Not video but audio - someone I know is a big Barbara Cook fan and used to tape her concerts in the UK. She got to know BC a little and once got a phone call from the lady asking if she could send her a copy of a particular concert.
My favorite (and I have NOOOOO problem telling this story) is a Miss LuPone. Patti came out hard against bootlegs a few years ago and it struck me as quite odd since Mama Rose herself is an active seeker in videos of her own work. Being against something is one thing but being a hypocrite like her is another.
Fans should be allowed to take pictures before the show of the theatre and curtain and for the curtain call for a souvenir, but never during the performance as it is dangerous.
I do think audience members should be allowed to take pictures of the curtain and stage before the show and at intermission though. There is no harm in it and a lot of people don't even know it is prohibited until they get yelled at by an usher.
Do you think the stage curtains just happened? That no one went to the trouble of designing it and copyrighting it? The stage curtains are protected under copyright just as much as the sets.
"All our dreams can come true -- if we have the courage to pursue them." -- Walt Disney
We must have different Gods. My God said "do to others what you would have them do to you". Your God seems to have said "My Way or the Highway".
Photographs of the set & costumes are not allowed for several reasons, the main one being copyright. A community theater director could easily take photos during the show and then duplicate them for their own production. (With the internet, however, taking photos during the show are the least of concerns to designers.)
"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle
Look, the way to cut down on bootlegs is really simple. The productions themselves need to film them and release them. Too expensive you say? Add $1 to the ticket price and call it a "preservation fee". Tickets are already so damn high it won't matter and it's not like most people would mind that. Distribution too much money? Don't distribute them to the stores. Do what Warner Bros. does and release them via request online. Want a copy of GOD OF CARNAGE? Go to a website, place an order for say $29.95 (doesn't seem like a bad price at all to pay) and it will be mailed to you.
It's not as complicated as everyone makes it out to be. These antiquated Equity contracts are in serious need of revision as it is. Once that's done it will be a matter of regular contracts and agreements being signed. Lincoln Center library is great but I never saw the point of them with their restrictive policies. They should be available to anyone at anytime.
Or at least release the very few that get taped for posterity for purchase, like the Sondheim shows.
I wonder what kind of a case Live from Lincoln Center can make against it, now that the Metropolitan Opera is beginning to release their HD cinema broadcasts on DVD.
Well when the Lincoln Center recordings were recorded the contracts were nothing like what they would have to be for it to be distributed and sold, so their case would be that they legally can't (which is true without going back to every single person involved in the shows and having them sign more paperwork and agreeing on royalties, etc.)
I do think that since most shows close at a loss in this day and age, at least a portion of the sale of the shows could go back to the Producers of the shows. Hell, make it a $2 "Preservation Fee" per ticket. I'd be excited each time I bought a ticket that I was helping to fund the release of it after it closes.
Again, it's not going to stop bootlegging all together. There's always going to be the people who need to see the understudy for Chistery in the 6th Non Equity BumF*ck, Alabama tour of WICKED. But it would surely make most others obsolete and create great looking records of the shows instead of camcorder copies.
I am completely in support of bootleg broadway stuff. I don't do it, but it is incredibly resourceful to see them on utube and other sites. Seeing bootlegs make me want to see a show even more to be honest. I see nothing wrong with it, other than it should be under a producer's control to decide when a show should be recorded. But it should definitely be made public.
It's also kind of silly to me when people freak out over bootlegs of shows that have long closed. Once the production has closed and the tour has ended there's not really any more money to be made outside of the licensing fees for stock and regional productions. How does it hurt any of the actors or creators should someone choose to watch a bootleg of a production that has ended and one that they never would have been able to see otherwise?
I realize that there would be value in being able to watch classic performances and productions, but I think a lot of this bootlegging business ignores the fact that theater is a live art form. Being in the theater and getting engaged in the show is such a singular experience and to film these performances and to have people use them as a substitute for that experience seems very sad to me.
I don't think I have any bootleg copies of things, but I would be happy to watch things at the Library for the Performing Arts. I understand that people outside of New York do not have the same opportunities that people in the city do, and I have sadly missed a number of shows over the years, but there are ways to get into theater and to fall in love with Broadway from afar (not including bootlegs).
And don't get me started on people whipping out their cell phones and texting devices at intermission/ There is no earthly reason why your texts can't wait until the show is over and you are outside the theatre.
I'd like to hear more about why you think people shouldn't be allowed to use their phones during intermission? During a show, sure, but during intermission? I'm on my phone all the time during intermission, I've never even thought there was anything wrong with it. (And this is coming from someone who puts her phone on silent, and then turns it off, during the show itself, to make doubly sure that it won't ring during the show.)
I don't think texting/phoning during intermission should be prohibited, but I agree that I would rather not see it done. In The Drowsy Chaperone, the Man in Chair goes on a rant about how he hates intermissions because they take you out of the action of the show and back to the real world. Texting/calling people further takes you out of it. But I'm an idealist. Also a bit of a hypocrite. Texting during intermission is a habit I'm trying very hard to break myself of.
There is little-to-NO money to be made from recording productions for DVD. In fact, you LOSE money. Lonny Price told me that to film the CONCERT version of CANDIDE it costs $2 million and they were lucky if they got HALF of that back.
To film a production, there are SO many costs. A film crew & creative team (for the taping) is an expense. Paying all the stage performers & creative team (for the stage) is an expense. Paying the writers is an expense. Paying for DVD production & distribution is an expense. And if you do any marketing, that's an expense. And if you use clips in your marketing, you have to pay the actors an additional cost.
It's incredible that there are producers out there who are willing to sacrifice their money to make recordings of productions happen. Although if I were that rich, I'd do it, too.
I've said it before in other threads regarding bootlegs and I'll say it again:
Yes, theater is meant to be seen LIVE and watching a production on DVD defeats the purpose of theatre. However, in my opinion, the benefits of a DVD recording are far superior to the minuses. It preserves the show, it promotes the show, and it potentially reaches an audience that would have never otherwise have seen it.
"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle
It's amazingly expensive to tape a show. But like I said, they don't need 12 cameras and they don't need to market/distribute it like a commercial release.
I wonder if BARE would have had the following it does without a bootleg. I've seen clips on YouTube and it seems the bootleg made people WANT to see the show. It should have been released by the producers opening week. lol
I know that bootlegs don't help a lot of shows, but I do think the performers grow more of a fan base and get more well known because of them.
I do see how they can lose money for a show, so I get that factor too.
Jordan Catalano does have some interesting ideas to lower the costs, however it's still not low enough to make a profit. I do wonder what the difference in costs is, however, in filming a production with a high number of performers, such as 42ND STREET, versus a show with a smaller cast, such as NEXT TO NORMAL.
And again regarding using cell phones during intermission: if shows were WRITTEN well enough in present times, then we wouldn't BE on our phones during intermission. We would all be buzzing with each other in the theater so excited about what we have just seen and what we think will happen next!! (But since we've already seen the movie, we know what's going to happen...)
"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle
I could be wrong, but I honestly don't think producers releasing a dvd of a production would stop bootlegging.
People want to see different performers in the different roles, look at Wicked for example. Is there really just one or two boots of it? I dont think so.