With famous locations getting so crowded, working photographers often fall by the wayside. So should there be a pecking order?
In the surfing world, old timers who have been surfing at the same spot for as long as anyone can remember have first priority on any waves that come though. Once they’ve caught their waves, the pro and semi-pro surfers are next in line. Right at the bottom are the groms (young beginners). By the time it should be their turn to catch a wave, the old timers have paddled back out again. It is a universally accepted pecking order. At popular surf spots, groms never get a chance at the primary location, so they have to learn at an inferior wave.
At most surfing locations, getting uncrowded waves means getting out there at sunrise.
If you’re not a surfer, this probably sounds ridiculous and unfair, but this pecking order has done wonders for removing aggression from the surfing world.
Ironically, I was thinking about all of this while photographing surfers in San Diego. I was trying to create compelling images of a beach for a tourism guide, when I inadvertently set up in front of a photographer who looked like he was camped out there for the day. I must have taken at maximum of 20 seconds before moving on, but not quick enough for this irate photographer.
Later that day, at a pier, I had set up to take what is an admittedly stereotypical image. While waiting for people to clear, at least 4 different couples stepped in front of me with their mobile phones and asked if they could “quickly get a shot”. To bring back my surfing analogy, I was both the grom and the old timer that day. It got me wondering: should there be some sort of priority system in photography circles?
In certain situations, there is a clear pecking order: the wedding photographer is the ultimate don on the day. Similarly, photojournalists hired to photograph an event feel nothing (and rightly so) about stepping in front of other photographers
Large events require a priority system to ensure photographers don't get out of hand. Photograph by Michael DeStefano
It is less clear in situations like landscape photography. Popular locations such as Mesa Arch at sunrise or Horseshoe Bend at sunset look more like a media scrum than rural wilderness.
Historically, a priority system was not necessary in photography; there were many locations and few photographers. Now that just about every person in the world has a camera, there are places and situations where crowds are a problem. At the moment, whoever is most aggressive and obnoxious wins. People are also taking unnecessary risks to get good views as we saw in Episode 1: Photographing the World 4 Behind the Scenes.
Surely a pecking order for photographers starts to make sense? If so, what should the pecking order be based on? Some ideas are:
- Age – can it be argued that it can be more difficult to get to the prime positions for the elderly? Also, many parts of the world believe in honoring the elderly, so it would not be much of a stretch to give them priority.
- Local knowledge – The local photographer carefully watches the light and has their favorite spots which they keep returning to. Can it be argued that they deserve priority for their persistence?
- Skill level – This would be a tricky one to implement, but should the highly skilled photographer have priority over someone who is snapping away with little regard to technique?
- Work vs pleasure – Should the photographer who is commissioned have priority over the photographers who are having fun? For example, at Mesa Arch, if the photographer is commissioned by the National Parks, can they claim the best position? Similarly, when I work on travel shoots, I always pay for permits for commercial photography at the locations I visit. Should this give me priority over photographers who are not expected to deliver to a client?
Have you experienced frustrations dealing with crowds of photographers? I’d love to hear how you navigated through these situations.
This is a bit of a silly proposal. You cannot put a pecking order on photography locations. The only "pecking' order I'm aware of is first one there creates the line. The only iconic location I've photographed is the Grand Canyon. Huge crowds and expecting people to stay clear of your shot is ridiculous. I think the only way you can create some sort of control is a permit system like the Wave in Arizona. I think there are talks of Tunnel View creating a permit system, but then the question becomes fairness. A place like Tunnel View should be enjoyed by all. A family that just wants a quick photo with Cap and the Dome as a backdrop should not have to get a permit. Perhaps a permit at crowded locations if you're using a tripod? Of course enforcing such permits could be difficult. Hell...a person can show up, break out the tripod for 5 minutes and then bounce. You'd have to have regular patrols to prevent misuse. Can you imagine though, at the rate we are going...What will Tunnel View and Mesa Arch be like in 25 more years if nothing is done?
Considering the amount of discussion over a topic like the number of card slots in a camera, I would hope this proposal isn’t silly. Either we, the photography community, figure something out, or a system will get imposed on us like the ones you’ve mentioned at the Wave.
I was more so referring to a pecking order as described in the surf community. There should be a system like tripod permits for over crowded locations. I think imposed tripod permits are great! Make them pricey too. Weed out the casual photogs from the serious hobbyists, semi-pros, or full pros.
