[CR]Re: North American Handmade Bicycle Show...an update

(Example: Framebuilders:Masi)

Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 15:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Robert S. Cauthorn" <bcauthor@azstarnet.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
In-Reply-To: <MONKEYFOODPTeip68V800000b4f@monkeyfood.nt.phred.org>
References:
Subject: [CR]Re: North American Handmade Bicycle Show...an update

Don,

I'm with Dale on this one too. Part of the pleasure of going to an event for participants is taking photos of it to recall -- nearly all trade shows I've ever attended allow it.

Besides, we should be talking about celebrating the craft, which fan photos do. It's not like there are trade secrets to protect.

I think it's a huge mistake to go down this road. I mean, are bags going to be searched upon entering the exhibit hall? Are people going to be forcibly ejected because they want to take a picture themselves with a noted framebuilder?

The prohibition is bad for the public and it's bad for the builders -- if you start tossing people for taking pictures of a builder's bike, some people will think it's because the builders want it that way.

In effect, you're going to punish visitors -- potential handbuilt frame customers all -- specifically for being enthusiastic.

Imagine this scenario -- I'm in love with a Richard Sachs bike and I start taking pictures of it because I want to remember details for when I order one from him. I get kicked out for this? Who benefits from that? E-Richie? Me? You? The craft of framebuilding?

If this is really motivated by the concern of some builders, a better approach would be to make signs available for them to put at their booths asking the public not to take pictures. I doubt there will be much demand for such signs -- most builders are hungry for the attention.

Having a pro shoot pictures is a fine thing, I suppose. And to the extent that they're comprehensive and good quality I imagine they'll be the *most* viewed versions of the event. Nobody chooses bad pictures over good ones.

(If the plan is to charge the builders to have photos taken -- and thus not present the work of builders who balk at an extra fee -- I think that's a whole other discussion.)

Under any circumstances, this is the internet age now and it's futile and perhaps self-destructive to try to control all the images of the event.

You're only going to alienate a lot of people with the policy and it won't work anyway -- sneaking pictures will become a sport since you're all but announcing a challenge.

Don, you know I support your effort to the nth degree -- I've done legwork on the street to help out. I feel your *extremely* worthy goals are best achieved by making this the most positive event possible for the builders and the public. Putting yourself immediately at odds with the public doesn't get you where you want to be. This event is about outreach, right?

And by the way, I learned of last year's event specifically by virtue of images and accounts that people put on the net.

Bob Cauthorn San Francisco, CA

Dale Brown wrote:
>
> << 1 day after last years show, pics from the show of Paul Sadoffs bike
> were on a porn site. YES, a porn site.
> This was not cool with Paul and my job is to make sure the builders
> have a positive experience with this show.
> Allowing no public cameras cuts down on that possibility. >>
>
> Hmmm. Why would someone put bikes on a porn site? Doesn't make sense to
> me., How did Paul find those? Heck, they can take photos from the
> internet of Pauls stuff anytime they want and publish them on a porn
> site. Are you saying that some omne who attended the sh0ow last year
> took pictures and sent them to a porn site??? Crazy! And who cares?
>
> << Another problem was the first show had a bunch of folks snapping
> pics and publishing them to their own sites. Alot of the images were
> less than first class and i would rather have only pro images
> published. If you can think of a way to do this, let me know.>>
>
> Hmmm again. Seems to me that any publicity is good publicity. The
> quality of the pictures is something anyone cares about? Certainly
> anyone who cared to take pictures did it out of interest for the
> subjects and invested their energies because they liked what they saw.
> It's a little insulting to fans to say they have no access. Doesn't
> make sense to me. I saw all the shots from last year (except this porn
> thing) I think and I thought they added a lot to the event. Nope, I
> don't buy it, sorry.
>
> I assume you have been to Interbike etc. They supposed ban pictures by
> non media types and it has never worked.. Futile efforts = frustration.
> My advice; fagetaboutit!