Girl with a Pink Umbrella

[Stan]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Well said Colin - I was not quite sure how to respond to Shutterfly. Interestingly wheen his post came through i was just finishing an edit of the original shot along the lines of your edit - suppose i had better not post it up now for fear of causing more offence.

I notice that the poster has been a member since August and has taken no active part in the forum until today.....sorry he did pose a question earlier in respect of software for mono conversions and despite a number of members offering advice was never polite enough to say thank you !!!!

Stan

[colin C]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

was never polite enough to say thank you !!!!

So, you're implying I am unlikely to get a thank you for educating the member ........................... how very disappointing!

Regarding your edit - post away. We are very good at regulating ourselves within a code of acceptable conduct and if we stray from what is reasonable and acceptable, we have Robert to contend with.

[Stan]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Regarding your edit - post away.

OK, here goes - although like tyhe original it is hosted on flickr, both are "private" and not visible on flickr to anyone other than myself.

Stan

[Guesty]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Hi Stan,

First of all, nice capture.

Secondly,

... And when you've learned all those lovely photoshop skills, perhaps the other thing you should learn is NOT to take random, pics of children and then post them on Flickr and related places. If this child is your daughter, I fully retract my comments. If not, then shame on you for being so totally irresponsible. If this was my kid I'd be furious. ( .. And, no, I a not some paranoid nutter ... Just an amateur photographer with more common sense.)

What a bizzare over reaction. :what:

I had a similar encounter with a woman while taking photos of MY children at a local water park. Given that the children were in various stages of undress I was sympathetic and showed her the photos. I explained how, using DoF, I had not actually taken any recognisable images of children other than my own. To her however, even blurred topless children were an affront and she insisted I delete them or she would call the police!

I have to say that my final response was no where near as polite as Stan's nor as jovial as Colin's.

I'm ashamed to say I did put the camera away after that though. Such a sorry, paranoid world we love in now a days.

[Columbarius]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Well said Colin!

article-0-136433DA000005DC-963_634x406.jpg

Hercules.jpg

Not only images of children, but naked children!

The first probably did more than anything else to bring about the end of carpet bombing with napalm and the Vietnam war.

Although Titian (I think) painted it I confess to making the second image. Where do I hand myself in?

[DeeGee]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Stan.

This could just be me. But her feet don't seem to sit right. Maybe a little shadowing under the edges to merge more with the sand to give foundation... if that makes sense.

[digiman]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Wow, thought it was all going to kick off then! A very bizarre over reaction, with a story behind it no doubt......

I love this forum for the fact that it starts off as a post of a pink umbrella, then becomes a lesson on PS, with very relevant pointers on improving an image. Then on to lessons in UK law!! Where else woiuld you get such a comprehensive education

Nice work Stan and Colin, and Colin, I did love your response... great to see you back

[Stan]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Cheers Di and Garry

This could just be me. But her feet don't seem to sit right.

I think you are right Di - I should have left the shadow under the shoes which i think would have sorted it

Stan

[Shutterfly]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Very well done on becoming judge and jury on what is and what is not acceptable, under the law in the UK. Parliament and the judiciary are no doubt greatly relieved that you have singlehandedly relieved them of the burden of formulating new laws. Presumably you also castigate the TV, newspapers and magazines for showing photographs of .................... I almost shudder to say the word ..............Children!

Thankfully the Law in the United Kingdom incorporates a modicum of common sense and precludes the taking and owning of "Inappropriate" pictures of children, not pictures of children. The initial arbiters of appropriateness are the Police, who strangely enough are trained in the law and they will decide whether to take further action, or otherwise. If you still consider the girl with the umbrella inappropriate, then I urge you to reconsider your above statement.

In your response you may wish to consider including one or more of the following phrases:

• I overreacted

• I apologise

• I didn't know what I was talking about.

All ... firstly, thank you for your interesting responses to my original post. As very much the new kid on the block around here I was unsure how my post would be greeted, or whether and to what extent this issue has been debated in the past; but now I know.

Stan - as you clearly don't agree with my post and therefore condone the behaviour highlighted, I feel you are in no way morally mature enough to be making snippy criticisms about my manners.

Colin - (and others) further to the above comments, having re-read my post I can't see any reference in it to the law of the land. Nor did I, any point, use the word "inappropriate". As a keen photographer of some years standing I am fully aware of the law with regard to what I can and cannot, under the law, legally photograph. This is a point upon which I need no further education. If my feet are planted in public territory, then pretty much anything or anyone is photographic fair game. But is it?

Until very recently, it was legal in the country to hunt wild animals with packs of dogs with the aim of killing said quarry. Many people did so and acted legally under the law. Many others, rightfully in my view (got forbid, another Shutterfly opinion!!) thought the practice morally reprehensible and did not take part. Happily, the law now concedes to the moral view. My point, which you have misinterpreted, is that, regardless of what is or is not legal, some actions are morally unacceptable to many. This is one such case, in my opinion.

I fully accept that you too have the right to voice opinions on this forum. However, with reference to the above, bullet points:

1. I most certainly did not over-react, and stand by my view that, if this were my child and I knew who had taken this picture, I would be loudly and angrily demanding its immediate removal.

2. I absolutely will not apologise for voicing my opinions on this forum. If you don't like them, then that is your problem, but that is what on-line forums are for.

3. I do know what I'm talking about both from the legal and moral standpoint. As I said, I'm not some troll or paranoid nutter in spite of your opinions (to which you are entitled).

I have deleted the rest of this response as I feel I have now said my bit on this matter. Clearly, there are many educated, informed, mature, intelligent and responsible folk on here and I am one, and will continue to lurk and post as I think fit unless I get permanently banned for voicing an opinion.

