The disgruntled DWF joint members

[Uzair Kharawala]

I'm sorry Damien but I'm with John on this one. If one needs to 'expand their blinkered, negative minds' then I have to say that we will need a change in law. I believe public nudity is an offence (please correct me if I'm wrong). No photographer will set up a 'nude' shoot in say London, Manchester, B'ham, etc. He/she will be arrested. Period.
I wouldn't be comfortable with nude model shoots in a hotel where I'm staying with my young kids. There is a place and a time for everything in life. Shoots like this should be hosted in one of the seminar rooms.

Oz

[Tim Hoy]

Okay..... I agree 100% that the bulk of the posts are negative and unpleasant. BUT I'm going to stick my neck on the line here and say..... I was by no means the only person who thought a few things involving models in very public areas of the hotel and trade show, were not in good taste and I had a few people comment to me about it. I also saw the look of shock on some faces on more than one occasion. Not everyone wants to see a model in a see through latex suit when they go to a trade show to buy a camera, or even see a naked woman posing in public as they go about their business. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just saying we need to be careful as we all have different ideas of what is 'tasteful' and what is not.

I know there is a place for certain types of shoot at the event, but can't we keep them for private areas in the future...and maybe be careful what goes on the website after?

-prepares to be shot down-

My previous post in this thread relates to my general opinion of the DWF and the high level of arbitrary and unnecessary negativity.  It serves me right for not actually reading the post that started off Damien's observations as I actually agree with what John has to say above.  There's a huge market for the sort of shots that were taken at the convention and I'm certain that Damien's models didn't have their arms twisted, but fair comment Mr Baikie - there is a time and place for everything.  As much as I love the naked human body (well probably not mine) a closed set would have been more appropriate.  

If the observations from those who were or might have been offended had been made in a similar style to that employed by John, I suspect that Damien might not have responded as he did though.  

[BlackSwann]

Same... membership cancelled - it's disgusting!!!!

On a lighter note I've just renewed my membership to the SWPP - and it's all thanks to you guys!!!!

[McGillicuddy]

I'm sorry Damien but I'm with John on this one. If one needs to 'expand their blinkered, negative minds' then I have to say that we will need a change in law. I believe public nudity is an offence (please correct me if I'm wrong). No photographer will set up a 'nude' shoot in say London, Manchester, B'ham, etc. He/she will be arrested. Period.
I wouldn't be comfortable with nude model shoots in a hotel where I'm staying with my young kids. There is a place and a time for everything in life. Shoots like this should be hosted in one of the seminar rooms.

Oz

This is easy... your wrong, its obstructing the public high way that is the usual offense... how did Pat Litchfield shoot the Pirelli calendar on the streets of NY?

if you had a problem with me Oz you should have come to me instead of posting on another forum... not very professional eh mate. Guess which way you've gone in my estimation

[McGillicuddy]

Okay..... I agree 100% that the bulk of the posts are negative and unpleasant. BUT I'm going to stick my neck on the line here and say..... I was by no means the only person who thought a few things involving models in very public areas of the hotel and trade show, were not in good taste and I had a few people comment to me about it. I also saw the look of shock on some faces on more than one occasion. Not everyone wants to see a model in a see through latex suit when they go to a trade show to buy a camera, or even see a naked woman posing in public as they go about their business. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just saying we need to be careful as we all have different ideas of what is 'tasteful' and what is not.

I know there is a place for certain types of shoot at the event, but can't we keep them for private areas in the future...and maybe be careful what goes on the website after?

-prepares to be shot down-

My previous post in this thread relates to my general opinion of the DWF and the high level of arbitrary and unnecessary negativity.  It serves me right for not actually reading the post that started off Damien's observations as I actually agree with what John has to say above.  There's a huge market for the sort of shots that were taken at the convention and I'm certain that Damien's models didn't have their arms twisted, but fair comment Mr Baikie - there is a time and place for everything.  As much as I love the naked human body (well probably not mine) a closed set would have been more appropriate.  

If the observations from those who were or might have been offended had been made in a similar style to that employed by John, I suspect that Damien might not have responded as he did though.  

Tim your 100% correct

[John Baikie]

I'm sorry Damien but I'm with John on this one. If one needs to 'expand their blinkered, negative minds' then I have to say that we will need a change in law. I believe public nudity is an offence (please correct me if I'm wrong). No photographer will set up a 'nude' shoot in say London, Manchester, B'ham, etc. He/she will be arrested. Period.
I wouldn't be comfortable with nude model shoots in a hotel where I'm staying with my young kids. There is a place and a time for everything in life. Shoots like this should be hosted in one of the seminar rooms.

Oz

This is easy... your wrong, its obstructing the public high way that is the usual offense... how did Pat Litchfield shoot the Pirelli calendar on the streets of NY?

if you had a problem with me Oz you should have come to me instead of posting on another forum... not very professional eh mate. Guess which way you've gone in my estimation

That is very unfair.

