Assembly

Indeed, its just a heads up for your consideration.

I work with children (that's my full time job), and I have been employed as camp photographer in the past, apart from covering youth events all the time. So 2 things I learnt:

1 In the UK you can take photos of minors if you have parental consent.
2 If you have taken photos of children, the parental consent form must mention where you are going to publish your photos. In my case, when I was employed, I couldn't post the photos anywhere and had to only send them in the main office of the organisation.

This is only my personal experience, and I hope it helps.

Nathan

Hot topic in the UK. A recent copy of Amateur Photographer had someone bemoaning the fact that he kept his camera in his pocket when confronted with a wonderful scene of children lining up for a school bus. Personally, I would NOT put a picture up for public consumption with someone else's children clearly identifiable (actually, the missus won't allow my children either!) I think there is also a difference with being inside something like a school or event and street photography.

But this is very much fuelled by paranoia...

Tony

Cheers Nathan.

Tony - Blimey, you're making me feel guilty - I've often put up pictures of my own daughter (and sometimes her cousins). Do we really have to be so cautious? I mean, I can understand why one wouldn't post a photo if the child in it is scantily clad, but should we as parents really be so concerned about everyday pics of our offspring appearing in a public forum? (I'm not saying this is your view - just raising the question).

I understand the point about parental consent - but, assuming the innocent nature of any photos posted, doesn't this also raise issues about any image of a person being posted without consent. Should children be treated any differently than adults, that is? The current policy for adults being - if I'm not mistaken - that consent is required if the image is used for commercial purposes.

It's ludicrous isn't it? Paranoia sweeping the nation, entirely fueled by the media.

There is no law in the UK prohibiting photography of children in a public place, although local councils may have restrictions on photography in certain locales - near a school for instance.

This might not stop you getting arrested for doing it though. You'll just spend a few hours in police custody until they realise their mistake.

Mhuni - didn't mean to make you feel guilty and you're correct, this isn't my view. Tim's right, the media would have you think that we're swarming with peadophiles (especially those with cameras!) and children are in imininent danger. Reality is, of course, that it's no worse than 50 years ago, 99% of harm is done to children by their immediate family, and the closeting of children is leading to a generation of fat b*stards glued to their Nintendo...

(Blimey - start the week with a bang, eh?!)

Tony

Very sensitive topic.

I had been avoiding chipping in afraid that I might say something that could be misunderstood and then spark a hotter debate and suddenly this thread get out of control. We had enough of that last weekend and definitely do not want to contribute to another situation where tempers can really flare out of control.

But in light of a very recent situation that occurred, as early as yesterday, and although nothing controversial and now this morning with Dr Mhuni's thread now progressing towards the subject I feel compelled to dive in.

First of all let me leave it clear what my position is with regard to this issue because I have been also bang in the middle of a very unhappy situation so here it goes.

I am all for any measures required to protect children, and probably, dare I say, even if those measures are as drastic as taking preemptive steps to eliminate or even just to reduce the risks for any danger for children. For goodness sake I already go through situations not related to this particular aspect and in my view totally ridiculous and I put up with it, if its not because of how I look its because of my name, and if not that its because I fit so and so profile or just because I hold an EEC passport and that brings an avalanche of issues that triggers suspicions. But I have to admit also that most times its very well handled by the cops and often within a few minutes the moments go from a tense situation to a light mood one and usually ends up with a chuckle from both the sides and an innocent joke regarding me having a cocktail of aspects that make me a prime target for raising suspicions. Apart from an odd one where I was stuck at the airport with the immigration guys grilling me for seven hours most encounters which are directly originated by the cops end up quite well.

Now what I am surprised with is this. In what way would forbidding photographing children in the public area and being viewed on the net help avoid the nasty and such drastically sad situations we see in the media happening? I do see a related link, but as a whole I just fail to understand the whole aspect of it. Nowadays where you get high powered phone cameras that you can take it with you in the swimming pools, discreet P&S cameras with such range that images can be captured easily from hidden locations, in my view the ones who want to do this they would always find a way of doing it. Are we really able to stop this?


And the other aspect in my personal opinion is this. I did use to avoid uploading images of my little ones on the net, but then gave it a deep thought and realised that I do not want to live in a world that I would have to live in constant fear of something that can happen out of an image out there of my kids, and I do not really want to overprotect my kids to that extent. Educate yes, but not overprotect. I heard a few weeks ago on the radio about a man who while sitting in the bus and the lady in the seat in front of him who had a child with her, and aparently the child obviously being a child wouldn't sit still, kept on jumping up and down and then decided to innocently turn around to the man int the rear seat and making faces etc, and the man innocently decided to play along and make faces, and suddenly when the mother realised this she turned around and raised a havoc and called the man a paedophile. What a sad situation and in my view this is really hyped up by uneducated people who get dragged along and just get sucked into it.

I went for a stroll with my young one yesterday at a local sailing club where kids and adults go, and wanted to start getting him interested in sailing, had my camera with me and its a really wonderful lake, when I arrived I asked the manager there if I could take a few shots of the lake as there were lots of sailing boats there and loved the scene, he very politely told me that it could really raise issues and it would be better not to.

