so annoying

You only need the one piece of information to judge here and that is all in the paragraph wearning people about a photographer.
 
Skiver said:
I guess because i have never been in a situation like this I can never truly relate to how it feels whereas it seem most of you have. I think I am guilty of trying to look for the good in some people when it may not be there.
Click to expand...

nothing wrong with looking for the best in people but I think in this case
the person concerned (woman posting on facebook) isnt worth the effort:)
 
Skiver said:
When you miss-quote me like that it would...
Click to expand...

Where are the quotation marks? :shrug:

We all know not everyone's an expert in getting their views across in writing but what you've said seems pretty clear to me, in fact had you not said you have problems in articulating your points when writing I'd never have even guessed.

Personally I'm not judging her on her profile, I'm judging her on that one single status and that's all I need to form a judgement because nothing else she could have written would change how I feel about that particular post.
 
Skiver said:
Then that is fair enough - but would you also say that someone who does should just sit there and deal with it? There is no right or wrong here in my opinion. Regardless it should be dealt with WITHOUT accusations.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with politely striking up a conversation and asking the photographer what he's taking photographs of, without making him feel like he's doing something he shouldn't?
 
PMN said:
I'd say if you went through his Facebook posts and found something as ridiculously stupid as this woman's posted then you'd have every right to judge him.

What the hell happened to people accepting responsibility for the things they do in life? Whenever I post anything anywhere on the Internet I'm representing myself and occasionally other people or organisations I'm associated with, if I say something stupid that reflects badly on myself or others then I expect to have to deal with the consequences. It's that simple.

I'm utterly sick and tired of people being able to do whatever the hell they want and some people will just say, ahh well, you know, it's alright because we don't know the full circumstances. We don't need to know the full circumstances, she made a stupid, narrow minded and potentially very damaging post. We don't need to know any more to form a judgement.

What about the poor photographer who potentially had to deal with being questioned by the police? What about the consequences for him had this stupid bint somehow managed to do some real damage to him, his reputation, his work, his relationships with others, etc? Why have you conveniently chosen to ignore his perspective in this whole thing?
Click to expand...

I guess the difference here is I saw her post slightly differently. trying to look past the irrational rant for what could be true concern. I think I have highlighted quite well that having an opinion on something and not being able to explain it properly in a single post can make you look pretty stupid.

I didn't mean to count the photographer out, and ignore his side of this but unfortunately we don't have it so I was more trying to look at it from hers and maybe (even wrongly) try to suggest that there may be more to the story than we know.

Please understand that I am really not trying to say any of you are wrong - I understand and agree with a lot of what is being said, especially the post I am quoting now. Like I said, I may be looking for the good in someone that may not be there.

LCPete said:
nothing wrong with looking for the best in people but I think in this case
the person concerned (woman posting on facebook) isnt worth the effort:)
Click to expand...

Probably true!

PMN said:
Where are the quotation marks? :shrug:

We all know not everyone's an expert in getting their views across in writing but what you've said seems pretty clear to me, in fact had you not said you have problems in articulating your points when writing I'd never have even guessed.
Click to expand...

You quote me in my reply, like I am doing here.

Just out of curiosity, what exactly are you saying is clear?

Rob L said:
What's wrong with politely striking up a conversation and asking the photographer what he's taking photographs of, without making him feel like he's doing something he shouldn't?
Click to expand...

I think I tried to say that at some stage, but could you not perhaps see that if you were to try and politely talk to someone and in reply all they did was hand you a piece of paper it may come across as a little rude? The piece of paper in itself could be the thing that tipped her opinion over. I am purely speculating here I know.
 
Last edited:
It's a little strange that the P**** word is thrown so easily when photography has probably never been so popular. We even have adverts for compacts, Compact System Cameras and even DSLR's on prime time TV with attractive people using cameras in exotic locations and whilst doing adventure sports and other exciting things... yet particularly a man by himself with a camera is a P****.

This is why I never attempt "street" or even use my camera if women or children are about.

I've only ever had one positive experience involving other people when out with my camera and that was when an aviation tog spotted me and wanted to know what I was shooting and what with. Usually when I'm a bit slow to put my camera away all I get from women (of a certain age...) is the shocked "he's a P****" look.
 
Skiver said:
Like I said, I may be looking for the good in someone that may not be there.
Click to expand...

And believe me that's a quality I greatly admire, there's enough negativity in the world so the more positivity we can have the better. The only thing is, as I say, people have to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no idea whether this woman genuinely is a narrow minded fool in real life or not but actions like hers can have hugely damaging and lasting effects on completely innocent people, and in such cases I very much side with the innocent party.

