…Honestly, Im not sure why the fathers of these girls let the guys live, unless its so someone in prison can grab dude’s manbun and teach him what REAL sexual abuse is…
7
sns…you wold hope that’s the only reason why
2
Oh, and dont take pictures of random people because thats an asshole thing to do regardless of the medium.>>>
I generally like your comments, but this is a ridiculous one. With your thinking, there is no documentation of public life on film or video.
8
Also, your example of why –some guy shooting upskirt videos— that sounds an awful lot like taking guns away from law abiding citizens because some people break the law with guns.
11
SNS,
I had the same thought. The old technology was BETTER! SIMPLE and FAST. The chemicals developed the photograph in a minute.
The bias that new technologies and ideas are better than old ones is why we will not successfully put men on the moon ever again.
Grandpa had a Polaroid.
No pictures of Grandma.
No pictures of the kids.
No pictures of the grand kids.
Thousands of pictures of fish caught and deer shot.
9
BFH
WEDNESDAY, 10 JULY 2024, 8:14 AT 8:14 AM
“Oh, and dont take pictures of random people because thats an asshole thing to do regardless of the medium.>>>
I generally like your comments, but this is a ridiculous one. With your thinking there is no documentation of public life on film or video.”
…thank you for the general like, but I think I didnt make myself clear on what I meant. I dont mean capturing people unintentionally in the background, I mean deliberately taking pictures of people specifically without their knowledge or consent that are just sitting there not bothering anyone like this old guy apparently was. Theres too much ambush photography is what Im saying, and if its someone who isnt a public figure or public employee and you sneak a picture of them so you can clown them on the Internet later and they dont even know about it, thats both asshole and cowardly.
And with more serious things too. My patients were spared this in my medic days for the most part as cell phones werent quite a ‘thing’ then, but I have since in emergency situations had a ring of phones pointed at me and a patient. Im ugly and used to it, plus I do know what Im doing so I dont care about me, but I think its utterly atrocious of someone to video a young preeclampsic pregnant woman they do not know repetitively seizing on the floor so’s they can share it without her knowing with the world so she maybe finds a memento of the day she lost her baby while spasoming across a cracked concrete floor. Under such circumstances I request supervisors and such shut it down before she pisses herself since its a private business and they arent supposed to have them out anyway, but I cant otherwise stop them since I have other things to do.
At no point am I saying that cell phone cameras should be regulated or anything, just that people who do asshole things with them should be called out.
6
And who is the arbiter of what is “assholish” and what is not?
2
I dont have the answer to that, BFH, beyond “I know it when I see it”.
My whole point is that, in the pre-cell days when most people didnt have a camera constantly available, it was a question we rarely had to ask.
1
“And who is the arbiter of what is “assholish” and what is not?”
Up until now I think it is each individual who decides what is assholish and who is an asshole. That is until some elected bureaucrat decides to define assholish as illegal then the courts and juries will decide. God help us.
2
Hey SNS, fuck off!
SNS is asshole.
“SNS is asshole”–
naaa. He is a good commenter. I just get a little upset when any 1st amendment right is encroached upon. Too many people think you have the right to privacy when, for instance, sitting in a subway. You don’t.
I’ve heard someone in public saying, “I did not give you my permission to photograph me!!” way too many times. No one needs your permission.
Additionally, there is no mention of the dozens and dozens of government surveillance cameras everywhere we go, but as soon as a citizen exercise their right to take a picture in public, they are the bad guys.
You may not like it, but in the same way, there is a need to “protect speech” that some object to, there is a need to protect activity that some object to. If you don’t want your picture taken, don’t go out in public.
6
And that device is better than a Polaroid because you get to edit and alter it before you print it. How many Polaroids that you paid for hit the garbage bin? I can imagine someone saying, “I wish there were a way to verify the picture is good before wasting the expensive film.”
Well, we have it, and now some people think it’s inferior.
LUDDITES!!!!!
lol
5
The amount of an asshole a person is, is directly proportional to the distance they are away from you at the time you discover this flaw. The closer they are, the nicer they get.
There is an old time (and court) tested axiom within the criminal justice community that the eyes can not trespass, piggybacking off tangentially of the application that there is no expectation of privacy in public. The camera is an extension of the eyes.