That favours the wealthy photographer, but yes, I think they’re good systems.
"So let it be written, so let it be done!"
A permit system is never going to happen at Tunnel View specifically. I could eventually see a quota on the valley that once it meets the max capacity for the day you cant get in, but even then that's still a ways out. Most peoples opinions too of popular spots is also during peak times. Go during the off season and even a spot like Tunnel view isnt that bad.
pecking order:
1. Who gets there first
2. Who gets there second
Early bird gets the worm
Spoken like a fit and active person.
Life isn't fair. Life isn't meant to be fair. If it takes you longer to get up a mountain, start earlier in the day or accept the fact that maybe you need to adjust your photography to match your physical limitations.
Michael? Read back over your posts a few times and tell me if you can find the DICK in the crowd? I found him!
Please feel free to let us all know.
When my daughter graduated from high school, I managed to get a seat near the front by the stage. While shooting pictures, the paid photographer actually asked if she could use my pictures for the event. With out knowing any real value of my work and it was for a school system only I gave the school copies to use.
Oh man! That’s the 2nd story I’ve heard like that today. It’s a dog eat dog world in the photography world it seems.
I'd rather see a push to encourage people to take their shot then keep moving, when they find themselves "in the shot" of someone else. Nothing worse than being set up waiting for the light to work, and somebody stands still in your shot, chimping or looking at their phone.
That's a much more practical message than trying to introduce some kind of general pecking order rule, which I think would be a futile exercise not even worth contemplating.
If I was in a crowd of photographers and instagrammers, I would already have packed my camera down, knowing that I would have no joy in such a common picture. But that is off course a luxury that you don´t have, if you are commissioned to do a particular image.
If as a landscape photographer someone commissioned me to get a certain photo at a very busy location I'd most likely just go online and find a photographer that already took the picture the client is looking for. Contact that photographer and buy the photo off them. Seems like a huge headache to put in all that effort when I could just be a broker.
All photographers are equal, but some are more equal than others.
Right?
So photographers being commissioned, i.e. paid, to shoot a location should be given priority over those who've spent their own money to be there? I don't think so. I spent several thousands of pounds for my one and only trip to the parks in Utah last month and if I was asked to move because a professional wanted my spot I'd tell them they could have my place when I'm done. If you want the best spot, get there first.
If you go to a busy location go search for a unique shot. I'm not sure why you would want to take exactly the same shot as everyone else there. I live 45 minutes away from Banff so I understand the frustration with having a million people in the same spot but really it comes down to go search for the shot that nobody else is taking. Just cuz I'm from the area doesn't give me priority over anyone else there. If you do set up and someone decides to stand in front of you ask them to move. Seems like people are afraid of any sorta conflict.
With all the crowds; I’ve found the best way is to be ourtous and have patience. Our National Parks are for all of us with or without a camera. Not to get on my high-horse and look down at others, Yest if been that guy that walked out into the lake to get the mirrored mountain shot ((for 30-esc), while others meekly til the iconic shot fro the shore 😂😂. And yes, I’m the guy that’s politely asking tha selfy takers to make it quick and move when impatience takes over. I’m not sure if pecking order is the answer; but maybe signs (in multiple languages) and parental instructions about common courtesy would be a good start.
no.
you're welcome.
"First come, first serve." "Early bird gets the worm." So on and so forth. No pecking order. Show up super early, get the shot, throw up deuces, and squall tires out of the parking lot.
First off, landscape photography is usually done on public lands, and on public lands, no one has the priority, all have equal access. And, if you have a commercial filming permit in a place like a national park unit, you are required to go out of your way to not interfere with the public.
Also, there is etiquette ... don't be rude and setup your camera in front of other people's cameras. If you are a tourist and want to get in front of someone's camera, ask if it is clear to do so for a moment.
That said, at a location like Mesa Arch or Horseshoe Bend, there is nothing better than the old first one there gets their choice. I've shot at Mesa Arch a number of times and essentially whoever gets there first gets the best location AND sets the line as to how close or far others will setup from the arch. Then the next four or five photographers will get the test of the prime spots. After that, everyone else gets the sloppy leftovers.
