Has anyone had this come up yet, and how did or would you handle?
A player wants to use a digital camera to record board positions during the game. His intent is to record periodic or key positions in case the score wasn’t kept properly. The shots are only for post-game anaysis, are not in lieu of keeping score, and would not be referenced during the game or used to make claims.
This might be considered a “poor man’s” DGT board or similar to taking a video, except it involves overt activity during play which could be considered a distraction to the opponent.
Does a player have a “right” to make this supplemental record? Only when he’s on move? Only with opponent’s consent? Does the player’s age or skill level make any difference? …
I do not believe that the player has a right to do that. It is at the very least a distraction. Remember not only can this distract the opponent but the players around that game.
Tim Just
Rules Committee Member
Editor, 5th Edition Rulebook
I would treat this the same as photography by spectators – spectators have NO RIGHTS, but as long as they aren’t distracting the players you should try to make reasonable accomodations.
Of course, I would insist that the camera NOT use a flash and NOT make a loud noise (most digital cameras would be fine) – just as I would for any spectator.
It’s up to you as the TD to set the boundaries of what’s acceptable here. For example, if you restrict spectators to certain areas you SHOULD restrict photography to those same areas (rather than directly over the board). Many tournaments don’t allow spectators to stand behind a player, but only in the walkways between rows of tables. Photography from this location might be OK.
A player does not have a RIGHT to do this. It should only be allowed if he can do it without distracting others.
It might be somewhat less distracting to the opponent if the pictures were taken only when the player is on the move. If you get to that point, however, you have to start considering the distraction to OTHER players.
The opponent has no right to object to taking pictures of the BOARD. This is a public activity. HOWEVER, if the oppent can reasonably claim that this activity is distracting, you should make the player stop.
[1]
This “distraction” argument gets tossed around too easily nowadays.
The TD should forbid my behavior if he deems it excessively distracting. But I would add that the TD should reject complaints of distraction that are hyper-sensitive.
Any motion can be claimed as a distraction. Could I complain every time my opponent or the player next to me flexes at his ankle rapidly up and down thus shaking his knee and whole leg up and down? Generally no; even tho it is somewhat distracting to me.
The TD enforces a Good playing environment, not a Perfect environment.
A silent flashless digital camera can be silent. Taking a few photos during a 2-4 hour game seems a distraction only to the hyper-sensitive (at least a reasonable TD might so conclude).
Chess is a competitive sport; it ain’t for hyper-sensitive sissies.
[2]
A bigger problem is that I strongly doubt the actual person who is taking these photos can discern the position in the photos. I have tried this several times with a few different cameras, and I find it impossible or nearly so to reconstruct the position from only the photos (of other peoples’ games).
The underlying problem is the Cook-Staunton design for the chess pieces. That design was driven by the needs of the manufacturer (be turnable on a wood lathe), not by the interests of the players. The C-S design has saddle us with 28-of-32 pieces being cylindrical. This tends to make them all look too similar to each other in low resolution (tho other design aspects contribute to the problem).
I think this excessive cylindrical similarity also hurts the prospects for chess on TV. Viewers at home do not want to see a 2D diagram with icons of the position, rather they want to see the actual 3D board with pieces.
Of course a set of chess pieces could be designed with primacy given to their visibility and distinguishability in photos and on TV. But that would represent the ‘ch’ word (namely “change”), and the chess world hates change. It is widely claimed that it would be hard to acclamate to a new chess pieces design. I strongly doubt that claim. I have toyed with the idea of proving my doubts justified, using a controlled experiment. I bet players could acclamate to new pieces in a mere 10-15 minutes.
This is an odd “supplemental record,” but there are enough odd woodpushers out there that make it a realistic situation.
If I were the TD, I’d allow it only if his opponent agreed to it before the game, and he’d have to get all his opponents to agree to the same before each round. If his first round opponent said it wasn’t a problem, he could use it; but if his second round opponent said no, I’d disallow it. And of course, if his opponent agreed but it became a nuisance to the players around him – like if he were taking pics every other move – I’d put the kai-bosh on it.
Personally, I would never use a camera for that kind of thing. I usually just go to the bathroom, fire up my laptop, and plug the position into Fritz after every move to keep track of the position. Plus, it saves time later.