%age Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 . . . . and I think Amadeus is savvy enough to know what he should and shouldn't do. In any case, I do not think he would want to do anything to unnecessarily distress or offend anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 22, 2009 Author Share Posted February 22, 2009 Well there is the problem. How can you have a serious information service where in the next sentence we are discussing the why, when, and wherefors of the rare occurences of white dog poo these days. Now, maybe if there was a 'serious' area for subscribers (. . . perhaps there is!), more people might want to subscribe to get the latest official news releases, which could cover any costs of the additional administration. But it is not and should not be a "news site" there are plenty of those and just because one person on the periphery of news-gathering uses it to hawk his wares doesn't mean it should change. I think it is a news site already - this discussion is posted in Local News, where BBC Newsbot posts a News feed, and loads of people check for, post, or reply to News every day, so in a way and by its very nature it's a news site anyway, or at least a site with news on it... The way news are reported, and the way in which we all receive the same simply has changed in recent years. It used to be that you read the paper or check the radio/telly to find out what's going or what happened. Then along came web 2.0, cheaper cameras and mobile phones with better optics and video capabilities, and suddenly everyone could report anything before any of the normal sources had a chance of even finding out about it - hence the likes of BBC inventing "Your News", asking for user submissions under any bigger news story, the invention of the term "Citizen Reporter", and even the local journos asking for "Your Say". After all, manxforums is a bona fide information media. But not necessarily a medium of bona fide information. Good point, Declan, and one of the weak points of this new type of news reporting - anyone can report anything, but there are fewer checks as to what is genuine and what isn't. Users are responsible for what they post, as laid out in the t&c's. Crap excuse,your a voyeur,you dont know whether anyone is seriously injured.I find it very bizzare that you take pictures of crashes.Reminds me when I used to marshall at the TT,bad incidents would happen and there would be some ghoul taking snaps of it,all for moral purposes of course.... Am I a voyeur? No, not more than anyone who looks at the pictures, and I certainly do not head out to get close up shots of all the gore and blood I can find. This particular incident simply happened next door, qualified as news, and hence I took a few shots. There are limits, some set by law and some simply self imposed, as to what I would ever take pictures of. The mentioned person being carried into an Ambulance, any details identifying who was involved (i.e. number plates, shots of the driver, etc..), being examples of what I would not take pictures of, nevermind publish them on the web or elsewhere. The same goes for incidents where it's clear that they were more serious - loss of life, serious TT accidents, etc. There've been a few occasions where I could have taken shots in the past, but decided not to - maybe I wasn't sure about the legal situation, maybe it just didn't feel right. News? Yes, but not at any price. I have raised this subject of taking images in public places with the Data Protection Office (due to my job and hobby) It is quite a complex subject but needless to say that you cannot (lawfully) publish pictures of peoples faces (which would make them recognisable) without their consent ! Car number plates should also be blanked out unless prior permission has been sought from the owner (nice one Amadeus) There is another twist in this as well in as much that Amadeus is potentially withinin a crime scene and any images could be subject to Police evidence etc. There is a whole can of worms to be opened with this subject and if anyone is interested I will send them a PDF file outlining photographers rights (well UK photographers rights). The way I understand it is that you can take pictures/video of people in a public place and publish the same as long as it is a general shot, i.e. a wideangle of strand street with loads of people in it - if you take a close up portrait of someone in strand street and publish it, it's a different matter. At the time when the pictures of this particular incident were taken, the road was officially opened again, so not a crime scene as such anymore. He takes thse pictures in the hope of selling via the press photography pool as far as I gather. therefore he is only doing his job albiet freelance and lets face it he takes decent pictures, so give him a break he is only trying to make a bit of an extra living and unlike yourself doesn't speculate or guess on causes and reasons Most pics of me that you see in the news don't pay - I just pass'em to them. Maybe it's time they do, though. Some stuff did pay, but not a fortune by any means - it's more practice and general interest in news - never know - maybe it'll be a job one day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jehovah Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 do the police mind you taking photos? I usually ask for an ok to do so - news in the end, and the paper does the same thing. Those pics will probably end up in other news anyway (BBC, manxradio, etc), so no difference to them. Remember the car down marine drive a short while ago? That was frontpage on the examiner in the end - no real difference between people reading it on their site or here - news is news, and if it happens next to my house I'll try and catch it. Number plates are blanked out, obviously. Sorry to be pedantic Amadeus, but how, exactly, are Manxradio likely to use the photographs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 22, 2009 Author Share Posted February 22, 2009 do the police mind you taking photos? I usually ask for an ok to do so - news in the end, and the paper does the same thing. Those pics will probably end up in other news anyway (BBC, manxradio, etc), so no difference to them. Remember the car down marine drive a short while ago? That was frontpage on the examiner in the end - no real difference between people reading it on their site or here - news is news, and if it happens next to my house I'll try and catch it. Number plates are blanked out, obviously. Sorry to be pedantic Amadeus, but how, exactly, are Manxradio likely to use the photographs? For the pics next to online stories - example: http://www.manxradio.com/newsread.aspx?id=30286 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 could have had a scoop yesterday, chap being manhandled and stuffed into the back of a black mariah police van outside Shoprite (Vic Rd.