x-ray
Veteran
If it hadn't been for that very nasty storm Friday, I might have been one of those photographers down there!I was planning to go down there (I had the day off) but when the weather started getting nasty I stayed put.
It was a nasty 30 minutes. I was staying in the Embassy Suites just across from the old market. I went back to the hotel just minutes before the weather hit. I have a couple of images of the frontal boundary moving in. I've never seen anything quite like it. I heard that the winds exceeded 80mph and can believe it. Amazing how many huge trees were blown down. I actually thought I was going to get to photography a tornado.
dmr
Registered Abuser
If you could post the photos of the storm, or make arrangements to get them to me (dmr436 at gmail dot com) I know there are people around here would would like to see them from that vantage point.
There **WAS** a tornado about 30 miles or so southeast of downtown Omaha on the Iowa side. They say that all of the damage on the Nebraska side was straight-line wind, and some reports say 100mph. There were 100 year old trees totally uprooted! As you probably heard there were 2 fatalities where a tree fell on a car.
Some parts of the city are still a mess, power lines down and debris blocking streets.Where I live (far southwest exurbs) all we had was rain and wind, but some of the farmers over by the river have some massive crop damage due to flooding and wind!
R
rpsawin
Guest
x-ray,
Did you speak to any of these guys about their technique? It most likely would not have changed their behavior but it may provided them something to think about.
While attending a public festival "personal space" is an optimistic goal as the sheer number of bodies in a confined area makes it highly unlikely. I suppose technically they were within their rights but they displayed a lack of consideration for others.
Anyway, my 2 cents...Best regards,
Bob
Did you speak to any of these guys about their technique? It most likely would not have changed their behavior but it may provided them something to think about.
While attending a public festival "personal space" is an optimistic goal as the sheer number of bodies in a confined area makes it highly unlikely. I suppose technically they were within their rights but they displayed a lack of consideration for others.
Anyway, my 2 cents...Best regards,
Bob
btgc
Veteran
Personal space is more like abstraction. Right now teenager in flat next to us is loudly hearing radio, our mailbox each day is fed with spam messages, in public transportation stranger can vomit right in my personal 10-15cm area because of coincidence. If you are living in your own house, birds still can sh1t in your lawn or what's worse, fumes from street come into your garden. When you drive your car, anyone can bump your personal rolling space with his personal rolling space, thus making them intersecting and abusing your privacy. Visiting insurance office you again loose your privacy as clerks will stare at you and what's worse - will offer to take seat, used by so many other people. Again, privacy is abstraction.
So one more picture in public space doesn't change things too much, or does it ?
Well, I can understand if anyone with evil SLR jumps around you but then lens is long enough to grab by it and get jerk closer for short conversation. For this reason if I miss magic moment I just pass by and don't try second chance - probably this means no hunting. So lesson is - on street use small thin cameras, be gentle and have good pictures
So one more picture in public space doesn't change things too much, or does it ?
Well, I can understand if anyone with evil SLR jumps around you but then lens is long enough to grab by it and get jerk closer for short conversation. For this reason if I miss magic moment I just pass by and don't try second chance - probably this means no hunting. So lesson is - on street use small thin cameras, be gentle and have good pictures
x-ray
Veteran
dmr:
No I didn't know anyone was killed. My wifes parents live around 94th street and they were without power for a while and the next day they had power problems. We say a tree blocking one of the main roads that was at least a hundred years old. It seamed that every block on the west side had trees down. I'll post an image shortly so everyone can see it.
My problem with the photo issue in public places is not the photography but the lack of respect and professional attitude about how and what they were doing. It was clear they were annoying people but they continued to charge ahead. Whether they were professional or not they should display a professional attitude and approach to their mission. Ones best photos are not made of people annoyed with the camera person. I use the term camera person because it takes more than a camera and making proper exposures to be a photographer.
No I didn't know anyone was killed. My wifes parents live around 94th street and they were without power for a while and the next day they had power problems. We say a tree blocking one of the main roads that was at least a hundred years old. It seamed that every block on the west side had trees down. I'll post an image shortly so everyone can see it.
My problem with the photo issue in public places is not the photography but the lack of respect and professional attitude about how and what they were doing. It was clear they were annoying people but they continued to charge ahead. Whether they were professional or not they should display a professional attitude and approach to their mission. Ones best photos are not made of people annoyed with the camera person. I use the term camera person because it takes more than a camera and making proper exposures to be a photographer.
