keith_halsey

Its a long shot but does anyone out there have the contact details for a Proffessional Photographer who attends a

Glamour/Nude/Fetish event in London in Homerton at an Arts Centre Called Chats Palace called Night of The Cane

held each year in November which is an adult "School"recreationist event with a famous adult "Caning Competiton"(!)

He could be described as bearded about 5'9"quite tubby and carriea round a Sony £3000 onsite photo printer for full

colour lazer prints to guests.We desperatelt want to buy some of this years event iof he was there.He willingly

supplies prints with full permission and very good they are too.We have lost his conatct details.

<p>Regarding the general concept of photographing a clothing item in a store would this be acceptable?If done in the changing room on the pretext of trying it on it would be difficult to prevent.The purpose?Perhaps commercial or sales.Even to make a historical fashion record....I guess some stores would object some not care.It would be harder in a top end designer place with more attention and supervision.Is there a "copyright"issue?In otherwords if you photo the design and use the photo in fashion newsletter/offer it for sale before you have bought it/or make comments about it good or bad are their any issues you can think of?<br>

 <br>

 </p>

Hi Im an ex student and have always been fascinated by tales I have heard about The 1960s in California eg

SanFrancisco that "Hippies"and Student Girls would readily pose for $10 as a "once off"!?This seemed a good way

to supplement their meagre income as they were perhaps "runaways".

That this sort of cultural phenomonen could arise is indictaive of the free wheeling atmosphere that must have

prevailed then.

There are similiar reports in France at the same time of Paris Burlesque shows accepting entrants from amongst

Secreataries and Housewifes out shopping at lunch time who earned a quick $50 for half an hours casual

appearence-maybe as a one off!

How times have changed.

Even in Londons'Sohos 1970s there were walk up "photographic rooms"where customers were provided with a

camera,indoor studio and model!For 15 minutes.They were presumably allowed to keep the efforts of their work?

What fun!

Now we cant say Boo to a Dog in the park before the Thought Police are on our backs or a sexual harrassment case

ensues!

What would be the law nowadays regarding such a set up?

I presume the Thought Police have long since enacted laws to prevent such mutual fun?

I have heard and seen some websites on using Infra Red Filters at night to obtain dramatic white light looking black

and white photos.Its appears to be very technical with jargon about overiding built in camera exposure CCDs

customising on a micro scale(have you ever tried opening up,a digital compact to remove the CCD?)etc and charts of

supposed filters that fit over the lenses of various makes for success.

In practice what I found was that photo shops I went into 1)thought I was barmy when I said I wanted to photograph

Graveyards at midnight(actually Im more interested in Nightclub situations)2)Had a rummage round in their drawers

and came up with a choice of 1 IR filter priced at around £50+.3)Couldnt find any second hand (IR)ones4)Held it over

the camera-the back screen went black.Decided it wasnt a good buy.Scratched my head as to what to do.My

cameras are both Fuji FinePixes.Does anyone know of a camera/filter set up that will work without modyfying the

internal CCD-there are supposed to be some that work?

<p>Hmm Thanks for all the great responses and articles posted.I found these very helpful.Still not clear-have security the right to erase memory photos?,does mere possession of a camera(no actual photo taken) constitute breaching of the agreeing "not to take" photos rule?I suppose it depends whether the wording is no photography or no picture taking...?As cameras get smaller and more flexible it is going to be harder and harder to keep them out of large public events.To fully search every individual of say 20,000 visitors taking say 10 minutes per visitor would be impossible!As it would create such long lines that it could take 4 weeks for everyone to get in!Wi Fi camera signal detectors can detect wireless cameras apparently-when in use-such as those used by Exam Cheats or Casino Cheats-"beaming"photos outside but they do not work on ordinary cameras.But its a losing battle.I have regularly observed very many suspected breaches at many events with people freely using mobile phone cameras and so on in droves.Presumably this was because "Security"had been unable to "confinscate"visitors mobile phones,hold them safely till the end of the event and then return them to their rightful owners at the end on leaving to the tune of 7500 mobile phones!</p>

<p>Heres a tricky one,the other day I took an Xd card into a UK High Street Self Print store (think it was a Kodak type machine)to have a print done of a really really treasured photo(you know the money shot that took all morning to get).The photo(s)came up OK on the screen and I started to edit and compose the order.Then due to monetary reasons I decided to add another order-from a USB pen-and toggled around with the orders onscreen trying to join them to avoid 2 fix fees as advised by the staff.I may have pressed back,dont save changed,etc several times,then Hey Presto I discovered that the photos had all vanished off the Xd card!The staff strongly maintained that this was "impossible"(probaby through fear of suing).They then were allowed to check the card on their computer and this showed the photos had indeed all vanished.They were at a loss to explain how this had happened and alternated between a mixture of strong denial of its possibility and mild blame of me.In short their position was you must be imagnining it!When this didnt wash it changed to "oh its the first time this has happened"but we dont understand why"because the software cant do that".I then went to an other internet source and double checked.Everything had vanished off of the Xd card that I had painstakingly put on there that morning.They then tries lamely to sell me a software recovery programme that they claimed could retrieve inperfect state every single deleted Xd image since its inception numbering many 1000s photos.I showed disbelief!All I can think of was that I used my own Xd-big socket convertor and have had previous viral problems with the card from time to time...but these have always been resolved on re-formatting.As far as I am concerned it was a good card with great photos in a normal state.They had their XD sockets taped up and normally a customer would have to ask for a convertor device from behing the counter.So I nver got my photos and lost them all!Be warned!</p>