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanic Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 "The way I understand it is that you can take pictures/video of people in a public place and publish the same as long as it is a general shot, i.e. a wideangle of strand street with loads of people in it - if you take a close up portrait of someone in strand street and publish it, it's a different matter. At the time when the pictures of this particular incident were taken, the road was officially opened again, so not a crime scene as such anymore." Totally correct... The public seem to have a mis-conception of photography rules in the UK, people in general shots okay, but you need a model release form (or similar permission) to publish a portrait of person. However, with everybody and his dog having a camera on his mobile and CCTV everywhere this is difficult to enforce. As for sensitive things like car crashes or similar you have to be careful what you publish as it can cause all sort of problems - if in doubt, don't publish. The other thing to be careful of is photography rules in different countries when you are on holiday - some are very strict indeed or others are very lax - people in Paris will actually pose for you !! Another thing to remember is - nobody, including the police, can ask you to delete all the images on your camera's memory card (or pull the film out of an old camera) without a court order. Right or wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I'm one of those seagulls in the pic above and I take great offense that you didn't get my permission or make me sign a seagull release form, before you published it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryMcCann Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Forget the legalities. People dashing up to photograph the aftermath of car crashes without knowing fully what has happened to the people involved are a bit sick. The end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 you need a model release form (or similar permission) to publish a portrait of person Whether or not the picture needs to be model released depends upon how it is used. If it is used editorially then it would not need to be model released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanic Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I'm one of those seagulls in the pic above and I take great offense that you didn't get my permission or make me sign a seagull release form, before you published it. I always have trouble with birds, and getting them to sign a model release forms, especially when I ask them to loosen up their feathers a bit or to show a bit of wing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 He takes thse pictures in the hope of selling via the press photography pool as far as I gather. therefore he is only doing his job albiet freelance and lets face it he takes decent pictures, so give him a break he is only trying to make a bit of an extra living and unlike yourself doesn't speculate or guess on causes and reasons Most pics of me that you see in the news don't pay - I just pass'em to them. Maybe it's time they do, though. Some stuff did pay, but not a fortune by any means - it's more practice and general interest in news - never know - maybe it'll be a job one day... Oi I was trying to be on your side there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted February 22, 2009 Author Share Posted February 22, 2009 Oi I was trying to be on your side there I know - thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Another thing to remember is - nobody, including the police, can ask you to delete all the images on your camera's memory card (or pull the film out of an old camera) without a court order. yes, my understanding/thoughts are that the picture taker has the copyright to the picture with all the rights that gives? john wright mentioned something like this over hise rose photo on some website where they claimed it wasn't his but one similar!! the snag with the web is anyone can take a screen capture and edit anyones photo and use it. you don't ( i haven't ) hear of anyone getting done for copyright infringement from the web?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Another thing to remember is - nobody, including the police, can ask you to delete all the images on your camera's memory card (or pull the film out of an old camera) without a court order. yes, my understanding/thoughts are that the picture taker has the copyright to the picture with all the rights that gives? john wright mentioned something like this over hise rose photo on some website where they claimed it wasn't his but one similar!! the snag with the web is anyone can take a screen capture and edit anyones photo and use it. you don't ( i haven't ) hear of anyone getting done for copyright infringement from the web?? As I understand it, you can't get "done" for copyright infringement because it is not an offence as such. The remedy is in the civil law. JW will explain. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryMcCann Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I am just glad you didn't photograph me parking there. It is so convenient for the HSBC cash machine. Sometimes if people are watching me I do do a little limp whilst exiting the car though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.