Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Unfortunately they finished filming at that location. I didn't care enough to find out where they'd gone next... Christine Aguila wrote: - Original Message - From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] frank theriault wrote: I like your stoy, though. I'll join the swelling chorus and suggest you take a photo-walk again, in the same area, tomorrow. I wish I lived close enough I could go along tomorrow. :-) Let's all fly in with our Pentax cameras and storm the place. Our numbers would overwhelm them, and our camera brand would discombobulate them! :-) Peter, you got room at home to put up PDML folks for a few nights? -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] Last time something like that happened to me I was on a subway platform with camera poised - aimed at an incoming train, not at people. snip One would think, given that the subway system _might_ be a target for some, that the TA would _encourage_ photography. Might be worth a word/note/email to someone in authority. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Bob W wrote: Flash photography is not allowed on the London Underground, and there are signs all over saying so. When people take flash photos on the platforms they are told off by a public announcement read by Stern Father Voice (the same chap who often asks Inspector Sands to report to the Control Room). There are good reasons for it being disallowed, amongst which are that people are a bit nervous about bombs on the tube; it is also apparently very dazzling for the train drivers. Non-flash photography is ok though. So if you spot a flasher in the Underground can you photograph him as long as you don't use a Flash? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We use Pentax. They wouldn't even know we're photographers! They'd certainly never take us for pros! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
that's a very disappointing story - I was expecting to see someone showing their bottom repeatedly. The type of people they hire are asses, in both senses of the word. Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: 18 September 2008 04:35 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer. I should really read these things before I hit send. Corrections in text. Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, (but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses). I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps). Suddenly this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them, and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. He was left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part that, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false, to avoid legal problems they still need signed releases from anyone who shows up on camera. Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lousy photographs to follow. Now _that's_ revenge. - Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
P. J. Alling wrote: I should really read these things before I hit send. Corrections in text. Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, (but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses). I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps). Suddenly this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them, and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. He was left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part that, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false, to avoid legal problems they still need signed releases from anyone who shows up on camera. Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. We have all been there, Brother Peter. Heartening to see you stood your ground. Here in Sydney, while they pay to shoot in the city, there are plenty of tax breaks for them to make it worthwhile. All complaints...speak to the hand. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
P. J. Alling wrote: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. Obliquely related to this, and kinda OT, but exactly the sort of thing that gets my goat. http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2008/09/_by_aimee_green_after.html I'm glad Mr Tabor stood his ground too. D -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
What a stupid individual. Not that I'm surprised. Not at all. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 5:22 AM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Do it, they deserve it :) Just make sure you and your material won't get damaged somehow ... -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Thibouille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What a stupid individual. Not that I'm surprised. Not at all. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 5:22 AM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Take a film camera, that should REALLY throw him off.:-) Dave Do it, they deserve it :) Just make sure you and your material won't get damaged somehow ... -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Fun story. Keep up the good harassment! -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 8:22:31 PM, you wrote: PJA Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home PJA town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along PJA minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a PJA collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of PJA pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks PJA selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy PJA individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me PJA that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I PJA asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, PJA except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the PJA