Tales of Home [5]

I wouldnt ask either. I have taken photos of loads of people around and about that I find interesting. I just dont want the hassle of having to explain, although I try not to get their faces if possible, and I wouldnt post unless it was something odd like seeing a monk on the Tube. for example there is one guy who lives round here who looks just like Gandalf on a bike, hes great, so are you telling me I cant post a photo? or the barman who looks like Orlando Bloom? I have taken loads of photos of people at medieval fairs and they dont mind at all, they actually like being photoned.

Gandalf on a bike! I wanna see Gandalf on a bike!   

well he is very hasty so I havent actually got him yet. but I will.   

 

"so are you telling me I cant post a photo?" - figg

In Norway, taking a photo of someone you don't know, and putting it on the Internet afterwards is considered a pretty serious violation of a person's privacy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing anyone, just trying to point out that there seems to be a pretty big cultural difference here. Medieval fairs and similar festivals where the whole point is to dress up is a different matter, though, I'm pretty sure people wouldn't mind being photographed in their costumes. The metro is a different setting, and I'd advice anyone traveling to Norway not to photograph strangers (unless they agree to), however odd they may look

I agree Ringdrotten, this is clearly a cultural difference.

The sort of pic Lance put up are all over social media in the UK and not considered anything unusual in the culture and as Lance pointed out newspapers print them all the time.

When I'm in a city like London I just assume that there are a minimum of 10 security cameras photographing me at all times, and I behave accordingly. Living in a world like that, I think it's natural to get used to the idea that your image doesn't belong to you. But here in the country, as Petty says, it would be mildly rude not to at least ask "OK?" as you pull out the camera.

I do remember that when the newspaper reporters in Stockholm asked me a few questions and took my picture for the paper, they were very insistent that they had to buy my something to eat or in some other way compensate me for my trouble. It seemed to shock them that I didn't think that normal. In America it would be very strange indeed if a reporter tried to feed you!   

Different cultures....  

Norc wrote:

Lancebloke wrote:OK... next time I will put in spoilers for you.

jesus, don't patronize! i am saying you should show some fucking respect for other people you pompous little shit!

Think you need to get over yourself a bit. Just because it isn't normal for you doesn't mean it isn't for others. Sorry that I don't live up to your perfect moral code but maybe you should have a little respect for the way other people do things. If not I suggest you don't ever leave your country or you might get yourself in to trouble.

I realise people have tried to explain and calm it down a bit but I don't appreciate being called childish names by someone who tries to dictate what is or isn't right when they clearly have no idea of how it works somewhere else.

Lancebloke wrote:

Norc wrote:

Lancebloke wrote:OK... next time I will put in spoilers for you.

jesus, don't patronize! i am saying you should show some fucking respect for other people you pompous little shit!

Think you need to get over yourself a bit. Just because it isn't normal for you doesn't mean it isn't for others. Sorry that I don't live up to your perfect moral code but maybe you should have a little respect for the way other people do things. If not I suggest you don't ever leave your country or you might get yourself in to trouble.

I realise people have tried to explain and calm it down a bit but I don't appreciate being called childish names by someone who tries to dictate what is or isn't right when they clearly have no idea of how it works somewhere else.

get over yourself, Lance! I am sorry i called you that, that was a bit hasty thinking back on it. Also, sorry that i feel so strongly about this matter, i had no idea that that kind of rudeness was normal. I guess there is a cultural difference, but i still feel that it really is stepping over the line just taking pictures of people you don't know and people who don't know you and posting them online. And omg sorry for not being such a betraveled ass who knows everything and how it works and such. I am actually really offended by u saying not to ever leave my country just because i think with a polite mind. u seem to think of me as this naive kid, which i am not if u fucking knew me, and ofcourse i don't expect u to live up to my "perfect moral code", there is no such think as a perfect moral code, but there is something called respecting other peoples privacy. and don't say i don't have respect for other peoples way of living,(something u clearly don't since you're taking pictures of a monk on the tube because he looks odd and unusual), so don't you call me disrespectful, but i think i am absolutely allowed to react when i think someone is being rude.


also if respecting someone elses way of living is just accepting rudeness and stand by and watch someone violate their privacy then ok, yes i am being fucking disrespectful!

also if it feels weird asking for a photograph, then u should probably not take it.