So now I am at a loss here. What world do we live in? We do want to protect our children yes, absolutely, and if I have to have my liberties shortened on a leash or even if I have to undergo through a few troubles I really do not mind, but I would like to know that my freedom and liberty of movements being limited in some way can really make a difference. Like it does when I am stopped under the terrorism act. I do not mind that because I fit the profile, well, according to some boffins I suppose , but I am quite ok with that. Show me that by me not being able to take photos in the open and enjoy moments with my child around taking pictures of other kids while sailing will help curb the drastic and sad nature of these sickening situations and I will not even blink and complain about it. In fact you might even find me with a big placard saying "PLEASE STOP DSLR CAMERAS AROUND CHILDREN'S PLAYGROUNDS" if this really would make a difference. But I suspect we are looking at the wrong angle here, and in the mist innocent people and photographers are getting the brunt of it and on top of it all people, uneducated might I add are just getting into the bandwagon and proliferate the scare that photographers are somewhat related to all the wrong things around with the kids. I have even my doubts if those sick people can even take photos properly. Their agenda is totally different.

So here I am, please educate me because I am at a loss. Again, I could be entirely wrong so please do not grill me if I am,

Amin

Can't disagree with you one bit. It's an interesting juxtaposition and I think demonstrates how people in authority (gov't, media etc.) can use fears (and racism is grounded in fear) to twist reality. So the public believe that these measures are NECESSARY in order to prevent terrorism or protect our children. Absolute b*******, but that's how the agenda's set.

Tony

I have to say I agree with you Amin. And your point about whether someone aiming to get surreptitious images of kids would more likely use a discreet compact than a DSLR is well made.

Restrictions on photography - relating to both terrorism and paedophilia - in the UK seem ludicrously over the top. I'm lucky to be living somewhere where these aren't clouding what invariably is the perfectly innocent use of cameras to record treasured moments. At kids parties (and school functions) here, parents routinely bring and use cameras - DSLRs and compacts - which is how it should be. I guess this isn't the case in the UK any more.

And Tony, you make an excellent point in observing that a. the occurrence of paedophilia is probably no greater than it was 20 or 50 years ago; and b. that most instances occur within the family, or close family friends, and recent hysteria and the policy response has done nothing to reduce its prevalence.

Dr Mhuni
I am sorry to put the following comment on this thread as this was for your image but as the subject has started developing further and you did mention that you would be interested in hearing more views about the issue I will add it here. If not happy with it please just say and I will ask the mod to move it to a new thread.

Further on the subject above, just reminded me, did anyone watch yesterday's movie "Hard Candy"? I think it was on BBC2. If not here is the link

It was one of those movies that I just hated watching but at the same time was so gripping that I just had to watch it. Till the end I was always in the hope that eventually the photographer would come up with the words "She was my sister, or daughter, that's why I kept her photograph", or something like that, and turning the tables completely upside down ...... I better not carry on, but suffice to say you should have a quick glance and if you want to read the story that site has links that will lead you to it.

I also do think that if in real life situations like that happened it would serve as a fantastic example and probably even discourage many of these nasty criminals to do what they do, and word would get around that it could happen to them.

Not encouraging vigilantes here, least even that a 14 year old did that, but my oh my, that was a punishment worse than death for the moments before he finally was allowed to go, and quite a befitting one

No worries Amin, this morning the thread was empty!

Though if others have opinions to voice re. this then another thread might be sensible.

Am currently trying to work up another version of the shot by transplanting the head from one photo to another!

Now THAT will be something to see Good luck with it, although I think it might prove to be very difficult. Luckily you've got a nice black background for his head on this shot, hopefully it's the same in your other shot.

It is actually looking alright so far. I'm surprised. Not sure it's worth the time I'm spending on it, but I guess I am enhancing my PSE skills. Already employed 3 features I've not used before!

Right, I've finished working on the head transplant. Have spent so much time looking at this shot now (far, far too much, no doubt - was up till 1 last night and have just spent a further 1 hour on it) that I find it impossible to assess. If anyone else can be bothered to re-visit it I'd appreciate the feedback.




Think I did a pretty good job on the head - although there is some haloeing around the head which isn't there in the larger version (you will have to take my word on this). Flipped the image and then cut and positioned the head on his body!

Cloned out the unfortunate damp patch that Amin noticed. Well most of it.

Haven't managed to do anything about the columns (and the girl in the green shirt is also not desaturated in this version). For some reason when I trace a selection and cut it to another layer, it now leaves a nasty white line in the image. If I adjust the Refine Edges setting all I seem to be able to do is increase the size (and haziness) of the line. It wasn't doing this before. Not sure what I have done. (Told you my PS skills were rudimentary:blush.

It's interesting, the kids are more blurred in this one (still don't look anything like as nice at this size as they do in the larger version mind - but that may now have more to do with the size I'm viewing the image at than re-sizing). They shouldn't be though, as as far as I'm aware I took the same steps in sharpening. I also tried following JR's suggestion, but this didn't come out so good (perhaps it would at different settings?):

As per Flickr comment - It's better and the edging round the head is quite discrete but I think the lighting is slightly different for the head and body now. Clone out the blues

I think that's a great job you've done with the head! There might be a tiny lighting difference but I don't think anyone who didn't know about the PP would notice.

I like it, but for the same reasons as before. The turned head is good, but so was the faceless head. I don't know which I prefer

Also I think you made a good decision about desaturating green shirt girl in the first photo. Do it again