Last edited:
x-ray
Veteran
Sounds like the beginning of a bartender joke. Walked into a bar and ********!
I knew you were joking. No problem.
Still want to get down to Memphis and visit, make some images and have some ribs.
I knew you were joking. No problem.
Still want to get down to Memphis and visit, make some images and have some ribs.
dmr
Registered Abuser
Here's a response from somebody else who saw what you saw ...
nebugeater said:
The thread on the local board is here:
http://eomahaforums.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=7941
jmkelly
rangefinder user
Any chance it was these guys intention to annoy? Given how atypical rude behaviour is among Nebraskans, maybe they were "trying to start something".
yanidel
Well-known
Maybe Omaha is so boring that when something happens all street photographers go there .... ?
I really try not to be seen when I take my pictures. Waist shots, quick shots so people don't change behaviours. I wish I could do more right in your face shots yet people do not like it here and it will get you in an argument pretty fast.
I really try not to be seen when I take my pictures. Waist shots, quick shots so people don't change behaviours. I wish I could do more right in your face shots yet people do not like it here and it will get you in an argument pretty fast.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Maybe Omaha is so boring that when something happens all street photographers go there .... ?
Y'know, be careful saying anything about a locale that you're not familiar with, even in jest. I'm assuming that you're from Paris, France, not Paris, TX.
I came to Iowa as a student, spent 3.5 years there and have nothing but respect on how life was lived there, nothing boring, it's of warmth and generosity. Visit there one day, you may like it.
willie_901
Veteran
The following pertains to the U.S. and assumes both the photographer and the subject are on public property.
The definition of personal space is debatable. If if I walk up to someone and put the lens a foot from their nose, a jury would likely say I invaded their personal space. If I used a 200mm telephoto lens, and pointed the lens at them from 20 to 30 feet away for a second or so, it's hard to make a case their personal space was violated. So if I have a 50mm lens, and I'm 12 feet away, and point the lens at someone for 2-3 seconds – is their personal space violated?
I think not.
You and my subject may disagree. But who's right?
However the legal precedent for violating someone's privacy is clear. We are constantly being photographed by security cameras in the private and public sector. When we are in public, we have no right to privacy. Get over it.
There are obvious exceptions. If you step out your front door, someone in the street or sidewalk can take your photograph even though you are standing on private property. Anyone who walks out their front door knows they are visible from public property. However if you are sitting in your backyard behind a 6 foot tall solid fence, you have a right to privacy. And if I'm standing on public property right next to your fence and stick my camera over the fence, then I've got a big problem.
At any rate, when I'm at a public event like a large art fair I shoot and move away quickly. I am more selective than the stereotypical DSLR user, so my camera is not always pointed at someone. I've never had an issue and can only think of one time I even got a dirty look.
The definition of personal space is debatable. If if I walk up to someone and put the lens a foot from their nose, a jury would likely say I invaded their personal space. If I used a 200mm telephoto lens, and pointed the lens at them from 20 to 30 feet away for a second or so, it's hard to make a case their personal space was violated. So if I have a 50mm lens, and I'm 12 feet away, and point the lens at someone for 2-3 seconds – is their personal space violated?
I think not.
You and my subject may disagree. But who's right?
However the legal precedent for violating someone's privacy is clear. We are constantly being photographed by security cameras in the private and public sector. When we are in public, we have no right to privacy. Get over it.
There are obvious exceptions. If you step out your front door, someone in the street or sidewalk can take your photograph even though you are standing on private property. Anyone who walks out their front door knows they are visible from public property. However if you are sitting in your backyard behind a 6 foot tall solid fence, you have a right to privacy. And if I'm standing on public property right next to your fence and stick my camera over the fence, then I've got a big problem.
At any rate, when I'm at a public event like a large art fair I shoot and move away quickly. I am more selective than the stereotypical DSLR user, so my camera is not always pointed at someone. I've never had an issue and can only think of one time I even got a dirty look.
x-ray
Veteran
DMR:
Thanks for posting the response. Good to know I wasn't the only person who thought this was out of line.
Thanks for posting the response. Good to know I wasn't the only person who thought this was out of line.
x-ray
Veteran
Willie:
I know the law too regarding privacy. It's no a question of legality or not it's a question or ethics, respect and whether it prevents a person from enjoying their day because some self centered HCB - SOB is driving someone crazy.