There's a great little line in the film The Social Network that says "the Internet's not written in pencil, it's written in ink". So, so true.

Skiver said:
Just out of curiosity, what exactly are you saying is clear?
Click to expand...

That you're trying to provide an alternative view and maybe pre-judging this woman is perhaps not right. At least that's what seemed you were saying to me? :shrug:

I think we're kinda starting to go round in circles a bit with this now, maybe we should all go off and edit a few photos or something? :LOL:
 
Last edited:
PMN said:
I have no idea whether this woman genuinely is a narrow minded fool in real life or not but actions like hers can have hugely damaging and lasting effects on completely innocent people, and in such cases I very much side with the innocent party.
Click to expand...

It'd be interesting to know what pictures she has on her mobile phone. I'd be happy to guess that some could be... questionable... in the opinion of someone.... somewhere...
 
PMN said:
And believe me that's a quality I greatly admire, there's enough negativity in the world so the more positivity we can have the better. The only thing is, as I say, people have to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no idea whether this woman genuinely is a narrow minded fool in real life or not but actions like hers can have hugely damaging and lasting effects on completely innocent people, and in such cases I very much side with the innocent party.

There's a great little line in the film The Social Network that says "the Internet's not written in pencil, it's written in ink". So, so true.



That you're trying to provide an alternative view and maybe pre-judging this woman is perhaps not right. At least that's what seemed you were saying to me? :shrug:

I think we're kinda starting to go round in circles a bit with this now, maybe we should all go off and edit a few photos or something? :LOL:
Click to expand...

One of my favorite movies, I know exactly what you mean.

That was my point, just wanted to make sure my random rants were actually understood!

agreed - I don't post here often and quite an amateur so don't often get to share an opinion so I may have gotten a little carried away.:wacky:
 
Skiver said:
That was my point, just wanted to make sure my random rants were actually understood!

agreed - I don't post here often and quite an amateur so don't often get to share an opinion so I may have gotten a little carried away.:wacky:
Click to expand...

Yep they were understood, and there's no need to explain. Forums would be pretty dull places without an occasional animated discussion! :)
 
I tend not to hang arround in parks and very public places as usually all the god awfull fugly kids and there scraggy mothers scare all the nice stuff away :LOL:
 
These are the sort of people who attacked a doctor's office a few years ago because it had a brass sign with the word Paediatrician on the wall!


Steve.
 
I think if the original post wasn't enough to mark her card as a self obsessed ignorant bimbo, the fact that she has deleted all posts that don't agree with her narrow vview of the situation should.

After all, if she thought she had genuine concerns, having an opportunity to voice them with other photographers or supporters of the photographer would be a welcome outcome. Perhaps we could all learn from her and next time the situation would be drama free.

Instead, she buries herself into her paranoid world and steels herself to go find some more perverts to confront.
 
I found the irony in the posts right next to it, encouraging people to share their images of Sheffield past and present, there's loads of random street shots including people:razz:.
 
OK maybe completely controversial, but a few of the Norfolk Mafia have had discussions over similar.

In scenarios given above... or actually lets make one up...

Keen amateur tog dad takes his 8 yr daughter to the park and takes pics of her on slides / swings etc... for the family album / 18th birthday embarrassment....

In doing so, he accidentally captures another fully clothed child in any given shot...

What possible harm has come to that child as an event of him photographing his daughter (other than the remote remote risk of some estranged parent knew somehow found out his kid was at x y weeks ago... and that assumption is loaded up to facebook / whatever with a full public access...
 
I can see what Skiver is getting at actually.
As for not taking kids photos 'cos he/she has a 'big DSLR'.... well it could be classed as double bluffing. Also don't forget..everyones not into photography and don't understand macro etc.
JohnyT
 
Mr Bump said:
I tend not to hang arround in parks and very public places as usually all the god awfull fugly kids and there scraggy mothers scare all the nice stuff away :LOL:
Click to expand...

:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::clap:
The ignorant inbreds make so much noise that mother nature just shuts up shop for the day;)
 
Phil V said:
I was holding back. You don't want to know how I really feel :bat:.
Click to expand...

Go for it Phil, it could add years to your life - feel that relief, the blood coursing through your veins, as you do the - FULL VICTOR MELDREW:D
 
To be fair though, it is a bit weird when a guy is hanging around children's areas with a huge DSLR.
 
Steve Smith said:
She might have deleted comments on her own page but I think they are all there on the page which shared her original post.

EDIT:

Here - https://www.facebook.com/sheffieldborn?fref=ts


Steve.
Click to expand...

