News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


EAF

No Photos Allowed
« on: July 08, 2005, 10:22:51 PM »
After reading the Old Sandwich thread, I was annoyed that the club does not allow photos to be taken of the course.

I don't think that Gold Digest or GW should include courses that prohibit full photo access on their course ratings lists. If the Old Sandwich course is excellent, then let the world get a glimpse of why the course should be included on the ratings list. GD and GW raters should not be allowed to submit rating evaluations for such private clubs.

Imagine if exclusive clubs like PV and Cypress Point had not allowed any photos of the GCA brilliance found there! The golf world would have been deprived of many architecture ideas.

Are there any courses currently on the GD or GW ratings that have "no photos allowed" policies?

astavrides

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #1 on: July 08, 2005, 10:28:45 PM »
valderrama doesnt allow photos.  [still my playing companion smuggled a camera onto the course.  I dont know how many pictures he took, but he did take one of my ball plugged on the hillside one inch above the edge of the water hazard on the (in)famous 17th.  i'd post the photo if I knew how.]

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #2 on: July 08, 2005, 10:37:14 PM »
I disagree. I love to take photos at courses I play and find to be architecturally interesting. Just ask Shivas. :) If a course doesn't allow pix then that is okay, since most of the world wouldn't ever see that course in person, and little can be learned architecturally from photographs. The photos I take remind me of architectural features I might have forgotten, but I doubt I would pick up much by looking at pix of a course I have never seen in person.
   I have been compelled to see some courses based on the photos of the bunkering, Kingsley Club and Sand Hills come to mind. But the most valuable resource for learning what courses are worth seeking out are the guys on this site, not photos.
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

EAF

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #3 on: July 08, 2005, 10:38:26 PM »
Sorry, but hosting Ryder Cup Matches and a regular European PGA Tour event to be broadcast worldwide doesn't fit the "no photos allowed" policy.  :)

Were you able to replace your imbedded ball on that slope in front of 17?

Don Herdrich

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #4 on: July 08, 2005, 10:46:34 PM »
My "no cameras allowed" comment was a JOKE people.......I felt it would be a classy move to NOT take pics of every/any hole.

As far as raters and OS, that is a touchy subject I will not go into further here.....

I think Pine Valley doesn't allow cameras on the course by guests......it has really hurt them, huh??
« Last Edit: July 08, 2005, 10:49:39 PM by Don Herdrich »

EAF

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2005, 10:55:49 PM »
Ed,

I think that there is much to be learned about the architecture and design of a course from photos. Take a look at all the photos posted on GCA. The picture of the bunker on the 18th at Bandon Dunes is amazing. Without that picture, I would not think that such a penal bunker could even be built.

Just like photos of the great architectural features found on famous buildings are used for study and future designs, GCA pictures allow "access" to distant and important places.

If the private clubs want to be highly regarded and rated then they should be required to allow photos.

Mike Erdmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #6 on: July 08, 2005, 11:09:27 PM »
I think it's a pretty safe argument that the private clubs that don't allow photos to be taken could largely give a rat's ass if they end up in a magazine's Top 100 list.

Sure, you may want to see photos of a course and might even learn some things, but photo access has ZERO to do with recognizing the quality of that course's architecture.


Don Herdrich

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2005, 11:27:59 PM »
"If the private clubs want to be highly regarded and rated then they should be required to allow photos."

This is an idiotic statement.....how in the world do photos have ANYTHING to do with ratings and lofty regards???

I agree totally with Mr Erdmann's statement...he hit the bullseye!

Donnie Beck

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2005, 05:43:29 AM »
PRIVATE = 1 a : intended for or restricted to the use of a particular person, group, or class <a private park> b : belonging to or concerning an individual person, company, or interest <a private house> c (1) : restricted to the individual or arising independently of others <private opinion> (2) : carried on by the individual independently of the usual institutions <private study>; also : being educated by independent study or a tutor or in a private school <private students> d : not general in effect <a private statute> e : of, relating to, or receiving hospital service in which the patient has more privileges than a semiprivate or ward patient

Until you spend the money to join one of these clubs I think it best to respect their wishes. It is a privilege anytime you are allowed on the property.

HamiltonBHearst

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2005, 06:33:52 AM »


Mr. Beck

Who is kidding who here.  It is a honor to be rated by these prestigous publications.  Full and free access should be given to the rating community at all times and of course pictures should be allowed.  How else will the GD subscriber learn about places like Fischer's Island? :D  

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2005, 07:54:48 AM »
EAF, you'll be pleased to know that as a matter of policy, Golfweek doesn't evaluate courses or allow raters to see them unless the facility agrees to the following:

-provide a photographer to accompany each group so they can document their discovery of the architectural wonders;

-unlimited access to all meals, locker facilities, spa and massage treatments, comped, of course;

-the right to publish the names, addresses and phone numbers of all members.

