got scolded when doing street shot?

[ManWearPants]

I have almost been run down by a beach buggy deliberately. Good thing the sand below is soft enough for me to pull my leg away just as I can feel the front wheels dragging my feet under. Scared the hell out of me.

I also have been told off so many times that I gave up on shooting strangers in any situation. If you need to include strangers, either make sure they are aware and approve, or they are part of the bokeh/cannot see face/faraway. I think I enjoy photography more after deciding not to take photos of strangers. The people who approach me are more interested in the what I am taking instead of why I take their photo.

 

[sidloojl]

yes.. those self made tasers that you can find on youtube.. made from those disposable small cameras.. carrying it ard wont be much of a suspect for carrying of dangerous weapons.. and situations when the person is scolding u, if u take a real taser out they will run, if they see u take another camera out, they will shout louder at u and moving closer to u wanting to punch/slap u.. there goes ur chance and shock their waist or anywhere

can show us the link to make our own tasers?

 

[Aidorian]

Bah! reading this makes my blood boil... Maybe they afraid our cams can shoot out a heat seeking missile:dunno:

 

[usdream]

I do know that some people will get scolding when they stand on the street w/o looking @ the traffic. But skating place shouldn't be a problem as not endangering anyone. Maybe except when the flash affecting someone while they are skating...

 

[calebk]

yes.. those self made tasers that you can find on youtube.. made from those disposable small cameras.. carrying it ard wont be much of a suspect for carrying of dangerous weapons.. and situations when the person is scolding u, if u take a real taser out they will run, if they see u take another camera out, they will shout louder at u and moving closer to u wanting to punch/slap u.. there goes ur chance and shock their waist or anywhere

I honestly think this is not the best way to handle such a situation. It makes a bad name for ourselves. The whole mantra behind street photography is respecting who/what you are shooting. This is definitely not respectful.

 

[Agent Jx]

I honestly think this is not the best way to handle such a situation. It makes a bad name for ourselves. The whole mantra behind street photography is respecting who/what you are shooting. This is definitely not respectful.

is ok man.. that's just me, i dun represent any groups in shooting, or even so, my real name is not "agent Jx" lols.. so nobody will know..

oh ya.. tasers-making, just go youtube search it, you'll find alot of them.. just some basic modification to the cheapo film cameras.. and there you have it

 

[phazed1]

I think generally if I was in a privately owned place and someone representing the owner (security guard, staff etc) approaches me to keep my camera, I would keep it. Reason is that the place belongs to them. I may be a paying customer, but photography is not part of the service they are providing to me as a customer. Whether they chose to discriminate against DSLRs is their own choice. I know of one hotel which allows both DSLRs and PNS, and you can point anywhere you like without being harassed - condition is that you do not set up a tripod or you will be barred. All this is within the law. However, what I cannot stand is those ultra paranoid people who prevent me from shooting from a public road, walkway, field etc. According to the law, as long as I am not infringing on anyone's privacy (i.e. no lewd shots), or using someone/ someplace for commercial means, such photography is not a crime. Yes, I can stand on a road and take a picture of a pretty girl if I wanted to, or a candid portrait on an angry security guard.

I think that sites like stomp and the whole citizen journalism thing have contributed to the paranoia surrounding photography. Us Singaporeans are already born camera shy, now imagine if fear was added to the equation. I think it would be good for any local lawyers/ seasoned shutterbugs reading this to chip in from a legal perspective so that we may be aware of our rights as hobbyists and professionals. Then in the event that we are confronted, we may at least be able to explain ourselves clearly without the need to escalate things to a more heated level? Just a suggestion, I am truly worn out and numbed by harassment.

