This one time, at band camp, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I can photograph the Empire State Building, and maybe even sell
copies of those photos, but I can't build another Empire State
Building.
Perhaps somebody could sell you a copy...
Kevin
--
Democracy is two wolves and
This one time, at band camp, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is, and that is, I am sure, by design.
Any society that lets lawyers get too high in the social structure runs this
risk, and don't even think about letting them run the government.
Keep them locked up like the trolls that
Hey all. Back in the day (some number of months ago), I was marginally
active around here. Today, I hadn't looked at my PDML mailbox in so long,
there were over 10,000 unread messages. What the heck happened?
I changed jobs. Well, sorta. I'm still working at the same camera shop,
but now
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 05:27:46 +0200, Village Idiot [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I have a ZX-50 and I have two issues. First, I need to know how to keep
the film from rewinding completely into the canister since I will have
to load it at a later time. Hi,
The rewinding on an MZ-50 stops
Jens Bladt escribió:
Thanks a lot for sharing this, Dario. Very informative. And l o a d s of
excellent shots.
What does YMMV mean?
Sorry to hear about you bad experience with Sigma, Carlos. As you can see,
not everybody agrees on this :-).
Regards
Jens
My experience with Sigma hasn't been
I have been lurking on this list for a while so I might as well introduce
myself :)
As many of us I used to enjoy photography in childhood, I had some pretty
crappy off-brand Pentax screw mount cameras and lenses but I did enjoy it
immensely. I took a 10 year break from photography in my teens
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 02:33:27 +0200, Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Agreed, now that I look at my records I've purchased from
interslice nearly as often as raven571.
Thanks for pointing Jon out.
Thanks for all replies, both on- and off-list. If it all works out I'll
show some
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Doug Brewer wrote:
P. J. Alling wrote:
Nice shots. I think this kind of photography works better when the
automobile in question is a somewhat brighter color.
Funny you should mention this. I was released from the lock-up just this
morning, after being arrested trying
On 15/8/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed:
I don't disagree with anything you say, Cotty. First, let me point
out she wasn't an old lady, but was likely half my age (which puts her
in her mid-20's). My reaction could/should have been much calmer, but
I was reacting (poorly) to
Hi Krisjanis, welcome to the list. You make a good point. I would take it
one step further and not even ask if they minded being recorded. I'd
simply take out the recorder - at a strategic point - and hold it (or the
mic) in an obvious manner. In fact, while filming and at the point of
being
Tom Reese wrote:
William Robb wrote:
I believe any time a police officer asks you to step out of the car,
or please come with me, you are being detained.
If you are being detained without reason, you are then suffering from
an unjustifiable arrest.
...
Be as co-operative as possible,
I was downtown in Los Angeles one day with my ZX-5n. I never go
downtown without a camera. Suddenly around the corner came some hispanic
undocumented workers rights parade. My Spanish is rusty enough that I
couldn't grasp 100% of what they were chanting, but the whole affair
seemed kind of
Funny, no one has ever challenged me when I take photographs. I wonder if
this happens 10x more to men than it does to women?
Marnie aka Doe (Of course, I haven't tried photographing an electrical
plant yet.)
Markus Maurer wrote:
Hi Margus
thanks a lot for your solution.
Since I did not join a single lesson in chemistry, in fact, do not
understand anything about molybden isulphide oil,
is there a more common name for that seldom fluid ;-)
A good start would be your local hardware store. Look for a
keithw wrote:
Markus Maurer wrote:
Hi Margus
thanks a lot for your solution.
Since I did not join a single lesson in chemistry, in fact, do not
understand anything about molybden isulphide oil,
is there a more common name for that seldom fluid ;-)
A good start would be your local hardware
On 16/8/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
Funny, no one has ever challenged me when I take photographs.
Marn, you just look like a tourist :-) XXX
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
This one time, at band camp, Krisjanis Linkevics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If they want this to be a paranoid society
Dont knock it, it worked fine for Hitler.
kevin
--
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
keithw wrote:
I disagree with that. If the cop is violating someones rights without
probable cause then the victim should point out that the cop is
commiting a criminal act.
Point it out to whom? The cop perpetrating the act? Hardly...
Yes to the cop. Civil rights are meaningless if we
There's quite a lot of Hammersmith Riverside. How about meeting at a
specific point, such as the Dove, or the pub closest to the bridge on the
upstream side? I can't remember the name, unfortunately, and I'm only
suggesting it as a meeting point, not for its merits as a pub.