Problem is Nora, you go in all guns blazing and you have again just now. Saying that that 'kind of rudeness is acceptable' is very belittling, like you think you are better. That isn't respectful at all as isn't resorting to yet more insults such as 'betraveled ass.' Yet again very grown up of you.

Annoying thing is I can see you point of view and that maybe that kind of thing shouldn't just be acceptable, I have removed the picture from my post because of that.

But when it comes to the manner in how you have put your point across Nora, don't think you have gone about it well and I had thought better of you before.

Ringdrotten wrote:"so are you telling me I cant post a photo?" - figg

In Norway, taking a photo of someone you don't know, and putting it on the Internet afterwards is considered a pretty serious violation of a person's privacy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing anyone, just trying to point out that there seems to be a pretty big cultural difference here. Medieval fairs and similar festivals where the whole point is to dress up is a different matter, though, I'm pretty sure people wouldn't mind being photographed in their costumes. The metro is a different setting, and I'd advice anyone traveling to Norway not to photograph strangers (unless they agree to), however odd they may look

interesting. Its completely different here, and its not considered a serious violation otherwise in crowd scenes, say at football or tennis matches when the camera pans the crowd and focuses on one person, that person doesnt sue the tv company for breach of privacy and they dont insist all faces on tv filmed in public places are obscured in case of breach of privacy. The only time peoples faces are obscured is when kids are involved in criminal cases or are the kids of celebrities, not not always. Photographers and journalists take photos of ordinary people without their consent every day. In tourist areas you cant help getting snapped in other peoples photos. I think its not ok if you are setting out to ridicule or hurt someone by publishing their photo.

Which I wasn't trying to do.

  

Lancebloke wrote:Which I wasn't trying to do.

  

I know you werent.   

Lancebloke wrote:Which I wasn't trying to do.

  

I know Lance.  When I saw the picture, my first thought was "that's kind of cool!"  I'd bet the monk is playing by the same rules you are, and when he chooses to go among people wearing his robes he's actually hoping people will notice, maybe think a little bit, or even talk to him.

I suspect he's not at all unhappy when people take his picture.  That's just so normal in tourist cities that signs are usually clearly posted in places where cameras are NOT welcome.

Now the use of "fuck" in conversation with the monk would have been extremely rude, by comparison. One might think you were calling him out. 

Edit: If you've ever met Japanese tourists, you'll know they aren't shy about taking pictures of everyone and everything.  Mothers nursing their babies,  for example.  Yet theirs is one of the most formally polite societies on the planet. It just doesn't seem to apply to  cameras! 

yeah the last wedding I went to was in the centre of Florence and there were literally hundreds of Japanese tourists taking our photos like we were celebs or something.   

Mrs Figg wrote:

Ringdrotten wrote:"so are you telling me I cant post a photo?" - figg

In Norway, taking a photo of someone you don't know, and putting it on the Internet afterwards is considered a pretty serious violation of a person's privacy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing anyone, just trying to point out that there seems to be a pretty big cultural difference here. Medieval fairs and similar festivals where the whole point is to dress up is a different matter, though, I'm pretty sure people wouldn't mind being photographed in their costumes. The metro is a different setting, and I'd advice anyone traveling to Norway not to photograph strangers (unless they agree to), however odd they may look

interesting. Its completely different here, and its not considered a serious violation otherwise in crowd scenes, say at football or tennis matches when the camera pans the crowd and focuses on one person, that person doesnt sue the tv company for breach of privacy and they dont insist all faces on tv filmed in public places are obscured in case of breach of privacy. The only time peoples faces are obscured is when kids are involved in criminal cases or are the kids of celebrities, not not always. Photographers and journalists take photos of ordinary people without their consent every day. In tourist areas you cant help getting snapped in other peoples photos. I think its not ok if you are setting out to ridicule or hurt someone by publishing their photo.