 

[devilcup]

pardon me for digging up a old thread.

still a bit upset here even though it's been a month.

brought daughter to Fuji Ice Palace during last June school hols. She skated while i stayed at the sides taking pictures of her with my 50d attached with 70-200 L lens. Happily snapping away for most of the 2 hours until towards the end, one of the staff came over and told me i have to keep my camera or he will confiscate. To be fair, he was rather polite but firm. I reasoned nicely with him that there were a lot of other people there taking pictures with the compact PnS and some with video cam. So what's the difference? He said those PnS are fine. I didn't want to argue with him further since i am already done and was about to pack up anyway. if he had come to me much earlier, i would have kicked up a big fuss

was i wrong? or was i being discriminated just because i am using a non PnC with a long white color lens....making me look like someone from the press/media. i don't recall seeing any signs outside prohibiting taking photos.

pls advise.

then bring a Canon G10 or similar. the effect still the same. and it PNS! wat a stupid reason!!! now the pns camera can be 15mp! and can take clear pic...

 

[bengchiat]

I think generally if I was in a privately owned place and someone representing the owner (security guard, staff etc) approaches me to keep my camera, I would keep it. Reason is that the place belongs to them. I may be a paying customer, but photography is not part of the service they are providing to me as a customer. Whether they chose to discriminate against DSLRs is their own choice. I know of one hotel which allows both DSLRs and PNS, and you can point anywhere you like without being harassed - condition is that you do not set up a tripod or you will be barred. All this is within the law. However, what I cannot stand is those ultra paranoid people who prevent me from shooting from a public road, walkway, field etc. According to the law, as long as I am not infringing on anyone's privacy (i.e. no lewd shots), or using someone/ someplace for commercial means, such photography is not a crime. Yes, I can stand on a road and take a picture of a pretty girl if I wanted to, or a candid portrait on an angry security guard.

I think that sites like stomp and the whole citizen journalism thing have contributed to the paranoia surrounding photography. Us Singaporeans are already born camera shy, now imagine if fear was added to the equation. I think it would be good for any local lawyers/ seasoned shutterbugs reading this to chip in from a legal perspective so that we may be aware of our rights as hobbyists and professionals. Then in the event that we are confronted, we may at least be able to explain ourselves clearly without the need to escalate things to a more heated level? Just a suggestion, I am truly worn out and numbed by harassment.

sounds like a sensible person talking,
unlike some 'die-die i shoot n its non of ur problem as long as i m not breaking the law though i m shooting u' photographers here.

as long as i m in the pic,
i feel as if my privacy is infringed.

ever since this thread,
i hv a little bottle of yellow solution produce by urs truly here,
n if my pic remains in the camera,
little accident will happen :bsmilie:

well, its not illegal too, its accident.
n shits happen to shitty pple.

 

[devilcup]

sounds like a sensible person talking,
unlike some 'die-die i shoot n its non of ur problem as long as i m not breaking the law though i m shooting u' photographers here.

as long as i m in the pic,
i feel as if my privacy is infringed.

ever since this thread,
i hv a little bottle of yellow solution produce by urs truly here,
n if my pic remains in the camera,
little accident will happen :bsmilie:

well, its not illegal too, its accident.
n shits happen to shitty pple.

that i neber bother to take on stranger... i will not noe if they come bash me up wahaha

i will just take object and ppl who allow me to take pic.

this thread remind me to do one thing, take my pns cam along if kana warn to keep my dslr wahhaa

 

[phazed1]

sounds like a sensible person talking,
unlike some 'die-die i shoot n its non of ur problem as long as i m not breaking the law though i m shooting u' photographers here.

as long as i m in the pic,
i feel as if my privacy is infringed.

ever since this thread,
i hv a little bottle of yellow solution produce by urs truly here,
n if my pic remains in the camera,
little accident will happen :bsmilie:

well, its not illegal too, its accident.
n shits happen to shitty pple.

... I did not think that the need for the photographer/ subject relationship was urgently in need of clarification. Accidents are no good for everyone.

 

[calebk]

is ok man.. that's just me, i dun represent any groups in shooting, or even so, my real name is not "agent Jx" lols.. so nobody will know..
...

