| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/23/2005 12:15:06 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by Niten:
By the way, if anyone ever approaches you and says your not allowed to take photos where you have been taking photos just format your card right then and there without letting them see anything. Go home and run recovery software on your card and get them all back. |
now here's someone who has taken some perv shots before.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 12:17:29 AM · #52 |
nope I almost never shoot in public unless I'm shooting for a customer.
I did see a picture of a naked woman one time though.
Message edited by author 2005-12-23 00:18:43. |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 12:43:13 AM · #53 |
| i don't want to totally squash your fun, but please no name-calling. :) |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 12:50:04 AM · #54 |
| Whats the difference if the guy took a picture or just walked around and stared at the womens butt's? There are pervs everywhere! |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 12:51:10 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by BADDBOYY21:
Whats the difference if the guy took a picture or just walked around and stared at the womens butt's? There are pervs everywhere! |
one is permanently documenting it
possibly to sell to other super pervs for profit
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 12:52:15 AM · #56 |
Originally posted by Niten:
By the way, if anyone ever approaches you and says your not allowed to take photos where you have been taking photos just format your card right then and there without letting them see anything. Go home and run recovery software on your card and get them all back. |
Last week I got told that I could take photo, but that I wasn't allowed to use a tripod. What do reccomend for that? :D |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 01:09:37 AM · #57 |
Originally posted by _eug:
Last week I got told that I could take photo, but that I wasn't allowed to use a tripod. What do reccomend for that? :D |
A steady hand and a lens with image-stabilization? : ) |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 01:19:50 AM · #58 |
Originally posted by _eug:
Last week I got told that I could take photo, but that I wasn't allowed to use a tripod. What do reccomend for that? :D |
Monopod... :-) Hey, they didn't say you couldn't use a monopod.
Edit: Or a bipod for that matter.
Message edited by author 2005-12-23 01:20:18.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 01:49:13 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by saintaugust:
Originally posted by BADDBOYY21:
Whats the difference if the guy took a picture or just walked around and stared at the womens butt's? There are pervs everywhere! |
one is permanently documenting it
possibly to sell to other super pervs for profit |
Yeah...or they will actually end up on some website. The sad part is that it's pretty much legal to take the pics at the moment. |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 01:57:45 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by BADDBOYY21:
The sad part is that it's pretty much legal to take the pics at the moment. |
SAD part??? What's sad about taking pictures in a public place, of people who are in public?
The only sad thing here is the trampling on individual rights, photographer or not.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 02:11:29 AM · #61 |
What's sad is he is using his constitional right to facilitate his perversion!
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 02:25:21 AM · #62 |
So - you the jury, having read all the evidence and hearing both sides of the story, including the defendant's version, hereby convict this guy of being a pervert and a low-life. Furthermore, you hereby sentence him to serve time in jail, make him do community service and kick him in the balls.
Huh? What's that? Oh I see, the jury has only heard the prosecution's evidence--- Wha? News story? Ok, the jury has made its decision based on that 3 paragraph news story. Fair enough. Hang him from the highest tree.
Geez.
Not necessarily defending the guy, but I can very easily find pics in the gallery on this site - beach bikinis, tight shorts at a stadium, probably lots more if I look. The whole thing sounds utterly ridiculous to me that the guy was arrested. And here is a quote from the article (or "transcript from the trial" if you will):
Originally posted by News Article:
Maricopa County sheriff's deputies cited a man for harassment after authorities said he was caught taking pictures of young women's pelvises and buttocks as the women shopped at Chandler Fashion Center. |
If he took pictures of their elbows or eyebrows, he wouldn't have been arrested? I don't get it. Harassment would be if someone told him not to take their picture and he continued to do so, but even then (as in the case of Paparazzi) I am not aware that it's illegal.
Another point - I see news clips on stories of Obesity where they use footage of peoples asses in public places all the time. Or key body part shots through the windows at health clubs.
What bugs me more than theses stories is how readily people attack the accused. Anyone ever read any posts from people here who have been falsely accused of things? I can think of a lot worse things than a guy taking pics of women's asses - and nowhere in the article did it say any were minors, so I am assuming they weren't but even if they were, is this what we want?
*shaking head* |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 02:31:00 AM · #63 |
Yeah, what he said. :)
Thanks for saying it better than I could, Ken.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 02:34:50 AM · #64 |
I agree with you completely, Art. He did nothing that IS illegal. It will be illegal if things continue on the path they seem to be on.
Are YOU as a photographer willing to give up your right to carry your camera in public? Because, those of you that are bashing this guy, without all the evidence, are taking us down that path.
He's a perv, maybe he should be kicked in the nuts, but if he's sentenced for this, we're all looking at persecution and prosecution soon.
Luckily, I have a City issued press pass, maybe my camera won't be taken into custody.
Message edited by author 2005-12-23 02:36:44.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 03:06:28 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by Niten:
You guys are right though any guy caught looking at womens butts is a lowlife. ;) |
All guys look at womens butts (unless they bat for the other side), does that make all guys pervs?
Originally posted by radionin:
Correct me if I'm wroung but don't you need someones personal release before you can use there image to make profit?? |
I think you need a signed release form to sell a picture only if it shows the persons face.
Message edited by author 2005-12-23 03:09:07. |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 03:08:56 AM · #66 |
He's a perv...quit defending HIM! Put your teenage daughter in the equation. Defend his right to take pictures but don't defend the PERV.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 03:13:51 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by BADDBOYY21:
He's a perv...quit defending HIM! Put your teenage daughter in the equation. Defend his right to take pictures but don't defend the PERV. |
I fully agree that nobody should be taking pictures of any kind of under 18's (21 in america) without the parents permission. But for adults, we all take pictures all the time of people, and I'm sure a lot of those pictures will contain a butt even if it wasn't supposed to be the main focus of the picture. |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 03:35:09 AM · #68 |
It seem a few of us are reading between the lines on this incident.
