Should Disney enforce the Flash Photography policy?

[6laurac]

I like the idea of stopping the rides to announce "no flash photography" but then the ride would be stopped as soon as it started up again with all the culprits using their cameras and phones now.

 

[devoy1701]

I can think of no instance at Disney where a flash is required except in certain pavilions or close up outdoors at night. On rides, you ruin everyone's ride; at dinner you annoy all the diners, at night 90% of what people are using the flash for is too far away anyways.

I have on POC turned around and flashed someone behind me right in the eyes after asking 3 times and the 20th flash.

With how cheap point and shoot cameras are today, it's no wonder that many people handle them without actually knowing how to work them or some of the basics about taking photos. This is what the issue ultimately boils down to...lack of education about photography and courtesy. Many people don't realize that if and object is farther than 10ft away from the camera and it's pitch black that the picture won't turn out using your built-in flash...so they just keep trying and trying and hope that one will turn out. You know...as long as it has 17MP it will take a good picture...because that's all that matters...my camera has more MEGAPIXELS than yours!

 

[Jay & Sue]

Although it would not solve the problem, I have often wished that there would be an official daily "take all you want photo hour" for the rides.

 

[florencej2]

Dark rides are called dark rides for a reason but can Disney really further ruin other guests ride experiences by stopping the ride to catch one culprit? There has to be a less intrusive way...

 

[gaga4disney]

Dark rides are called dark rides for a reason but can Disney really further ruin other guests ride experiences by stopping the ride to catch one culprit? There has to be a less intrusive way...

it's ruined by the flashing anyway. the point would be to stop the flashing from continuing through the rest of the ride.

 

[ddbowdoin]

I voted No because it won't happen. I didn't vote no because I do it all the time. I don't ever see people using their flash during dark rides so it doesn't bother me any.

I've only been twice in the last two years after a 10 year gap... but in the 14 or so days I've been I saw so many flashes in every dark ride, especially POTC that I wanted to strange someone!

 

[ddbowdoin]

With how cheap point and shoot cameras are today, it's no wonder that many people handle them without actually knowing how to work them or some of the basics about taking photos. This is what the issue ultimately boils down to...lack of education about photography and courtesy. Many people don't realize that if and object is farther than 10ft away from the camera and it's pitch black that the picture won't turn out...so they just keep trying and trying and hope that one will turn out. You know...as long as it has 17MP it will take a good picture...because that's all that matters...my camera has more MEGAPIXELS than yours!

that's what I said... but I'm a "snob", apparently standards are pretty low in these parts

 

[TINKER625]

I'm so glad someone has said something. Its becoming extremly distracting too when your at a show and someone is using there Iphone to video the show. (little mermaid) Its like a light shining in your face the whole time.
If your thinking it is stated you CANNOT use cameras people still do it. However, I told the people to stop. Oh yes I did. They did stop.

 

[ddbowdoin]

I'm so glad someone has said something. Its becoming extremly distracting too when your at a show and someone is using there Iphone to video the show. (little mermaid) Its like a light shining in your face the whole time.
If your thinking it is stated you CANNOT use cameras people still do it. However, I told the people to stop. Oh yes I did. They did stop.

the thing that really bugs me is how people actually justify filming dark, indoor attractions.

1.) you have no method of stabilizing that camera... unless you somehow have hands of steel that never vibrate
2.) you're using a crude tool to capture something that demands intricate and expensive equipment
3.) what is the real value of you shooting it? I mean honestly, do people actually use their phone and then say, wow this is amazing quality eh?

so once again, you've ruined peoples experiences to capture something mediocre at best.

 

[flynnibus]

that's what I said... but I'm a "snob", apparently standards are pretty low in these parts

Yes, because only P&S owners don't know anything about photography or courtesy...

Ignorance is independent of one's camera choice. The only difference is how much money the soccer mom threw at the camera. There is no education standard to buy a camera with interchangeable lens either...

I see just as many people use flash when not allowed with their DSLRs at the kid's gymnastics meets too.

It's not the tool.. it's the user. And cheap point and shoots have existed long before any of us had digital cameras of any sorts. So this isn't a new phenomenon.