The last time was in London I was struck by the presence of CCTV cameras at just about every interaction and walk-ways. It creeped me out much more than say a private person with a camera in hand because the government can easily use it for nefarious purposes.
This is the age we live in, so unless the camera is shoved in your face or your freedom of movement is somehow infringed, get on with your life.
5
BFH
WEDNESDAY, 10 JULY 2024, 12:50 AT 12:50 PM
“And that device is better than a Polaroid because you get to edit and alter it before you print it. ”
…I will confess at this point that I didnt particuarly care for the Polaroid format even when new, because I too preferred to improve and edit images even in the ’80s.
Thing is, it wasnt in real time, I had to use an enlarger, several nasty chemicals, and a darkroom to do it, working with 35mm, 126, and 620 formats mostly, with my best results in black and white.
I thought the REALLY fun Polaroids were the giant clunky ones with a handle on one side because you had to YANK the film out of the very manual camera to bust the chemical pack on one end open and spread it across the entire image as you pulled it through the rollers. You then had to wait some period of time before you could CAREFULLY peel the thing open to reveal the image as it was literally developing from the chemicals you rolled on it. Image quality wasnt super, but the rig wasnt too expemsive either, and at that time it was either that or wait till your prints came back from “the lab”.
What I’m describing is the super early ones like this;
…it might be fun, BFH, to maybe have threads specifically for discussing the First and other amendments specifically?
Just putting it out there…
1
The Polaroid became popular because you could take naked pictures of your girl without going to the film developer… let’s just be honest.
5
I’ve always had fun up in the attic with my Kodak Instamatic.
3
Polaroid cameras were used well into the 2000s (after digitals) for legal and insurance documentation because the couldn’t be altered… same reason for the old FAX machine.
Polaroid was hella simpler.
Oh, and dont take pictures of random people because thats an asshole thing to do regardless of the medium.
Modern day Polariods…
There’s a TV drug ad for them too!
Try Zyrteroid….
…I hate the ease of modern photography for a whole bunch of reasons, but ESPECIALLY because it makes perv-outs like THIS possible…
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/repeat-offender-arrested-again-accused-of-taking-inappropriate-photos-up-shoppers-skirt/vi-BB1pHFUJ
…Honestly, Im not sure why the fathers of these girls let the guys live, unless its so someone in prison can grab dude’s manbun and teach him what REAL sexual abuse is…
sns…you wold hope that’s the only reason why
Oh, and dont take pictures of random people because thats an asshole thing to do regardless of the medium.>>>
I generally like your comments, but this is a ridiculous one. With your thinking, there is no documentation of public life on film or video.
Also, your example of why –some guy shooting upskirt videos— that sounds an awful lot like taking guns away from law abiding citizens because some people break the law with guns.
SNS,
I had the same thought. The old technology was BETTER! SIMPLE and FAST. The chemicals developed the photograph in a minute.
The bias that new technologies and ideas are better than old ones is why we will not successfully put men on the moon ever again.
What an asshole —-> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-J_Day_in_Times_Square
Grandpa had a Polaroid.
No pictures of Grandma.
No pictures of the kids.
No pictures of the grand kids.
Thousands of pictures of fish caught and deer shot.
BFH
WEDNESDAY, 10 JULY 2024, 8:14 AT 8:14 AM
“Oh, and dont take pictures of random people because thats an asshole thing to do regardless of the medium.>>>
I generally like your comments, but this is a ridiculous one. With your thinking there is no documentation of public life on film or video.”
…thank you for the general like, but I think I didnt make myself clear on what I meant. I dont mean capturing people unintentionally in the background, I mean deliberately taking pictures of people specifically without their knowledge or consent that are just sitting there not bothering anyone like this old guy apparently was. Theres too much ambush photography is what Im saying, and if its someone who isnt a public figure or public employee and you sneak a picture of them so you can clown them on the Internet later and they dont even know about it, thats both asshole and cowardly.