We, too, are opposed to the idea of privacy and are determined not to respect it.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2005, 07:58:32 AM by Brad Klein »

PThomas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #11 on: July 09, 2005, 08:00:54 AM »
SFGC also prohibits I believe

it would be interesting to know if anyone has ever seen anyone else violate such a policy:  does the person get kicked off, warned, what?  just curious (I'm NOT planning anything either!)
199 played, only Augusta National left to play!

Kyle Harris

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #12 on: July 09, 2005, 08:02:54 AM »
I never knew such policy even existed and I hope some of the clubs I've played in the past two months while I've had my digital camera didn't mind...

Didn't even think to ask permission either, however, my thank you gift to each of the clubs for having me on has been a framed photo of one of their holes. (Look at my pictures of Manny's 8th and 16th to get an idea of what they get).

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #13 on: July 09, 2005, 08:09:08 AM »
As a matter of fact, while many clubs have a policy of no cameras, what they are really trying to prohibit is public use of such images for publication, lecture or commercial purposes. It's always a good idea to inquire beforehand, as you are subject to whatever local club rules prevail. But I've found that many clubs will allow you to take photos for your own collection, whereas they don't want others to see it. Of course in an era of internet posting, the line between private use/public dissemination is a little fuzzier.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2005, 08:12:27 AM by Brad Klein »

Jfaspen

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #14 on: July 09, 2005, 08:10:09 AM »
I believe Shadow Creek also has a no-photo policy...  

Ken Fry

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #15 on: July 09, 2005, 08:42:57 AM »
Brad,

I've always been interested in one of those chocolate mud coverings and cocoa bath spa treatments at Hershey.  Let me know when a team decides to visit the old place.....

Ken

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2005, 09:14:07 AM »
EAF

I agree it's the height of stuffiness.

Clubs that do this just take themselves and their sacred "privacy" way too seriously.  

I've taken thousands of pics of private clubs and luckily have yet to come across one that has this daft policy.    
« Last Edit: July 09, 2005, 09:15:32 AM by Paul_Turner »
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2005, 01:15:21 PM »
EAF

I agree it's the height of stuffiness.

Clubs that do this just take themselves and their sacred "privacy" way too seriously.  

I've taken thousands of pics of private clubs and luckily have yet to come across one that has this daft policy.    

Paul,

Daft or not, it is their club and one should play by their rules. From time to time I am invited to a friend's house for cocktails or dinner. He spends some time in the Orient and has a Japanese style house, therefore he has acquired the custom of removing one's shoes when entering the place. I am not wild about it, for fear I may have a hole in my socks, but I do as good manners woulds dictate.

Bob

David Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2005, 01:54:06 PM »
If the Old Sandwich course is excellent, then let the world get a glimpse of why the course should be included on the ratings list. GD and GW raters should not be allowed to submit rating evaluations for such private clubs.

If you are being sarcastic you must include the requisite smiley faces to let us know.

In the words of John McEnroe, "You cannot be serious."
"Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent." - Judge Holden, Blood Meridian.

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #19 on: July 09, 2005, 02:14:27 PM »
Bob

Agreed, but as golf courses don't have feelings, I don't see the harm.

Can anyone cite one example where a course or club has been harmed by an unauthorised photo of the course?
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Mike Hendren

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2005, 09:45:19 PM »
And this is the same crowd that was up in arms over the Supreme Court's recent infringement of property rights!

I cannot for the life of me envision Bob Huntley roaming around his host's residence snapping photographs of prized artwork acquired in the Orient.

I do not take photographs at a private course without asking.  My request was only denied once, and I had no problem with that whatsoever.  I also suspect that particularly club would absolutely love to show up on the ratings radar screen.  Even when granted permission, I take photographs judiciously, not wanting to appear that I am documenting the golf course.  

Mike
Two Corinthians walk into a bar ....

Nick Pozaric

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #21 on: July 10, 2005, 11:26:02 AM »
SFGC also prohibits I believe

it would be interesting to know if anyone has ever seen anyone else violate such a policy:  does the person get kicked off, warned, what?  just curious (I'm NOT planning anything either!)
no photos, my caddy told me he would take one but i said no thanks.  i bought a yardage book which has some nice pics in it

HamiltonBHearst

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #22 on: July 10, 2005, 07:43:54 PM »


SFGC allows photos.  Joel Stewart had some up on the site a few months ago.  Wasn't there a discussion with the west coast guys?

Top100Guru

Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #23 on: July 10, 2005, 08:44:01 PM »
Hey Hamilton........your Quote

"Full and free access should be given to the rating community at all times and of course pictures should be allowed.  How else will the GD subscriber learn about places like Fischer's Island?"

.....is in a word........STUPID........."If the average rater" would play as a guest and "not be comped" then maybe there would be more "Reliability" in the ratings that come out from each and every publication these days........and by the way, Learn how to spell "Fisher's" and maybe I'll arrange for you to get out there sometime.........
« Last Edit: July 10, 2005, 08:59:59 PM by McConkey III »

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:No Photos Allowed
« Reply #24 on: July 10, 2005, 09:00:39 PM »
Access through proper spelling...that sounds like the best thing ever for golf.....

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017