 

[Timekeeper]

Again - what relevance does PREVENTING it from happening have to do with the idea of ENFORCING a policy?

We can't PREVENT a crime from happening, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have enforcement of the law if it's broken.

Prevention is really moot.

Impact of the enforcement on the actual ride experience is what actually matters. Not if it's physically possible to prevent it or not.

Prevention is the key here, and far from "moot." Preventing it from happening goes to the heart of what guests are apparently finding discomfort with - flashing. If all of the remedies being considered focus only on what to do after the fact, then it won't solve the problem (of interrupting the integrity of the show and guest experience). If you look at the news and follow things that are happening (or not happening) in the political arena, you'll see a lot of this "after the fact" attitude to "fixing" problems. Sure, that's one approach, but it's the least effective approach.

 

[ShookieJones]

It's not the tool.. it's the user. .

This is so true.

Although, if you think about it.... in the case of people using flash photography in dark rides....the users are the tools.

 

[devoy1701]

Yes, because only P&S owners don't know anything about photography or courtesy...

Ignorance is independent of one's camera choice. The only difference is how much money the soccer mom threw at the camera. There is no education standard to buy a camera with interchangeable lens either...

I see just as many people use flash when not allowed with their DSLRs at the kid's gymnastics meets too.

It's not the tool.. it's the user. And cheap point and shoots have existed long before any of us had digital cameras of any sorts. So this isn't a new phenomenon.

That's what I said....hyperbole and sarcasm aside. The relative inexpensiveness of cameras nowadays puts many more of them in the hands of people who don't know how to use them (whether iphones, cheap p&s, or DSLRs). I do doubt that there are many people who don't know what they're doing who are opting for the $2000 DSLR over the $700 DSLR.

As to your last point...while true, the digital camera age has added to it...no longer do you only have 24 pictures that you can take (better not waste them!) and then have to pay to see how they turned out. You can take as many as you want now for relatively no extended cost past the initial purchase of your camera. So I imagine that onboard photography has increased tremendiously over the past decade.

 

[Timekeeper]

the thing that really bugs me is how people actually justify filming dark, indoor attractions.

1.) you have no method of stabilizing that camera... unless you somehow have hands of steel that never vibrate
2.) you're using a crude tool to capture something that demands intricate and expensive equipment
3.) what is the real value of you shooting it? I mean honestly, do people actually use their phone and then say, wow this is amazing quality eh?

so once again, you've ruined peoples experiences to capture something mediocre at best.

What is mediocre? The next time that I see a family wearing Make A Wish t-shirts and buttons, filming inside of a dark attraction using a camera that costs less than $3,000, should I interrupt them and tell them that they may as well cease filming because their results will be mediocre? Never mind why they decided to document these happy moments together, and just focus on the technical quality of the end result? Even if the family is not wearing Make A Wish clothing, am I then entitled to make my own judgments about them in the absence of special buttons, and that they are therefore less entitled to document their memories?

There are people who will forever adhere to the "my lens is bigger than yours" attitude ...And then there are people who understand the real motivation for photography; the "human" element (so to speak); and might eventually understand that we should not impose our personal opinions as to individual motivators onto everyone else. Maybe our ancestors should have done a better job of illustrating human history inside of cave walls. How dare they leave us with such a mediocre record of our past.

 

[flynnibus]

Prevention is the key here, and far from "moot." Preventing it from happening goes to the heart of what guests are apparently finding discomfort with - flashing

No, prevention isn't necessary. If you create a situation where everyone doesn't cross the line VOLUNTARILY, there is no need to PREVENT anyone from crossing the line.

The majority of our laws work not by PREVENTING something from happening, but by DISCOURAGING it and punishing when it does happen.

So the problem of 'you cant prevent it' really is moot. It's not a requirement to pursue the goal. The government can't PREVENT me from punching you, but the government has successfully kept me from punching you by discouraging me from doing so because of the consequences of doing so.

Same thing applies here.. it's just like running the park. Disney can't PREVENT you from picking up and start running... but Disney can discourage it and ACT when people do run in the park.

The fact that Disney has no way of stopping it before it happens really isn't of consequence. What matters is how successful Disney can be at discouraging it to the point where people voluntarily avoid doing it.

If all of the remedies being considered focus only on what to do after the fact, then it won't solve the problem (of interrupting the integrity of the show and guest experience). If you look at the news and follow things that are happening (or not happening) in the political arena, you'll see a lot of this "after the fact" attitude to "fixing" problems. Sure, that's one approach, but it's the least effective approach.

You say this because you are missing the key difference. The politics you talk about is when people try to make it physically impossible to do something.. instead of educating people why they shouldn't do it and avoid it on their own accord.

Trying to make something impossible is the futile road.. people will always come up with a way around it. What is far more effective is making everyone WANT to follow the path you desire them to follow... followed by making people scared not to follow the path due to consequences if they don't.

We don't build guns that can't be pointed at people... we educate people that pointing guns at people can lead to bad consequences for you and others.

You can't stop free people from doing things - you can only steer people with positive and negative consequences.

 

[flynnibus]

That's what I said....hyperbole and sarcasm aside. The relative inexpensiveness of cameras nowadays puts many more of them in the hands of people who don't know how to use them (whether iphones, cheap p&s, or DSLRs). I do doubt that there are many people who don't know what they're doing who are opting for the $2000 DSLR over the $700 DSLR.

See it all the time... when you have rich people they buy the better product, even if it's more than they need. Every person at my barn has a higher end DSLR body than I do - yet the prime reason most of 'em even have the DSLR is purely for the faster shooting rate. Soccer Moms don't generally need a 5D.. or even 60D.. but they have em. It's most about how much income your household has than what most people need.

As to your last point...while true, the digital camera age has added to it...no longer do you only have 24 pictures that you can take (better not waste them!) and then have to pay to see how they turned out. You can take as many as you want now for relatively no extended cost past the initial purchase of your camera. So I imagine that onboard photography has increased tremendiously over the past decade.

That is true.. should make it less of a decision when to hit that shutter

 

[MKCP 1985]

And by should they, I mean, should they toss the ignoramouses who insist on ruining the ride experience for the rest of us?

a poll free of bias, refreshing. :lol:

 

[Timekeeper]

So the problem of 'you cant prevent it' really is moot. It's not a requirement to pursue the goal. The government can't PREVENT me from punching you, but the government has successfully kept me from punching you by discouraging me from doing so because of the consequences of doing so.

Oh, I get it now. You're a proponent of the theory of deterrence within the realm of our criminal justice system. Okay, you're entitled to that opinion, and there has long been - and forever will be - debate on exactly that issue.

While the criminal justice system "enforces" our laws, as you pointed out, there are still a plethora of crimes being committed every moment of every day. But if you're satisfied with potential punishment as deterrence and therefore adequate enforcement, in both the criminal justice system and theme park attraction policies, so be it.

 

[flynnibus]

Oh, I get it now. You're a proponent of the theory of deterrence within the realm of our criminal justice system. Okay, you're entitled to that opinion, and there has long been - and forever will be - debate on exactly that issue.

While the criminal justice system "enforces" our laws, as you pointed out, there are still a plethora of crimes being committed every moment of every day. But if you're satisfied with potential punishment as deterrence and therefore adequate enforcement, in both the criminal justice system and theme park attraction policies, so be it.

As long as we are free - that's what you get.

Be realistic - people don't need to be strip searched to find all cameras to enforce 'no photography' rules. It's reasonable, and realistic to intervene when a camera does come out when it's not supposed to.

It's reasonable and tolerable for some rogue flashes to go off, if they are few and far between. The failure to prevent 100% of occurrences does not make the effort futile or pointless. So to focus on 100% prevention as metric of success is just being instead of practical.

You can improve the experience for the vast majority without successfully stopping any possibility of a flash going off.

The 'Running in the park' analogy hits home 100%. Disney doesn't NEED a way to prevent you from running to make it practical and worthwhile to enforce a no running policy in the parks... nor does it need to achieve complete elimination of running for the majority to benefit from the policy.

 

[Raven66]

All I know that when someone takes that many flash pictures all at once in the dark, it brings on a massive migraine in me.

I did actually take a flash picture once on a dark ride. I thought I had turned the flash off. I had turned it off already. I apologized to all sitting around me.