set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no PJA expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of PJA anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim PJA that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under PJA fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included PJA selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and PJA selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a PJA large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I PJA also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in PJA part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being PJA in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these PJA people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make PJA me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss PJA them off. PJA Lousy photographs to follow. PJA -- PJA You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. PJA --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Sounds like a nice place for a photowalk. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fun story. Keep up the good harassment! -- Best regards, Bruce Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 8:22:31 PM, you wrote: PJA Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home PJA town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along PJA minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a PJA collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of PJA pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks PJA selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy PJA individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me PJA that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I PJA asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, PJA except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the PJA set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no PJA expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of PJA anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim PJA that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under PJA fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included PJA selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and PJA selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a PJA large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I PJA also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in PJA part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being PJA in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these PJA people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make PJA me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss PJA them off. PJA Lousy photographs to follow. PJA -- PJA You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. PJA --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. I wouldn't even have asked. I'd have told him to get da f*^ out of my way or go to jail. If he didn't move toot sweet, I'd have called the cops myself right then there to have him hauled up on an assault charge. And I WOULD swear out the warrant for the assault. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part that, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false, to avoid legal problems they still need signed releases from anyone who shows up on camera. Actually, no they don't. The same fair use that protects your right to photograph in a public place, gives them cover as long as your appearance is fairly anonymous. If you appear fleetingly in some scene showing pedestrians, gawkers or bystanders of any sort in the background, but are not singled out or prominently featured in any way, they don't need a release. If they zoomed in on your face for a closeup, then they would. Also, if they caught any part of your argument with the ass producer and wanted to use THAT, they'd have to get a release. I'm in some B-movie filmed here in NC in the 80s. They used a newly opened section of I-40 near Wilmington, NC for filming. It was open for about a week, then closed again - and they DIDN'T put up a sign about it being used as a movie set. It was open the day before when I drove down, and closed when I was going back home the next day. I ignored the barricade, and drove on through. And I thought I wasn't the only one, because it looked like normal traffic on the highway. Next thing I know, some asshole in a hopped up car comes flying past me and dozens of police cars chasing him. A few minutes later, I see them all heading down the other side, going the other way ??? Then, here they all come back past me again ... W.T.F. is going on here? Finally, I go under an overpass, and there's a film crew on the embankment with the director, and all the hangers on, and a camera mounted on a hydraulic boom capturing the whole thing ... and some guy yelling KEEP MOVING, KEEP MOVING! Which I did. ;-D A friend who saw the movie said there was a big blue Chevy van like mine in a chase scene. So, I don't think they need a release. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Peter -- About a year ago I went to a reading of a play written by a friend -- all the readers, except one, were members of Actors Equity and doing the gig for free I was snapping away making a little gallery for my friend the writer... I posted the photos adn sent the writer the link -- I think I may also have shown it to the list or at least to some mutual friends... writer write me that this was, apparently, taboo taking photos of pro actors during a performance was a major nono --- of course, everyone saw I was taking them and I certainly would have stopped if someone had asked I didn't want my friend to get into trouble so I've hidden the gallery - and I gave him a printout... I think it is one thing to grab shots of actors hanging out around the set, etc, and another to shoot stuff that would be in the film - just a guess... It's annoying,aint it? ann P. J. Alling wrote: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
