Tony Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 Photographers are mounting a campaign to try to stop people overeacting to them taking snaps in public. From the BBC Misplaced fears about terror, privacy and child protection are preventing amateur photographers from enjoying their hobby, say campaigners. Phil Smith thought ex-EastEnder Letitia Dean turning on the Christmas lights in Ipswich would make a good snap for his collection. The 49-year-old started by firing off a few shots of the warm-up act on stage. But before the main attraction showed up, Mr Smith was challenged by a police officer who asked if he had a licence for the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxforcefive Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 There should be a campaign against photographers taking snaps in public without the consent of the person they are taking the snaps of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 There should be a campaign against photographers taking snaps in public without the consent of the person they are taking the snaps of. Like hell there should! Why on earth would you want to stop public photography? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 what? so at an event like that, a photographer would have to obtain consent from everybody present? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxforcefive Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I think it would be more a case of making it public knowledge that there are photographers taking photos and giving the individual the choice to stay and maybe get snapped, or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyesey Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 what? so at an event like that, a photographer would have to obtain consent from everybody present? Makes sense. Nobody should have the right to take pictures of me without my say-so, except the police photographer if I get arrested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkymiss Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 Makes sense. Nobody should have the right to take pictures of me without my say-so, except the police photographer if I get arrested. What about cctv images then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyesey Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 What about cctv images then? What about them? Those don't get published, and nobody makes money out of them. They're for security purposes only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 I think it would be more a case of making it public knowledge that there are photographers taking photos and giving the individual the choice to stay and maybe get snapped, or not. i would have thought that at a public event where there are celebrities about, it is fairly obvious that there will be people taking pictures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 What about them? Those don't get published, and nobody makes money out of them. They're for security purposes only. and my photos don't get published, nor do i make money from them if i'm taking a picture of my friend / relative and you happen to walk past, should i have to ask your permission? or if you are that sensitive about it, how about staying out of the frame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.