Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,275   Posts: 1,534,697   Online: 980
      
Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 152
  1. #31
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,093
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Sorry, I cannot agree with some of the posts above. It is not political correctness, it is the result of horrendous behavior by many individuals.

    There are people out there with libraries of pictures of naked children who also engage in horrible physical and sexual abuse of children.

    The "zero tolerance" rules are there to take the discretion out of the hands of people like store clerks and lab employees.

    The discretion and judgment is quite rightly transferred to people who are knowledgeable about the scourge of child abuse.

    The problem with the OP's situation isn't with the lab, it is with the police, who followed up, determined that there was no problem, but confiscated the entirely innocent slide anyways.

    The police may have been forced to confiscate the slide, due to the rules they are required to enforce. If so, those rules need reviewing.
    Also +1

    But I am sorry that you got caught with yours son's pans down.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    701
    At least in the US, labs have language stating "Submitting any tangible or electronic media, image, ... constitutes an agreement that any loss or damage to it by our company, subsidiary, or agents, even though by our negligence or other fault, will only entitle you to replacement with an equivalent quantity/size of unexposed photographic film or electronic media." Seems to me that their turning it over to the police caused you loss of this single image. You should demand that the lab give you an equivalent amount of unexposed transparency film. Since they can't give you a single shot, you should demand an entire roll, and since only 36-exp. rolls are still manufactured, you end up with 36 shots of transparency film for the cost of one single image.
    ME Super

    Shoot more film.
    There are eight ways to put a slide into a projector tray. Seven of them are wrong.

  3. #33
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    So... How much money did you USED TO spend at that establishment?

    Do you think the owner ought to be made aware of that?

    Regardless of what the law might be, I think it's funny that people who aren't legal professionals, who don't have degrees in psychology or who aren't sworn officers of the law would take it upon themselves to make judgements that they are clearly not qualified to make.

    What would you say if you took your car to the auto mechanic and he threatened to call the cops because he thought your vision wasn't good enough to drive? What if your doctor said you couldn't leave his office until you fixed the headlights on your car? You'd tell them to go to hell. Unless there is a clear danger, those people people have no business making those kinds of demands. A photo lab operator is just as unqualified to make such a decision.

    I don't think that the law reads that every bare bum must be scrutinized. I think the people in that shop stepped way over the limit. I don't think that business should be rewarded with a portion of your hard-earned income for being so stupid.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

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

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    On the heels of the NSA revelations welcome to 1984 where the governments uses their citizens to spy on others.

    The funny thing is that I suspect people who produce pornography have been using digital cameras for some years to avoid a problem such as this. There is an obvious solution, process you own film.
    Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 06-15-2013 at 10:40 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  5. #35

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    On the heels of the NSA revelations welcome to 1984 where the governments uses their citizens to spy on others.

    The funny thing is that I suspect people who produce pornography have been using digital cameras for some years to avoid a problem such as this. There is an obvious solution, process you own film.
    My contention exactly.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,028
    Maybe the image should be posted here and we can help determine if it is naughty or nice.

  7. #37
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,958
    Images
    6
    Remember those old naked baby portraits on bear skin rugs? Is that porn?
    "Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
    Aaron Chang

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Above the Hills, south of Rome(Italia)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    177
    Images
    13
    Lowly ! Just let everybody know the details of the photolab (name, address). Should i come down under i will simply avoid it....

  9. #39
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,517
    Quote Originally Posted by ME Super View Post
    At least in the US, labs have language stating "Submitting any tangible or electronic media, image, ... constitutes an agreement that any loss or damage to it by our company, subsidiary, or agents, even though by our negligence or other fault, will only entitle you to replacement with an equivalent quantity/size of unexposed photographic film or electronic media." Seems to me that their turning it over to the police caused you loss of this single image. You should demand that the lab give you an equivalent amount of unexposed transparency film. Since they can't give you a single shot, you should demand an entire roll, and since only 36-exp. rolls are still manufactured, you end up with 36 shots of transparency film for the cost of one single image.
    That only applies to erroneous acting of the lab (losing, mis-processing etc. film). In this case they may have acted rightly.

  10. #40
    Bob Carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto-Ontario
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    4,651
    Images
    14
    I am a lab owner and have worked in very large labs my whole career.

    I would say this is a very grey area. But in Canada we are not obligated by Law to report what comes through our lab.

    Personally I have never came across the situation where I had to make this kind of decision, I have many clients who photograph their children and have never seen issue.
    I have had photographers warn me of subject matter before I process and print. I am given the opportunity to decide. Also since I control my shop I can make sure who handles the work.

    But in a very large lab, its another can of worms. You have no idea who is working the floor and one is opening themselves up for scrutiny or poor decision making. If a technician complains and refuses to work on the subject matter there is nothing the Lab Owner can do but comply.


    At BGM Colour Labs in Toronto , I remember the RCMP bringing in days and days of processing of their investigations.
    The whole processing area was secluded, the film processer operator was given the film , and the film was loaded onto the processor and an RCMP officer would stand at
    the end of the Refrema processor and sleeve the film... Nobody from the lab, was allowed to see the film , even the film operator.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mainecoonmaniac View Post
    Just to be fair to the photo lab, are lab required by law to report naked kid photos to authorities?

Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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