John
On
Glen wrote:
Over the last 24 hours I have been constantly saddened by the number of
posts indicating how many of you out there are having confrontations about
taking pictures in public places.
My troubles have been minor, but I am always surprised at the assumption
that I should not be taking
On 16/8/05, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
There's quite a lot of Hammersmith Riverside. How about meeting at a
specific point, such as the Dove, or the pub closest to the bridge on the
upstream side? I can't remember the name, unfortunately, and I'm only
suggesting it as a
On 16/8/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed:
Bob mentioned the Dove, so that seems like the rendezvous. I'm driving -
any idea which road it's accessed from? Ta.
Is this the one?
http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/s/15/159/Dove_Inn/Hammersmith
Fullers as well!
Cheers,
Cotty
Cotty wrote:
Is this the one?
http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/s/15/159/Dove_Inn/Hammersmith
Yep, that's it. Been there before - it's pretty good.
S
Cotty wrote:
Is this the one?
http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/s/15/159/Dove_Inn/Hammersmith
http://london.openguides.org/index.cgi?Dove_Inn_(Hammersmith) too.
S
Steve Jolly wrote:
Yep, that's it. Been there before - it's pretty good.
Apart from the food.
S
Hi Doug.
Some nice shots there, but 007 and 013 are my fav's.
Love the older cars.
Dave
I was in Indianapolis this weekend, and a
Buick
collector's club was
having a show at the same hotel, so I wandered over Saturday evening
with a camera to
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: My visit with Ann
You can't fool me...
I don't need to.
- Original Message -
From: Krisjanis Linkevics
Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights (another take and an introduction)
If somebody comes up to harass me I take the voice recorder out, ask them
if they object to me recording our conversation and explain that they are
harassing me
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny, no one has ever challenged me when I take photographs. I wonder if
this happens 10x more to men than it does to women?
Marnie aka Doe (Of course, I haven't tried photographing an electrical
plant yet.)
At this rate, Marnie, it's starting to sound like
Doug says it is cool for me to issue an invitation here, so here goes.
I moderate a bunch of photographic discussion groups on BestStuff.com,
as well as being their photo guru. My most popular list is the
Russian Camera Users Group. Some of you may find it or the other lists
interesting.
Malcolm Smith wrote:
[ ... ]
In many ways it's all a nonsense; chances are in a small town you are
appearing on CCTV somewhere and in a big city maybe 50, 100, 200 cameras?
Not that I have any objection to that - I welcome it today - but the
principle should be both ways. If you objecting to
There's no problem with posting For Sale items or links to your own eBay
auctions here.
Do you still have a web site? I'd been wondering what you were up to...
20--20
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
Ah ha! I now have permission!
Gamma picked up my option a couple of years back, and
I have also had Tokina and Tamron AF lenses, and in my view they have
been more reliable than the Sigmas I've owned or borrowed.
This has been my experience, too. However, to be honest, I have not had
much experience with Sigma lenses - none with any autofocus lenses ever,
and none with any
In a message dated 8/16/2005 6:55:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At this rate, Marnie, it's starting to sound like a lot more than 10x!
I've been asked on a very few occasions not to take pictures, but always
politely.
(I *have* photographed an electrical plant, under
BTW, can anybody tell me why the messages I send to the list from Outlook
Express get kicked back to me? This is the first week I've used Outlook
Express,
and it takes some getting used to.
Maybe you are sending HTML messages, rather than plain text messages...???
Fred
Hi Pentaxians
thanks to all of you responding to my question how-to separate stuck
filters, namely Graywolf, Juan, Bob,
Amita and more :-)
I followed William Robb's advice using household gloves (common cheap short
red ones for Cotty) and it worked very well!
It gives you a lot more force and
Hi Marnie
thanks for having a look and I agree with your comments.
I will remain a mystery what the two bees really did or had in mind ;-)
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 6:20 PM
To:
thanks William, you are the hero of the day for me ;-)
Oh, great - now we'll never hear the end of it... [Just kiddin', Bill -
g.]
Fred
Hi Frank
thanks for your insights ;-)
I will remain a secret what the bees really did I think ...
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 10:14 PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: PESO:Doppeldecker fly's
Toralf Lund wrote:
Malcolm Smith wrote:
[ ... ]
In many ways it's all a nonsense; chances are in a small town you are
appearing on CCTV somewhere and in a big city maybe 50, 100, 200 cameras?
Not that I have any objection to that - I welcome it today - but the
principle should be both
Hi Pentaxians
I tell the people that I will send photos to the local newspapers reader
section when they ask what I do take the photos for and whether I work for
the press.
People seem to like that answer ;-) and it is not untrue.
I would also say something like it's all for art if asked :-)
Lucas,
Thanks for the advice!
Derek
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 05:27:46 +0200, Village Idiot [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I have a ZX-50 and I have two issues. First, I need to know how to keep
the film from rewinding completely into the canister since I will have
to load it at a
On 16/8/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed:
There seem to be a fair amount of Brits here on the forum. Do you guys
outnumber the Yanks now? I went to school in London and miss the place
now and again.
Hi Bill, Cotty here. Brit. On the list since 1998 - I don't recall you
from
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Markus Maurer wrote:
I followed William Robb's advice using household gloves (common cheap short
red ones for Cotty) and it worked very well!
It gives you a lot more force and your hands don't slip away from the tiny
filter rings.
I think the important thing to note is
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, Boris Liberman wrote:
http://malakoff.no/pictures/35/imgp2818.jpg - is very good. I really like the
repetition here.
Yes, but is the focus right?
I think you did a fine job, especially taking into account that you had to
take pain killers :-(...
Wishing you well!
I
On 16/8/05, Steve Jolly, discombobulated, unleashed:
Steve Jolly wrote:
Yep, that's it. Been there before - it's pretty good.
Apart from the food.
There's just nom pleasing some people ;-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 16/8/05, Markus Maurer, discombobulated, unleashed:
I followed William Robb's advice using household gloves (common cheap short
red ones for Cotty)
Paaa. Not even any ticklers?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
oh, you just know I'm an arteest.
thanks for the comments, bud.
Cotty wrote:
Holy moly, you turning into one a them there pretentious artests?
I'll buy that fer a dollar.
First one's always the best. Love that one.
http://www.alphoto.com/images/buick007.jpg
All good. Well done
On 16/8/05, Toralf Lund, discombobulated, unleashed:
Personally I dislike the surveillance cameras that are popping up all
over the place. I think they represent a restriction of my personal
freedom as well as a way for authorities to give the public a false
sense of security, and I object to
Markus wrote:
thanks William, you are the hero of the day for me ;-)
LOOK! UP IN THE SKY! IT'S A BIRD! IT'S A PLANE! NO, IT'S WILLIAM ROBB!
RUN! Before he comes back down and something splashes on you!
:)
I like them! A nice mini-folio.
Tom C.
From: Doug Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Fun With Buicks
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:03:38 -0400
I was in Indianapolis this weekend, and a Buick collector's club was having
a show at the
Hey Dave,
yeah, the older cars had style.
007 and 013 seem to be the popular choices. Thanks for taking the time
to look and type in a comment.
Doug
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Doug.
Some nice shots there, but 007 and 013 are my fav's.
Love the older cars.
Dave
Cotty wrote:
On 16/8/05, Toralf Lund, discombobulated, unleashed:
Personally I dislike the surveillance cameras that are popping up all
over the place. I think they represent a restriction of my personal
freedom as well as a way for authorities to give the public a false
sense of
I like it. Bokeh is nice. The flowers really 'pop'. My only nit is that
the center sunflower is a little worse for wear... I know it's what was
there.
I never realized until yesterday, that a sunflower is made up of hundreds of
tinier flowers (does that make it a composite?). Each tiny
In a message dated 8/15/2005 11:16:02 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just a pretty flower picture, well sort of...
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_gms.html
Technical Info:
-
Pentax *ist-D @ 1/250 iso 400
vmc Vivitar Series 1 35-85mm f2.8
Wow, Paul. That's nice. The colors, lines, everything!
Tom C.
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: PESO: Cruising with Dad
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 11:40:31 -0400
Well, it's a slow list day, so I'll post another
At 09:44 AM 8/16/2005, William Robb wrote:
Excellent idea.
I think I would take it a step further and not ask their permission for
recording though.
Why set a precedent when none is needed?
William Robb
Depending on what part of the world you live in, there may be no legal
requirement to
William Robb wrote:
I can see a lot of pros buying Pentax to get around this sort of stuff.
HAR
HAR, HAR, HAR
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 02:30:03PM +0100, Steve Jolly wrote:
Cotty wrote:
Is this the one?
http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/s/15/159/Dove_Inn/Hammersmith
Yep, that's it. Been there before - it's pretty good.
I've been there many, many times (almost all 25+ years ago, though).
Jerry, I have the lens but I also have a dial-up connection. Sorry.
I have tested it on my *ist D against a brick wall at 20 mm., and at the
same time tested the DA 16-45 f4 at the same focal length. The two are
very close, but I would have to say that at 20 mm. the FA 20-35 is very
slightly
Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and
that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires
all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued.
Regards,
Bob...
I can fish out a DS RAW file this evening ...
I compared the 16-45 and 20-35 at 20, 24, 28 and 35mm focal length
settings. They are very very close on sharpness, in my opinion, but
the 20-35 has less rectilinear distortion and nicer out-of-focus
rendering quality. The 16-45 seems to go a
You have a very good photographic eye, Juan. Your shots very much
non-kliche, which I like.
Also from a technical point of view they a good work!
Regards
Jens
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Juan Buhler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 15. august 2005 20:16
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
I've owned both the 20-35 and the 16-45. Before going digital, the
20-35 was one of my favorite lenses. After going digital, I found that
as a wide angle lens it wasn't all that wide anymore. That doesn't mean
it's not a fantastic lens though. I used it a lot as a normal-ish lens,
and got
On Aug 16, 2005, at 10:17 AM, David Oswald wrote:
What does that tell you? The two lenses are both so good that
people have mixed feelings in choosing one over the other, perhaps.
I have no mixed feelings about it. The 16-45 just didn't cut it for
me ... I just about refused to carry it.
Thanks Tom. Hope to try some more tonight. Lots of cars on the Avenue now with
the Dream Cruise just days away.
Paul
Wow, Paul. That's nice. The colors, lines, everything!
Tom C.
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 10:19 AM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Another one bites the dust
The photos and item descriptions of the sale items should be done
and the auctions started by tomorrow
Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and
that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires
all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued.
In many places, law enforcement
At 11:34 AM 8/16/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At that time, I will report back if I get stopped by someone fearing I am a
terrorist.
That is, if you are ever allowed to contact anyone outside the detention
center. Remember, in the current 9-11 hysteria, you can be detained
indefinitely,
This is an example of a street shot I like. In fact it's a wonderful, maybe
even delicious example of a genre I usually dislike! Why?
It stands on it's own. It requires no words or explanation. The visual
image 'says it all'.
Excellent job.
Maybe this means I don't dislike the genre, but
LumiQuest 80-20 - http://www.lumiquest.com/lq872.htm, it mounts to the flash
with Velcro and operates with the flash pointed up. Large openings in a 45
degree pass light to the ceiling with a cross hatch itself (white)
reflecting light forward as a diffuser. It comes alone or packaged with gold
Sorry for putting words into your mouth. ...I just was trying to
summarize, and really meant to lend credance to your point of view. I
can't argue the size issue; the 20-35 is more pleasant to handle for
that reason, and that's why I miss it. The 16-45 fits in my small
camera bag along with
Mark Roberts wrote:
Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and
that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires
all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty, but you can be sued.
In
Hi David,
I think this shot works and has captured a lot of interest. I don't usually
like photos with 'sculptured' grass lawns or walkways/roads, but it works
here. It may be the contrast between the wiggly line of dry leaves on the
left and the straight path on the right. The sun peaking
In a message dated 8/16/2005 10:32:38 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 11:34 AM 8/16/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At that time, I will report back if I get stopped by someone fearing I am a
terrorist.
That is, if you are ever allowed to contact anyone outside the
keithw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. In most states, only one party to the conversation has to consent and
that can be you if you're a party to the conversation. California requires
all parties to consent. There is no criminal penalty,
Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doug says it is cool for me to issue an invitation here, so here goes.
I moderate a bunch of photographic discussion groups on BestStuff.com,
as well as being their photo guru. My most popular list is the
Russian Camera Users Group. Some of you may find it
Output express sends mail in rtf format IIRC by default. The list only
accepts ASCII, any mail with an attachment is returned to sender.
You'll have to configure outlook express to send text only.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's no problem with posting For Sale items or links to your own
No problem, David. I'm just a bug for small and light equipment,
presuming the quality is there. ;-)
Your medium-fanny-pack size bag must be a lot bigger than the
Billingham L2 I normally use. DS with one lens mounted plus two
others, and my usual selection of small bits (spare batteries,
You probably can photograph, Glen. In Denmark you could.
Weather you publish these on you own website or in a newspaper is not
important. The same rules apply as long as they are published.
But:
You can't legally publish the photographs in a way that would be offensive
to the persons shown in the
Thanks Tom! It's good to hear such praise from someone who isn't
usually inclined to street photography.
In general, I find that street photography as a genre is better when
it is presented in the context of several related photos. Standalone
photos are much harder than, say, landscape or
William wrote:
My understanding is that the act of photographing is fine, the act of
publishing (this includes a website) is where you can run afoul of things.
