View Full Version : Another "No Cameras Allowed" venue ...
This has been circulating on some of the Las Vegas boards, and just confirmed by the Arizona Republic.
The Grand Canyon Skywalk, that huge U-shaped clear glass platform, which just opened, has a "No Cameras" policy, including cell phones.
Their excuse is that cameras and cell phones might be dropped and might scratch the surface of the platform.
There's no {expletive} way you are getting me out on that thing anyway, but if I were to go, getting some shots would be my main reason for it. There's speculation that they may have to drop this policy, since it will be a major deterrent (the others being a $75 total cost, a 15 minute time limit, and a rough dirt road to get there) to the success of the project.
Oh well ...
jan normandale
03-29-2007, 08:47
This has been circulating on some of the Las Vegas boards, and just confirmed by the Arizona Republic.
The Grand Canyon Skywalk, that huge U-shaped clear glass platform, which just opened, has a "No Cameras" policy, including cell phones.
Their excuse is that cameras and cell phones might be dropped and might scratch the surface of the platform.
There's no {expletive} way you are getting me out on that thing anyway, but if I were to go, getting some shots would be my main reason for it. There's speculation that they may have to drop this policy, since it will be a major deterrent (the others being a $75 total cost, a 15 minute time limit, and a rough dirt road to get there) to the success of the project.
Oh well ...
Its disrespectful of me but I have a hunch there is a marketing genius behind this policy "we'll lose revenue because once people see pictures they won't need to come"
Like you pointed out though, many will not come if they can't take pictures of the family for the folks back home.
I think eventually they will cave because they have a lot of $$ to recapture on that big ticket facility which is basically a one trick pony.
RF-Addict
03-29-2007, 08:48
Wow - theu must be nuts! I live in Scottsdale and was actually looking forward to a trip to the West Rim, incl. the new platform, but there really is no point if I cannot bring my camera - I will call them just to confirm that this is their policy and post their answer here. This is really stupid on their part. They just want to sell their postcards or whatever they have. Ridiculous.
Ben Blacket
03-29-2007, 08:54
If there's a 15 min limit, I'd say they don't want people lingering & holding others up?
they give you little shoe covers for your shoes...kinda like the clean room shoe covers i believe...
pesphoto
03-29-2007, 09:00
Just bring along an XA for a couple quick pics. Wonder how closely they'll watch.
clintock
03-29-2007, 09:03
I used to live in Vegas, and went to the canyon several times, never could I ever manage to take a photograph that would begin to do the place any kind of justice. Nothing can touch being there and looking at the hugeness of it all.
I guess maybe if I jumped out onto the rocks like that guy from the now famous email did, I would have had better luck!
Observation perches like that can be a pain when people are on one side of it trying to take a picture of their family/friends on the other side of it with the canyon in the background- nobody wants to cross the shot..
'Hold on, just one more--- as they fumble with the menus and try to see the display.'
Now if they only allowed film cameras, there would be no problems;->
jtzordon
03-29-2007, 09:05
Never even heard of this thing...off to google I go.
jtzordon
03-29-2007, 09:08
Evidently they only expect English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean speakers to visit the website.
http://www.grandcanyonskywalk.com/
RF-Addict
03-29-2007, 09:15
I just called them and the rumor is true - no cameras on the skywalk. To make matters worse, they do not even have lockers to store your camera and if they find you with a camera on the skywalk they will fine you $500. What I can't figure out is how they managed to build this thing to withstand an earthquake, but they couldn't figure out how to make it scratch resistant! They must have never heard of a company called invisible shield - they make invisible covers for all kinds of glass and plexi glass (incl. for your didgi cams) and they give you a lifetime guarantee that it is resistant to scratches.
The lady I talked to was very upset about this rule as well - she is afraid that it will keep many tourists from visiting the skywalk - I told her that they certainly had lost me as a paying visitor. She thought it would be best to write letters to the tribe and complain about the situation.
pesphoto
03-29-2007, 09:17
weird for sure. I bet they'll sell you photos of it in the gift shop though.
