Beginner I realise I'll get flamed for wanting to aquire yet another camera but...

Bobsyeruncle said:
Try taking photos in a shopping centre and see what happens....
Click to expand...
I did that at Christmas time but only of the decorations and a sort of grotto thingy. I used my mobile which is out of the ark and awful but I got some pictures to show people what it was like and no one hassled me. I wouldn't have used a large camera though. I've also recently taken pictures outside Tesco and inside a fish and chip shop and no one batted an eye but again not with a large camera. One thing I think is true for me is that people take less notice if I'm with someone, I think there could well be a different reaction to a lone man with a camera, I think that would attract more negative attention in public places.

In the past I've had the usual P**** comments and the more puzzling "Are you from the council?"
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I did that at Christmas time but only of the decorations and a sort of grotto thingy. I used my mobile which is out of the ark and awful but I got some pictures to show people what it was like and no one hassled me. I wouldn't have used a large camera though. I've also recently taken pictures outside Tesco and inside a fish and chip shop and no one batted an eye but again not with a large camera. One thing I think is true for me is that people take less notice if I'm with someone, I think there could well be a different reaction to a lone man with a camera, I think that would attract more negative attention in public places.

In the past I've had the usual P**** comments and the more puzzling "Are you from the council?"
Click to expand...
Yea I agree I wouldn't have any concerns taking photos of people or things if I was with my fiancé, but alone I feel much more self-conscious about how I might appear. Weird!
 
tijuana taxi said:
Realise even more so now just how unpleasant those sorts of comments are.
Daresay some people still think its ok, thankfully not that many these days.
Click to expand...
I read those comments and I'd consider them close to the wind or if being harsh beyond acceptable but I took them to relate to characters and storylines not actresses. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that a level of benefit of doubt or leeway could be allowed given the personal issues some have. ymmv and I may not have seen or picked up on some other comments or what some could infer. Generally I'm not a fan of banning but I do appreciate that someone causing mayhem or upset may need to be controlled. Somehow.

Contrast that imo questionable or bad taste or not scenario and possibly issue related behaviour with what I find more objectionable on forums, that there can at times be a number of people with similar political or issue related views who persist and needlessly introduce their arguably toxic and divisive politics and views in thread after thread. I'd be happier with that being rooted out than focusing on what could if we're being kinder be seen as more behavioural issues than deliberate intended sexism or offence. There are imo more obvious instances of insulting and belittling posts, and those who post them and those who like them.
 
Andy Into The Wild said:
Yea I agree I wouldn't have any concerns taking photos of people or things if I was with my fiancé, but alone I feel much more self-conscious about how I might appear. Weird!
Click to expand...
I think having a female there helps. I've seen women physically tense up when seeing me with a camera and then visibly relax when Mrs WW appears. Just my humble opinion but I think this is the lone wierd man with a camera effect.
 
woof woof said:
a number of people with similar political or issue related views who persist and needlessly introduce their arguably toxic and divisive politics and views in thread after thread.
Click to expand...
That's why HT was invented, so "they" can spout and that it all stays in one place,
rather than being spread around the other forums.
 
seadog99 said:
They can be public places, if they happen to have conditions of entry that limit photographic activity, that’s a different matter.
Click to expand...
But, if you reflect on that, you will see that if they have the power to perming or deny photography, that indicates it’s not a public place :(,
 
seadog99 said:
They can be public places, if they happen to have conditions of entry that limit photographic activity, that’s a different matter.
Click to expand...
No they can't ... they are either privately owned or have permanent or temporary ticketed or other restricted entry which may have conditions of entry e.g. 'No Photographs', 'Licence required for photography', 'No food or drinks' etc etc. Even some areas of what appear to be public pavement may in fact be owned privately and be subject to restrictions/prohibitions.
 
I remember being asked by the warden of a local N/R to take some photos for there visitor centre many years ago . Some silly woman then reported me to her as I was lurking around with a long lens camera .think she got short shrift from the warden
 
sphexx said:
But, if you reflect on that, you will see that if they have the power to perming or deny photography, that indicates it’s not a public place :(,
Click to expand...
It remains a public place during opening hours whether you are allowed photography or not. There is no specific legislation that determines what or what not is a public place for photography.

The only legislation that determines a "Public place" I mentioned earlier. If it wasn't a public place you couldn't commit certain public order offences that may/may not include the use of photography equipment when asked not to,

In short, the definition of a "Public place" has nothing at all to do with photography.
 
seadog99 said:
It remains a public place during opening hours whether you are allowed photography or not. There is no specific legislation that determines what or what not is a public place for photography.

The only legislation that determines a "Public place" I mentioned earlier. If it wasn't a public place you couldn't commit certain public order offences that may/may not include the use of photography equipment when asked not to,

In short, the definition of a "Public place" has nothing at all to do with photography.
Click to expand...
A privately owned place when open to the public always has the opportunity to create conditions of entry or change them at will.
In that respect, it is very different to an actual public place.

And there are legal differences in the HRA, insofar as where you can have an expectation of privacy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top