I don't agree. You can't!
In my understanding a public website, accessible without a password or
similar, is no different from any other
On this map:
http://tinyurl.com/8vbq6
There is a car park under the two Ms in Hammersmith Flyover, next to the
Appolo, which can be accessed on the South side of the Hammersmith one-way
system, just after the Fulham Palace Road exit.
Alternatively, you may be lucky enough to find
Cotty wrote:
On 16/8/05, Toralf Lund, discombobulated, unleashed:
Personally I dislike the surveillance cameras that are popping up all
over the place. I think they represent a restriction of my personal
freedom as well as a way for authorities to give the public a false
sense of
Thanks, for everyone's comments so far.
I should have mentioned that the city festival and concert that I *might*
be photographing and *might* put on my personal web space is in the USA.
Any references to laws only help if they apply here. (It's my fault for not
mentioning my location
That should read Apollo.
J
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:30:58 +0100, John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On this map:
http://tinyurl.com/8vbq6
There is a car park under the two Ms in Hammersmith Flyover, next to the
Appolo, which can be accessed on the South side of the Hammersmith
one-way
keithw wrote:
Toralf Lund wrote:
Malcolm Smith wrote:
[ ... ]
In many ways it's all a nonsense; chances are in a small town you are
appearing on CCTV somewhere and in a big city maybe 50, 100, 200
cameras?
Not that I have any objection to that - I welcome it today - but the
principle
I agree with Tom on this one. I think it's my favorite from among Godfrey's
recent work. The subject is just delightful, and the framing and composition
are excellent.
Paul
Thanks Tom! It's good to hear such praise from someone who isn't
usually inclined to street photography.
In
- Original Message -
From: Markus Maurer
Subject: The household gloves trick works well to separate filters!
thanks William, you are the hero of the day for me ;-)
yer welcome.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Another Photographer's Rights Question
William wrote:
My understanding is that the act of photographing is fine, the act of
publishing (this includes a website) is where you can run afoul of things.
I don't agree. You can't!
- Original Message -
From: keithw
Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights
Yessir, I do.
However, I see no danger from being watched by remote cameras, as I
don't plan to ever do anything illegal!
If they catch me scratching my butt, i hope they have a good laugh! ;-)
The
Welcome Krisjanis
Paranoid society or not, I do believe it's good to know your own rights as
well as respecting and not violating the rights of other people.
As photographers we are often confronted with other people questioning our
rights to take pictueres. Sometimes they even manage to scare a
[ ... ]
... as well as a way for authorities to give the public a false sense
of security,
I recall reading several times, several places where numerous
nefarious people were stopped, felons caught, illegal acts thwarted,
etc. That's a reasonable sense of security. Proven, as it were...
David Oswald wrote:
Cotty wrote:
On 16/8/05, Toralf Lund, discombobulated, unleashed:
Personally I dislike the surveillance cameras that are popping up
all over the place. I think they represent a restriction of my
personal freedom as well as a way for authorities to give the public
a
I just realized that the Canon Eos vest is VERY similar to the Fotodiox vest
(ebay auctions).
Very nice vest, so it seems :-)
http://tinyurl.com/cywqb
http://tinyurl.com/dphcf
I wonder if they could make me one with PENTAX and *ist D written on it :-)
Jens
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra:
You should appollogize.
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 August 2005 19:48
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Mini London PDML
That should read Apollo.
J
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:30:58 +0100, John Forbes
[EMAIL
Here's a better map:
http://tinyurl.com/6cmv9
The nearest pub to the bridge, on Lower Mall, is (I think) the Blue
Anchor. The Dove is on Upper Mall.
John
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:12:24 +0100, Bob Walkden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I vote for the nearest pub upstream of the bridge, but I
William Robb wrote:
The problem is that some people just don't like Big Brother watching them
all the time.
For me, the concept of security cameras watching my every move is quite
Orwellian.
Freedoms get removed in small little bite sized pieces, not all at once.
After you don't mind the
Toralf Lund wrote:
But I part from my earlier notes, what I meant to say is that
I only recall reading about cameras being used *after* a
crime was committed.
That does increase security somewhat, as it helps taking some
known culprits out of circulation, so as to speak, but not by
It's already illegal to wear sunglasses and a hat in Banks in the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. They want a nice clean photo from the
security cameras
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: keithw
Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights
Yessir, I do.
However, I see
1 - 100 of 183 matches
Mail list logo
