Wednesday, 30 September 2009
There I was, North Greenwich Bus station, on a public pavement, and doing what I've wanted to do for about six months, taking night-time shots of London Docklands. I am using the Bronica medium-format camera, and having a great time. I've taken two rolls (that's the thirty shots of film), and I change position to shoot the towers on the front of the 02 building (this is at night, everything is DARK at 19.00 h). Two security guards leap out from a gatehouse and tell me I must stop, or they'll arrest me under the 'Anti-Terrorism' legislation. I try and ignore them, but they stand in front of the camera. I explain that I'm on a public pavement, obviously going about my lawful business. This isn't good enough for the manager, who radio's his control to call the police; he says I have 'a professional camera, looks like it takes film." I say that I am entitled to shoot images in a public place, and they can clearly see that I'm not obstructing anyone else. I take my shot, and move away. They follow me, up close. I phone 999 as I feel these guys are not going to let me and my camera go. The police talk to them on my phone, then they tell me that I've got to go. I say that because the police aren't there, they can't see that I'm in a public place. I invite the police to come, but after waiting twenty minutes for them to arrive to deal with this 'terrorist offence', no-one shows up, and I tell the security guys I've got to go.
Click on this post title to find out more about FLASHMOB - Freedom to photograph . . . What do you think I should do ? Write to the management at O2 ? Write to my MP ? If I forget it, what will they do to the next guy who tries to take a harmless photograph from the public road outside somewhere ?
Tuesday, 29 September 2009
Saturday, 19 September 2009
Monday, 7 September 2009
Sunday, 6 September 2009
Isabel Wilkinson writes about Stimpson, a British photographer, re-creating 'classic' photographs in Lego. See it at
(or just click on my blog-post title, to go there pronto).
Nora Ephron has done it again. She's hot in Hollywood, and she's in the Sunday Times at
This film is supposed to be fab, according to the reviews. Do see it - I will be . . .
Saturday, 5 September 2009
I finally got it to work . . .
WOO - HOO . . .
I've tried for at least a year (NOT non-stop !) to get a hot-link environment going on my blog-posts. You know, click on a a picture and go to another one, that sort of thing. Well, I haven't solved that one yet, but NOW, if you click on the BLOG POST TITLE, it instantly HTML's you to the newspaper article or other stuff that my post is about . . .
more info at
but now you know that to go there you've not got to copy and paste, just click on the _ _ _ _ _ . . .
I've re-done the title for every article back to Martin Parr in May. Two don't work, but you can always copy and paste those two, can't you ?
There I was, minding my own business, until page 26 of today's Manchester Guardian woke me up . . .
includes an audio clip of Lizzie herself. The link
has more of Saner's article. The photo in the newspaper on page 26 lists THIRTEEN Photoshop 'corrections' performed on this photo of the twenty-year old model. The model isn't any fatter than she used to be, it's just that the magazine didn't get rid of her tummy with Photoshop.
According to Emine Saner, this has generated lots of e-mails, but is it a sign for the future ? The Lib-Dems are considering introducing legislating to ban re-touching on photos used in adverts aimed at the under-16's.
See more on women and airbrushing at