tracert shows the traffic falling apart on telia.net/cloudflare consistently.
i have mentioned this twice before.
i advise hosting with mochahost.
cloudflare really sucks, and when it kill traffic consistently, any perceived security benefits are lost.

phuketrichard wrote:

General Mackevili wrote:

phuketrichard wrote:if ur referring to me ,
I have NEVER photographed anyone EVER that asked me not to

But have you received permission from EVERYONE you have photographed?

Shoot first...

has ANYBODY?

No, Richard, don't evade the question. It's very relevant, because you're the guy who's moralising here.

Either do it the way you preach everyone else should, or piss off.

Seriously tiresome, if someone nicked your photos and made money from them, I agree with you.

Anything else, that's life.

phuketrichard wrote:I think many of us that do photograph, Do not get necessarily verbal consent to take a street portrait, BUT when i point my camera at someone and they smile back at me, i take that as consensual consent> Would you not agree?

NO.

By the same reasoning, do you think every Asian woman who smiles at you wants to go to bed with you?

Stop lying to yourself to justify your actions. This is Asia, people smile when they're embarrassed, nervous, angry, humiliated, etc.

I know you know this.

People use your photos, you use people. End of.

You bin listening to dem Hollywood schmucks too much.

TheGrinchSR wrote:Note: With relatively few exceptions, photographers have a legal right to photograph in any public space. They only usually need permission if they want to commercially exploit someone's image (though for groups - this is often not true either).

Is this legally true in Cambodia?

vladimir wrote:

TheGrinchSR wrote:Note: With relatively few exceptions, photographers have a legal right to photograph in any public space. They only usually need permission if they want to commercially exploit someone's image (though for groups - this is often not true either).

Is this legally true in Cambodia?

100% legally true in Cambodia. Actually, Cambodia doesn't yet have laws regarding commercial exploitation of images... so you can shoot and publish without permission. Though, I'd say that was a pretty shitty thing to do. However, I see nothing wrong with a street photographer taking images without permission - I see plenty wrong with publishing them for commercial exploitation without permission.

TheGrinchSR wrote:

vladimir wrote:

TheGrinchSR wrote:Note: With relatively few exceptions, photographers have a legal right to photograph in any public space. They only usually need permission if they want to commercially exploit someone's image (though for groups - this is often not true either).

Is this legally true in Cambodia?

100% legally true in Cambodia. Actually, Cambodia doesn't yet have laws regarding commercial exploitation of images... so you can shoot and publish without permission. Though, I'd say that was a pretty shitty thing to do. However, I see nothing wrong with a street photographer taking images without permission - I see plenty wrong with publishing them for commercial exploitation without permission.

Grinch, that's my point. in America, people pay models/ extras if they're shooting commercially.

Seems some people want the 'models' to work for free, even unknowingly, and they reap all the rewards, but Dog help you if you copy the picture.

Richard, weren't you the guy that suggested if someone isn't willing to pay a cop a $5 bribe/illegal fine he should think twice about staying?

By the same token, if you're not prepared to pay your models, maybe you should do the same.

It sounds like a similar situational logic to me.

Richard, this issue is about money. That's what copyright is based on. You travel around, take pictures of people you ASSUME give informed consent, and then profit from the photos, yes.

You are seeking validation/approval of what you do: I'm not going to give it.

Your half-arsed attempt to discredit me by saying I know nothing of street photography is ridiculous. Most posters on here are in the same boat. We are not discussing the technical aspect, we are discussing the ethics of copyright, a western ideal with roots only in financial benefit, in an oriental country.

You're not shooting models because that would cost money...the plebs are too ignorant of the law to ask for payment, but you profit from that. That's fine, go ahead, but please don't try and whitewash it and put guilt on others.

My point about women smiling is that in Asia people smile for different reasons, not the same as in the west. You know that, but you chose to try and deflect the point. Why? No lawyer would ever try and postulate that a smile equals consent, even in America, seriously, what a feeble joke/attempt to justify/legalise the photo.

ASK them, Richard, ASK them.

When did this strong desire to see the law enforced arise...when your pocket started being affected, right? And after you've had your flings with hookers and hard drugs, right?

Laughable, really.