Whether you like it or not, you still represent a group of people known as photographers. It doesn't matter whether anyone knows your real name or how you look like. If you impress a bad impression on someone, it makes for a bad impression of photographers in general.

Like I said earlier, photography in general, and street photography specifically, is about respect. If you give due respect to the subjects, they will give due respect to you as well. It takes two hands to clap.

If they are hostile to you, you can choose to just walk away or delete the picture. What do you have to lose? Will you lose sleep or money over that one image? Is it worth tasing or hurting that person just for the shot? I think not. Learn to walk away from a hostile scene, or pacify it. No point adding oil to the fire.

...
as long as i m in the pic,
i feel as if my privacy is infringed.

ever since this thread,
i hv a little bottle of yellow solution produce by urs truly here,
n if my pic remains in the camera,
little accident will happen :bsmilie:
...

Another case of choosing not to settle the situation amicably. :thumbsd: We are all civilised beings here (some maybe less civilised than others). Surely we can solve the problem.

I've been confronted by people who asked me why I took photos of them/included them in the frame, and from experience, if you reply nicely, they will be less likely to be hostile towards you.

If they are hostile, try and pacify the situation and explain that it's all just a hobby and you are not shooting for the press or Stomp. If they still do not want to listen, just delete the photo, like I said before. If it's film, tell them that I can't delete as it's film. If they are insistent, you can assure them that the image will never be publicised, and WALK AWAY. Don't start a fight or brawl.

If they continue to harass you, especially physically, you can turn around and inform them that it is very easy to dial 999, and you have not broken any laws but they have. Don't take matters into your own hands. It will just get you into deeper ****.

 

[lsisaxon]

is this olympus super good or sth?

It's more like a digital rangefinder camera that has interchangeable lens. It is basically using the micro four-thirds system which Panasonic and Olympus adapted from the original four-thirds, making things smaller by getting rid of the mirror box. Hence it is not a DSLR compared to the Olympus E-series and Panasonic L-series.

You can think of it as a digital PnS that has capability to change lens, or a DSLR that's on fulltime sensor based liveview. Panasonic's equivalent is the G-series but they are stupid enough to make it look and behave like a small DSLR but using electronic viewfinder. Olympus is smarter to make it look like a traditional rangefinder camera instead.

They both can use Micro Four Thirds lenses directly or use Four Thirds lenses via an adapter. At present, OM lenses can also be mounted via an adapter which in fact opens up the possibility to mount any SLR lenses on it with the right adapter (which I think 3rd party is likely to make) since there is no mirror box present. The sensor used is smaller than DX, so the crop factor is 2x instead of 1.5x.

 

[lsisaxon]

an uncle demanded me to pay him for including him in the photo...

If you shoot digital, delete the image in front of him. Tell his image is not worth that much money.

If you shoot film, agree to pay him, draft a contract, make him agree and sign that he will owe you 5 times more than what you agreed to pay him and publish an apology in the newspaper if the film is developed and turns out that he's not in the picture.

 

[albertsy2]

i know guys using zoom lenses will always take pics of women, but after a while it gets boring right?

 

[aloyyolaaloy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkIWW6vwrvM

just do it :devil:

 

[Agent Jx]

tasering people are very fun for me~ i love to see the pain on their face and cause these Sh*theads to cry.. i prolly wan to break their head too!! :devil: :bsmilie:

 

[Agent Jx]

i know guys using zoom lenses will always take pics of women, but after a while it gets boring right?

nope! :bsmilie: i walk ard with a 500mm lens.. and my fav targets are people

carrying a 500mm as a walking-ard lens.. if you see me on the streets.. u'll know im not shooting scenaries~ hahahas

 

[shutterpeep]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkIWW6vwrvM

just do it :devil:

whoa, in your face! I admire his passion!

 

[Agent Jx]

whoa, in your face! I admire his passion!

well.. to be a magnum, it's always those shots that nobody does normally.. and he 's got balls! but the culture of the people over there are open.. as compared to singapore, u do this, they will argue with you.. lols..