"My cameras don't explode"

Jon Claremont said:
Every year in Portugal holidaymakers take pictures on the beach and bystanders call the police.

You cannot take somebody's picture without their knowledge and agreement, even if they are insignificant in the background.

The police will take the film from your camera.
.............................................
There goes any chance of Portugal getting any of my tourist dollars. 😛
 
I'm just glad I live in a camera-loving country. God forbid if they start banning photography in public places here.
 
anselwannab said:
Krasnaya_Zvezda-

Maybe you wouldn't get hassled so much if you didn't wear your space suit while taking pictures.

I never saw what building you were photographing that was already demolished.

I wasn't in the pressure suit. Guess that's why he didn't recognize me for the celebrity that I am.
I'm developing the film right now. I'll post the shots after I scan them, even tho I was shooting with a HOLGA.
A REAL terrorist camera if there ever was one 😛
 
RJBender said:
Was it the Rolex building in Dallas? The Swiss Consulate occupy the top floor of the building.

R.J.
3679.jpg

That is indeed the building to which I was referring, NOT what I was shooting, but across the street from it.
 
RJBender said:
If your friend has business cards from the Dallas Police, get one and have a luggage tag made from it for your camera bag. Hey, if your bag is lost or stolen you want people to know where to turn it in, right? 😀
luggagetag.gif


Does the Dallas police have an auxiliary unit, staffed with volunteers, that get IDs and badges? 😕 If so, you might want to consider that option. 😀

R.J.

Great idea, I think I'll do the luggage tag thing. I have, in the past, worked for the Health Dept., and I'm sure you can imagine the preferential treatment I received from certain business, such as restaurants, even tho I was in no way connected to food inspection. I do, in a round about way, work for the CDC--- at least I am paid by them---- I could explore that option. Might put them off.
"What are you taking pictures of?"
"Can't tell you. I'm here from the CDC. Better stay back."
But all of that ignores the point, to wit: a law-abiding citizen, on public property, not commiting any crime, having to answer to or explain his actions to the authorities. Wrong in my book.
OK, enough from me tonight. I know I've reached my vodka limit when I use a phrase such as "to wit".
Thanks to everyone for their opinion regarding this subject, most interesting.
Do' svedanyah.
 
bmattock said:
George Sr. I never liked him, though I have always been conservative and at that time was a registered Republican (I'm now a Libertarian, even though that party has been outlawed in North Carolina). I was on my way home from work and got stopped when his motorcade came through. I got out of my truck and watched, standing next to the motorcycle cop who had stopped traffic. When GB came through, it was like an instinctive act. I just did it. He saw me, we were very close, just seperated by the glass in his limo window and maybe five feet of space. He was MOST unhappy, his smile froze on his face and he got a really mean look on.

I figure everybody needs the air let out of 'em now and again. What can I say. The debbil made me do it.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks


Oh well, that was a time when family values was a big campaign issue. Look where that got us:

http://www.badmash.org/videos/video...ed512K_Stream.flv&t=George W flips off camera

R.J.
 
Krasnaya_Zvezda said:
I wasn't in the pressure suit. Guess that's why he didn't recognize me for the celebrity that I am.
I'm developing the film right now. I'll post the shots after I scan them, even tho I was shooting with a HOLGA.
A REAL terrorist camera if there ever was one 😛

Are you a former cosmonaut? (I assume that's CCCP painted on the front of your helmet?)

R.J.
 
Krasnaya_Zvezda said:
Great idea, I think I'll do the luggage tag thing. I have, in the past, worked for the Health Dept., and I'm sure you can imagine the preferential treatment I received from certain business, such as restaurants, even tho I was in no way connected to food inspection. I do, in a round about way, work for the CDC--- at least I am paid by them---- I could explore that option. Might put them off.
"What are you taking pictures of?"
"Can't tell you. I'm here from the CDC. Better stay back."
But all of that ignores the point, to wit: a law-abiding citizen, on public property, not commiting any crime, having to answer to or explain his actions to the authorities. Wrong in my book.
OK, enough from me tonight. I know I've reached my vodka limit when I use a phrase such as "to wit".
Thanks to everyone for their opinion regarding this subject, most interesting.
Do' svedanyah.

Krasnaya_Zvezda,

I agree with your feelings. Everytime this comes up on a thread more people get involved and more are outraged with these new "security" procedures. That is a good start to a solution. 😉 I wish you success in working around this problem until a solution is found.

R.J.
 
I carry a camera with me all the time.

Often when I go inside a bar or whatever the security guy does a double take and tells me I can't take a camera in.

I just say 'But I'm a photographer' and they always say 'That's ok then'.
 
