Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


If you go down to the woods today........????


hornchurch 3 108
26 Apr 2012 3:13PM
Well you might get a big surprise....... as I did, a few weeks ago I ventured into my local forest which is Epping forest In Essex... I took some images and I sell images through fine art America..... I uploaded a few and made some digital art versions using elements 10.... in all uploaded about 30-35 images..... just over a week ago I received a Email which I first of all thought was a hoax but after a bit of googling i found out its not a hoax... a Epping forest lkeeper emailed to to tell me that I need a commercial licence.... and I should contact him if needed....??? so I emailed him explaing that i did not know a licence was required and enquired about the cost.... i added that if the cost was not viable i would remove the images..... received a automated reply that he was not availalbe until yesterday...... so I phoned his office to enguire.... a lady answered and there is no set price.. its up to the keeper to decided how much to charge myself..???????????? I have received no reply to my email my images are still on the site.......As for epping forest on arriving I had to remove items of strewn litter from the site to take images, there was general dog fouling and evidence of fires being lit... so I do not think i am a serious offender.... fineart america uploads my images to google.... so I guess thats where he found my images but a 15 minutes session on stock photo and micro stock photo sites I found a fair few thousand images......Epping forest is owned by the corperation of lLondon so it apears with national trust a no go the hasstle of photographers and restrictions increase...... any views on this........ and as i have not heard back from him should I leave the images on site.....??

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

NEWDIGIT 3 401 United Kingdom
26 Apr 2012 3:33PM
This sounds crazy, its an area open to the public so why is a license required to take photos?
If and I say IF there is a legal reason then the license fee should be a set price and not open to interpretation.
Personally I would ignore the "jobs worth" and let the "PC's"take a flying jump
User_Removed 10 17.9k 8 Norway
26 Apr 2012 3:35PM

Quote:Personally I would ignore the "jobs worth" and let the "PC's"take a flying jump


Agree 100%.
hornchurch 3 108
26 Apr 2012 3:43PM
To add some more info... this keeper is has prosecuted people for picking mushrooms in epping forest... and on a saturday morning decided to pick me out of the many thousands of images of the forest..... as for no set price well it just seems very fishy...... in all i Get hassle when i take photos in london and did not expect it in a forest.....
hornchurch 3 108
26 Apr 2012 3:56PM
I just uploaded one of the images....... Smile
robthecamman 3 1.3k United Kingdom
26 Apr 2012 3:59PM
load tosh
robthecamman 3 1.3k United Kingdom
26 Apr 2012 4:01PM
enquire with police how things stand sounds like some idiot chargeing them daft enough to pay
26 Apr 2012 4:03PM
just had a look at your image.

How is that identified as being Epping Forest, or indeed any other location, apart from the metadata that you chose to put with the image?
hornchurch 3 108
26 Apr 2012 4:06PM
Hi well when i uploaded the image I titled it as epping forest and put a little bit about its history there are a mixture of different photos...... faa upload them to google this is where i guess he found them.... he emailed me through my site... i replied back and have received no answer.
26 Apr 2012 4:31PM
sorry that was the point i was driving at, it is the fact that you have entitled the image and produced an explanation which has lead to the Epping connection.

Had you given it a name without reference to Epping, there is no way to distinguish those tress, from billions of others.

I am not being critical, just offering an observation, that the image has merit irrespective of its location. A potential purchaser is interested in the image not the location. (although for many images of a particular landmark that will not be the case).
robthecamman 3 1.3k United Kingdom
26 Apr 2012 4:36PM
sounds like a plonker takeing mickey to me why not just ignore
janeez e2
6 1.2k 8 United Kingdom
26 Apr 2012 4:51PM
Hmmmm......sounds a bit fishy to me. Take a look at this link which defines their role and power and I would then suggest you contact the Epping Forest district council and ask them about this. It may be that this particular person may have discovered a way to earn himself a little extra cash. I know licenses for photography are bought in some cathedrals and are usually only a couple of quid but this is a new one to me. I cannot see that he is any different to the Verders of the New Forest and they don't charge for taking pictures.
crookymonsta e2
6 704 10 England
26 Apr 2012 5:06PM
If you are really concerned about this get in touch with the City of London Corporation, who own Epping Forest. I have had a close look at their website and can find nothing to indicate that a licence is required for photography. The only mention I can find on their website relating to licences in Epping Forest are for group activities of any description. Mushroom picking is, indeed, open to prosecution but that doesn't just apply to Epping Forest, other areas are equally covered. I can't imagine the CLC giving a keeper carte blanche to charge any fee he sees fit.
hornchurch 3 108
26 Apr 2012 5:24PM
As a update i just phoned the city of london corperation they said that I do need a licence for anything other than personal use... they then said epping forest deal with the cost and i should call them, they then gave me the same number phoned before and at this time its emergency calls only..... the lady i spoke to on that number stated the keeper sets the price..... ??
loweskid 13 2.0k 1 United Kingdom
26 Apr 2012 6:01PM
Page 6 of the Epping Forest Bylaws ....

Prohibited.... Taking photographs or film for a commercial purpose without the written consent of the Superintendent and on payment of such charges as the Conservators from time to time fix.

I wonder if the contributors of the 2000+ images that are offered at Alamy (some of them Royalty Free) know this.... Grin

Personally I would just carry on selling them but don't caption them as Epping Forest.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.