Someone posted this link on DPReview and it took me by surprise. I've heard about it, but never seen it. Not exactly macro or micro, but we all take other shots as well, so its interesting.
http://current.com/items/88856223_you_c ... cture_this
Danny.
Its a spooky world
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Its a spooky world
Worry about the image that comes out of the box, rather than the box itself.
Actually I am surprised that there are not more incidents or confrontations between the average citizen with a camera and local or government authorities such as in this presentation. It seems that "terrorism," is doing exactly what it is supposed to do and that is to make us afraid of most everything.
I do not know about other countries in our world but here in the United States, it seems as though our local and national news media, do an excellent job via video, of suggesting ideal targets for would be attackers, without our authorities having to harass the average "joe" with a camera.
I can understand the concern of government officals in wanting to provide protection and security and their efforts are much appreciated but terrorism is one hard cookie to crumble, because it is unpredictable in its nature. So, that is the lint out of my belly button and I feel so much better now.
I do not know about other countries in our world but here in the United States, it seems as though our local and national news media, do an excellent job via video, of suggesting ideal targets for would be attackers, without our authorities having to harass the average "joe" with a camera.
I can understand the concern of government officals in wanting to provide protection and security and their efforts are much appreciated but terrorism is one hard cookie to crumble, because it is unpredictable in its nature. So, that is the lint out of my belly button and I feel so much better now.
Totally agree Ken. I can actually understand exactly why this happened.
What I can't figure out, is that the police of any country is there to uphold the law, not create the law.........on the spot because they feel like it. Thats really what that clip is about I think. Its very simple, the law makers make a law, we stick by it. If not, then fair dues and good luck.
Don't really want to get into terrorism, because ......... well we all have different ideas on what that is............ shh Danny
All the best and I just found it interesting from a photographers viewpoint I guess.
Danny.
What I can't figure out, is that the police of any country is there to uphold the law, not create the law.........on the spot because they feel like it. Thats really what that clip is about I think. Its very simple, the law makers make a law, we stick by it. If not, then fair dues and good luck.
Don't really want to get into terrorism, because ......... well we all have different ideas on what that is............ shh Danny
All the best and I just found it interesting from a photographers viewpoint I guess.
Danny.
Worry about the image that comes out of the box, rather than the box itself.
-
augusthouse
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:39 am
- Location: New South Wales Australia
Bureaucracy always attracted the stupid because they could not hold down proper jobs in the private sector where rational thought is required!
For years in the UK one of our radio monitoring installations picking up Russian submarine communications was supposed to be top secret and did not even exist on maps, yet a major highway ran close by it with hundreds of cars passing it daily and it's radio masts were a hundred or so feet high and some directly by the road, so hardly inconspicuous and very well known nationally!
No doubt anybody stopping to take a picture would have been pounced on, but anybody could have photographed it from a passing car. The authorities were too thick to distinguish between the two because evidently spy's don't use cars and only photograph on foot, and obviously never use concealed cameras!
State secrecy is not done to prevent spying, only to keep from the taxpayer how their money may be being wasted. Was it not Kruschev who said there would be copies of any papers on the US Presidents desk that morning on his by that afternoon, and I am sure the reverse applied! Secrecy is therefore largely to prevent the taxpayer from knowing, because terrorists or foreign governments can always obtain the information one way or another.
I am sure even friendly governments spy on each other, even if in a more informal way than enemies, just to make sure nothing is being witheld from them. Do we honestly think that a certain degree of observation of each other is not being carried out between the UK, USA and France? I am sure you take an interest in what your next door neighbour is doing in case it may affect you.
DaveW
For years in the UK one of our radio monitoring installations picking up Russian submarine communications was supposed to be top secret and did not even exist on maps, yet a major highway ran close by it with hundreds of cars passing it daily and it's radio masts were a hundred or so feet high and some directly by the road, so hardly inconspicuous and very well known nationally!
No doubt anybody stopping to take a picture would have been pounced on, but anybody could have photographed it from a passing car. The authorities were too thick to distinguish between the two because evidently spy's don't use cars and only photograph on foot, and obviously never use concealed cameras!