I know the law too regarding privacy. It's no a question of legality or not it's a question or ethics, respect and whether it prevents a person from enjoying their day because some self centered HCB - SOB is driving someone crazy.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
x-ray, the problem is, you are generalizing your conclusions.
timmyd18
Established
I'm saddened about the backlash that x-ray has gotten here (and especially on that omaha board) for speaking up about something that i agree is a problem.
there have been a lot of really defensive posts about people having no rights to privacy in public and assertions about how the photographers are acting within the law. fine, but that isn't x-ray's point.
what i've taken from his posts are that they are not questioning the photographer's rights but pointing out that these people were obnoxious, something perfectly within their rights to be, but something that i'd hope most of us desire to avoid.
quantum physics tells us that we can't observe something without changing it. i think it is generally true for photography, as well. that's not to say that people shouldn't do street, because as others have pointed out there are better ways of doing street than this. but look at it this way: if we take a picture of a person in an interesting scene, we're going to try and ascribe some meaning to it. if the only meaning that's there is "i'm trying to get to work and some jerk has a camera in my face," then i'm not sure we've done much in the way of creating fine art.
there have been a lot of really defensive posts about people having no rights to privacy in public and assertions about how the photographers are acting within the law. fine, but that isn't x-ray's point.
what i've taken from his posts are that they are not questioning the photographer's rights but pointing out that these people were obnoxious, something perfectly within their rights to be, but something that i'd hope most of us desire to avoid.
quantum physics tells us that we can't observe something without changing it. i think it is generally true for photography, as well. that's not to say that people shouldn't do street, because as others have pointed out there are better ways of doing street than this. but look at it this way: if we take a picture of a person in an interesting scene, we're going to try and ascribe some meaning to it. if the only meaning that's there is "i'm trying to get to work and some jerk has a camera in my face," then i'm not sure we've done much in the way of creating fine art.
x-ray
Veteran
Unfortunately there are the people that think the world revolves around them and their desires. Fortunately the majority of people are respectful and would not do this. The sad part is I think this selfish self centered attitude point the direction that our culture is going. We live in the "It's all about me" times.
pachuco
El ****
No need for it to be annoying or naughty, if it's done correctly.
I could not agree more!
photophorous
Registered User
I don't think anyone is saying street photography is wrong. Just sounds like these guys were being rude and generally giving street photographers a bad name. We could all stand for a little more acceptance in the public eye these days, so it seem sensible to avoid drawing attention to behavior that might alarm people. It's just a matter of common sense. Sure, you're free to do what ever you want. Free to own a gun and free to shoot yourself in the foot with it.
Paul
Paul
JohnTF
Veteran
The question seems a bit of a set up, if they had not been seen as acting rudely, the post would not have been made, so it is a question of manners rather than photography?
While shooting in Paris at a street market, some guy thought I got him in the edge of my shot, (shooting with a Fuji 645 folder) and proceeded to give me a lecture in broken English as to the laws in France. I was taken aback a bit, but had no way to know if I got him in my shot.
I read the laws were recently changed, or revised in court, in France.
If I shoot in one place for awhile, and am using obiously expensive gear, I can either shoot and scram (HCB's words), or quietly wait until I am seen and see if the subject raises any objections, which makes the following shots generally less than candid.
I am clearly divided on this issue, but in most of Europe that I have visited, people are more tolerant, so I shoot less here unless it is telephoto.
Unless there is some driving reason, (I used to shoot for print media), I really do not feel comfortable in getting in people's faces.
I had an apartment in Prague several summers, and the local kids and families got to know me a bit, and I got some shots I had not planned of some of the kids who almost "forced" me to shoot them.
Let me know if there is a simple answer, it is not merely a question of rights.
While shooting in Paris at a street market, some guy thought I got him in the edge of my shot, (shooting with a Fuji 645 folder) and proceeded to give me a lecture in broken English as to the laws in France. I was taken aback a bit, but had no way to know if I got him in my shot.
I read the laws were recently changed, or revised in court, in France.
If I shoot in one place for awhile, and am using obiously expensive gear, I can either shoot and scram (HCB's words), or quietly wait until I am seen and see if the subject raises any objections, which makes the following shots generally less than candid.
I am clearly divided on this issue, but in most of Europe that I have visited, people are more tolerant, so I shoot less here unless it is telephoto.
Unless there is some driving reason, (I used to shoot for print media), I really do not feel comfortable in getting in people's faces.
I had an apartment in Prague several summers, and the local kids and families got to know me a bit, and I got some shots I had not planned of some of the kids who almost "forced" me to shoot them.
Let me know if there is a simple answer, it is not merely a question of rights.