Yes, but there's a difference between football games and public events where you go in knowing there will be cameras and journalists all over, and a bus, train or tube where you don't expect to be filmed by news reporters and the like. Journalists will use their photos in an article and delete the ones they don't use. You never know what sort of person the guy sitting next to you may be. You don't expect people to take photos of you (in Norway that is, and I guess there's a lot of truth in the statement that we're the most naive country in the world), and people do get offended if they believe someone is filming/photographing them in a setting where that's neither expected nor considered "OK". And before anyone says anything about surveillance cameras on public transportation - yes, we do have them here as well, but I've got no problem with those. I choose to believe they're there for security reasons, and am glad that they're there. My problem is people I don't know who take a picture of me and go about their way. They're probably never going to look at the photo twice, but I don't like it. That being said, I don't even have a profile picture on facebook that shows my face, so perhaps I'm a little weird that way. Anyways, I know you weren't trying to offend anyone, Lance. To be honest, my first reaction was "Great photo of all these damned people with their phones every minute of every hour! The guy in the middle must be sitting in silent protest" Once again just trying to explain the fjordian way of things, and if I haven't made it any clearer this time (and chances are that I haven't), then I give up!

Edit: "I think its not ok if you are setting out to ridicule or hurt someone by publishing their photo." - figg

If I knew everyone were thinking like that, mrs figg, I wouldn't have a problem with it either It's just... you never know  

Ringdrotten wrote: And before anyone says anything about surveillance cameras on public transportation - yes, we do have them here as well, but I've got no problem with those. I choose to believe they're there for security reasons, and am glad that they're there.

Speaking just for myself, I resent the presence security cameras in public places more than I can find words for.

 They seem to me to be more Orwellian than even George Orwell could have imagined.  

I imagine them to be monitored by an army of bored, voyeuristic Homer Simpson's, and I find myself staring  into them defiantly, wanting to make rude gestures.  

They are everywhere in the U.K. particularly London. I would imagine I am on 50 or 60 cameras per day.

Lancebloke wrote: I would imagine I am on 50 or 60 cameras per day.

    

I remember, maybe a dozen years ago, reading that the Brits has pioneered software that could scan and identify faces in crowds and read number plates on moving vehicles.

Now that technology is everywhere, both public and private. How could that possibly go wrong?  

Thank you so very much, UK! 

Edit: I know it's not fair to blame the UK when it was inevitable.
It just seems ironic that when 1984 is such a classic of 20th century Brit Lit, that the primary message some people seem to have gotten is,
"OOoooo! That WOULD be a more efficient way to police people!" 
 

Got to agree David, the UK is the most monitored population on the planet I believe.

Even in my small town I cant go anywhere near town centre without being picked up on half a dozen cameras.

There is even one for the public to enjoy where you can be broadcast to the world without any idea  

http://www.dunoon.tv/

this is a very ambiguous issue. what with the modern obsession with 'selfies' and FB and a million social media stuff like blogs etc etc. In one way we have smart phones where we snap stuff 24/7 and on the other hand we have people who take it as an invasion of their privacy having any public photos of themselves. Its mixed messages and we need to decide our own boundaries I guess. Bottom line dont hurt anyone, or damage their reputation, or use the photos for nefarious purposes. When I post stuff its for purely interest value, if someone is interesting or doing something unusual, I dont take photos of just any random person on the street. Photography is an art and you just cant ask people before you snap em or the moment has passed.
on a side note I discovered my cousin has photo portraits that hang in the National Gallery in London.   he has some great ones of Woody Allen and Andy Warhol.  

Bloody police states!   

But modern life is what it is.
Every day people in London get caught on dozens of cameras, one of them takes a picture of a monk passing through, and a young Norwegian girl gets upset at the apparent lack of respect involved in taking the shot.

Who in their right minds could have anticipated such a strange exchange of ideas a couple hundred years ago?

It may be because English is your second language Norc, but as a native speaker of it I find "little shit" to be really belittling, and mean. I have heard people use it in a softer, more humorous way, but over text chat it's best avoided. As are most bad names, of course.

Thanks to all this debate I'm now really curious as to what this monk looked like!

Im now really curious as to what this monk looked like!- Forest

Monkish.    But I think he might have had a habit.   

It's a good thing you are not belitteling at all then, Forest.

Language in replied and comments is one thing, but I do agree with Norc. Also writing on the phone is no fun, may return later.