This guy was arrested by two mall security guards, rent a cops, who happened to be posse,i.e. unpaid police helpers. The photos he was taking had buttocks and pelvises in them according to the police report. Most full body shots do, most crowd shots do. They don't claim he was taking closeups of just those body parts, they just insinuate that. Makes him sound like a perv.
The article ends with the phrase that he "took the pictures for his own pleasure ", which to some people might sound rather salatious, but on an amature photography website this is what most of us do, and it ain't just for pervs.
The fact that some photos might possibly be put to bad use is beside the point, any image can be misused, the crime does not occur unless and until that happens. Unless there is alot more to this case than is reported in this short article, I would rather be the lawyer suing the mall than the prosecutor taking this case befor a judge.
IMHO the main lesson to take from this and other similar stories, when you go to the mall, leave the camera at home. |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 07:46:06 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by bluenova:
I fully agree that nobody should be taking pictures of any kind of under 18's (21 in america) without the parents permission. But for adults, we all take pictures all the time of people, and I'm sure a lot of those pictures will contain a butt even if it wasn't supposed to be the main focus of the picture. |
It's even legal to take pics of kids in public places from public places... |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 08:07:00 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by bluenova:
I fully agree that nobody should be taking pictures of any kind of under 18's (21 in america) without the parents permission. |
paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaraaaaaaaaaaanoia!!!!!!!
Kids are cute. Much more interesting than adults too. Doesn't mean I'm a perv. We're so freaking paranoid "omg they are going to put little julie's photos on the web and some guy is going to jack off to it"
GUESS WHAT - he's doing that from his bedroom window overlooking the park RIGHT NOW where he can see your little Julie. Get her home or get over it.
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 08:08:46 AM · #71 |
You know, it's a good thing we don't have to think for ourselves anymore -- just believe and embellish any sensationalized propaganda that is fed to us and we're all set for the lynching.
It's absolutely amazing. It's true. I read it somewhere.
Just follow the ass os the sheep in front that is being led to slaughter.
Baa!
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 08:25:09 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Originally posted by bluenova:
I fully agree that nobody should be taking pictures of any kind of under 18's (21 in america) without the parents permission. |
paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaraaaaaaaaaaanoia!!!!!!!
Kids are cute. Much more interesting than adults too. Doesn't mean I'm a perv. We're so freaking paranoid "omg they are going to put little julie's photos on the web and some guy is going to jack off to it"
GUESS WHAT - he's doing that from his bedroom window overlooking the park RIGHT NOW where he can see your little Julie. Get her home or get over it. |
I agree that kids are cute and oftern make much more interesting pictures than adults (I have some great ones of my nices and nephews) but in order to sell a picture of a Minor a parent/gardian signature is required on a release form. If I was in a public place and somebody was taking a picture of my child without asking, I wouldn't be too happy about it, and would confront the photographer about it. |
|
|
|
12/23/2005 08:32:13 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by bluenova:
but in order to sell a picture of a Minor a parent/gardian signature is required on a release form. |
Did the article say sell? Or did I say sell? Cuz I missed where anyone is talking about selling?
People do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the mall. That being said, the mall is private and the mall owners CAN kick him out for doing it - doesn't mean they are correct, morally upstanding people - just that they have the legal right to control his access to their property.
He didn't place hidden cams in the women's room to get naked butt shots or people changing in the changing room. Is it an interesting photo? Who knows. That's for everyone to decide on their own. You are right, he can't sell it IF they are recognizable. I hate to tell ya - if he took a picture of the back of your kid's head, he can sell it all he wants without a release. "OH NO! Some perv is gonna whack it to the back of my kid's head!"
I can't deal with the ... paranoia, the restrictions of "you can shoot this here, but not here and definitely not here or of this."
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 08:32:34 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by BradP:
Oh good timing!
Just as I suggested this: Singled Out |
Yes, and when you said that, I also stated one should be careful, as I myself was told to NOT bring my camera back into Wal-Mart, even if I was only taking pictures of flowers.
Stores, malls, and just people in general do not like photographs of themselves today unless they know who you are. Otherwise they think either you are a pervert, or your pictures will end up in a perverts hands - especially if you are taking shots of women.
When I take candids, I take them from behind and whole body shots. Something maybe emotionally impactful. I have one of a girl on a swing which came out great in black and white. But in any case, the risk is too high today to just weild your camera anywhere you like.
Yesterday I had my camera with me, of course..LOL..and caught a car accident on my way back from the store. I pulled over and took some shots, but the cop that was writing up the incident, had he saw me, may not have taken too kindly to it. License plates can be on film, faces of victims, etc. I was going to use it for the "Ooops" challenge, but decided against it since I like my pattern shot better, but the point is, I could have gotten in trouble for it big time had I been caught.
You have to be quite cautious in today's society.
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/23/2005 08:39:48 AM · #75 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
But in any case, the risk is too high today to just weild your camera anywhere you like.
You have to be quite cautious in today's society. |
Or you can step up and assert your right to take whatever legal photograph you want to take. Again, Walmart is private - you don't have that right. Don't bring your camera there. The side of the road? Please.
I wonder what women's message boards would have been like before Suffrage. "Don't let those men know you want to vote - they won't think you're very ladylike and you won't get a husband, THEN where will you be - alone, unable to vote... you don't want to be alone! Just do what they say."
And the women who were arrested posing as men while they tried to vote? "Better not do that - you'll be arrested! That's against the law..."
Yes, but SHOULD it be?!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 01:38:04 PM EDT.