 

<p>Am thinking of buying an "AgentCam"off of E Bay from Hong Kong price about $50.Has anyone used one and what is the quality like?They are about the size of a packet of chewing gum and take mini SD cards.Someone told me that they are as poor as mobile phone camera quality possibly but this may have just been sales talk.</p>

<p>Can anyone clarify general principles of law regarding "Paraparrazi"type photography in a public place?(UK).As I understand it anyone can photograph anything in a public place theoretically unhindered even of unwilling or downright hostile subjects?(With the very few exceptions of certain kinds of voyeuristic photography which has been found to be a breach of privacy...)However where does one stand if ones subject or premises owner-ignorant of the law-takes offence and objects-perhaps violently?-A blazing row is not sensible.Could a photographer be accused of "provocation"of some sort?Press photographers seem to have more protection if equipm,ent is damaged etc.It was not so long ago in the UK that during events like demonstrations etc.Police used to seize cameras-rip out and expose the film-then return the empty camera to their owner.Was this lawful?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hello Roger-Yes but I get the impression that a considerable percentage of the exhibitors,guests and models in the show DO want the attention even of amateurs-at least by their very exhibitionist behaviour....anyway none of them including guests have ever been consulted,they are just TOLD not to bring cameras.Who has decided on this rule?Probably a tiny clique of control freaks at the top.There is absolutely no good reason why amateur cameras should not be allowed in.Many other events allow cameras as do museums and exhibitions.Its sheep think.Perhaps someone should do a survey with a clipboard asking visitors if they would A)be neutral about camerasB)Are actively FOR cameras or C)Against cameras.This seems to me a case of the tail wagging the dog.Just because a few individuals may be paranoid or frightened or want to assert a minority ruling a majority of being incidentally photographed.Do these people also object to store cameras etc?So I think there are people in there who would love to be photographed having made such an effort with their costumes.The negative associations with photography have to be dispelled.Ironically enough within a few hundred yards of the Event are several well known camera shop chains desperatly struggling to make a living by selling cameras to the public.The event is diametrically opposed to this trade.As for finding alternatives of willing photo participants this is for the average guy A)expensive B)very difficult C)few and far between.Dont forget this event is only held one day a year.</p>

<p>Here in England we are currently undergoing a great deal of paranoia about shooting photos in public,parks,beaches,Malls,etc are all off limits.Even School plays have been camera free due to parental concerns!Very few people carry a camera or do street photography which is why it may arouse suspicion.There is a lot of fear and ignorance from less well educated people around.Ones big fear is of some great big trucker type guy coming up to you unawares demanding "why you takin'photos"?With the "takin photos" uttered like some hideous offence in itself.Having ones camera snatched and broken is an entirely plausible scenario in rough inner urban areas.Professional Security type tend to be more restrained but still are mixed up and confused by people taking photographs.The annual nude Bike Ride in Hyde Park however sees 1000s photographers of all types and they swaped it making any ban unenforceable!Its when you are on your own that you are in a weak position.It may be best not to make too specific photos of any person as if your camera is seized and the immediate memory examined by nosy Security folks these may arouse questions whereas its harder to argue with a general crowd scene and "prove"just what or who you were photographing.(I can imagine a humouros encounter in a court where your offending photo is displayed on a projector and the judge argues over whether your interest was in the pedigree dog in the right corner or the luscious big breasted dolly bird in the top left!To which the defence could well counter well thats just a dirty mind!)If you get the opportunity and you feel the situation is getting heavy then it moght be best to delete the days work to clear the air which raises ludicrous Mission Impossible type scenes of you struggling to swallow the chip or fumbling to press delete before the goons shout "keep your fingers off of the camera"!Best thing is just dont photograph in a manner that can be seen to be furtive,of questionable angles or subjects,or for some purpose that is questionable.Good luck!</p>

<p>Hi Thats very ingeneous-I could possibly make an aluminium bracket that will bend and fit onto the base

screw(no hot shot top)and then adapt an old fashioned cable release quite a bit of filing and drilling though!My

other idea was to fit a D type clamp over the shutter button with camera switched to continual frame shot at the

desired photo shoot this being necessary on the FinePix as it does not appear to lock on continual still shotting

though it does do continual video shooting when the 10 minute time limit is overidden</p>

