The big EVENT OF THE CENTURY  this weekend begins with Old Beatle Paul playing a super show . I was thinking that perharps some stock photographers who is his fan (I am not, I was a Searchers fan not Beatles; John 's fan, not Paul's),would take this momentus occassion as a photo-op .
But as I was chewing on junk food in a super take away worldwide joint (no names mentioned, they really don't need any more PR ) , I can't help but the headline story with a sidenote : "WHAT TO LEAVE AT HOME"...
PROFESSIONAL VIDEO AND PHOTO EQUIPMENT. or words to the effect.

The tickets are a whopping $350+- ringside to the lowest 150+- standing only bring your own chairs...

 I just spent an equal amount for the "lowest bring your own chair ticket price" on the new Pentax 50-200 OEM DA zoom. My pal at Henry's showed me the newer moisture resistant similar FL version priced a little less than the ringside ticket price.  Hell on wheels ! If I wanted to dish out $350 for the show, I'd rather splash it on another Pentax lense, or put half of it to a Sigma super wide aspherical lense.

I guess Paulie is a pop icon and he can do what he wants. But I can't help to think that in Brazil during the carnival and other shows at SP, RDJ, Bahia,etc..
the tickets to the biggest stars of Musica Axe and Tropalismo costs far far less,
and after the show the fans are even given the op to meet the stars to take photos and get their autograph. No big stink about videoing the show,etc.

Quite a diff , isn't it?

I wonder if any pop or rock fans have come across any other shows that do this thing on cameras and video cameras. It's not very photography friendly.
I know many indie group are quite photo friendly. But I have no first hand testament on that as I am not a concert fan.

Input anyone? Pros and Cons welcome. If you adore Paulie, go ahead and scream back at me..
 I encourage open discussion all the time.

You're not kidding ! All you need is love ! 

I'm a Beatles fan, yeah, yeah, yeah, but does it make a difference?  Don't all stars restrict videos and cameras in their shows.  At Cirque du Soleil, before the show started I was checking photos taken that day, and soon someone appeared to say photo and video cameras were not allowed during the show (and I had no intention of doing that).  In a recent free concert in a church here, I was filming some clips and a security guy said filming was not allowed.  You may take videos in shows here in Brazil, but don't think this is allowed.

Wow, has things really changed that much in Brazil? In 2001 I was at the Carnaval and we walked into the trio eletricos with our cameras flashing. Even in Boston with Daniela Mercury, I snug in her dress rehearsal and sound check. Dani was just about to leave for a break and she saw me. When I identified myself, she stop to speak with me and even pose for me and my wife. Even asked our names to sign on our ticket. And this was Dani, the biggest star in Axe.
After the show around 2 am, the fans waited for Dani to come down stage to chat and pose with them. I went back to my hotel it was way past my bedtime.

My contacts in Brasil still go to the Carnaval to dance with Dani, and she has not mentioned them banning videos or cameras. In fact, she videos the show every year .

Unless it's changed now, I am not sure.

I think this is quite common,a lot of professional photographers and video people would be covering the event through official "press pass" channels and they don't want 50,000 "competitors" blazing away. Some events will release video etc of the concert etc.

Australian open tennis they won't let you take in any lens greater than 200mm.

The more famous people or event is there are the more restrictions.

Not that I agree with the prices in general on a relative price comparision between other shows Paul is one show I would pay the money for, some of the prices for 1 hit wonders are just a rip offs.

You can't blame it entirely on McCartney as everything on that stage from the set design, pyrotechnics to  lighting design will be protected by the individual designer's contracts, then theres the dancers, not to mention the musician's union,  ASCAP, the talent agents (who get a percentage of everything) and the other rights holders to the music.   They like to make it sound like it's all McCartney, but there's a long list of individuals who expect a royalty every time a photo is taken.

Back in my old life... for some reason I got to sit beside my boss instead of up in the rafters for the debut of Paul Stanley (from Kiss) as Phantom.  The theatres of course have a no-photos/video policy (not to mention everything I listed above).  Sitting in front of us was Stanley's wife with her camcorder.  I pointed it out to my boss, who was head of the whole company at the time.  He normally would normally have hit the roof - but hey - it was Paul Stanley's insanely gorgeous wife so we just had a little laugh.  I bet that ACTRA and Andrew Lloyd Webber wouldn't have been so forgiving.  I'd sure like a copy of Pam's bootleg... would be worth good moola.  Those Kiss fans are as crazy as Trekkies.

I think this is quite common,a lot of professional photographers and video people would be covering the event through official "press pass" channels and they don't want 50,000 "competitors" blazing away. Some events will release video etc of the concert etc.

Australian open tennis they won't let you take in any lens greater than 200mm.

The more famous people or event is there are the more restrictions.

Not that I agree with the prices in general on a relative price comparision between other shows Paul is one show I would pay the money for, some of the prices for 1 hit wonders are just a rip offs.

Melbourne commonwealth games was nothing over a 200mm lens.  I tried to get more clarification and pointed out that our p&s at the time had a 350mm equiv lens and asked will staff know what they are looking at (I was actually being serious because I was spending long days out and didnt want to get to the games and get turned away) basically got in reply "the
rule is nothing over 200mm". twice had comments from security along the lines you must get great photos with that camera (and attached bigma

been elsewhere though and told no dslrs.

Talking about Minox made me figure out why I was not stopped by security at the shows in Brazil, Boston,etc...  During those days, when travelling I left my 35mm Nikon F at home, bringing only some strange looking Samsung half frame that I found at a pawn shop in Calgary. The deception was that this camera had a motor drive and a zoom from wide to tele.  Perharps the security thought it was some cheap super8, as many of my friends , and even the camera salesmen in Brazil thought it was some Super8 movie junk .

After all,  the ad to Paul's concert did specify No PRO video or photographic cameras.

I have to admit that 200mm is pretty decent for tennis open. Although it may not be much for the Melbourne Games or Grand Prix.
Even if Paul allowed 200mm, that wouldn't be that bad either. With a 14 MP camera, you can still crop pretty close shooting with even 100 mm.
I can see why they get stricter nowadays. I supposed during the days of 35mm, it isn't too often you see amateurs with a battery of SLR and lenses. But with digital, literally anyone can still get a bridge or a P&S with more or less 200mm +.

Phil, did you try anyway going in with the P&S 350mm equi zoom? Security probably look at SLRs and not P&S. Much like in the old days when many thought the Minox was just some toy cam or Instamatic, ha!ha!.

I had the sigma 50-500 on I think it was the pentax k10 at the time.  I doubt many of the staff even knew of the rule and think it was probably there in case someone came along with a 600 f4 and got in the way or made people next to them made complaints etc.

Like him or hate him it was an amazing concert last night! 50,000+ and the wife and I made it within a stones through of the stage! I didnt take my kit and a good thing too we were pressed together so tightly things would have only gotten broken.