No pictures please

who said anything about you taking your shirt off for yrma:smt104that would be for lippy and the rest of the lovely ladies of the forum...we are going through withdrawl pecs

 

im retired like Mike...


no one follows up in real-time with their lust for dick, and im tired of being teased

 

there are a few ladies following up on their lust for dick:smt005don't give up...

 

The Few, The Proud, the Dicklusters

sorry, I had to write that

 

while you may not be required to get permission to photograph people or their shoes, professionally, I think protocal would be that you would. like i said, i would be slightly creeped if I saw a random person taking pictures of people's feet. however, if said person said it was in persuit of art, and asked, I would say shoot away

 

Actually, you are mistaken...Photography can be limited in public places such as museums and other tourist attractions, where signs are posted prohibiting photography. Photography can and has been prohibited in train stations and hospitals, though access isn't monitored in those facilities.

The standard that you have cited for invasion of privacy, a reasonable expectation of privacy is correct. However, that doesn't prevent someone from bringing suit for defamation, or false light as it may be known in other jurisdiction.

The example that you provided is not representative of this tort. However, if you photograph people sitting on a bench in a public park and publish that picture and allude to sexual predators hanging out in parks, then those people could bring suit for placing them in a false light or defamation. You have not lied, but you have mislead a person seeing the photo that the person in question is a sexual predator. A similar example might be a person photographed in front of an topless bar with a caption that read, "Local men frequent topless bars looking for Sex".

 

Hey lets get back to me not being about to keep a woman. I like that. Please continue further, I like the direction this is going.

he he he he tarnish the name if the U.S. military. BWWAAAH AHA HA HA Shit, with people like you in uniform we have nothing to worry about.

...wait..

...hold up.

...you aren't in uniform.

Shut the fuck.

 

You would be wrong sis.

 

Actually every place you mentioned public access is monitored or limited. Those of us who shoot know that there are places where photography is prohibited. In these cases it must be expressed, (posted)..

I believe the standard applies here as wall. You said "show in an unfavorable light". If the person again is doing something, hmmm......unfavorable, and I take their image, they can not then turn around and suggest that I showed them in an unfavorable light. Their actions are their actions.

This is going away from just an image. If I take an image of the people sitting on a park bench and post it. Nada.....but if I take an image of the people sitting on a park bench, post it......and then add text, commentary, or interpretation....this is a bit more than simply taking an image. And now we are going into the realm of "...but what if"

Again we are not talking about just a photograph.

Good info though.

THE TEN LEGAL COMMANDMENTS OF PHOTOGRAPHY​

I. Anyone in a public place can take pictures of anything they want. Public places include parks, sidewalks, malls, etc. Malls? Yeah. Even though it’s technically private property, being open to the public makes it public space.

II. If you are on public property, you can take pictures of private property. If a building, for example, is visible from the sidewalk, it’s fair game.

III. If you are on private property and are asked not to take pictures, you are obligated to honor that request. This includes posted signs.

IV. Sensitive government buildings (military bases, nuclear facilities) can prohibit photography if it is deemed a threat to national security.

V. People can be photographed if they are in public (without their consent) unless they have secluded themselves and can expect a reasonable degree of privacy. Kids swimming in a fountain? Okay. Somebody entering their PIN at the ATM? Not okay.

VI. The following can almost always be photographed from public places, despite popular opinion:

accident & fire scenes, criminal activities
bridges & other infrastructure, transportation facilities (i.e. airports)
industrial facilities, Superfund sites
public utilities, residential & commercial buildings
children, celebrities, law enforcement officers
UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster, Chuck Norris

VII. Although “security” is often given as the reason somebody doesn’t want you to take photos, it’s rarely valid. Taking a photo of a publicly visible subject does not constitute terrorism, nor does it infringe on a company’s trade secrets.

VIII. If you are challenged, you do not have to explain why you are taking pictures, nor to you have to disclose your identity (except in some cases when questioned by a law enforcement officer.)

IX. Private parties have very limited rights to detain you against your will, and can be subject to legal action if they harass you.

