Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Cotty wrote: On 22/3/05, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed: Absolutely. I just wonder how one arrives at an answer. I've never, for example, taken photographs at an active car wreck as my first instinct is to help the people involved. But I know a person who has and who has been assaulted because of it. I have chanced upon such situations in my career and without question, as an alleged First Aider, I offer help immediately. If I wasn't working, and had the stills gear instead, I would do the same. I'd make a crap war photog. Not as crap as me. I reckon I could become a world record sprinter with no difficulty. Although a friend of mine (a librarian, for crying out loud!) says that one's first reaction when coming under fire is to retaliate. I think that's just his Geordie upbringing 8-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
- Original Message - From: Markus Maurer Subject: RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Hi Frank and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) The point is, it doesn't matter how they feel about it. It becomes an issue of the ethics of the photographer, and how he or she feels about publishing a picture of someone without their permission. William Robb
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Markus Maurer Subject: RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Hi Frank and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) The point is, it doesn't matter how they feel about it. It becomes an issue of the ethics of the photographer, and how he or she feels about publishing a picture of someone without their permission. Not just that but publishing against their express wishes. mike
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
- Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Markus Maurer Subject: RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Hi Frank and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) The point is, it doesn't matter how they feel about it. It becomes an issue of the ethics of the photographer, and how he or she feels about publishing a picture of someone without their permission. Not just that but publishing against their express wishes. mike The point is though, that the decision is the photographer's, not the subject's, at least in the jurisdiction that Frank and I live in. William Robb
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Markus Maurer Subject: RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Hi Frank and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) The point is, it doesn't matter how they feel about it. It becomes an issue of the ethics of the photographer, and how he or she feels about publishing a picture of someone without their permission. Not just that but publishing against their express wishes. mike The point is though, that the decision is the photographer's, not the subject's, at least in the jurisdiction that Frank and I live in. William Robb Absolutely. I just wonder how one arrives at an answer. I've never, for example, taken photographs at an active car wreck as my first instinct is to help the people involved. But I know a person who has and who has been assaulted because of it. What if the pictures you were taking had the potential to be used politically, in a manner you did not agree with? Would you still take them? Or does it come down to the phtotographer taking pictures of the things that interest them, so they are sure that there will not be such fallout? Is that not propaganda? More questions than answers, tonight. mike
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
- Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Absolutely. I just wonder how one arrives at an answer. I've never, for example, taken photographs at an active car wreck as my first instinct is to help the people involved. But I know a person who has and who has been assaulted because of it. That is the risk one takes, of course. What if the pictures you were taking had the potential to be used politically, in a manner you did not agree with? Would you still take them? Or does it come down to the phtotographer taking pictures of the things that interest them, so they are sure that there will not be such fallout? Is that not propaganda? More questions than answers, tonight. I'm going to put a few generalizations out there, so I anticipate that there will be a few exceptions to disprove the rule, but here goes: I doubt if anyone would take a picture that has the potential to be used politically, in a manner they do not agree with. At least not knowingly. People tend to do things that match their own agenda. Taking pictures is just one of those things. It is a pretty safe assumption that pretty much every picture taken is some form of propoganda, whether it is benign, harmless or otherwise does depend on a lot of factors. William Robb
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) The point is, it doesn't matter how they feel about it. It becomes an issue of the ethics of the photographer, and how he or she feels about publishing a picture of someone without their permission. Not just that but publishing against their express wishes. mike The point is though, that the decision is the photographer's, not the subject's, at least in the jurisdiction that Frank and I live in. Unless you're a whore like me. Then someone tells you to go do it. You do feel guilty, But the person telling you to go do it okays the salary that pays the mortgage... *sigh* I may join a commune in Uppsala. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 22/3/05, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed: Absolutely. I just wonder how one arrives at an answer. I've never, for example, taken photographs at an active car wreck as my first instinct is to help the people involved. But I know a person who has and who has been assaulted because of it. I have chanced upon such situations in my career and without question, as an alleged First Aider, I offer help immediately. If I wasn't working, and had the stills gear instead, I would do the same. I'd make a crap war photog. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 10:36:45PM +, Cotty wrote: I'd make a crap war photog. I could believe that ...