<p>Shopping in London England looking for digital compacts new in the $200 range with remotes.None found to exist except an unsuitable Canon.No lugs either.Told "you must buy one brand  digital SLR"minimum $800 to get that.One suggestion that possibly manufacturers DO sell remotes for "some"models(didnt know which ones)as an optional purchasable accessory at HQ.Models interested in Fuji Fine Pix series.Oh well looks like its the self timer trick.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This years Huge Indoor Erotica exhibition held at Olympia London England (2008)saw no outside street photographers attempting to photograph arriving celebrities on a cold winters day.It appeared that casual street photography outside the event was frowned upon as a large security prescence and Police intimidated any photographer from even "loitering"near the only possible photo point outside the main doors as taxis and limos arrived with the best dressed guests male and female.Surprsingly this was the spot the miserable looking motley assortment of security staff chose to hang out!Inside only official pass carrying photographers were officially allowed to form a ludicrous melee around the main stage area overseen by fluroescent jacketed police man in the galleries.Guests bags were all serached at the door and were told hope youve got no cameras we dont like cameras in here.(this is mild compared to the anti camera policy at some of Londons fetish nightclubs where random seraches usually of the wrong people occur inside venues of bags have occurred by officious amateur stewards for the night and where threatening language has been used in blogs claiming if even tiny cameras were found they would be "inserted up some place where the sun doesnt shine!"What are people so scared of?Their personality being stolen?The reasons seem 2 fold1)to maintain a monopoly on the photo trade2)to protect privacy(as if anyone there was important enough?3)Fear of leering coming out into the open as expressed by cameras.Some years ago at Dennis Gildings'Balls cameras were allowed and actively encouraged within the venue.The catwalk was flashing.Why the shift?Anyone else frustrated?</p>

<p> </p>

Well Herre Jesse Schust,All I can say is that because of your use of the words "pervert","creep"and characterisation sinsisterly of normal healthy adult males indulging in a bit of private thought fantasy and harmless self stimulation I have been put right off your ride!I did have initial sympathy for it.The ride so far has not had any trouble but riding through the largest city in Europe naked might spark some from less well educated amongst the bystanders eg.violent closet homosexual aggressors,true mental nutcases,batty women with umbrellas et al.The whole thing has the makings of sparks of conflict.Additionally one otehr very important point.I was reading an old interview with Stengl-the 70 year old Concentration Commander of Treblinka before he died.In it he states how when watching the crowds of naked prisoners being herded to the gas chambers he perceived them as non humans due to their nakedness and lost all empathy consequently.Both naked men and women were herded,not on bicycles granted,up a "tube(tunnel)"with whips to the gas chamber area.The nakedness allowed the guards to regard them as "non-human".Could not the same feeling be sparked in clothed onlookers

of your followers?If trouble did break out and say a nudie was attacked would the clothed(textiles as I believe they are called)photographers and bystanders come to the nudies aid or just stand and gawp?You might well want to ponder this question as its a very good one.the nakedness creates an us and them.Are you not bringing down public esteem for the participants to the point where they just cut off from the nude "freaks"or treat them as chimpanzees ina circus?Eh?

As a long standing photographer of many years experience in London UK I feel like adding some observations to this debate.:The policy on photography in fraught situations in the UK has never been black or white.For instance in the 1970s Police routinely would seize onlookers cameras in Kings Road Punk demos open the backs on the pretext of searching them,rip out the film and chuck it.Dont know if this was "nice"or "legal"?But as far as I know complaints were not effective.In those days to photograph something like that was still fairly rare for an ordinary Joe and considered a bit "odd".Also most cameras accessible to teens/ordinary folks were absolute garbage.Many wouldnt take pictures below 2.0 F!We talk here os Kodak instamatics and the like.One of the reasons that public photography is becoming a huge issue is because 1)Cheap Digi Cams with huge ranges make everyone and his dog equipped for surveillance very cheaply and easily.2)In the UK the Govt started it with all their CCTV cams.Digi cams and mobile phone cams are the citizens CCTV.3)The camera is a potent weapon as long as the photos are accepted ina court of law.4)Increasingly in the UK although its technically legal to photo people in public places the law is being directed in petty ways to discourage public photgraphy.Hence cases of peeping toms featuring prominently on the national news.Many of these are very trivial and open to questionable interpretation-is a camera on a stairway 4cm under a skirt hem"voyeurism"?Does a woman have right not to expect "creeps and pervs"looking up her 18"micro suede mini skirt?What is in denial here is (male)human sexuality.The male human responds to the sight of a naked female appropriately,erection,urge to mount,leer,that is because the sight of a pretty naked female is hypnotising and beautiful even in wickedly so.What these people(Cyclists) are expecting is males will deny this heterosexuality and self censor themselves(ie not take photos)and they are trying to make the point in their confused fuzzy logic sort of way that lechery is wrong or morally questionable.They are right.But do they need to strip off and wiggle their bits in peoples faces to prove it?Their hatred and absolute paranoia of what they call "creeps and perverts"is truly narrow minded.No love here.These are the "no single males","lynch and castrate"brigade on their bikes!I do not think these folks really believe they will not be photographed.I think they are just bored and play this little game for something to do and something to carp about "oooo look theres a perv behind that wall-get them!!!!"In a way they are acting decoy to encourage "pervs""out"from their "hiding places"so they can confront them in public.For pervs are sneaky and they cannot be recognised any other way perhaps?To conclude you cannot have a nude bike ride and no "voyeurs",male erections and peeping.Its a lost cause like King Canute trying to stop the tide!