In message <2008051109132284492-guig@yerawathamecom>, guig
writes
>On 2008-05-09 09:41:48 +0100, "The One" said:
>
>>
>>>
>> Generally in public places, people can F off, its my camera I can
>>take what
>> I please with it. If people don't like it then they have every oportunity to
>> stay inside all day, or run for cover when they see my lens. I use the right
>> to roam laws fully, often jumping into farmers fields at dawn, as far as i'm
>> concerned they can sod off.
>
>Unfortunately there are places in this country where your attitude will
>get you a smack in the coupon or a lot worse.
What is worse it will colour other peoples perception of a photographer
so whoever turns up next will loose before they have even tried to
politely explain what they are doing
>> I've been to numerous catherdrials which insist of you paying a
>>copyright
>> fee, for photographing inside. Again I never pay and take photos anyway.
>> There is no such thing. A church albeit sacred is a public place so again
>> they can sod off.
>
>As mentioned by others churches are generally privately owned and if
>you're a wank about taking your pictures then they can have you ejected
>or arrested. But you're probably a brave guy and willing to take the
>risk or are you only brave when dealing with people who are essentially
>non-violent. I'd love to be in a mosque or east end pub if you tried
>your pish, wind and shite.
Trouble is if buggers it up for the next photographer along.
However The minus One is long on unhelpful criticism, has yet to say
anything positive about anything and yet to show that he/she has even
held, let alone used a camera.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
|