Inappropriate bahaviour

[subaqua]

do peados like other legumes too?

the only time eldest sprogs school has asked for pics not to be taken is when it has been professionally recorded/photographed or there are copyright issues. at the beginning of each year there are permission slips sent out saying that you give/don't give permission for your child to be photographed. none have been returned showing no permission in the 7 years she has been at primary.

in the OPs post Matt doesn't state if the theatre said because of copyright etc. I do think that there are bigger things to worry about in life though Matt. let it wash over you and don't get het up about the silly things

 

[Cubist]

My kids' school got round the whole hysteria thing by saying

"Feel free to take photos, but don't post them online. " (Common sense? Takes a Yorkshire primary headteacher.....)

 

[Matthew_T]

From contacting the Information Commissioner, they have stated that the videoing and recording of people and vehicles may come under Section 36 or the Data Protection Act. Which states: Personal data processed by an individual only for the purposes of that individual’s personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes) are exempt from the data protection principles and the provisions of Parts II and III.

That is a quote relating to pictures beng taken on the public roads. The theatre was private land.

At the start, the guy who advised against filming didnt say anything about copyright. However, there were songs in all performances which has copyright issues.
The woman in front didnt take oen or two photos, she took about 9 or 10. She didnt just take photos of her sister, she captured other children in the pictures as well. She spoiled the whole evening as me and other people behind me could see her taking them. Noone else in the whole theatre was taking photos. She was the only one dumb enough to do so.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

You should lighten up a bit.

 

[tyred]

Matthew, I suggest you try to stop getting upset at minor rule infringements by others. Life's far too short to worry about what others are doing and everyone who is alive has bent a few rules and pushed some boundaries of some sort in their time. In this case, it's questionable if any actual rules were broken. Disrespectful possibly, but not the end of the world.

 

[dellzeqq]

I don't think that there is any reason why people should not take photographs on private land, whether it be a church hall, railway station or shopping centre. If the owner of the land wants to allege a trespass he or she can do so, but they'll lose.

 

[classic33]

That is a quote relating to pictures beng taken on the public roads. The theatre was private land.

And that is the point made earlier, by myself. The landowner/building owner can legally restrict you from taking photos/videos. Certain places may not be covered.
You stated clearly that you were instructed not to use cameras. Abide by that request & you'll stay out of trouble.

http://www.pbiz.co.uk/index.php/photographers-rights
See the bits on children & private land/property.

Some schools use such events to raise money for the school, others will "use the law" simply to over protect the children in their care.

 

[asterix]

Visited Amsterdam's Rijksmuseum once. They have this picture by Rembrandt called 'The Night Watch' which is huge and you are not allowed to photograph it. I'd seen loads of copies but in real life it is very impressive and I stood there taking in the detail and drama of the picture. Suddenly I was shoved to one side as an American woman of large proportions announced that I was in the way of her camera shot!

In hindsight I do wish I had taken her camera and jumped up and down on it. But sadly what marinyork said is true: for me Rembrandt's painting is inextricably linked to a rude American. I'll have to go back one day..

 

[PK99]

When the performance was over and we started to leave, I said to the woman "I hope you are going to delete those pictures". She turned around and looked at me with a face of surprise as I walked away with an angry face on me. I was not happy at all.

?

Matt,

Your aspergers influenced interpersonal skills seem to lead you into potential confrontation rather too regularly - as does your need to see rules being followed.

In this instance, "I hope you are going to delete those pictures", is a rather aggressive way of making your point. A better intervention might have been "Excuse me, do you know that photography is not allowed this evening?"

 

[PK99]

I don't think that there is any reason why people should not take photographs on private land, whether it be a church hall, railway station or shopping centre. If the owner of the land wants to allege a trespass he or she can do so, but they'll lose.

There was a "battered womens' refuge" close to a school i knew, and a very real need to respect the wishes of some of the women who did not want their kids being photographed

 

[ttcycle]

I think it's a very sad day that plenty of schools are prohibiting photography at school events - I saw some photos of my niece who had been in a school performance stood at the end on the stage by herself- really what does this actually say as a memory?!

It's unreasonable, I understand the issues of copyright but really the reality is that a lot of parents taking photos are not going to be using them commercially. I understand the frustration that can come with intrusive flash usage but an outright ban on photos is ridiculously unflexible.

Being a freelance photographer in the smoke, I can confirm not much has changed MDB on the legality and misinformed/ignorant public.

 

[Matthew_T]

*Sigh* I guess that once again I have overreacted.I must stop doing this now. I have calmed down on the roads and have bitten my tongue, but this instance annoyed me.

It wasnt just me who was annoyed, but everyone who had seen the woman doing it. I could here people behind me tutting and talking about it and my mother was annoyed as well.

 

[jowwy]

That is a quote relating to pictures beng taken on the public roads. The theatre was private land.

At the start, the guy who advised against filming didnt say anything about copyright. However, there were songs in all performances which has copyright issues.
The woman in front didnt take oen or two photos, she took about 9 or 10. She didnt just take photos of her sister, she captured other children in the pictures as well. She spoiled the whole evening as me and other people behind me could see her taking them. Noone else in the whole theatre was taking photos. She was the only one dumb enough to do so.

how do you know for sure that other people were captured in the pictures, without seeing them for yourself?? and why does it matter, its upto the powers to be in the theatre to tell her to stop, NOT YOU.

and i'm sure someone taking a few photo's can't have stopped you enjoying the performance, especially when it was only 9 or 10 photo's. How long did that take a few minutes at the most.

 

[Matthew_T]

how do you know for sure that other people were captured in the pictures, without seeing them for yourself??

I did see them. She was sat directly in front of me and was holding the camera between her and her friend who she was talking to for the whole performance. She clearly was not paying attention and enjoying the evening.

 

[Trickedem]

Good article on this subject in the Guardian last week
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/jun/23/photos-children-school-ban?newsfeed=true