Originally Posted by wayne naughton
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
I remember the Princess Diana aftermath, since I was in college at that time. Often I would go out with two 35mm cameras to work on various class projects. Just carrying more than one camera would cause some people to mistake me for a professional photographer. It was the same issue when traveling with more than one camera. People would get a scowling look on their face and ask you "are you one of those paparazzi or news guys?"
It took years before those scowls mostly disappeared. Unfortunately now the situation is that if it seems you have too nice a camera, more than one camera, a tripod, or anything too photographically beyond a point & shoot camera, then you must be some sort of intrusive surveillance or unethical professional. It does seem that more open minded or better educated (?) individuals are not overly concerned, nor offended by someone practicing photography. Unfortunately there are enough closed minded individuals, or enough bored security guards, to cause trouble.
In a way anyone who photographs professionally, or as a very active amateur, is an ambassador of photography. It is in all our best interests to relate well to the general public. If there are enough nice people out there taking photos, and engaging the public, then perceptions can change.
A G Studio
Last edited by HerrBremerhaven; 06-21-2007 at 02:06 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Hmmm...there could be some "traction" with this:
Originally Posted by Stever
Q: "Are you a paparazzi?"
A: "Nah, this is a film camera."
Some people may be interested in this for background:
and may also be interested in googling "Jason Fraser", a British pap who has crossed the line (just) and become a legit "by permission" celebrity photographer while I believe still running a pap agency. JF is far from the worst in terms of behavior but a very informative example in terms of what can be achieved in monetary terms through pap activities.
How many times you snapped someone on street without asking? Is it taking someone’s picture while one is in his own privacy. Have you ever took a fish out of water sport sake. I am not saying you bad, and I am sure you are not, but I just do not understand why you are accusing paps, and how many people knows just anything about them.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Daniel, I am sure you are a nice guy, but you are making a mistake if you think everyone else is. The term "paparazzi" may be a little vague, but I am using it quite precisely to mean the sub-species of celebrity photographer who will deliberately physically obstruct his subjects, even attempt to block their way, swear at them, deliberately obstruct or even ram their vehicles, and all to get a picture which is "different" insofar as the subject is in a rage and appears to be trying to "attack" (actually defend him/herself from) the photographer. Do you understand now why I am saying what I am saying?
Originally Posted by Daniel_OB
I have *no idea* where "spot news" ends and "papparazzi" starts.
If you will remember, during the aftermath of the Diana tragedy, a certain top movie star embarked on a massive verbal anti-papparazzi campaign - which resulted in a boycott from ALL papparazzi. They simply REFUSED to perform any of these nasty deeds toward him. That meant that a MAJOR source of publicity was GONE! His PR people panicked. They increased the "insider tips" (yes, Virginia, that DOES happen - PR people working hand-in-hand with these "scum") - "He will be at ___ (fill in the blank) next Wednesday at 12:30 pm - with ___ (aspiring new female star)...
Needless to say, Offended Star soon had an impassioned talk with his people, the "anti" campaign ended and things gradually returned to normal.
I can understand the popular conception of papparazzi ... that the are ALL - INVARIABLY - mean, evil people picking on helpless - and hapless celebrities. That image is sort of necessary to increase the interest in their work. SOME ARE, indeed deserving of that reputation - lower than whale dung. I would submit that MOST are not. They are simply an essential element in the publicity structure.
I can remember one instance - from a "tip", three or four of us were waiting on a boardwalk to photograph "Rising Young Starlet". She approached, and at the best strategic moment, fell out of the top of her bikini. Shutters fired.
She (indignantly) "You can't do that!! I'll SUE...!" We replied, "Not to worry, I didn't get the shot anyway... film screwed up" ... another, "Me neither, I left the lens cap on" (he was using a SLR). No one, supposedly, "got the shot". She, silent now, went back down the boardwalk, reapproched, and fell out again. Still, no one got the shot.
She finally realized what we were doing after the third attempt, and fall out... and broke out laughing. We, "Starlet" and "Papparazzi" alll went to lunch together.
There are boundaries. I have seen film destroyed (and have done that) because the images would have been too painful to the subjects.
Last edited by Ed Sukach; 06-22-2007 at 08:51 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: Speling mistaeks
Ed Sukach, FFP.
The paps merely service the media who are the true whores.
News item: NBC outbids ABC for Paris Hilton post-release interview. Will pay $1.0MM to interview the ex-con.
News Item source: The so-called "serious NY Times":
Well, yes, it is a "serious story". :rolleyes: That's why they put it on page C1 of the Business Section with a teaser paragraph on the A1 front page "Index".
Ain't it the truth!
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
I agree. But this goes beyond the paparazzi category I believe.
Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
Well, some if not many tourists with their cameras take the same kind of approach on non-celeb people sometimes, like geisha ladies in Kyoto, Japan. The geishas are ordinary people who live there and work for their clients, but because they are part of the tourism attraction, when they go outside (to go to work), they get a tremendous amount of attention from the tourist crowd.
If you're in the area in the early evening, you will see a lot of camera flash going on and wonder who's in the spot getting such a red-carpet treatment, etc, and it's not a Hollywood or any other type of media celeb. And usually when the geisha accompanied with her client(s) is caught with a large crowd, she can't get out of the cab, etc.
You know it's not like every tourist is pursuing a career to be a National Geographc photographer, but certainly, some seem to do that quite aggressively, and when you walk by them, concerning the "public interest" and so on, you go, "What the f--k?" I think we are just too much sometimes...