Main Entry: 1professional
Pronunciation: pr&-'fesh-n&l, -'fe-sh&-n&l
Function: adjective
1 a : of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession b : engaged in
one of the learned professions c (1) : characterized by or conforming to
the technical or ethical standards of a profession (2) : exhibiting a
courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the
workplace
2 a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of
endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer> b : having
a particular profession as a permanent career <a professional soldier> c

football>
3 : following a line of conduct as though it were a profession <a
professional patriot>
- professionally adverb

It is a ownership issue. See "The Lone Cyprus".

*
Photographs by Christian Bonanno
http://christianbonanno.com/

------------

Most National parks are open to the public.  I don't understand the
statement.  I have been all over the Badlands National park.  Not prohibited
from going anywhere,  however,  there are places where it is a bad idea to
wonder of the trail.

Sure, I would love a front row seat at the next shuttle launch,  or perhaps
be on the front lines shooting combat, or on the sidelines at the super
bowl, but there has to be a filter.  I am sure there are times and places
where this just make sense.  I didn't know it was a huge problem.

Tell us your story.

Being in the UK I have no idea what laws and rules apply in the USA.   But I
would think that "pro" doesn't so much describe the person as the activity
they are involved in at the time.        That is to say that a person
normally employed as and earning his living as a photographer would not need
a permit if he were there on vacation snapping pictures for the family
album. On the other hand anyone looking to take photographs and then publish
them would need a permit.

The issue is one of copyright and commercial exploitation rights.   What
owners of land and objects are concerned about is commercial exploitation of
their property.   You will probably find that the terms of the "permits"
cover anyone taking a photograph, but they put up notices for "pros" to draw
their attention to the need for the permit.   The reasoning being that the
family with their point and shoot cameras are unlikely to be looking to
publish so don't need to see the document that details what they can and
cannot photograph for publication.

Prohibition other than for reasons of security probably means they have a
deal with a pro for all the photos they need.

I was questioned for taking photos in the street in the UK.   Here we have
CCTV watching most of the major streets in major towns.   My "crime" was to
be seen walking in the street in the middle of the day with an SLR camera
photographing people and buildings.    I politely pointed out that I was
taking pictures for my own interest and was allowed to continue.
I refrained from pointing out the irony of the situation wherby I was
questioned for a few stills of people who happened to be in the street while
they were following me and recording me on video!.

As for threatening the rights of photoprahers.     Well my view is that
anyone has the right to take photopraphs, so long as these don't impinge on
the freedoms and security of others.    If you mean threatening your rights
to publish the photographs you take for financial or other gain, then that
is just business.

In this context, it means somebody who is going to use photos taken at a
specific location for commercial work...