As a sports photographer I find there is a professional courtesy among the other photographers whereby the first there has priority over picking their spot and, for the most part, this is well respected. There have been a few occasions where I have got to a spot early and set up only to have another photographer who felt their assignment was more important than mine step in front of me but every time that has happened and I have asked them to move I have been backed up by others who respect the ‘rules' and the offending party has moved. The same courtesy does not apply in public places and I have often had people block my shot with little regard for manners, but I chock that up to their ignorance more than anything. Short answer is it should remain first come first served.
It seems like most people agree with you Stephen. The status quo will go on. Whether it is sustainable in the long run is another story.
My intention in writing this was to help photographers be a little more considerate of others, including other photographers.
If I see a lot of photographers,pro or not, I leave. I won't get a unique shot. I hate getting a shot that is almost identical to everyone else's.
As long as the selfie folks go last.
The surfing hierarchy evolved because people behaved like animals with out it. Prisons have similar systems to reduce bloodshed in the yard I believe. I propose that superior photographers should simply need to be content with their superior results obtained through practice and patience with their fellow man.
What a terrible idea. Hired photographers in a closed venue (eg weddings) should have some priority over guests etc. of course. But to suggest that there should be a pecking order in public is ridiculous. If there is any order of priority in open public places like national parks, it should always be the general publics right of access over the pro photographer who is likely there to make commercial use of the location as opposed to just enjoying it as a citizen.
Any pro who gets pissed at me for being in "their" shot at a public spot is going to get an earful!
David, I sympathise with your sentiment and if you read carefully, I gave an example of being in that very situation. What you've described - the public having right of access, is in fact a pecking order. My article was to suggest formalising some basic guidelines so that we avoid situations resulting in the earful that you speak of.
Thanks. My original reply is probably colored by the attitudes I keep reading from many pro level photographers who seem to regard the public as a nuisance at these locations. It comes across as a extremely elitist and ingracious. I'll add that I'm from Hawaii and spent many many hours in the lineup as a body border (a not too bad one either) and the surfing pecking order analogy is similarly elitist IMO as it seemed to be only be for higher level surfers - everybody else was permanently a 'grom' and many on water fights still broke out if you didn't garner the top surfers acceptance, not a that good a system.
So you'll understand me if I say - super stoked Jerry took the title! Proud Saffa. Also Tanner killed it.
Regarding the post, I was surprised to see that most photographers recommended a system that worked for them and gave little consideration to people not in their position - for example, first come first serve works very well for the fit, strong male, less so for the elderly.
Here's an interesting one. Yesterday, I traveled a couple of hours to photograph an iconic jetty in Tokyo Bay. Now, I noticed a film crew further up the beach recording a music video, but I still wanted to try out some different angles etc, so that when sunset kicked off, I would be ready to get the shot I'd traveled to take. Now, one of producers of the music video came and asked me if I could move at 6:30 to 7:30 because they wanted to shoot the band with the jetty in the background and me being set up where I was was in their shot. I speak an intermediate level of Japanese, but managed to communicate that I had traveled a couple of hours just to shoot this jetty ... and 6:30 to 7:30 pm was the good light ... so whilst understanding that it's a public place, I would move only if they compensated me for my travel expenses because moving would deny me the shot I'd traveled to get. Anyway, they agreed to pay my travel expenses and so, at 6:30 pm, I moved up the beach and shot an alternative location. Got some rather nice shots and thus, when I turned up to collect my compensation money, I sort of felt a bit guilty that I'd got such lovely shots that I wouldn't have got if I'd stayed on the jetty. Also, one thing that kind of amused me ... the whole time they were shooting their video, random tourists would wander into their shot ... so they kind of missed the light at its best anyway. I love the fact that every time I get a bit narked that people think they are entitled to locations or positions etc ... I usually find that if I walk away and find somewhere else ... I usually get a more original shot that people haven't thought about. I mean, one thing I tried was shooting underneath the jetty ... there was some nice bands of light ... but the tide was a bit high and I didn't want salt water in my camera (seeing one of the latest fstoppers videos reminded me not to take that risk!) ... but anyway, once again ... forcing myself to move around and think of alternative shots rather than the obvious one teaches me a lot more than just going with the obvious shot. Still, I think it's fair that if someone is denied the opportunity of getting their shot, some form of compensation is fair.
Here is the shot I got of the coastline ... and here's a shot of the jetty albeit with some ghosts and gear etc.