And with more serious things too. My patients were spared this in my medic days for the most part as cell phones werent quite a ‘thing’ then, but I have since in emergency situations had a ring of phones pointed at me and a patient. Im ugly and used to it, plus I do know what Im doing so I dont care about me, but I think its utterly atrocious of someone to video a young preeclampsic pregnant woman they do not know repetitively seizing on the floor so’s they can share it without her knowing with the world so she maybe finds a memento of the day she lost her baby while spasoming across a cracked concrete floor. Under such circumstances I request supervisors and such shut it down before she pisses herself since its a private business and they arent supposed to have them out anyway, but I cant otherwise stop them since I have other things to do.
At no point am I saying that cell phone cameras should be regulated or anything, just that people who do asshole things with them should be called out.
And who is the arbiter of what is “assholish” and what is not?
I dont have the answer to that, BFH, beyond “I know it when I see it”.
My whole point is that, in the pre-cell days when most people didnt have a camera constantly available, it was a question we rarely had to ask.
“And who is the arbiter of what is “assholish” and what is not?”
Up until now I think it is each individual who decides what is assholish and who is an asshole. That is until some elected bureaucrat decides to define assholish as illegal then the courts and juries will decide. God help us.
Hey SNS, fuck off!
SNS is asshole.
“SNS is asshole”–
naaa. He is a good commenter. I just get a little upset when any 1st amendment right is encroached upon. Too many people think you have the right to privacy when, for instance, sitting in a subway. You don’t.
I’ve heard someone in public saying, “I did not give you my permission to photograph me!!” way too many times. No one needs your permission.
Additionally, there is no mention of the dozens and dozens of government surveillance cameras everywhere we go, but as soon as a citizen exercise their right to take a picture in public, they are the bad guys.
You may not like it, but in the same way, there is a need to “protect speech” that some object to, there is a need to protect activity that some object to. If you don’t want your picture taken, don’t go out in public.
And that device is better than a Polaroid because you get to edit and alter it before you print it. How many Polaroids that you paid for hit the garbage bin? I can imagine someone saying, “I wish there were a way to verify the picture is good before wasting the expensive film.”
Well, we have it, and now some people think it’s inferior.
LUDDITES!!!!!
lol
The amount of an asshole a person is, is directly proportional to the distance they are away from you at the time you discover this flaw. The closer they are, the nicer they get.
There is an old time (and court) tested axiom within the criminal justice community that the eyes can not trespass, piggybacking off tangentially of the application that there is no expectation of privacy in public. The camera is an extension of the eyes.
The last time was in London I was struck by the presence of CCTV cameras at just about every interaction and walk-ways. It creeped me out much more than say a private person with a camera in hand because the government can easily use it for nefarious purposes.
This is the age we live in, so unless the camera is shoved in your face or your freedom of movement is somehow infringed, get on with your life.
BFH
WEDNESDAY, 10 JULY 2024, 12:50 AT 12:50 PM
“And that device is better than a Polaroid because you get to edit and alter it before you print it. ”
…I will confess at this point that I didnt particuarly care for the Polaroid format even when new, because I too preferred to improve and edit images even in the ’80s.
Thing is, it wasnt in real time, I had to use an enlarger, several nasty chemicals, and a darkroom to do it, working with 35mm, 126, and 620 formats mostly, with my best results in black and white.
I thought the REALLY fun Polaroids were the giant clunky ones with a handle on one side because you had to YANK the film out of the very manual camera to bust the chemical pack on one end open and spread it across the entire image as you pulled it through the rollers. You then had to wait some period of time before you could CAREFULLY peel the thing open to reveal the image as it was literally developing from the chemicals you rolled on it. Image quality wasnt super, but the rig wasnt too expemsive either, and at that time it was either that or wait till your prints came back from “the lab”.
What I’m describing is the super early ones like this;
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e9lvcFlUBxM
https://delmarwatsonphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Polaroid-Swinger-1024×768.jpg
The pinnacle of casual photography, nicht wahr?
Doesnt get any better than that…
…it might be fun, BFH, to maybe have threads specifically for discussing the First and other amendments specifically?
Just putting it out there…
The Polaroid became popular because you could take naked pictures of your girl without going to the film developer… let’s just be honest.
I’ve always had fun up in the attic with my Kodak Instamatic.
Polaroid cameras were used well into the 2000s (after digitals) for legal and insurance documentation because the couldn’t be altered… same reason for the old FAX machine.