Printable View
Maybe, for those with some vestige of sentiment, this could be a compelling reason in giving the photographer the same freedom as the addle brained forum correspondent, and the determination to ignore the same.
Russia in color, a century ago - The Big Picture - Boston.com
ok then if i am fo full of it. answer this
what new restrictions have been placed on photographers?
ok im not having ago at you at all but this thread has been a very busy one but could you put in dot point your main points of view that you are trying to get across
As it is at the momentQuote:
Originally Posted by schmierer LR at singleton
You don’t have to pay to take photos
Anyone can take your photo and publish it with out your permission.
To give you the impression that you will have to pay to take snap shots of your holiday trips is rubbish. But it is the tactic being employed here.
My argument is that they should not be allowed to take your photo with out your permission, there would be exceptions, IE if you became a crim etc
If you look at the people behind this organization, and there history, and conflicts, all becomes clear. Under the smoke of crying restrictions they actually want more freedoms or liberties. In short reducing your liberties or privacy. Put it another way, increase there freedom and reduce your freedom.
ok thanks i understand it alot clearer now
cheers tony
My point of view.
First I dont photograph people simply because of the attitudes you can see in this thread.
I am not a professional photographer. I am keen hobbyist who would one day like to sell my works.
I took the image below on the weekend and because I didn't buy a permit I can't sell this image.
For me this movement is about my freedom to sell the photos I take without having to pay for permits or submit my work for approval. Go read the fine print on the Sydney Harbour restrictions.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...010/08/111.jpg
This link will display a larger view.
On Black: Sydney by Night. by mowog [Large]
Very nice image.
Why you cannot sell the image?
The bridge and the Opera House are not ;) the main subject in the image.
The water and reflection of the light are the main subject and the other are just in the BG.
There are many "grey areas" in the regulations ;)
I will be getting this printed by the Fuji Flex process at Created For Life.
The first one out will be a 100" print for my wall at home.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mowog
Quote:
Originally Posted by mowog
Ok so you don’t take photos because some one may give you a bit of a slap for doing so. GOOD. But why should you think that you automatically have the right to photograph someone and that it is only fear that don’t?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mowog
Quote:
Originally Posted by mowog
I assume you were alone, or working alone and it didn’t take a team of 10 or more to take this photo.
You didn’t Buy a permit, which is free by the way! And if you do decide to sell the image you can retrospectively get approval
Quote:
Originally Posted by mowog
What Harbor in the world will let photos be published with out approval? There are security and commercial interests to consider and Sydney harbor is quite lax in this regard.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...010/08/111.jpg
This link will display a larger view.
On Black: Sydney by Night. by mowog [Large][/QUOTE]
Nice photo by the way
already changed the paper in the printer, and its just starting now.Quote:
Originally Posted by mowog
i use hairspray, helps to keep them looking good