I remember some policemen(low rank) has tried to bug me, just to show up, specially with females, it happens quite a lot...But sometimes it's just their duty to tell u not to shoot, so they r only doin what they r being told, and it shows..
 
bmattock said:
. I just did it. He saw me, we were very close, just seperated by the glass in his limo window and maybe five feet of space. He was MOST unhappy, his smile froze on his face and he got a really mean look on.

So Desert Storm was your fault was it? It seems the Bushes have a track record of temper tantrums when they're flipped the bird whether by a disgruntled citizen or a Middle Eastern President! 😀 😀
 
bmattock said:
Actually, I'm very glad to hear that others feel the same way. I don't know why there is not more outcry against loss of rights in other countries besides the USA. But if you read the UK's "Amatuer Photographer" magazine, there has been a lot of coverage about the right to photograph in public places being shut down. Very bad mojo and some folks quite upset over it.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Most people I talk to about our civil rights here in Holland are more than willing to hand "other people's" civil rights over to the government, those they accuse of being a problem for our society. They all forget that pther people's civil rights are their civil rights too. So, they don't mind demanding limited protection from the law for law breakers, criminals and anyone arrested by the police but when I counter with that they could get arrested too than all of a sudden it's not they who are the really bad criminals.

It's odd but people are very easy with giving away other people's rights but never seem to understand that my rights or yours, and your rights are mine too. And not many seem to be able to see the fundamental problem with this notion.
 
I have this encounter every once in a while. It goes something like this:
Cop: Can I ask you what you're doing?
Me: Art.
Cop: Oh. Are you an artist?
Me: Am I under arrest or something?
Cop: Uh . . .
Me: I need to get back to work.
Cop: . . .
 
Poptart said:
I have this encounter every once in a while. It goes something like this:
Cop: Can I ask you what you're doing?
Me: Art.
Cop: Oh. Are you an artist?
Me: Am I under arrest or something?
Cop: Uh . . .
Me: I need to get back to work.
Cop: . . .


GOOD ANSWER!

R.J.
 
Poptart said:
I have this encounter every once in a while. It goes something like this:
Cop: Can I ask you what you're doing?
Me: Art.
Cop: Oh. Are you an artist?
Me: Am I under arrest or something?
Cop: Uh . . .
Me: I need to get back to work.
Cop: . . .

Excellent "people management".

As I said a while back - like looking over a painter's shoulder - some people are just "curious" as to what you are doing.

Whether they have a "right" to ask you may be a misconstrued sense of their "authority". But sometimes a simple answer like the above "defuses" a situation whereas if you challenge their supposed "right" or "authority" you escalate the matter into a confrontation!

If you treat their initial query as "curiosity" you get "in charge" of the situation. In fact, if you go back to the original incident - the "security guard" had his curiousity satisfied and went away.

Oh and please, no trite comments about cats, curiousity and latter killing the former etc. 😛
 
Take all the arguments above, pro and con.

Consider that "A soft answer turneth away wrath" - Proverbs 15:1.

On the other hand; consider this.

Just one exercise. Please try this, even if my next words freak you out.

Wherever you see the word 'photographer' in the above thread, make it 'black photographer'.

Now, how do you feel? A security guard comes up to a black photographer and says "What are you doing here?" And you reply "I'm taking photographs." And the guard replies "We don't allow black photographers here."

Do you really feel like being 'polite' to a person who objects to your being a black photographer, while they wear a security guards uniform and bear the trappings of authority?

You might reject my argument - you may feel that I am comparing two totally different situations. Civil rights versus the right to take photographs from pulic property.

But is it really so different? Rights are rights. An infringement is an infringement. There are degrees of infringement, certainly - and I am comparing a small infringement to a large one - granted.

My point is that resistance to presumed authority will come when a certain line is crossed. If you won't object to answering a security guard's questions or if you'll give up your film or delete your images, you might well object if you're told you (black, asian, female, middle eastern, whatever) are not allowed to be.

So some of us draw that line in different places. I draw it fairly early out of the starting gate. I don't ask that everyone do as I do - I realize that there are risks involved - you can be 'in the right' and be arrested, beaten, or harassed anyway. That's life.

Not to put too fine a point on it, a famous man once said that it is better die on one's feet than live on one's knees. A bit overdramatic for this situation, but the thought is much the same.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
I am a photographer (sometimes) and although not black, but an eastern european, I'm proud of it and i am ready to break the jaw of anyone that has a problem with that, if necessary.
But i will start with keeping a civil conversation. If does not work, i will get ironic/sarcastic/cynical. Then i will try to run away.
Aggressivity is the last resort.

EDIT: the above includes a bigh white shark.
 
Back
Top Bottom