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:59:59 -0600, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Markus Maurer Subject: RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Hi Frank and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) The point is, it doesn't matter how they feel about it. It becomes an issue of the ethics of the photographer, and how he or she feels about publishing a picture of someone without their permission. William Robb Markus, There was no answer from me, because I didn't see your posts. For whatever reason, I didn't get them. I told you my personal rules for photographing the indigent. I try to ask them if they mind that I take a photo. I respect their answer. I'm not looking down the road as to whether I'm going to publish them or not. I just ask them if they mind if I take some photos. If they say yes, I shoot. If they say no, I don't. If they ask questions, I answer them honestly. If they ask if I'm a pro (that seems the most common question), I say, no, can't you see, I'm shooting Pentax. I've never been asked, but if someone asked if I was going to publish them, I'd say, I exhibit from time to time, I sometimes share photos with friends on the internet. To answer your question more specifically, if someone started saying, you can take my photo, but you can't publish it, or crap like that, I'd likely get bored and cranky and move on. There are enough people that don't mind me taking their picture that I don't need to waste time with street lawyers. I don't really know what more to say. Once the photo is taken, it's mine, and I use it any way I please. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Hi Frank and still no answer from your side whether people **know that you are publishing them later** and if they still **feel okay**? greetings ;-) Markus I know with the anti-paparazzi laws that are being proposed in some places, that may change, but we have no such laws here, so I can take and publish photos of people in public any time I want to. Who I photo, and when I show them is my decision. cheers, frank
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin - thanks to all
I would like to thank to all who commented on my photo. I found it fascinating to see different opinions for different reasons, but that's the way it should be, IMO. So once again thanks, folks. Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin - thanks to all
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:05:37 +0100, Peter Lacus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to thank to all who commented on my photo. I found it fascinating to see different opinions for different reasons, but that's the way it should be, IMO. So once again thanks, folks. Bedo. That's what this list is about - different opinions and lively discussion. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:33:46 -0500, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip An example is my buddy Ricky the Soap Angel Carver (who I haven't seen around before). snip I just re-read this post from last night (as I received an off-list comment WRT it), and I noticed that I mis-spoke (or rather mis-typed). I meant to say that I haven't seen my buddy Ricky the Soap Carver around ~lately~. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Jens Bladt wrote: What is the misery? Die Rundfunk Turm? I've been there many years ago :-) That was my first thought, too. Then I scrolled down - all the way down - and found the lady begging. For the presentation medium, the picture is too big.
RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Oh Yes. Now I see! It seems to me that the richer the county, the greater the difference between rich and poor! Luckily this is not allways true. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: mike wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 20. marts 2005 11:18 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin Jens Bladt wrote: What is the misery? Die Rundfunk Turm? I've been there many years ago :-) That was my first thought, too. Then I scrolled down - all the way down - and found the lady begging. For the presentation medium, the picture is too big.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Frank, http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Commenting on the photo in and of itself, my problem with it is that the woman sort of gets lost down there in the corner. I know you wanted to get the majestic statues in there to contrast the old lady, but I think in doing that she sort of gets lost. I was going to say, if I were taking the photo... and then give some advice, but I'm not taking the photo, and really, to be fair, I should only comment on what's being presented. vbg you are hereby allowed to modify this picture in any way you like. :-) So, I think that the photo as is, is still a good one; it's a good idea, to be sure. But I think it ~could~ be a lot stronger, if done just a bit differently. Honestly, I'm really anxious to see (or imagine) your version. BTW, the comment Bill made about Caveman, refers to a former lister (he'll be back, we all know it g) who really didn't like photos of so called street people at all. He railed against them every time one was posted, and IIRC, the last time he took leave of this list was after a flame war WRT an apparently homeless person. thank you for explanation. I don't fully understand the fate of these people however I feel it's a big failure of our society. :-( Cheers, Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Jens, What is the misery? Die Rundfunk Turm? I've been there many years ago :-) All my photographs came out green, because of the coloured glass in the dome! although it wasn't intended this way your interpretation is quite cool :-) Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Frank, It may not be a good idea to critique a critique of a critique :-) But then again I do think both yours and Cotty's comments are very interesting. I too have a problem with the passersby. I think the wheelchair adds another dimension to the two foremost persons' gaze at the beggar. Therefore, I think the shot would have been a lot better if they were not on the edge of the frame. Jostein - Original Message - From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 2:00 AM Subject: Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 00:12:38 +, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 20/3/05, Peter Lacus, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo. Bedo, half of all photography is not photographing at all. a...n...t..i..c..i...p...a...t..i..o..n Let the passers by do some passing by ;-) Cheers, Cotty I disagree. (sorry to critique a critique, but I know Cotty will take it in the spirit intended g). I think the passersby looking at the unfortunate lady are an important part of the photo. Commenting on the photo in and of itself, my problem with it is that the woman sort of gets lost down there in the corner. I know you wanted to get the majestic statues in there to contrast the old lady, but I think in doing that she sort of gets lost. I was going to say, if I were taking the photo... and then give some advice, but I'm not taking the photo, and really, to be fair, I should only comment on what's being presented. vbg So, I think that the photo as is, is still a good one; it's a good idea, to be sure. But I think it ~could~ be a lot stronger, if done just a bit differently. BTW, the comment Bill made about Caveman, refers to a former lister (he'll be back, we all know it g) who really didn't like photos of so called street people at all. He railed against them every time one was posted, and IIRC, the last time he took leave of this list was after a flame war WRT an apparently homeless person. That being said, I think you handled the sticky issue of photographing the less fortunate well, here. We can't see her face, and you really are trying to make a statement here, not just exploit her, IMHO. I think it's a sensitive photo. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Hi Bedo this picture does not really match my taste but I like the details on the sculptures and the shadows of the group. Is there a chance of having the man on the right and the stick of the woman uncutted on the negative? This Fuji Sensia looks like a fine film too. greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Peter Lacus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 12:18 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Markus, this picture does not really match my taste but I like the details on the sculptures and the shadows of the group. Is there a chance of having the man on the right and the stick of the woman uncutted on the negative? I just checked the original slide and no, unfortunately it's already cut on it. :-( This Fuji Sensia looks like a fine film too. indeed it is, but with one minor complaint - it could be too bluish sometimes, so I would recommend to use Skylight or Cloudy filter when there's a chance to catch deep shadows on it. Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:05:05 +0100, Peter Lacus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank, you are hereby allowed to modify this picture in any way you like. :-) I really am not very good at editing the work of others. Some here on this list are good at cropping or otherwise re-working any photograph; I have enough difficulty doing that stuff with my own work! LOL Honestly, I'm really anxious to see (or imagine) your version. Well, I think that maybe I was being unfair to Cotty with my comment earlier. I think that what I should have said is that I would have chosen between the juxtaposition between beggar-lady and majestic statues or the juxtaposition between beggar-lady and disinterested passersby. There are two reasons for that. First, physically, it's hard to get both the statues way above her, and the passersby in the same frame. Whichever I would have chosen, I think I'd have gone with a wider lens, to get close to the lady while still allowing the other elements to be in the frame. I think that might have had more impact. Now, you might well say, but I wanted both the statues and the passersby in there - that was my vision, or what I was trying to communicate. And, that's fair enough. But my thinking WRT street photography or reportage or whatever one wishes to call it is that simpler is better. If one wants to make a point, do it with as few elements as possible. There's enough room for interpretation and mis-communication with very simple scenarios. I often (but not always) try to isolate my subject by making them dominate the frame, or, lately, by narrow dof, or by panning (not applicable here) or whatever. But for me the less ambiguity (from a compositional point of view) the better. That doesn't mean that there can't be ambiguity or tension in the subject(s) themselves: far from it. Such ambiguity or tension makes the viewer think, and that's good. Keep in mind that this is only how I would have done it, or how I think when I'm doing it. I only mention this since you asked. And, I'm not saying I'm right or more right than anyone else. Far from it. vbg cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
frank theriault wrote: snip snip ... BTW, the comment Bill made about Caveman, refers to a former lister (he'll be back, we all know it g) who really didn't like photos of so called street people at all. He railed against them every time one was posted, and IIRC, the last time he took leave of this list was after a flame war WRT an apparently homeless person. That being said, I think you handled the sticky issue of photographing the less fortunate well, here. We can't see her face, and you really are trying to make a statement here, not just exploit her, IMHO. I think it's a sensitive photo. cheers, frank -- Bedo, I agree with Frank about the placement of the woman and your not disrespecting her because we can't see her face... but I find the full color of this shot distracting. I think it begs for black and white. (oh dear, that pun really was unintended!) annsan
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
So, not showing someone's face = non exploitive photo. Are you saying that when you show someone's face you're exploiting them? Shel [Original Message] From: Ann Sanfedele Bedo, I agree with Frank about the placement of the woman and your not disrespecting her because we can't see her face...
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
I don't buy that. I tend to feel that showing their face is more honest in some ways. At least you're not trying to catch them when they're not looking. I've found that very few homeless people object to having their picture taken, although I would never shoot someone just because they're homeless. But when I find something of interest, Like you, I sometimes engage the person first. If I do go for a candid, and they object, I simply delete it and apologize. Paul On Mar 20, 2005, at 11:13 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: So, not showing someone's face = non exploitive photo. Are you saying that when you show someone's face you're exploiting them? Shel [Original Message] From: Ann Sanfedele Bedo, I agree with Frank about the placement of the woman and your not disrespecting her because we can't see her face...
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
I have to disagree with Cotty (a few posts back) too. I think the contrast between the person in the forground, and the person in the the wheelchair is profound. It shows the difference is really between having family and friends, and not, rather than the physical disability. The grand monuments in the background show what is important to the government (not people). This is not an exploitive photo, but a statement about our instututions in the current world. I would however have preferred that the guy in the wheelchair was not quite so close to the edge of the frame. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Peter Lacus wrote: http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ I don't fully understand the fate of these people however I feel it's a big failure of our society. :-( -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.4 - Release Date: 3/18/2005
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
For me, the placement of the people at the right part of the frame is correct; they appear to feel pity and revulsion for the old woman and are trying to pass as far away as possible, almost moving out of the picture, although their shadows will pass over her, which is all the interaction they're comfortable with. It would look tidier if they were completely within the frame, but it would lose the effective visual and emotional tension that appears to me. A good shot. Pat White
