Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Hi Pablito,
This is real!
If you mean photographs, sure: as long as there's light again... Here it's midnight...
If with real work you mean a job, no. Three months ago I decided to stop working, and just do street shooting... I'm not rich but I found I had some money saved and I could do it, so I don't work anymore: not even in photography... I don't know how long I'll do this, one year? but it's the best thing I've done in my life... When there's light I'm usually out shooting, and during the nights I sleep and come to RFF. Some days I use a bit of my time for going out during day or night with friends, but it's mostly photography to me these days...
Cheers,
Juan
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
There you go again ... separating the victim from the masses based on an opinion and not fact!
A photographer has the same rights as a bus driver or a nun ... or Juan even!
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
There you go again ... separating the victim from the masses based on an opinion and not fact!
A photographer has the same rights as a bus driver or a nun ... or Juan even!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I do, for a start.
First, there's light relief/displacement actvity. I have two working speeds, 'on' and 'off'. After a while (which varies acordng to how difficult or boring the work is), my brain seizes up and I need to do something easier. Which, unless I go out of the house, is reading; or listening to the wireless; or going on RFF (I don't have a television, which is a far greater thief of time than RFF).
Second, I write for magazines, including a weekly column in AP and so forth. RFF is a fascinating cross section of potential readers, or at least, of the sort of people who might read what I write. The forum is an excellent illustration of modesty, boastfulness, knowledge, ignorance, brilliance, stupidity, humility, arrogance, internationalism, xenophobia, open-mindedness, bigotry, and more. So this is work for me...
What's your excuse?
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
pvdhaar
Peter
Hi Roger,
good to see that you're so involved with us, but isn't this more the kind of work that needs to be done be a psychiatrist?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Funny you should say that. I decided to read law when I failed to get into medical school. In the 1960s you didn't tell the interview boards that you wated to be a psychiatrist. Unfortunately I didn't know that at the time. Or perhaps fortunately, given how things have turned out.
Cheers,
R.
retnull
Well-known
Please excuse if this seems like a tangent...but this article in today's New York Times raises issues pertinent to this discussion:
The Web Means the End of Forgetting
http://nyti.ms/dgxk6T
"the Facebook application Photo Finder, by Face.com, uses facial-recognition and social-connections software to allow you to locate any photo of yourself or a friend on Facebook, regardless of whether the photo was “tagged” — that is, the individual in the photo was identified by name. At the moment, Photo Finder allows you to identify only people on your contact list, but as facial-recognition technology becomes more widespread and sophisticated, it will almost certainly challenge our expectation of anonymity in public. People will be able to snap a cellphone picture (or video) of a stranger, plug the images into Google and pull up all tagged and untagged photos of that person that exist on the Web."
We do not live in the same world as ol' Cartier-Bresson, innocently snapping away in the 1930s.
The Web Means the End of Forgetting
http://nyti.ms/dgxk6T
"the Facebook application Photo Finder, by Face.com, uses facial-recognition and social-connections software to allow you to locate any photo of yourself or a friend on Facebook, regardless of whether the photo was “tagged” — that is, the individual in the photo was identified by name. At the moment, Photo Finder allows you to identify only people on your contact list, but as facial-recognition technology becomes more widespread and sophisticated, it will almost certainly challenge our expectation of anonymity in public. People will be able to snap a cellphone picture (or video) of a stranger, plug the images into Google and pull up all tagged and untagged photos of that person that exist on the Web."
We do not live in the same world as ol' Cartier-Bresson, innocently snapping away in the 1930s.
Sparrow
Veteran
How else do you imagine the Dubai authorities got on to the mossad assassins so quickly last year .... it must have been recognition software
Roger Hicks
Veteran
This assumes, of course, that you can be bothered to do so (or have any reason to do so), and that the technology will always work.
Cheers,
R.
Sparrow
Veteran
Yes, but; what about when the software "recognises" the face and also has access to a data-base that contains name and address details, marital status, employment records, social security, medical, insurance ... brave new world, eh?
There you go again ... separating the victim from the masses based on an opinion and not fact!
A photographer has the same rights as a bus driver or a nun ... or Juan even!
No one is a victim in this. Juan is a photographer. He got yelled at by someone he wasn't photographing. Was it nice that they yelled at him? No. Were they right? No. However, I can't say that they aren't allowed to yell at him. People will yell at you sometimes for no damn reason at all... it's just part of life. Yes, this is my opinion. I've yelled at bus drivers before, but never a nun! and I'm not even religious.
ederek
Well-known
Wow, that's quite a step Juan. Am even a bit jealous. Wish you the best.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Stewart,
Again: assuming it works. After the first few arrests of innocent people, I think it'll be put on hold for rather a long time...
At least in most of the 'free' world, though I've no doubt that there are countries who will just lock people up for the rest of their lives (or execute them) without worrying too much about whether they've got the right person, or what their 'crime' was.
Cheers,
R.
Eugen Mezei
Well-known
fireblade
Vincenzo.
.
nice thread from the past.....
my ol' man use to say..."son, if your innocent and your conscience is clear, you don't need to explain yourself"
......so you were wrong in replying
i would have replied and have done many times, with a question, and its always the same question...."how would you like your nuts kicked in?" ...and continue my travels
Chris101
summicronia
I was thinking "man, this is old news! Girls kiss in public all the time." But then I saw that it was ancient history, so there you go: what is today, wasn't yesterday.
sanmich
Veteran
oceanpriest
Member
still no pic?
DominikDUK
Well-known
I think this is the classic case of you're both wrong and both right. You can take photographs of girls kissing on the beach it is not illegal. The lady is right in that you might give the girls some privacy. She was wrong in the way she voiced her opinion. You were wrong in the way you answered, if in fact the woman comes from a country where gay bashing is still comon I fully understand her reaction.
If like it seems the girls wanted to put on a show, you did what the girls wanted and the yeller is clearly in the wrong whereas you did feed the girls fetish
Dominik
If like it seems the girls wanted to put on a show, you did what the girls wanted and the yeller is clearly in the wrong whereas you did feed the girls fetish
Dominik