But just one last point ... not everyone who owns and uses an EOS camera is a "he". Some of us (myself included) are mature, thinking and creative women who like to give expression to their creativity through their cameras and I will be continuing to do so. Just as I will be continuing to express my own opinions on sensitive or controversial issues regardless of the (sometimes quite arrogant) bluster we witness on forums such as these.

Happy New Year!!

[colin C]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

I will be continuing to express my own opinions on sensitive or controversial issues

Congratulation on post number 3.

I wasn't aware that this was a sensitive, or controversial issue and out of 7,199 members, you are the only one who has decide it is. You have written a great deal in defence of your original opinion, but you haven't actually said anything. At the crux of your moral crusade is a charming candid shot of a young girl, in pink with a pink umbrella. You agree it is not against the law, you appear to concede that it is not inappropriate and your debate is against the moral acceptability of this delightful cameo of a photograph.

I and many others would be most interested to understand what makes you the arbiter of moral acceptability? Is there a Degree course, or do you have a Doctorate in Moral responsibility? I mention this out of interest because this child was not abandoned to roam the Bournemouth coastal areas by herself, at risk from any and all moral degenerates. There were loving parents keeping a watchful eye and no doubt looking out for her welfare. I find it unusual that they wouldn't have remonstrated with the photographer, if they considered he was doing anything unacceptable. Equally, Stan's partner Dee would never countenance anything except the highest moral standards.

So the photographer took the shot, in all innocence with no hidden agenda, the parents didn't see a problem, 7,198 other members haven't voiced any disagreement, yet you still have a problem with the photo. May I ask why? Is it just an opinion, or do you have some facts or evidence to support your opinion? I ask this because apart from legal training, I am also CRB checked. I have been on all the courses. I am checked annually and as a keen photographer, I am thoroughly against the sort of unfounded paranoia, that would inhibit decent men and women from enjoying their hobby and bringing pleasure to others, including photographs for the children and the parents of the children. Yes, some people have used a camera to take inappropriate photographs and we all strongly condemn that. Equally, some parents abuse and murder their children ................. so should we treat all parents as abusers and murderers? Of course not, that would be absurd!

So at the risk of bringing facts into your argument, what exactly do you object to?

• Is it a child?
• Should no child be photographed?
• At what age can a child be photographed?
• Can parents photograph their own children?
• Can parents post photo's of their children?
• Who will vouch for the moral acceptability of parents behaviour and motives?

[Nathaniel]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

I wish more people will post images rather than be "lurkers"; make more comments whether good,bad,foolish or idiotic, than come out of the woodworm once in a blue moon and make an "irrelevant" comment as has been made. The regular posters are known, whether we have met them or not, and one can form a reasonable opinon of the person concerned. It is the unknown lurker who makes a sudden foray ,a sudden dart into the world of the "known posters" that causes most unwanted difficulties to those who wish to improve their photography.

I wish to add that the edits by Colin and Stan are very nice indeed. A lovely picture.

[Bhuna]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

I myself am new here having only joined in the last month but I do know there are much better ways in expressing concerns than in the abrupt and dictorial manner in which the comments were made. Im sure that if the post read something along the lines of "I have some moral concerns over imagery of children appearing on public forums without parental permission due to ...., what are other members views on this" then Im sure we would be reading a reasonably constructive debate over the issue.

That way then it doesnt matter if someone has been here a day, a week, a decade, posted once or a million times, the subject is contructively debated without people being at each others throats.

[colin C]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Opinions are like bottoms ................. we all have one, though some appear to have more than their fair share!

All opinions are welcome on this Forum, as long as they fall within the Law of the land, common decency, fair play and the rules of this Forum. But an opinion is, by its very nature, just an opinion, not some divine truth to be held in awe and never questioned. They will be challenged and debated and if found wanting, fall by the wayside.

If your opinion is found right, act with grace and kindness to others. If your opinion was tested wrong, forego further argument, rather than continue to defend the indefensible. Whilst an expression of regret, or acknowledgement of error may be honourable, it is not a requirement. After all, this is a family of friends .................... with varied opinions and long may it continue.

[Clickclock]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Opinions are like bottoms ................. we all have one, though some appear to have more than their fair share!

All opinions are welcome on this Forum, as long as they fall within the Law of the land, common decency, fair play and the rules of this Forum. But an opinion is, by its very nature, just an opinion, not some divine truth to be held in awe and never questioned. They will be challenged and debated and if found wanting, fall by the wayside.

If your opinion is found right, act with grace and kindness to others. If your opinion was tested wrong, forego further argument, rather than continue to defend the indefensible. Whilst an expression of regret, or acknowledgement of error may be honourable, it is not a requirement. After all, this is a family of friends .................... with varied opinions and long may it continue.

Oh my goodness! ... New around here and having a look round I came across this one. What started out as a simple "what do you think" thread seems to have turned into a debate about freedom of speech. At the risk or being controversial, just 3 or 4 posts in to my new membership, surely personal opinions are just that, right or wrong? Not saying the original poster is either right or wrong, and certainly their original point could have been made in less strident language, but they are entitled to their opinion whether the rest of us like it or not, surely? Debate it as you wish, hold and support opposing views, but if this is a family of friends with varied opinions as you say, then accept your differences and move on. No-one should feel compelled to apologise for holding an opinion, however controversial or distasteful others may find it. Sorry! I'll go back behind the sofa now ....

[colin C]

Re: Girl with a Pink Umbrella

Sorry! I'll go back behind the sofa now ....

No need ................ your thoughts are very valid and well put.