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 19/3/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo. Bedo, half of all photography is not photographing at all. a...n...t..i..c..i...p...a...t..i..o..n Let the passers by do some passing by ;-) Cheers, Cotty I disagree. (sorry to critique a critique, but I know Cotty will take it in the spirit intended g). I think the passersby looking at the unfortunate lady are an important part of the photo. I didn't make myself clear enough. My intention was that the passers by should have been more prominent, more into the frame. Where they are is neither here nor there. Waiting a few more seconds would have placed the wheelchair user between the bridge parapets and IMO made the shot more interesting. That is what I mean by anticipation. Or indeed to wait until they are gone, if that is the photographer's intention. So when I wrote 'let the passers-by do some passing by' I meant that they could be photographed in the act of 'passing by'. Hope this helps. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 20/3/05, Jostein, discombobulated, unleashed: I too have a problem with the passersby. I think the wheelchair adds another dimension to the two foremost persons' gaze at the beggar. Therefore, I think the shot would have been a lot better if they were not on the edge of the frame. and hence my advice about a...n...t..i..c..i...p...a...t..i..o..n look at the whole frame - know what has happened in the last few seconds, what is happening, what will be happening in the next few seconds. If the shot as it is http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ is cropped, can it be loosened up a bit to include more of the people at right? If not, personally i would lose them altogether. .02 :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 20/3/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: Well, I think that maybe I was being unfair to Cotty with my comment No you weren't Frank. I was not clear in my post. You are hereby fully exonerated! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:42:04PM +0100, Jostein wrote: Frank, It may not be a good idea to critique a critique of a critique :-) But then again I do think both yours and Cotty's comments are very interesting. I too have a problem with the passersby. I think the wheelchair adds another dimension to the two foremost persons' gaze at the beggar. Therefore, I think the shot would have been a lot better if they were not on the edge of the frame. That's what I felt. I couldn't uinderstand why anyone would want to crop out this group - the comparison between the person on the street and the person in the wheelchair is fascinating.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:38:59 +, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No you weren't Frank. I was not clear in my post. You are hereby fully exonerated! Cotty, Why are you being so nice to me all of a sudden? I'm suspicious... LOL -frank (not paranoid at all!) -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:34:24 +, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't make myself clear enough. My intention was that the passers by should have been more prominent, more into the frame. Where they are is neither here nor there. Waiting a few more seconds would have placed the wheelchair user between the bridge parapets and IMO made the shot more interesting. That is what I mean by anticipation. Or indeed to wait until they are gone, if that is the photographer's intention. So when I wrote 'let the passers-by do some passing by' I meant that they could be photographed in the act of 'passing by'. Hope this helps. Cotty, My apologies. I completely misread you. Given what you said here, we are in fact ~ad idem~. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 08:13:04 -0800, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, not showing someone's face = non exploitive photo. Are you saying that when you show someone's face you're exploiting them? Well, even though you responded to Ann's comment, since she referred to mine, I should explain myself. I'll explain by (once again) presenting my personal rules for shooting people who appear less advantaged. There may be no logic to this, they're just my rules. If I show such a so-called street person's face, I usually make certain that I've chatted with them, that they're comfortable with me as a person, that they're comfortable with my camera, and that they know I'm taking a photo and that they're okay with that. An example is my buddy Ricky the Soap Angel Carver (who I haven't seen around before). Or the fellow spelling have a nice Sunday with his pennies. If I'm shooting someone who I believe to be significantly disadvantaged on the sly, I prefer not to show their face (if possible - sometimes it's not possible). So, in Bedo's case, were I shooting, I'd likely not want her face in there, because I have no reason to believe that they in any way consent to being photographed. Sometimes, if an image is powerful enough, and I think it important enough for me to capture, I'll show a face, if I don't have time to chat before the moment is lost forever. It's all a balancing act, I guess. Split-second decisions must sometimes be made, and I don't suppose that I make the right decision in every case. Now, I'll surreptitiously photograph people who appear to not be disadvantaged, from time to time. I don't know why I'm comfortable doing that. Maybe it's because I figure that the homeless have been exploited enough, and should be shown extra dignity due to their situation. I know that doesn't make sense, but at this point, I can't really articulate it much better than that. I certainly ~don't~ take the position, however, that everytime a so-called street person has his face photographed that it's exploitation. Just that I feel I have to especially careful when photographing them. Hope this clears things up a bit. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 20/3/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: Given what you said here, we are in fact ~ad idem~. touche ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Hi Frank I understand your rules well but for me, one important thing is missing: --- You not only take a photograph, you publish it later by showing it at least here. -- That is, of course not a problem for me, because otherwise I would not see all the nice people PESO's here, but it is a different thing according to the law and would maybe make a difference to peoples decision to let you take a photo of them or just to find it okay. What do you think? greetings Markus If I show such a so-called street person's face, I usually make certain that I've chatted with them, that they're comfortable with me as a person, that they're comfortable with my camera, and that they know I'm taking a photo and that they're okay with that.
RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 21 Mar 2005 at 0:17, Markus Maurer wrote: --- You not only take a photograph, you publish it later by showing it at least here. -- The concept of publishing via web display seems to be a legally gray area at the moment especially given that it's a medium without boarders so disputants are often governed by differing laws. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 00:17:58 +0100, Markus Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Frank I understand your rules well but for me, one important thing is missing: --- You not only take a photograph, you publish it later by showing it at least here. -- That is, of course not a problem for me, because otherwise I would not see all the nice people PESO's here, but it is a different thing according to the law and would maybe make a difference to peoples decision to let you take a photo of them or just to find it okay. What do you think? greetings Markus AFAIK, the laws WRT publishing photos of people are different in continental Europe than they are in the Common Law countries (meaning basically Britain, the US, and most if not all of the British Commonwealth countries). In Canada (with the possible exception of the Province of Quebec) if one is in public, with no reasonable expectation of privacy, I can take your photo, and publish it. I can't use it for commercial purposes (ie: to endorse or sell a product), but I can certainly sell such photos if anyone would buy them LOL). I know with the anti-paparazzi laws that are being proposed in some places, that may change, but we have no such laws here, so I can take and publish photos of people in public any time I want to. Who I photo, and when I show them is my decision. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
- Original Message - From: Peter Lacus Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Good thing Caveboy seems to have left the list William Robb
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
William Robb wrote: Good thing Caveboy seems to have left the list May I ask you why, William? Seems I don't getting the picture once again. :-( Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
Nice shot, well composed. It presents an interesting juxtaposition. Placing the figure in the lower left underscores the concept. Good work. Paul On Mar 19, 2005, at 6:17 PM, Peter Lacus wrote: http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo.
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
You had to be there... Peter Lacus wrote: William Robb wrote: Good thing Caveboy seems to have left the list May I ask you why, William? Seems I don't getting the picture once again. :-( Bedo. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On 20/3/05, Peter Lacus, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo. Bedo, half of all photography is not photographing at all. a...n...t..i..c..i...p...a...t..i..o..n Let the passers by do some passing by ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 00:12:38 +, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 20/3/05, Peter Lacus, discombobulated, unleashed: http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo. Bedo, half of all photography is not photographing at all. a...n...t..i..c..i...p...a...t..i..o..n Let the passers by do some passing by ;-) Cheers, Cotty I disagree. (sorry to critique a critique, but I know Cotty will take it in the spirit intended g). I think the passersby looking at the unfortunate lady are an important part of the photo. Commenting on the photo in and of itself, my problem with it is that the woman sort of gets lost down there in the corner. I know you wanted to get the majestic statues in there to contrast the old lady, but I think in doing that she sort of gets lost. I was going to say, if I were taking the photo... and then give some advice, but I'm not taking the photo, and really, to be fair, I should only comment on what's being presented. vbg So, I think that the photo as is, is still a good one; it's a good idea, to be sure. But I think it ~could~ be a lot stronger, if done just a bit differently. BTW, the comment Bill made about Caveman, refers to a former lister (he'll be back, we all know it g) who really didn't like photos of so called street people at all. He railed against them every time one was posted, and IIRC, the last time he took leave of this list was after a flame war WRT an apparently homeless person. That being said, I think you handled the sticky issue of photographing the less fortunate well, here. We can't see her face, and you really are trying to make a statement here, not just exploit her, IMHO. I think it's a sensitive photo. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin
What is the misery? Die Rundfunk Turm? I've been there many years ago :-) All my photographs came out green, because of the coloured glass in the dome! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Peter Lacus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 20. marts 2005 00:18 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: PESO: The splendour and the misery of Berlin http://www.misenet.sk/Berlin/ Bedo.