Nice one Steve, it seems that the "ordinary" folks have taken over the replies. If this was the middle ages, then I would hope that the stupid woman would get a few goes on the ducking stool in the local river.
 
London Headshots said:
To be fair though, it is a bit weird when a guy is hanging around children's areas with a huge DSLR.
Click to expand...

Are you serious, because I cannot see any "smilies". I go to a local country park with a DSLR and long lens, where there are plenty of children present, but have never managed to get any of the little brats (thank goodness) in shot, because I am more interested in the aesthetic aspect of life.
 
Just said it's a bit weird. Unfortunately, I cannot change the way I feel just because you happen to see things differently.

'weird' doesn't mean wrong, but I can see how, to a naive individual, a man with a gigantic DSLR would look suspicious.

Even as a working photographer myself, when I see guys with DSLR's around children, I always pause for a longer look. There's just something that strikes me in the core about it. Something about it *feels* wrong.

Even though I know it isn't.
 
About four years ago i was asked to photograph a local football match at a local park. The pitch was in the middle of a 400m running track which was itself surrounded by a 1.5m chain link fence. Half way through the 1st half a bloke came and stood in front of me between me and the touchline. when i asked him to move he ranted that he was preventing me taking photos of his two children who he pointed out were playing on a grass bank about 30m the other side of the pitch. The only way i could calm the chap down was to get the Manager and Chairman of the football club to explain to the idiot that they were employing me to do a job.

He didn't take kindly to my pointing out that he might be better employed looking after his kids who had now moved further away towards the river that runs down one side of the park.
 
London Headshots said:
Just said it's a bit weird. Unfortunately, I cannot change the way I feel just because you happen to see things differently.

'weird' doesn't mean wrong, but I can see how, to a naive individual, a man with a gigantic DSLR would look suspicious.

Even as a working photographer myself, when I see guys with DSLR's around children, I always pause for a longer look. There's just something that strikes me in the core about it. Something about it *feels* wrong.

Even though I know it isn't.
Click to expand...

But surely this perceived prejudice of a man using a DSLR is based on the tabloid smear campaigns when an irate patent gets upset about a photographer taking pics of flowers in a park where there also happen to be children playing?

Would it concern you if the photographer was using a camera phone, point and shoot or indeed if the photographer was female but carrying a DSLR ?

It its all to easy to judge a person based on an arbitrary thing e.g. their appearance. However the type of camera they are holding "near" children is no less an arbitrary judgement.

Ultimately such thoughts spread (as in this case) and it ends up being a self perpetuating fear in society that a "man" with a big camera any where near children is up to no good :-(
 
London Headshots said:
I try not to judge, but I can't help it. I think it's pretty human.
Click to expand...

For someone on a photography forum to say they suspect men with DSLRs if children are around is very strange... And sexist.

There are obvious exceptions like hiding in a bush next to a playground whilst sporting sunglasses, a porno tashe and long zoom lens pointed at young children (you get the idea), but to suspect a man with a DSLR near children is quite an offensive comment to me... As a male DSLR owner who likes to take my camera out to the park with my two little kids to capture the moment, I would like to think that people, especially photographers, might think I'm a keen photographer rather than a paedophile.
 
I recently had a woman try and kick my camera over screaming various obscenities including 'pervert' and 'P****' telling me to 'stop photographing her'. At the time my camera was on a tripod pointing almost vertically upward at a statue 20ft above.

It was also about 10.30pm, almost pitch black, not a child around and she actually had to walk out of her way to come and abuse me. I may not have helped matters at that point with my decision to give her an appraisal of her appearance and why it might detract from any desire to record her image.

It doesn't matter where you are or what you're recording anymore, if you have a camera someone will call you a P****. It's endemic of the UK I'm afraid and not going away while we continue to breed a Jeremy Kyle society.

I'm all for compulsory sterilisation of the type in the OP but then I'm told my views are not very palatable lol
 
Ivan S said:
I think maybe he should have taken his daffodil hobby away from the park where there are parents and children playing.

I know in this day and age it's not a wise choice to go to a children's play area where there are children and start snapping away at flowers with a great big camera, different if the tog was with his family with his own children, I wouldn't see that as a problem as I am sure the parents of other toddlers/children wouldn't, but if he was there lurking around bushes with a camera, well he should have a little more sense tbh.
Click to expand...

He could go to the park and run up and down behind the bushes with a Sony F900 on a Stedicam, in his Speedos and smeared with vaseline if he wanted to. He has no more or less right to be there than the mum and her kid.

The moment you let paranoid sociopaths affect how you live your life, you've lost.

London Headshots said:
I try not to judge, but I can't help it. I think it's pretty human.
Click to expand...

I blame Rupert Murdoch.