ann sanfedele wrote: Peter -- About a year ago I went to a reading of a play written by a friend -- all the readers, except one, were members of Actors Equity and doing the gig for free I was snapping away making a little gallery for my friend the writer... I posted the photos adn sent the writer the link -- I think I may also have shown it to the list or at least to some mutual friends... writer write me that this was, apparently, taboo taking photos of pro actors during a performance was a major nono In a theater or other private venue that's (usually) true -- it depends on the rules of the venue and the terms on your admission ticket. But in a public place like P.J.s case he's entirely free to take whatever photos he wants, whether they're bystanders or actors, in performance or not. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:22 PM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. Last time something like that happened to me I was on a subway platform with camera poised - aimed at an incoming train, not at people. A security guard approached me and told me that taking photographs was prohibited by TTC (Toronto Transit Commission) regulation 16. I rather took him by surprise when I replied that I was aware that regulation 16B prohibited the taking of photographs for commercial purposes without express written permission of the TTC. (the regulations, which have been incorporated into a City Bylaw are posted near a door on each subway car - and I'd read 'em!) I patiently told him that I'd never sold a photo taken in the subway system and didn't intend to sell what I was taking that day, so in fact I had the right to shoot. He said it made passengers feel uncomfortable to see a guy with a camera and asked again nicely if I could stop shooting. Deciding that (a) he was being nice about it, and (b) he had a gun and I didn't, and (c) in fact I was on private property (okay, it was quasi-public, but that's another discussion for another day) and he could in fact hand me a Notice under the Trespass Act and boot me off the premises for no good reason whatsoever, I chose to save my fight for another day. I smiled and said, Okay, look, I'm putting my lenscap on and turning off the camera. I certainly don't want to offend anyone or make them feel uncomfortable. Thanks! And that was that. So that's my story. I like your stoy, though. I'll join the swelling chorus and suggest you take a photo-walk again, in the same area, tomorrow. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
From: ann sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter -- About a year ago I went to a reading of a play written by a friend -- all the readers, except one, were members of Actors Equity and doing the gig for free I was snapping away making a little gallery for my friend the writer... I posted the photos adn sent the writer the link -- I think I may also have shown it to the list or at least to some mutual friends... writer write me that this was, apparently, taboo taking photos of pro actors during a performance was a major nono --- of course, everyone saw I was taking them and I certainly would have stopped if someone had asked I didn't want my friend to get into trouble so I've hidden the gallery - and I gave him a printout... I think it is one thing to grab shots of actors hanging out around the set, etc, and another to shoot stuff that would be in the film - just a guess... It's annoying,aint it? It's also quite wrong. They have no legal basis to object. As with Peter's sign stating that by entering you give permission to appearing in the movie, you have multiple Fair Use grounds on which to defend yourself: 1. You were there BY INVITATION of the writer, one of the participants. 2. Actors are PUBLIC persons, and their PUBLIC activities are, in the vernacular fair game. It's a public performance. They only own the rights to COMMERCIAL exploitation of their persona's. Fair use allows you to use the product of your own work for self promotion. You could, legally, even sell prints of the photos you took, and certainly you can use them to advertise yourself as a photographer. 3. They could have asked you to stop while you were taking the photos, and did not. If the reading took place in a theater, they could have told you in advance no photography allowed. But they didn't, did they? They didn't stop you from bringing your camera in; they didn't stop you from taking photographs. And I'd bet the original invitation from the writer included an implied, if not explicit, Would you bring your camera and take some pictures of actors reading MY PLAY, so I can use them to promote myself? I'd have told 'em to SOD OFF! And while they may hassle your friend, if he complained to me about it, I'd ask him back, Why did YOU put me in a situation for someone to hassle me? Consider having some special business cards made just for those occasions. The word litigious should feature prominently on the front, along with a statement of photographer's rights on the back. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Mark Roberts wrote: ann sanfedele wrote: Peter -- About a year ago I went to a reading of a play written by a friend -- all the readers, except one, were members of Actors Equity and doing the gig for free I was snapping away making a little gallery for my friend the writer... I posted the photos adn sent the writer the link -- I think I may also have shown it to the list or at least to some mutual friends... writer write me that this was, apparently, taboo taking photos of pro actors during a performance was a major nono In a theater or other private venue that's (usually) true -- it depends on the rules of the venue and the terms on your admission ticket. But in a public place like P.J.s case he's entirely free to take whatever photos he wants, whether they're bystanders or actors, in performance or not. I was thinking that the guy that chased him off might know about the other kind of situation -- although these days the actors are skittish anyway, even if out on the street ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Actually -- Bob didn't know I was bringing my camera - it was a tiny bar near my house... It was the theatre playwriting group that objected - He was redfaced about asking me not to display them - beyond what I already had... I was largely annoyed because I thought they would all be pleased to have a memento of the occasion - and because I went to the trouble of doing it when I could have saved myself the work. I really don't understand it myself but it does appear to be an Actor's Equity thing. It was a free performance, and they waived the drink minimum for me because there was nothing there I could drink at all. ann John Sessoms wrote: From: ann sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter -- About a year ago I went to a reading of a play written by a friend -- all the readers, except one, were members of Actors Equity and doing the gig for free I was snapping away making a little gallery for my friend the writer... I posted the photos adn sent the writer the link -- I think I may also have shown it to the list or at least to some mutual friends... writer write me that this was, apparently, taboo taking photos of pro actors during a performance was a major nono --- of course, everyone saw I was taking them and I certainly would have stopped if someone had asked I didn't want my friend to get into trouble so I've hidden the gallery - and I gave him a printout... I think it is one thing to grab shots of actors hanging out around the set, etc, and another to shoot stuff that would be in the film - just a guess... It's annoying,aint it? It's also quite wrong. They have no legal basis to object. As with Peter's sign stating that by entering you give permission to appearing in the movie, you have multiple Fair Use grounds on which to defend yourself: 1. You were there BY INVITATION of the writer, one of the participants. 2. Actors are PUBLIC persons, and their PUBLIC activities are, in the vernacular fair game. It's a public performance. They only own the rights to COMMERCIAL exploitation of their persona's. Fair use allows you to use the product of your own work for self promotion. You could, legally, even sell prints of the photos you took, and certainly you can use them to advertise yourself as a photographer. 3. They could have asked you to stop while you were taking the photos, and did not. If the reading took place in a theater, they could have told you in advance no photography allowed. But they didn't, did they? They didn't stop you from bringing your camera in; they didn't stop you from taking photographs. And I'd bet the original invitation from the writer included an implied, if not explicit, Would you bring your camera and take some pictures of actors reading MY PLAY, so I can use them to promote myself? I'd have told 'em to SOD OFF! And while they may hassle your friend, if he complained to me about it, I'd ask him back, Why did YOU put me in a situation for someone to hassle me? Consider having some special business cards made just for those occasions. The word litigious should feature prominently on the front, along with a statement of photographer's rights on the back. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
frank theriault wrote: He said it made passengers feel uncomfortable to see a guy with a camera and asked again nicely if I could stop shooting. Deciding that (a) he was being nice about it, and (b) he had a gun and I didn't, and (c) in fact I was on private property (okay, it was quasi-public, but that's another discussion for another day) and he could in fact hand me a Notice under the Trespass Act and boot me off the premises for no good reason whatsoever, I chose to save my fight for another day. You should have told him to go explain 16B to the uncomfortable people. -- Scott Loveless New Cumberland, PA http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On 17/9/08, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. Har! He's fulla shit. But don't inflame the situation - no need. Smile, nod, walk off, shoot away. Just be careful there isn't a local PD looking after them with stars in his eyes or you'll feel the sharp end of his stick. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Not entirely true, I have a friend who's the legal mind behind a local studio. His opinion is that releases are necessary. You never know when someone is going to be a b*d. John Sessoms wrote: From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part that, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false, to avoid legal problems they still need signed releases from anyone who shows up on camera. Actually, no they don't. The same fair use that protects your right to photograph in a public place, gives them cover as long as your appearance is fairly anonymous. If you appear fleetingly in some scene showing pedestrians, gawkers or bystanders of any sort in the background, but are not singled out or prominently featured in any way, they don't need a release. If they zoomed in on your face for a closeup, then they would. Also, if they caught any part of your argument with the ass producer and wanted to use THAT, they'd have to get a release. I'm in some B-movie filmed here in NC in the 80s. They used a newly opened section of I-40 near Wilmington, NC for filming. It was open for about a week, then closed again - and they DIDN'T put up a sign about it being used as a movie set. It was open the day before when I drove down, and closed when I was going back home the next day. I ignored the barricade, and drove on through. And I thought I wasn't the only one, because it looked like normal traffic on the highway. Next thing I know, some asshole in a hopped up car comes flying past me and dozens of police cars chasing him. A few minutes later, I see them all heading down the other side, going the other way ??? Then, here they all come back past me again ... W.T.F. is going on here? Finally, I go under an overpass, and there's a film crew on the embankment with the director, and all the hangers on, and a camera mounted on a hydraulic boom capturing the whole thing ... and some guy yelling KEEP MOVING, KEEP MOVING! Which I did. ;-D A friend who saw the movie said there was a big blue Chevy van like mine in a chase scene. So, I don't think they need a release. -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