The plot thickens ... here's a cut-paste from Usenet (yeah yeah, I know ...):
I was able to verify the camera policy by going to several different
web sites. They say that in the future there will be "stationed
cameras" and with those cameras you will be able to purchase
pictures. Doesn't make sense to me either.
I'm not sure what they mean by "Stationed Cameras", but I kind of assume they will be like those pay binoculars that never seem to work right.
IMAO they are already setting the price point too high, and the no camera regulation is just another thing that lowers the value of the thing to the visitor.
Here's the question that I'll pose to the group...... I was under the impression that the "skywalk" was on reservation land? So whose going to fine you? the State, The Feds because it's a National Park or the Indian Tribe that built the venue?
Bunch of BS, they're going to sell photos from the gift shop to increase revenue. I think they'd sell more dramamine than anything else :D
The best comment that I read so far is that no photo of any kind can do justice to this natural wonder!
Best,
Sherm
Here's the question that I'll pose to the group...... I was under the impression that the "skywalk" was on reservation land? So whose going to fine you? the State, The Feds because it's a National Park or the Indian Tribe that built the venue?
Bunch of BS, they're going to sell photos from the gift shop to increase revenue. I think they'd sell more dramamine than anything else :D
The best comment that I read so far is that no photo of any kind can do justice to this natural wonder!
Best,
Sherm
If the skywalk is the on the reservation, the tribe could fine you whatever they wanted, and would have to enforce payment. Reservation lands are sovereign lands of the tribe, and tribal laws would apply. That said, they would still have to allow due process to anyone that they fined. So, I guess that would mean right to contest or appeal the fine, etc.
Boy, its just getter better and better. Between the price, 15 minute time limit and other restrictions, I would never visit the thing.
Dex and Whisper,
Thanks for the info. I'm with you guys I don't think I'll spend the dollars to do it.
Ronald M
03-29-2007, 10:21
Won`t be attending for sure now. Why can`t they just open a casino?
They can run the horses across it for all I care.
That said, they would still have to allow due process to anyone that they fined. So, I guess that would mean right to contest or appeal the fine, etc.
IANAL, but I've had several conversations with somebody who is, on subjects regarding what is legal to photograph.
My guess is, and again, IANAL, and I am not a Tribe member (IANATM?) that this is not codified in statute, even in Tribal code, but is some kind of facility use regulation. A direct quote from my attorney friend was:
"If an arrest is made or a summons is issued, there must be a statute cited."
I'm sure that if you were to sneak a camera out there, they would yell at you and probably ask you to leave, and if you did so peacefully, that would probably be it. (No habla Ingles?) :) :) :)
What he did add was that there are all kinds of catch-all laws of public conduct, trespass, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, etc., but that you usually have to push things, like refuse to leave, return without permission, or create a scene, for those to be thrown at you.
Not that I'm going to try anything anyway. :)
Boy, its just getter better and better. Between the price, 15 minute time limit and other restrictions, I would never visit the thing.
Agree, plus from Las Vegas it's a slow trip down route 93 (or is it 95? I always get those two confused) across the Dam, then another hour to the Res, then $45 pp to get in (a Reservation with an admission charge??????) then a drive on a nasty road, then $25 more, and in 15 minutes it's all over. That's about $5 per minute!
What is the big deal of not being able to bring a camera on there? I mean what kind of spectacular shots can you get on the sky walk that you can't get from any other scenic grand canyon overlooks? Do you mean you want to point the lens down at the ground below and take pretty pictures of the tiny rock formations at the base of the grand canyon?(OOOH looks like I'm floating!) In that case, if I was the owner of the skywalk, I wouldn't want people's metal lenses scratching up the glass surface either!
pesphoto
03-29-2007, 10:36
i'd probably walk it anyway.
Won`t be attending for sure now. Why can`t they just open a casino?
They can run the horses across it for all I care.
I like your idea better, at least you can have fun at the Casino.... while they "part" with your money........... less obvious than the giftshop holdup.
