Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Selling photos

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

UserDeleted
2 Mar 2004 - 1:17 PM

Carabosse,

Didn't you know that all police live at 123 Letsby Avenue....


Mike

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
2 Mar 2004 - 1:17 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

mattw
mattw  105189 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
2 Mar 2004 - 1:17 PM

Trafalgar Square is off limits now as well??

I spent a good hour there the other weekend, tripod out and all, in full view of all the 'uniforms' and no one bothered me.... If I was able to change lenses fast enough, I would even have asked the one holding the falcon for a close-up (of the bird)...

Still, it does beg the question - if Trafalgar square is not public property, then who the hell owns it???

A lot of places seem to think that simply owning a tripod is the sole criteria for being a professional, while others seem to think that only terrorists go around with big lenses and tripods, taking their time over pictures.

I spent a couple of evenings shooting Tower Bridge last year - and had a helicopter appear overhead both evenings minutes after I set up my tripod... Followed me about and only left when the tripod went away! On the second day a police boat came steaming over as well. I just smiled and gave them a wave. If an officer wanted to tell me politely that I shouldn't be there, then I would have moved on no problem, but I wasnt going to be intimidated into moving!

Matt

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139395 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
2 Mar 2004 - 1:25 PM

Bravo, Matt!!

I think we should take what we like when we like BUT just be sensible about it.

I wonder what the market is for pics of Trafalgar Square? A bit saturated methinks.

mattw
mattw  105189 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
2 Mar 2004 - 1:46 PM

These ones were quite nice - I post one soon.

I wasn't on a 'pro' shoot at all, but some, I'm actually fairly happy with, so maybe one day...
(saturated? have you seen the standard of London postcards??)

Matt

mattw
mattw  105189 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
2 Mar 2004 - 1:46 PM

These ones were quite nice - I post one soon.

I wasn't on a 'pro' shoot at all, but some, I'm actually fairly happy with, so maybe one day...
(saturated? have you seen the standard of London postcards??)

Matt

andytvcams
andytvcams  1110396 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Mar 2004 - 2:06 PM

Well here is a classic from the other week,i went to Portsmouth to photograph HMS Warrior,not for the first i might add,i bought my ticket nine pounds,got my little guide leaflet from a friendly member of staff and went aboard,
around my neck was my S2 DSLR,complete with a 24-70mm wide angle lens and to complete the outfit a lee bellows hood with a filter already in place all day i spent on that ship,
on deck below deck the only place i did not go was up the ruddy rigging,for some shots i knelt for others i lay ed on my back,
now on this ship are four guides dressed in period costume again most helpful,even showed me some places id missed,

so as the day drew to a close and the sun had set,i bid farewell as i walked down the gang plank and along the dock,now this is the fun bit,
as i was making my way to the exit i passed a smartly dressed lady heading to wards the ship,i had gone some ten yards when i heard this booming voice of
excuse me have you been taking photographs of this ship?,yes came my polite reply and before she could answer i told her that i was not a professional,just a visitor,NO Photography she barked,none says i?,
no said her,when i told her that from the minute id parted with my cash that i had said equipment around my neck,i had been on the ship all day,nobody told me no photography,there are no signs its not printed in the guide,or any were on the site?,
thats not the point she said,no photography allowed,she even took down my name and address,some of these jobs worths want hanging from the yard arm.

PS,if anybody wants to see my photographs,they are in old sailing monthly available from any good newsagents.

andytvcams
andytvcams  1110396 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Mar 2004 - 2:11 PM

The PS,bit is a joke.

agoreira
agoreira  106001 forum posts Wales
2 Mar 2004 - 2:16 PM

The Warrior used to based here in Pembroke Dock before it was told away to be restored. It was just a rotting hulk then, you wouldn't have wanted to photograph it then!
Frank

UserDeleted
2 Mar 2004 - 2:17 PM

Just been out and bought it - how disappointed am I :0)

BTW - there are 22 images of HMS Warrior on Alamy - although all are external shots.

Mike

andytvcams
andytvcams  1110396 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Mar 2004 - 2:21 PM

LOL.

Just Jas
Just Jas  1225751 forum posts England1 Constructive Critique Points
2 Mar 2004 - 3:08 PM

Did it say on the ticket 'No photography allowed'?

"No, Ma'am, I've been doing it quietly" Andtvcams replies.

LOL

Just Jas

(Carpentry on front door done, just got to wait for the sealant to dry before undercoating) (Tee Hee)

andytvcams
andytvcams  1110396 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Mar 2004 - 3:57 PM

Nothing on the ticket,the notice board regarding what you can and cannot do,ie no smoking,etc,nothing in the guide booklet,no signs on the ship anywhere,and to top it all off i made no attempt to hide the camera.

Andy.

Just Jas
Just Jas  1225751 forum posts England1 Constructive Critique Points
2 Mar 2004 - 4:09 PM

I may be wrong, but I don't think that they can enforce it (after the event)in that case.

They cannot seize your camera or your film, as you could probably tell me!

You might not be able to publish though.

Just Jas

andytvcams
andytvcams  1110396 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Mar 2004 - 6:46 PM

UPDATE: Your going to like this one,i rang them to clarify the situation,apparently the reason behind the ban is there was a party of children on board the ship a few weeks before me and a parent objected to a member of the public taking photographs that may or may of not have included them.

Andy.

minoltaandy
2 Mar 2004 - 10:06 PM

You're right. Fantastic, I'm glad to see we are protecting children against photos that might not include them. Can you even imagine the damage that could cause?

Tantrums, foot stamping, major therapy in later life, tax payers fotting the bill, glad that was nipped in the bud.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.