Interestingly, I noticed far more 'dodgy looks' last time I was home in England for a couple of weeks, than I have in the last six years in Australia. That said, nobody approached me, and they were more likely just interested glances than anything else.

I'm a bloke out on my own shooting on the streets all the time here, even take pictures of children, and I don't remember ever feeling someone was looking at me 'that way'. Maybe that's because I'm not looking for a problem though like some people seem to.
 
Phall82 said:
For someone on a photography forum to say they suspect men with DSLRs if children are around is very strange... And sexist.

There are obvious exceptions like hiding in a bush next to a playground whilst sporting sunglasses, a porno tashe and long zoom lens pointed at young children (you get the idea), but to suspect a man with a DSLR near children is quite an offensive comment to me... As a male DSLR owner who likes to take my camera out to the park with my two little kids to capture the moment, I would like to think that people, especially photographers, might think I'm a keen photographer rather than a paedophile.
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if anyone in the human race wasn't sexist in some way or another. I've noticed the only people who seem to be perfect all post on TalkPhotography.

That being said, it's estimated that male paedophiles outnumber women paedophiles by 10 to 1, so it's not particularly sexist to make a jump that a woman with a camera is ten times less likely, statistically, to be a paedophile than her male counterpart.

You also seem to have brushed over the part where I said I don't believe any of them are paedophiles. You instead chose to take offense. For some inane reason.
 
London Headshots said:
I'd be surprised if anyone in the human race wasn't sexist in some way or another. I've noticed the only people who seem to be perfect all post on TalkPhotography.

That being said, it's estimated that male paedophiles outnumber women paedophiles by 10 to 1, so it's not particularly sexist to make a jump that a woman with a camera is ten times less likely, statistically, to be a paedophile than her male counterpart.

You also seem to have brushed over the part where I said I don't believe any of them are paedophiles. You instead chose to take offense. For some inane reason.
Click to expand...

Hardly inane when you 'feel it's wrong in your core' to see a man with a DSLR near children.

Also if you don't believe any of them are paedophiles then why does it feel wrong and why quote statistics to try and back up that men are a high risk.

You're quite offensive and as someone from an area that has suffered serious paedophile issues in recent years, and in years gone by (Rochdale), I can tell you that the ones that have been charged aren't the ones with DSLRs, they're the ones actually grooming kids, downloading sick images and attacking girls (usually).

So your stats about women with cameras being 10 times less likely to be paedophiles than men with cameras isn't particulalry relevant as the ones I've seen in the news don't generally get caught for using a DSLR in public. The realities are far more serious than that.
 
A side issue not involving kids but a threatening situation.

Was in the car park of a McDonalds in Bristol ans standing by my car.

Got a phone call and held the phone up to answer it. (Galaxy S2). My partner in getting food had called me to say no banana milkshake was chocolate OK? I said sure and hung up. Straight away 3 yoofs and 2 skanky women demanded to know why I was taking their 'piktoors'?

Was taken aback till one demanded my phone to 'delete said photos'. I thought for a second and told them to F... Off.

Things escalated (I am fairly big built) When my man mountain mate Andy came out with my partner and food. He does door security at a few clubs and just sauntered over and asked the group to leave.... while they can.

They took off at speed shouting threads etc...

At that point a police car pulled in and Andy knew them. A quick chat revealed that various agencies take pictures

Benefits Investigators chasing cheats

LA chasing school truants

Border Agency.... chasing illegals

Police themselves re drug dealing etc

So the point here is that it is not just the concerned adults worrying about their kids the innocent photographers have to be aware of but a wider range of scabby individials.

There is a groundswell of lost individuals cheats and chancers out there. A common element is many seem to fit the Kyle show level. Watch one show you've seen them all.

Unfortunately we live in a time where expectations are low and it is easier to get blitzed on cheap alcohol and drugs for many ill educated ill behaved and poorly parented individuals "cascading" those skills generation after generation.

So do I take my "huge DSLR" with me.... everywhere? Mostly.

As for the FB woman...... sad sad sad. I noted she was a manager for Plusnet. Many organisations lump the manager title on multiple hourly rate staff. Keeps the troops happy.

I will never use Facebook but I did get to see her posts via my son's account.

She is a credit to Plusnet!

Mouthy Northern Bird with no brains was a comment from Andy (Leeds Born and Bred) and he went on to say he has removed HER many times from clubs.... I said he was just cynical till he showed me the scar a woman had put in his shoulder with a spike high heeled shoe.

His use of HER means a wide range of women, not all and not FB woman in particular.

What a country we have built.

Keep on togging and remember they walk amongst us...

S
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top