State secrecy is not done to prevent spying, only to keep from the taxpayer how their money may be being wasted. Was it not Kruschev who said there would be copies of any papers on the US Presidents desk that morning on his by that afternoon, and I am sure the reverse applied! Secrecy is therefore largely to prevent the taxpayer from knowing, because terrorists or foreign governments can always obtain the information one way or another.
I am sure even friendly governments spy on each other, even if in a more informal way than enemies, just to make sure nothing is being witheld from them. Do we honestly think that a certain degree of observation of each other is not being carried out between the UK, USA and France? I am sure you take an interest in what your next door neighbour is doing in case it may affect you.
DaveW
-
Harold Gough
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:17 am
- Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
The latest in the UK is that anyone 'covertly' taking photographs in a public place may be challenged by police.
I have a high-visibilty yellow jacket (not yet used, but in my car) to deal with that, and with the issue about photographing children in a public place. (I don't intend to do the latter but they tend to get into the frame when you aren't looking!).
Harold
I have a high-visibilty yellow jacket (not yet used, but in my car) to deal with that, and with the issue about photographing children in a public place. (I don't intend to do the latter but they tend to get into the frame when you aren't looking!).
Harold
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Very interesting Dave and Harold.
Harold, who actually defines that term covertly. So if we are taking photos of a building from among some trees, thats covertly ??? and yet, standing in Piccadilly square would be fine taking the same shot ???. I would be totally confused by what that means.
In other words, if I wanted to destroy something and take photos first, I wouldn't do it "Covertly", I would just stand right in front of it and take photos and that would be fine.
. Someone is going to have a nightmare writing a bill for parliament for that.
Fascinating.
Danny.
Harold, who actually defines that term covertly. So if we are taking photos of a building from among some trees, thats covertly ??? and yet, standing in Piccadilly square would be fine taking the same shot ???. I would be totally confused by what that means.
In other words, if I wanted to destroy something and take photos first, I wouldn't do it "Covertly", I would just stand right in front of it and take photos and that would be fine.
. Someone is going to have a nightmare writing a bill for parliament for that. Fascinating.
Danny.
Worry about the image that comes out of the box, rather than the box itself.
-
Harold Gough
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:17 am
- Location: Reading, Berkshire, England
Danny,
I think it probably lies in the discretion of the police officer, just as it does when they can move you on when your photography in a public place causes 'an obstruction' or is liable to cause a 'breach of the peace'.
These recent powers arise from special powers under legislation to prevent acts of terrorism. The UK is becoming more and more of a police state. (The police, and some private security guards, act as though e.g. photography in a public place, or photography of children in a public place, is unlawful). I am beginning to think that we might have more rights if we let the terrorists run the country.
Harold
I think it probably lies in the discretion of the police officer, just as it does when they can move you on when your photography in a public place causes 'an obstruction' or is liable to cause a 'breach of the peace'.
These recent powers arise from special powers under legislation to prevent acts of terrorism. The UK is becoming more and more of a police state. (The police, and some private security guards, act as though e.g. photography in a public place, or photography of children in a public place, is unlawful). I am beginning to think that we might have more rights if we let the terrorists run the country.
Harold
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Oh I can see their point Harold and quite rightly so. I would be worried if they didn't to be honest. Special powers need to be taken and given for special events. It just seems that photography seems to be a target here and I can't see justification for it. I mean, maps, plans, etc are easy to get if they want a target.
So how far does it go. Now its photographers, whats next. Artists painting a building, people doing sketches, just seems to be going overboard with someone taking photos.
Anyway, points taken and I certainly agree to a certain extent.
All the best.
Danny.
So how far does it go. Now its photographers, whats next. Artists painting a building, people doing sketches, just seems to be going overboard with someone taking photos.
Anyway, points taken and I certainly agree to a certain extent.
All the best.
Danny.
Worry about the image that comes out of the box, rather than the box itself.
-
Harold Gough
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:17 am
- Location: Reading, Berkshire, England