Boy, its just getter better and better. Between the price, 15 minute time limit and other restrictions, I would never visit the thing.
100% agreed!
And the camera restriction is not the main reason for me not to go there:
too expensive for too little time.
In the States I sometime feel like cattle which is guided through some gates. The only thing I am allowed to do is to pay money...
Sorry, just my 2c.
Bryan Lee
03-29-2007, 11:30
I never thought I would live to see the day Indians marched white people off a cliff, even if it is just for 15 minutes. Andy Warhol could not have predicted this development, and no photographs? The truth is I found the whole idea lame from the start, Indians going corporate is bad juju. Selling out the Grand Canyon is just wrong for anyone to do much less Native Americans. Maybe I will just rip off one of their add pictures, add "Sucks" then make a screen print t-shirt and be done with it.
Gabriel M.A.
03-29-2007, 11:31
The Grand Canyon Skywalk, that huge U-shaped clear glass platform, which just opened, has a "No Cameras" policy, including cell phones.
Their excuse is that cameras and cell phones might be dropped and might scratch the surface of the platform.
What an incredibly lame excuse. I'd start to believe it if they'd prohibit people to go in without taking their shoes off first. And jewelry. They might fall and scratch the surface.
Perhaps if they were honest about it: "we don't want you to take photos because our board of whatever-it-is are cheapskates and don't want to compete with somebody who may take a very good photo for free vs. somebody we had to pay thousands of dollars to do it"; perhaps then I wouldn't shake my head in disbelief.
Besides, that thing doesn't look solid enough. Have you seen those houses in Southern California by the edge of ticking mudslide slopes? Scary thought. I hope the $75 includes a parachute.
Gabriel M.A.
03-29-2007, 11:38
The land is private indian land. It is controlled by the tribal council.
ooooohhhh. Ay ay ay. Interesting.
100% agreed!
And the camera restriction is not the main reason for me not to go there:
too expensive for too little time.
In the States I sometime feel like cattle which is guided through some gates. The only thing I am allowed to do is to pay money...
Sorry, just my 2c.
Maybe you are just not going to the right places. Many national parks are excellent places to spend a lot of time, especially hiking, backpacking and camping. Arches and Bryce Canyon are two of my favorites, along with Glacier National Monument.
Entrance fees are pretty cheap, and you can go places where you will never see another soul, let alone be asked to pay for anything
I never thought I would live to see the day Indians marched white people off a cliff, even if it is just for 15 minutes. Andy Warhol could not have predicted this development, and no photographs? The truth is I found the whole idea lame from the start, Indians going corporate is bad juju. Selling out the Grand Canyon is just wrong for anyone to do much less Native Americans. Maybe I will just rip off one of their add pictures, add "Sucks" then make a screen print t-shirt and be done with it.
Couldn't have said it better myself :D
I have enjoyed this thread but I'm done. I'm afraid it's going in the direction of politics or heaven forbid race referring to the owners of the skywalk as Indians and not Native Americans and "marching White People off a cliff". Somebody is bound to get offended and thread will get closed because we wouldn't want to hurt anyone's fellings for telling it like it is.
Bryan great insight from an expat........
RF-Addict
03-29-2007, 12:35
Here is an interesting artice from the LA Times about the tribe's goal - their master plan calls for a cable car going from the rim of the Grand Canyon down to the Colorado.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-skywalk11feb11,0,6802248.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Where will it stop?
I never thought I would live to see the day Indians marched white people off a cliff, even if it is just for 15 minutes. Andy Warhol could not have predicted this development, and no photographs? The truth is I found the whole idea lame from the start, Indians going corporate is bad juju. Selling out the Grand Canyon is just wrong for anyone to do much less Native Americans. Maybe I will just rip off one of their add pictures, add "Sucks" then make a screen print t-shirt and be done with it.
Sad that you missed the main point of the having this built. The Indians are badly taken care of by the us government. Any cash pool such as this is a good thing for the local economy. Now the debate of whether it's ethical to sell out the grand canyon - shouldn't we leave that debate for the "natives" to discuss amongst themselves?