X. If someone tries to confiscate your camera and/or film, you don’t have to give it to them. If they take it by force or threaten you, they can be liable for things like theft and coercion. Even law enforcement officers need a court order.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------​

now these are just basic, so please don't "what if me to death", and N.A.P. suggest that the photographer find out the laws of the local area. For example in D.C. In the subway you can take photos EXCEPT at teh Pentagon station.....if they even see a camera you are asking to get stopped, (trust me on this one)....and its very very clear that cameras are not allowed.

On and on and on......but I don't think this was conversation about photography, but rather "Ymra...you are wrong"

In this case
In the situation I presented
In the conversation I posted

...I was right.

All "What ifs", grand father, Marines, and U.S. Army Soldiers not withstanding

 

Okay, so I might be wrong, but I feel asking is a polite thing to do. What would you have done if one of the people who you photographed asked that you delete their picture?

 

It depends on HOW they asked. I've done this a lot. "Excuse me I really don't want my picture taken, would you mind deleting" too easy...its gone (UNLESS) it was a shot that I really wanted and 99% of the time I'm just shooting to shoot.

 

No Bosox, you're 100% right. Don't mind Ymra.

We've got your back, DB. You're totally right!

 

yes and no

It starts to get into specifics here..and each jurisdiction has its own laws.

Just taking a photo of someone in public just for viewing image, or posting for non-commercial showing does not automatically create legal exposure for the photographer.

If I am going to "POST" work for non-commercial use. No exposure. If I am going to "PUBLISH" work in my magazine, I make sure that I have releases....

 

Beside you doing a lil ass kissing..............what makes you think she is right? So if I am as Union Station (as I was) and I'm taking image of hundreds and hundred of people (as I was). Your experience is that I should ask each individual person if I am able to take their picture?

So I can be polite?

Dude.........stop man. You may not know this, but no matter what you do....the ass kissing, brown nosing. Its not going to get you any pussy.

Now lets say a question came up about hmm...."cross country" If I didn't know anything about cross country running (which I do), I'm not going to pop my nose in an backup someone. I'm going to defer to those who know more

...this would be you. (I doubt it but ok)

....I guess what I'm saying young brutha is, sit the hell down. She can't be 100% right and at the same time be 100% wrong. However, in your long photography experience if you have any further to add...shoot.


"no pun intended"

 

Examine the photos that I've snapped, Ymra. No one has complained about them. The cop thought that taking photos of people's feet was socially awkward.

http://www.whitewomenblackmen.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15984&page=10

 

You are going to make a point any second..........any second now I'm sure of it! I'm just going sit here and wait.

*da da do doo la la la la*


























damn...no point made. Oh well.

You said she was 100% correct. I asked HOW SO? And you post pictures you took. I'm not sure I understand the connection.

(btw...none of those images where yours.....unless you went by a different name)

 

That is professional then

 

This day I was approached twice by police officer. One came up, respectful....and I moved. I don't want to hassle the guy while he's doing his job. But I won't be told "you can't do that just because I said so" And I will make then eat it.

I supposed I should just stand are parad rest

"Yes sir...move sir....roger sir"

Like some fucking private. ha ha ah ha

nahhh...

 

I don't blame you there. Gauging your personality however, I am surprised that you have chosen the military as a career. I spent 6 years in the reserves to pay for my education and could not do it as a career due to the scenario you cited. One of the reasons that I chose to be a teacher is to make people aware of their rights, especially immigrants, as they are seriuosly taken advantage of.

 

1] explain the bolded

2] wow....A TEACHER! MANNNNNNNNNNNNNNN my next life I want to be a teacher (real talk). I have always wanted to be a teacher. Right now I'm picking up another undegrad degree (business) my 1st is a history degree. That will take me lil less than three years.....and two to finish my teacher certification.

Right now I'm an instructor for the Army, and and Sub twice a month. I love it. Love it, love it.

Once I retire I'll be moving back to the D.C/MD area because teacher pay is MUCH MUCH better. I did not know you were a teacher!! wow!

A teacher and a prior-warrior. Impressive.

What was your MOS?