Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,607   Posts: 1,622,627   Online: 1143
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by wayne naughton View Post
    ...and rupert.
    Especially Rupert.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    861
    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.

    Ciao!

    Gordon Moat
    A G Studio
    Last edited by HerrBremerhaven; 06-21-2007 at 02:06 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: spelling

  3. #23
    copake_ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NYC or Copake or Tucson
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4,090
    Images
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Stever View Post
    That is why I am patient when I am asked,
    "ITAH?"
    "Does that only take black and white pictures?"
    "Why do you use film?"
    ...

    Steve
    Hmmm...there could be some "traction" with this:

    Q: "Are you a paparazzi?"

    A: "Nah, this is a film camera."


  4. #24
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Some people may be interested in this for background:
    http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article2141635.ece
    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.

  5. #25
    Daniel_OB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Mississauga, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    420
    David B.
    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.

    www.Leica-R.com

  6. #26
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel_OB View Post
    David B.
    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.

    www.Leica-R.com
    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?

    Regards,

    david

  7. #27
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,519
    Images
    26
    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
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  8. #28
    copake_ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NYC or Copake or Tucson
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4,090
    Images
    56
    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":

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/ar...n/22paris.html

    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".

  9. #29

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
    ...Note to the loony right: this applies equally to the loony left.
    Ain't it the truth!

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Japan
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,954
    Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington View Post
    I still feel, however, that the hallmarks of a pap picture are 1) no legitimate public interest and 2) provocative, possibly violent approach to subjects.

    Regards,

    David
    I agree. But this goes beyond the paparazzi category I believe.

    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...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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