Gee, I wonder where they learned their business practices from? ;)
Don't feel sorry for them, even if they tick off a large number of the "RF users" in this forum. They won't be begging for visitors.
And to all you who think you are capable of capturing awsome images from the skywalk.. this is probably the best image you can shoot there, and it's already too late for that. WOW just look at this guy, no safety cables or anything!
http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-02/27837604.jpg
The best comment that I read so far is that no photo of any kind can do justice to this natural wonder!
Best,
ShermAbsolutely. The best two weeks of my life was spent in the Grand Canyon, rafting down the Colorado River and sleeping under the stars at night. To follow the run of John Wesley Powell down the river was truly a spiritual experience of the highest order. The Grand Canyon is slowly but surely being ruined.
The truth of the truth of the truth, is that beyond the strictly paparazzi situations, and by this I mean violating the intimate privacy of a human being, all other situations in which taking pics is forbidden are due to ill intentions of either profit or violations of human rights.
Being those the rules of the game, I take for myself the fullest freedom of choice and the responsability of the consequences if it turns bad. And finito la comedia.
Cheers,
Ruben
Absolutely. The best two weeks of my life was spent in the Grand Canyon, rafting down the Colorado River and sleeping under the stars at night. To follow the run of John Wesley Powell down the river was truly a spiritual experience of the highest order. The Grand Canyon is slowly but surely being ruined.
Aren't you taking a bit of an elitist attitude? What is considered "ruined" to you might be called "more accessible" to others. Not everyone is able to raft down the colorado river and camp outdoors. This skywalk could be a gift to many people.
Don't feel sorry for them, even if they tick off a large number of the "RF users" in this forum. They won't be begging for visitors.
I don't know about that. On the LV travel boards there doesn't seem to be anybody ooo-ing and ahh-ing over this thing, just reciting the various reasons why they won't be going, everything from cost to travel time to ease of access to time limit to -- yeah, no cameras.
WOW just look at this guy, no safety cables or anything!
I really don't know about the Hualapai (sp?) but the Mohawks are well known for their uncanny sense of balance and their ability to work high construction jobs.
Aren't you taking a bit of an elitist attitude? What is considered "ruined" to you might be called "more accessible" to others. Not everyone is able to raft down the colorado river and camp outdoors. This skywalk could be a gift to many people.No. The Canyon is being environmentally ruined on a long term basis. I have the greatest respect for the Native Americans in the area, the Ute, Pueblo and in particular the Navajo who are a beautiful and spiritual people. They have every right, as someone stated above, to try to generate revenue from the Canyon. No-one, either from the Federal government or the state governments is even remotely interested in helping them. But they are getting very bad advice from the "businessmen" they seek counsel from. There are ways of making money that are not so harmful to the environment. Don't get me started on the Glen Canyon Dam at Page either... :mad:
Having worked in and around several reservations. I can fully understand their trying to use what is available to them to survive. They've been left with little choice.
And this no camera rule/law is not new. Many reservations do not allow photography without tribal permission. Usually through the purchase of a permit, with conditions attached.
yeah this is true out here on our rezervation we have the same policies what it comes down to is the tribal lands are sacred out here on the rezervation you cant find a place that wasnt touched by our ancestors, alot of tribal goverments dont allow photography because for instance people can mark a area that has say old burial grounds, pottery, artifacts stuff like that and come back later to take the stuff. even some of our moutains have carvings and people have come and stolen the rocks or cut out the carvings. believe me i have seen this first hand i used to work in our tribal archeology department.
As for the havasupai they are i think the poorest tribe in Arizona, but they really dont have a choice they mostly rely on tourism for income, they live in the bottem of the canyon so im sure it is difficult...
but as for the pictures i kinda agree with you guys about that you cant expect people to go to this place and not want to take pictures. But its there choice.
Here is an interesting artice from the LA Times about the tribe's goal - their master plan calls for a cable car going from the rim of the Grand Canyon down to the Colorado.
Where will it stop?
At the top and at the bottom, presumably ;)
jan normandale
03-29-2007, 14:19
I'm following James, comments and I know that if I go on the Hopi reservation, photography is not permitted. Disappointing but I lived with it. I understand the reasoning is all he described and more. I just think that the concept is at odds with what is being offered to the public as a commercial enterprise.
I am also aware that the tribe has several splits that run deep due to this issue. It is probably their best efforts at trying to manage a situation that is contentious within the tribal membership. It may result in fewer visitors however it is their attempt to do something to generate a few dollars. This tribe is not the Navajo Nation. I have a little empathy for them in this one.
I just hope they can recover some of their outlay while maintaining some benfits for the tribe as a whole and the social cost is worthwhile. Certainly there are many naysayers on the other side of the canyon where the historic action has always been. It's a long drive there and a lot of time and dollars for a "one note tune". I think those will be bigger issues than the no camera one.
I wish them good luck.
RF-Addict
03-29-2007, 14:52
I have been to the Hopi reservation as well and it was clear from the get-go that photography was not allowed on their land and that is perfectly OK. What irks me about the situation at the West Rim is that you are allowed to take pictures everywhere, EXCEPT the sky walk. We'll see how things develop, down the road all this might change. I'm afraid that once the novelty wears off, they will struggle to get people to visit the West Rim - just as they have in the recent past.
Silva Lining
03-29-2007, 15:12
The plot thickens ... here's a cut-paste from Usenet (yeah yeah, I know ...):
I'm not sure what they mean by "Stationed Cameras", but I kind of assume they will be like those pay binoculars that never seem to work right.
IMAO they are already setting the price point too high, and the no camera regulation is just another thing that lowers the value of the thing to the visitor.
If it is like the London Eye attraction - Stationed cameras take pictures of eveyone as the pass through the attraction, then, once you have come out the other side you can see yourself and partner on a TV looking confused with a bunch of kids and seniors who also are looking in the wrong direction and who apear to be part of your extended family, even though you've never met them.
Worse still, some of them super impose you on a sunny background - in case it raining:o
georgefspencer
03-29-2007, 15:30
Its disrespectful of me but I have a hunch there is a marketing genius behind this policy "we'll lose revenue because once people see pictures they won't need to come".
Or they will have pictures/slides to sell you.
Gabriel M.A.
03-29-2007, 16:46
Aren't you taking a bit of an elitist attitude? What is considered "ruined" to you might be called "more accessible" to others. Not everyone is able to raft down the colorado river and camp outdoors. This skywalk could be a gift to many people.
Now that the "elitists" have successfully lobbied for the return of the buffalo, the preservation of the bald eagle, these will soon become "more accessible" to others. It'd be a disaster if the same "elitists" (that include teachers, politicians, professors, scientists, and concerned native people who are directly impacted) ever get concerned with such a self-cleaning, perpetually-lasting Grand Canyon.
Gabriel M.A.
03-29-2007, 16:58
I am also aware that the tribe has several splits that run deep due to this issue. It is probably their best efforts at trying to manage a situation that is contentious within the tribal membership. It may result in fewer visitors however it is their attempt to do something to generate a few dollars. This tribe is not the Navajo Nation. I have a little empathy for them in this one.
I think I understand what that reasoning may be, but it is very at odds with their target market. (And here goes one of my flawed analogies) I think opening a restaurant where you are asking people not to say a word, not to speak unless spoken to by the staff...well, I think that'd be a bit of a culture shock for lots of people. I'm sure there is a market which would love to dine in such a place...but I'm not sure it'd be a big segment of the population.
But, then again, I'm no marketing genius. If I had thought of creating oxygen bars, I'm sure I'd made them flop.
