quite straight forward. However, like in the case of a hotel lobby, it is quite normal for guests to take photos but not do a set up that would cause obstructions to others. Or you have a group of photographers having one of CS outings taking photo inside their lobby. This is when the management would have to step in. The reason for stopping is not no casual photo taking but you are causing obstructions to their business.
In TS case, worse. He is taking photo on a opened public access area where generally photo taking is happening regularly. Why did the security picks him and discriminate him? I guess his set up is the main cause. So, instead of just telling him that photo taking is not allowed while the others could, a proper explanation is necessary if the party asks. Of course if he walks away quietly, matter solved. The management owes the public this responsibility because they are running a business. Under their planning approval, that space is required to be opened to general public and not consider GFA I am pretty sure. Just because they leased that space do not mean they can do whatever they like. After all, they are conducting a business and cannot discriminate visitors. This is NOT a 'private' space restricted to only their invited guests like a condo.
I have responded to this because we all love photography. We should know our rights and not let people push us around just because they think it was like that. We must also always be mindful of our actions and not to cause inconvenience to other users and affect their business. They didn't spend billions for us to take photos. Maybe someone here with legal knowledge would like to weight in?
So far there isn't any places have any sign states photography is allowed.
if you go to these commercial building establishments websites, you may find they state clearly that photography and filming will need to obtain written permission prior the shoot/filming, a fee usually applied.
This is what I found out as I need to shoot in some areas for commercial purpose. So either photographers/videographers apply for permit and pay a fee, or don't go there. Trying to fool them, will only fool themselves in the public.
FYI, if someone take photos of selfie or friends in the hotel lobby, the hotel won't stop you, but if I am a guest and I don't like them taking photos around me, I can tell the hotel manager that their lens are pointing at me direction or their flash irritate me. The hotel manage will have to ask them to go some where else to take photos.
As I said before, TS is clearly standing on their premises, the security guard won't go outside their territory to carry out any duties.
anyway, ones don't have to have a degree in law to understand this, if you invite somebody come to your house, you tell them please make themselves at home, this does not mean they can do whatever they like at your house, you can ask them to leave if you find they don't behave like a guests should.
these places are belong to commercial entity, they are here to make profits, not to entertain photographers.
That's not required, in the same way as walking on the pavement or talking to other people in the public does not require any permission. But what is required in the Common LAW (SG uses this as baseline of the legal system) is a statement (law or sign) if something is not permitted. So far the baseline. But there are many grey areas and TS has just stepped into one. Now, both side have their points: a certain type of photography requires a tripod setup (although still non-commercial) and the management does not allow commercial photography without permit (besides other legal / commercial reasons) exactly because it usually comes with a bigger setup.
To me, the solution is: talk. If TS wants to do this type of photography that requires a tripod setup and will be placed there for extended period of time then it's best to get the management informed and have their agreement. Communication is the key. The moment some security guards step into it the discussion already heads thew wrong way.
From what I thinks, if another person like me doing time lapse on the same spot, also wouldn't thinks of nothing is wrong while so many people taking photos over there. It's just the way which want to express it as, in time lapse. Authorities there stopped me n told me that other just take n go off, what is the different between one and many photos? Very weird as photography is allow but restricted!? Btw, if I staying there and do time lapse inside the room which they didn't aware, how they going to explain that? Just like my previous case at big box. I taking photo of the building structure and was stopped. They then told police that I am spying! Ya right, big box having so many photos of the price/products inside the building, consider ok? Yes, there are rules but if those authorities didn't handle it properly, it's abusing their power. Too bad I don't have lawyer friends else I sure be :devil: ;p
Last edited:
So why not act like a tourist and ramble up to guard and say 'sir can take time lapse snap in this area?' Play the fool you know...
Maybe speaks to him in cantonese and makes he thought that I from hong kong. Heh heh!
Sion
Senior Member
Likely case, you just bumped into no u-turn syndrome that's typical of security staff here.
These guys are unsure, don't dare make decision, don't dare to let it pass too.
Wait need to "answer"
So the easiest thing is just say 'cannot' or 'no', since saying yes is more risky in their opinion.
I've run into such situations many times.
In fact often the same dumb reason that HP or small camera is ok and larger more serious camera is not.
Some even mention that its for security reasons, but I think a terrorist would easily pose as asnap shot tourist with a friend or use a HP nowadays too.
These guys are unsure, don't dare make decision, don't dare to let it pass too.
Wait need to "answer"
So the easiest thing is just say 'cannot' or 'no', since saying yes is more risky in their opinion.
I've run into such situations many times.
In fact often the same dumb reason that HP or small camera is ok and larger more serious camera is not.
Some even mention that its for security reasons, but I think a terrorist would easily pose as asnap shot tourist with a friend or use a HP nowadays too.
RWS is private property. They can ask a guest to leave if they decide to do so.
TS was at the fountain with the Universal logo I assume, a very busy area. By putting up a tripod with camera and remain rooted for hours can be disruptive to other guests especially if it's very crowded. TS was not approached by other security staff does not mean he has a right to take photos since it's private property with its own set of rules. Their rules may be unreasonable but they have the right since it's their property.
Most other areas of Sentosa is public property though.
TS was at the fountain with the Universal logo I assume, a very busy area. By putting up a tripod with camera and remain rooted for hours can be disruptive to other guests especially if it's very crowded. TS was not approached by other security staff does not mean he has a right to take photos since it's private property with its own set of rules. Their rules may be unreasonable but they have the right since it's their property.
Most other areas of Sentosa is public property though.
Sion
Senior Member
Don't think you can achieve much by having a whinge about security people in a photo forum except to advance the impression that we are a complaint society.
More contructive is to take it up with the relevant authorities or organize a public protest or join a political party to ban banning photography in all public places.
:bsmilie:
Last edited:
I automatically defer to any official looking security/cop figure nowadays, even in Disneyland, because nowadays everyone is a trigger happy cowboy where I am...to much war past 20 years and everyone wonders why they shoot first and question later.
- Status