John Sessoms wrote: From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. I wouldn't even have asked. I'd have told him to get da f*^ out of my way or go to jail. If he didn't move toot sweet, I'd have called the cops myself right then there to have him hauled up on an assault charge. And I WOULD swear out the warrant for the assault. Geez John, tell us how your really feel... -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Ann, you were indoors in a controlled environment. Outdoors it's a different matter. As a former, (very former), member of the working press, I know just what that difference is and I really don't care what a Jr. Assistant Adjunct Producer thinks. (I used to much more tactful when I actually worked for an actual Newspaper though, then I would have tried honey, in this case I used acid). By the way, being inside wouldn't have stopped me from trying to take the pictures, I would just have been more contrite if told not to. ann sanfedele wrote: Peter -- About a year ago I went to a reading of a play written by a friend -- all the readers, except one, were members of Actors Equity and doing the gig for free I was snapping away making a little gallery for my friend the writer... I posted the photos adn sent the writer the link -- I think I may also have shown it to the list or at least to some mutual friends... writer write me that this was, apparently, taboo taking photos of pro actors during a performance was a major nono --- of course, everyone saw I was taking them and I certainly would have stopped if someone had asked I didn't want my friend to get into trouble so I've hidden the gallery - and I gave him a printout... I think it is one thing to grab shots of actors hanging out around the set, etc, and another to shoot stuff that would be in the film - just a guess... It's annoying,aint it? ann P. J. Alling wrote: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. Which left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part the, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false... Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
P. J. Alling wrote: Not entirely true, I have a friend who's the legal mind behind a local studio. His opinion is that releases are necessary. You never know when someone is going to be a b*d. If it's outside, in the open, I.E. exposed to the public, it's your legal friend who's full of it! Bastard or not, he's wrong. keith whaley -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Flash photography is not allowed on the London Underground, and there are signs all over saying so. When people take flash photos on the platforms they are told off by a public announcement read by Stern Father Voice (the same chap who often asks Inspector Sands to report to the Control Room). There are good reasons for it being disallowed, amongst which are that people are a bit nervous about bombs on the tube; it is also apparently very dazzling for the train drivers. Non-flash photography is ok though. Bob Last time something like that happened to me I was on a subway platform with camera poised - aimed at an incoming train, not at people. A security guard approached me and told me that taking photographs was prohibited by TTC (Toronto Transit Commission) regulation 16. I rather took him by surprise when I replied that I was aware that regulation 16B prohibited the taking of photographs for commercial purposes without express written permission of the TTC. (the regulations, which have been incorporated into a City Bylaw are posted near a door on each subway car - and I'd read 'em!) I patiently told him that I'd never sold a photo taken in the subway system and didn't intend to sell what I was taking that day, so in fact I had the right to shoot. He said it made passengers feel uncomfortable to see a guy with a camera and asked again nicely if I could stop shooting. Deciding that (a) he was being nice about it, and (b) he had a gun and I didn't, and (c) in fact I was on private property (okay, it was quasi-public, but that's another discussion for another day) and he could in fact hand me a Notice under the Trespass Act and boot me off the premises for no good reason whatsoever, I chose to save my fight for another day. I smiled and said, Okay, look, I'm putting my lenscap on and turning off the camera. I certainly don't want to offend anyone or make them feel uncomfortable. Thanks! And that was that. So that's my story. I like your stoy, though. I'll join the swelling chorus and suggest you take a photo-walk again, in the same area, tomorrow. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On 18/9/08, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Non-flash photography is ok though. Java snaplets? -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:59 PM, frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He said it made passengers feel uncomfortable to see a guy with a camera and asked again nicely if I could stop shooting. Deciding that (a) he was being nice about it, and (b) he had a gun and I didn't, They use 38's, you could have out ran that thing. Dave and (c) in fact I was on private property (okay, it was quasi-public, but that's another discussion for another day) and he could in fact hand me a Notice under the Trespass Act and boot me off the premises for no good reason whatsoever, I chose to save my fight for another day. I smiled and said, Okay, look, I'm putting my lenscap on and turning off the camera. I certainly don't want to offend anyone or make them feel uncomfortable. Thanks! And that was that. So that's my story. I like your stoy, though. I'll join the swelling chorus and suggest you take a photo-walk again, in the same area, tomorrow. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Cotty wrote: On 18/9/08, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Non-flash photography is ok though. Java snaplets? That stuff is *never* ok. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
frank theriault wrote: I like your stoy, though. I'll join the swelling chorus and suggest you take a photo-walk again, in the same area, tomorrow. I wish I lived close enough I could go along tomorrow. :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
- Original Message - From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] frank theriault wrote: I like your stoy, though. I'll join the swelling chorus and suggest you take a photo-walk again, in the same area, tomorrow. I wish I lived close enough I could go along tomorrow. :-) Let's all fly in with our Pentax cameras and storm the place. Our numbers would overwhelm them, and our camera brand would discombobulate them! :-) Peter, you got room at home to put up PDML folks for a few nights? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Christine Aguila wrote: [...] and our camera brand would discombobulate them! :-) We use Pentax. They wouldn't even know we're photographers! -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
- Original Message - From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christine Aguila wrote: [...] and our camera brand would discombobulate them! :-) We use Pentax. They wouldn't even know we're photographers! Right. That was kind of my point :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Sessoms wrote: From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses), when I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps), when I this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. I wouldn't even have asked. I'd have told him to get da f*^ out of my way or go to jail. If he didn't move toot sweet, I'd have called the cops myself right then there to have him hauled up on an assault charge. And I WOULD swear out the warrant for the assault. Geez John, tell us how your really feel... I could probably give those Grumpy Old Men lessons. I don't know why, but I came back from Iraq with a chip on my shoulder when it comes to officious assholes pushing me around and interfering with the Constitutional Rights I swore to defend. I paid for 'em; I'm gonna' use 'em. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:22 AM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting ... ... I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Take a video camera; that ought to really upset them. -- Sandy Harris, Quanzhou, Fujian, China -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
I should really read these things before I hit send. Corrections in text. Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting in my home town blocking traffic on half of main street. I was walking along minding my own business, (but actually armed with my trust *ist-Ds and a collection of appropriate lenses). I decided I'd take a couple of pictures to commemorate the event, (and maybe make a couple of bucks selling the images to one of the local fish wraps). Suddenly this scruffy individual rushes at me from the company and confronts me to tell me that I can't take any photos for, and I quote legal reasons. When I asked him what I was doing wrong, he was a a loss except to explain, except to repeat his original statement. When I pointed out that the set was on a public road and within full view of the public, with no expectation of privacy, and that I was allowed to take photographs of anything I wished under those circumstances, his new tack was to claim that I couldn't use them for anything. I then pointed out that under fair use I could use them for non-commercial purposes which included selling them, and my story to a newspaper, or printing them large and selling them as art. He was left him gasping for breath, (sort of like a large trout), at which point he went back to his original argument. I also found it interesting that they had posted a sign that stated in part that, ... passing beyond this point, indicates your assent to being in the movie..., which is patently false, to avoid legal problems they still need signed releases from anyone who shows up on camera. Where do they find these people, and what idiot is giving them legal advice? He managed to make me furious as well. I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Lousy photographs to follow. -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Photographer harassed by unidentified Ass. Producer.
Sandy Harris wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:22 AM, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Part of todays adventure. A low budget movie is shooting ... ... I'm thinking of going back tomorrow just to piss them off. Take a video camera; that ought to really upset them. I'm friends with the editor of the local access cable channel. She's already asked me if I'd like to borrow their camera... -- You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone. --Al Capone. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
