Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,993   Posts: 1,524,257   Online: 994
      
Page 10 of 16 FirstFirst ... 45678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 152
  1. #91
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    Quote Originally Posted by batwister View Post
    I've wondered if labs are actually passing artistic judgment on our pictures. Maybe if the OPs image had more of an aesthetic edge, the lab would have acted differently!?

    I only send colour to the lab, but I've often wondered - if they are indeed probing everyone's negs for content - whether the most efficient means to do this is for them to make scans, and indeed keep them as potential 'evidence'. I send my film in for development only, but still wonder if they have a folder on some computer with my name on it. We need a snooper to shed some light on this - 'PentaPRISM'?
    A long time ago I knew a guy who worked in a lab and one day he showed me his "collection" of nude women he'd collected from others people's film they brought in.

    It was pretty impressive for it's day.

    Now amateur porn is all over the internet.
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  2. #92

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,957
    blansky:
    his name wasn't robin williams was it
    im empty, good luck

  3. #93
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    980
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky View Post
    A long time ago I knew a guy who worked in a lab and one day he showed me his "collection" of nude women he'd collected from others people's film they brought in.
    Another good reason not to take it to the lab.
    Truzi

  4. #94
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,103
    Images
    60
    At the Kodak lab where my father worked in management for 30+ years, it was inevitably the women who worked on the semi-automatic slide mounting machines who would notice and set aside any slides containing nudity.

    As it was illegal to distribute pornography, the lab staff were concerned about Kodak becoming liable for such distribution by returning the film.

    The police would be called and the matter would be dealt with by them thereafter.

    The lab closed in the 1980s.

    And as to whether the staff were passing artistic judgment on the slides, have you ever considered how many slides or prints actually pass before the eyes of lab staff? Operating that slide mounting equipment must have been mind-numbingly boring!
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  5. #95

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,557
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    blansky:
    his name wasn't robin williams was it
    Ha. I liked the part with the pissed off Agfa guy.

  6. #96
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,912
    Images
    6
    When I was in college during the 80s, a lot of women objected guys printing photos of nude women. I work at a university art dept and I saw a gal retouching a nude self-portrait. It's a different world now.
    "Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
    Aaron Chang

  7. #97
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky View Post
    A long time ago I knew a guy who worked in a lab and one day he showed me his "collection" of nude women he'd collected from others people's film they brought in.

    It was pretty impressive for it's day.

    Now amateur porn is all over the internet.
    And to me, THAT GUY is the one who the cops should have been called on, not only was he stealing art, he was FORGING copies... And objectifying the art (which isn't illegal, but fucked up).

    Anyway the world was supposed to become enlightened wasn't it? When's that happening?


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #98
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    Quote Originally Posted by polyglot View Post
    I don't know what state Lowly is in though, and I don't see photo-lab operators in any of those lists except for Northern Territory (note that the lists are professionals who will be serious hot water for failing to report; anyone at all can make a report if they perceive an issue). It's possible that the lab operator had had training from some other context, or that they were just a damn busybody and called the wrong peoples.
    I think I'm reading the law the same way you are. (The summary of the law.) Only Northern Territory says that "any person" who "reasonably suspects" abuse is required to report. In every other location, only professionals are required. Thus, unless the lab is located in Northern Territory, they overstepped.

    I'm voting for "damn busybody."

    Quote Originally Posted by Lowly View Post
    From what they said, because "a member of the public" had complained, and because it involved child nudity, it automatically got classified at the lowest level and had to be destroyed. The picture destroyed can be debated by others, but my main issue is with the lab. Remember, this picture was not in a display in a public space, it was not digital where I had a chance to review it, it was not developed film that had been seen. It was only because of a complaint from a member of the public that there was an incident. 3 rolls of family snaps in that batch - 108 pictures (minus some that had some sort of light leak problem). This is where it solely comes down to the judgement of the lab
    In none of the research I have done, does simple nudity qualify as abuse.

    Specifically:
    "abuse" , in relation to a child, means:
    (a) an assault, including a sexual assault, of the child; or
    (b) a person (the first person ) involving the child in a sexual activity with the first person or another person in which the child is used, directly or indirectly, as a sexual object by the first person or the other person, and where there is unequal power in the relationship between the child and the first person; or
    (c) causing the child to suffer serious psychological harm, including (but not limited to) when that harm is caused by the child being subjected to, or exposed to, family violence; or
    (d) serious neglect of the child.
    It sounds, to me, like somebody is giving you the run-around. A police officer who doesn't know the law? Ludicrous! If you or I can look up a summary of the law on the internet, I think it would be part of the cop's job to review the relevant statute before proceeding with your investigation.
    This is not an on-the-spot incident where the officer is required to make a quick decision. He was able to collect evidence, follow up on it and make decisions before he interviewed you. A cop who admits he doesn't know the law is like a baseball umpire who admits he doesn't know the difference between a foul ball and a home run!

    To be honest, I don't think a bare bum even qualifies as nudity. I think the people at the lab AND the cops are both full of shit.

    In the U.S. there is a statute known as the Civil Rights Act of 1871. Also known as 42 U.S. Code, Section 1983.
    To summarize, any person who "under color of law" violates another's civil/constitutional rights is liable for damages and attorney's fees.
    I don't know about the civil rights law in Australia but, if I was in your shoes, I'd be calling lawyer.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/randystankey/

  9. #99
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    blansky:
    his name wasn't robin williams was it
    Surprisingly all the movies I've seen, I have never seen that one. Something about Robin Williams being a predator
    (If that was indeed the story line) never attracted me to see it.
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  10. #100
    AgX
    AgX is online now

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,361
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    At the Kodak lab where my father worked in management for 30+ years, it was inevitably the women who worked on the semi-automatic slide mounting machines who would notice and set aside any slides containing nudity.

    As it was illegal to distribute pornography, the lab staff were concerned about Kodak becoming liable for such distribution by returning the film.
    It is hard for me to believe that sending a processed film and even several prints back to the owner of that film is the same as the "distribution" the makers of that low most probably thought of.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin