Jaxx'sBuddy

there are NO photos of me on facebook and there never will. you cant use that as an argument especially when there is a backlash against facebook after a couple of people were murdered. Jaxx - it's not intended as an excuse for anything - just an example of how peoples photos are used - intentionally or otherwise on the net. There are sites that you can even upload your own photos to and sell them as advertising/marketing shots. if someone sells or uses their own shots then its not an issue. we are in this situation because of the net and the easy way people's images can be uploaded. as a society i dont think we have come to grips with what is going on and it is alleged that some people have lost job opportunities due to photo's on facebook being seen as inappropriate i think we really do need to grasp this nettle as a society and work out where we want to move with this. i dont like the direction we are going with the laws that we already have in place but it would be silly of us to ignore them

It may be your image, but it is the skill of the photographer which is being sold....not you or your dog. snap ellz i just said the same thing :D

there is an argument that we actually don't make the photographer money its what the photographer does with our image that makes them money.

there are NO photos of me on facebook and there never will. you cant use that as an argument especially when there is a backlash against facebook after a couple of people were murdered.

unfortunately yes they should be banned. I just don't think it's realistic or fair to have laws based on the very improbable. The fact is someone can be noticed anywhere. It's horrible and unfortunate but going out in public is a risk in itself and banning thing that don't effect 99.9% of people makes no sense. yep i agree with you but it seems to me that we are at a point where there are now laws that address this.

unfortunately yes they should be banned.

This is you, isn't it Raz... splurk :D :D :D

totally agree.

How about in a situation, where you have an expensive/rare/imported/highly-desired breed of dog and would like to reduce the likelyhood of strangers (with possible bad intentions) knowing unneccesary details about you. Therefore, you do not keep a Facebook/Twitter/Photo sharing account, you don't post photos of yourself or your dogs online and any forum that you frequent, and generally keep to yourself when out walking your dogs not because you are an unfriendly, petrified hermit paranoid that everyone will steal your dogs, but because you prefer to enjoy the company of your own dog/s and share them mainly with your family and friends? well i have one of the more unusual breeds and i dont publish any photos on the web. i still think my position is the same

Unfortunately it's come about for a reason and I totally understand what you're saying, Jaxx. Pretty sad, though. I think I get away with taking candid photos because I'm female but if a guy did it, probably different? yes i believe that is true unfortunately edit to clarify...that the unfortunate part is that not all guys are creepy but people see them as such because of the few creeps that are around

How would you know? The person who asks might be a creepy weirdo just as much as the person who doesnt ask. What's a creepy weirdo anyway? Paparazzi who make money out of snapping celebs? Rock spider who takes photos of little kids at the beach? Ordinary Jo Blow who takes photos to capture a moment? Serious questions. I'm not making fun here. What makes me different in taking street photography to 'a creepy weirdo'? What are the boundaries? those questions are why this is such an interesting topic for me. there is no way to tell a creepy weirdo from a not creepy weirdo. creepy weirdos look like us. thats the problem. i think as a society we are becoming more fearful and it is affecting our community spirit, what once was an innocent pastime (taking photos of people who are interestong or kids) has become a big no no i find that very challenging because whilst i understand it and will support the vulnerable in society, i dont like that we fear so much

I take photos of children because they express an emotion so clearly. Would you ever know where the photo was taken? Nup. How sad is it in this day and age that someone cant take a photo without suspicion because a few little creeps have stuck their phone up a girl's skirt to take a photo of her underpants. Privacy and confidentiality? How on earth is that being breached if someone takes a photo of a kid walking her puppy? As I said earlier, you wouldnt have a clue if I took your photo walking your dog down the street. i agree raz and i really do not like that we have a society where we have to be concerned about this type of thing. i wish we didn't have to work at the lowest common denominator, ie creeps who perve on kids or men who want to kill their partners

I do it all the time. You'll have to shoot me, Jaxx. ;) no shooting (pun intended) by me i think there are so many people where publishing their photo could cause them serious problems that the risk is too high. do i like this situation, not at all and i don't know what the solution is. if the photo was not to be published and for private use i would have no issue unless it was a child and that is only because of the creeps around What serious problems can it cause to so many people, and how do you know the photo caused the problem? I just can't see how the risk would outweigh the benefits. i know women that have been almost killed by their partners and had to change their identity and disappear to ensure they weren't killed. they are the people i am talking about. if their partner sees the photo and puts 2 and 2 together its serious for the woman. and i know this has happened when a photo was published in a newspaper without consent. the family had to be uprooted again for safety

I do it all the time. You'll have to shoot me, Jaxx. ;) no shooting (pun intended) by me i think there are so many people where publishing their photo could cause them serious problems that the risk is too high. do i like this situation, not at all and i don't know what the solution is. if the photo was not to be published and for private use i would have no issue unless it was a child and that is only because of the creeps around

So you would make all candid street photography illegal or do you really mean getting consent to USE the photo after? i think photographer should ask permission before taking photographs pf people. because they cant determine whether they are breaking this part of the law unless they ask: (2) Photographs must not be taken (or published) if a person’s identity is protected by a court order (eg. a suppression order, witness protection, child custody or protection order). You realise you can't really get a candid once the person knows, so that would be the end of street photography altogether. What a shame. Can't say it's my type of photography but there are so many amazing photographs over the years that record both history and society and culture all through candids. Asking permission to use the photo means if they do have the above issues, they are negated because the photo never sees the light of day. in totally agree with you. i think it is awful that we have become so distrustful as a society and we have to protect people to such an extent. i have seen some amazing street shots and yes they would be gone if consent was asked for. i dont know what the solution is

So you would make all candid street photography illegal or do you really mean getting consent to USE the photo after? i think photographer should ask permission before taking photographs pf people. because they cant determine whether they are breaking this part of the law unless they ask: (2) Photographs must not be taken (or published) if a person’s identity is protected by a court order (eg. a suppression order, witness protection, child custody or protection order).

well.... i would lie a little bit and tell them i found their rat dead and it looked as though one of the dogs might have killed it.

It's all over the place, isnt it. Obviously written by someone who thinks that all Islamics are big bad people who think dogs make them wash their hands before prayer, but the author is obviously trying to give a different stance, albeit badly. gosh, i used to make my kids wash their hands after handling the dog...i just thought it was good hygiene ;) :vomit:

i disagree with photographers taking photos of humans without getting their consent.

Poodles and Cockers make me itch like crazy. I love both these breeds but could not ever live with one. Two of my cats also make my eyes red and itchy but not the other. i didn't know that, ty. my daughter is allergic to cats...all cats, so i thought it was a species thing not an individual animal thing i learn something new every day ;)

how can people be allergic to one dog only and not all dogs? maybe its both dogs not just the pug?

until you get a diagnosis you dont know what is causing the reaction. it may not nbe the dog it may be something that grows flowers at this time of year. i believe you need to get the allergies/asthma assessed before you know whether it is the pugs fault

tell your husband you arent going to rehome him :D

What actually happens with the ignore button anyway?? I have never pressed it but am dying to know. ooppss Sorry if I have gone off topic you dont see the posts of the person on ignore unless someone quotes them try it out...choose some one its easy to unignore them as well

IGNORE is our friend... :D