Well it looks like you seppos have run head first into NATIVE TITLE, remember they were there first!! They see you/us whitefellas as INVADERS. IT IS THEIR LAND,they decide who comes and goes and what can and can`t be done on THEIR land. The same as when someone comes into your house. If this is a way of raiseing revenue for their benefit,good luck to them. The N.S.W. Govt. does this with Sydney Harbour Bridge Walks 120AUD + extra for digital photos, it is all run by a sub-contractor, and everyone is doing very well out of it, thankyou very much.
If there's a 15 min limit, I'd say they don't want people lingering & holding others up?
Ben
You using 5 ASA film and a f/128 lens?
Noel
John Camp
04-01-2007, 11:34
I think Indians should pretty much be allowed to do whatever they want, within certain wide limits. I don't think they should be allowed to *destroy* the Grand Canyon, but as far as I'm concerned, whatever else they want to do is okay, if it helps them out of the rut into which they have gotten and often been pushed.
I've done a lot of work with Indians in the US, and I can say most of them refer to themselves as Indians, or 'Indian people,' rather than Native American or 'Native peoples.' It may be a little different in Canada, where I have heard different terms. On the other hand, they usually don't refer to themselves by any racial label, any more than whites go around talking about being white.
Anyway -- if you think the Skywalk is a desecration of nature, go look at Malibu, or the Hudson River, or the Everglades.
As far as photography is concerned, anything you get out on the skywalk is going to be a snapshot. No great art will be lost by this restriction. I do think it is foolish; word of the restrictions will get around, and then few people will go. Then maybe the restrictions will come off, but by that time, the marketing damage will have been done. They should understand that they're not running a sacred site, they're running Disney World.
JC
"Indians going corporate is bad juju." Huh? And just who are YOU (with all due respect) to state what is "bad juju" for a culture? :confused:
"I think Indians should pretty much be allowed to do whatever they want, within certain wide limits. " And what limits would those be? :confused:
I find the restriction on photography to be disappointing and I don't understand it (at least for the reason given), but until I were to hear the full explanation from them directly, I would respect their decision.
The reason I don't understand it is that the Grand Canyon is a tourist destination (like it or not) and who doesn't want to take photos there? Obviously probably the majority go there with at least a disposable camera in hand.
As for ywenz's question about whether this would present any different vantage point, well yeah, it does. Here, from what I have seen, you are actually over the edge of the rim, so I can imagine at least a few different perspectives. But it's true that there are lots of other opportunities for photography.
I'm a Grand Fan of the Grand Canyon and the peoples that live there. I've hiked in and out, hiked across, hiked around and eaten some really good meals on both sides. I've been sooo waiting for this thing to open... but I'm greatly disappointed in price + time limit. For my wallet it's an absolute no-go... at this point.
I've got lots of shots of the Canyon and no, they don't do it justice. But the memories they stir do. It would be same on the SkyWalk; grab a shot of me and the wife with rocks in the background so we could remember another great time together. But $150 for two - 15minutes and no camera? naaaa. Sorry, gotta pass for now.
One of you guys needs to develop an Official SkyWalk Foam-padded non-scratching throw-away camera to be sold only at the Official SkyWalk Gift Shop. Being Cherokee, I'll only charge a minimal % for coming up with the idea. ;)
toyotadesigner
04-02-2007, 09:28
There are nicer ways to spend 75 US$, really. But don't complain, go to Europe and try to shoot the Eiffel Tower or a museum or whatever you can imagine. Guards everywhere, chasing you, barking at you. If you unfold a tripod on public ground in Nuremberg/Germany to take some shots of the new museum there, guards will give you a hard time even though you are allowed to shoot from public ground.
The result: quite a large part of potential visitor refuse to visit these points. So leave the whatever you call those Indians alone, the bad news will spread rapidly around the world, and sooner than later they won't be able to pay the interest for the loan to build the skywalk and run bankrupt. End of the story.
IMHO you can't get a better free advertising and publicity if you allow photographers to sell, publish or distribute images. But some people think they are smarter than the rest of the world and try to overcharge for nothing else but hot air.
I'd never pay anything for stuff like this because there are other places which are more friendly to visitors, photographers and potential friends and supporters.
just my 2 cents...
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.