[McGillicuddy]

I'm sorry Damien but I'm with John on this one. If one needs to 'expand their blinkered, negative minds' then I have to say that we will need a change in law. I believe public nudity is an offence (please correct me if I'm wrong). No photographer will set up a 'nude' shoot in say London, Manchester, B'ham, etc. He/she will be arrested. Period.
I wouldn't be comfortable with nude model shoots in a hotel where I'm staying with my young kids. There is a place and a time for everything in life. Shoots like this should be hosted in one of the seminar rooms.

Oz

This is easy... your wrong, its obstructing the public high way that is the usual offense... how did Pat Litchfield shoot the Pirelli calendar on the streets of NY?

if you had a problem with me Oz you should have come to me instead of posting on another forum... not very professional eh mate. Guess which way you've gone in my estimation

That is very unfair.

And what about the other thread....

 at least I say whats on my mind and defend my corner in an honest and transparent manor I haven't been subversive in any way shape or form

[John Baikie]

Yeah and that is good, but it's also fair that others can have an opinion as well?

I just don't want people talking about stuff for the wrong reasons that's all.

These folk are dying to down swpp at any opportunity and it makes me mad.

J

[Uzair Kharawala]

Damien
First of all, let me clarify a couple of things:

- I've posted the same message on the other forum as I've posted here. Same views, same opinions.
- Please do read my post on the other forum before you come to any conclusion, in that I also mentioned other photographic trade events / shows where such activities take place and I am not too impressed by that either.
- I did not know who did the shoot until you posted this thread. I stand by my views. Whether it is you or anyone else, doesn't matter, public nudity is a no no for me I'm afraid. This is why a forum like this allows everyone to express their views. It doesn't mean that just because we agree to disagree, I'm taking sides.

I've not made any slandering remarks to you or towards any other photographer, so please refrain from making any further comments regarding my professionalism and integrity.  


Oh BTW, I'm talking about the laws over here and not in NY!

Oz

[McGillicuddy]

Yeah and that is good, but it's also fair that others can have an opinion as well?

I just don't want people talking about stuff for the wrong reasons that's all.

These folk are dying to down swpp at any opportunity and it makes me mad.

J


And by standing up for my belief, HONESTLY and OPENLY I'm defending not only my reputation but the forward thinking and progressive manor the SWPP have adopted.

Its the fact that the SWPP is so SUCCESSFUL that people want to have a "Pop" and try and take a piece of the "Pie" that Phil & Juls have bust a gut to achieve.

John, sometimes a man just has to draw a line in the sand and say enough! I wont appologise for defending myself or the SWPP rep both were hard won. Both Phil and Juls know I'm SWPP through and through. I've never professed to get everything right all the time, but as a professional courtesy I don't expect to be whispered about behind my back... period

[McGillicuddy]

Damien
First of all, let me clarify a couple of things:

- I've posted the same message on the other forum as I've posted here. Same views, same opinions.
- Please do read my post on the other forum before you come to any conclusion, in that I also mentioned other photographic trade events / shows where such activities take place and I am not too impressed by that either.
- I did not know who did the shoot until you posted this thread. I stand by my views. Whether it is you or anyone else, doesn't matter, public nudity is a no no for me I'm afraid. This is why a forum like this allows everyone to express their views. It doesn't mean that just because we agree to disagree, I'm taking sides.

I've not made any slandering remarks to you or towards any other photographer, so please refrain from making any further comments regarding my professionalism and integrity.  


Oh BTW, I'm talking about the laws over here and not in NY!

Oz

Oz I may not agree with your statements but I believe all are entitled to be heard and even though I may not agree I will defend your right to say your piece with my last breath.

I'm not embarrassed or ashamed about my job or my friends, so we are going to have to be grown up and agree to disagree for the sake of the forum and professionalism. I do so hope you agree.

[Adam Woodyatt]

Calm down, we've all had a nice drink...

[John Baikie]

Yeah and that is good, but it's also fair that others can have an opinion as well?

I just don't want people talking about stuff for the wrong reasons that's all.

These folk are dying to down swpp at any opportunity and it makes me mad.

J


And by standing up for my belief, HONESTLY and OPENLY I'm defending not only my reputation but the forward thinking and progressive manor the SWPP have adopted.

Its the fact that the SWPP is so SUCCESSFUL that people want to have a "Pop" and try and take a piece of the "Pie" that Phil & Juls have bust a gut to achieve.

John, sometimes a man just has to draw a line in the sand and say enough! I wont appologise for defending myself or the SWPP rep both were hard won. Both Phil and Juls know I'm SWPP through and through. I've never professed to get everything right all the time, but as a professional courtesy I don't expect to be whispered about behind my back... period

I don't have a problem with that at all. I also have been SWPP through and through and it's widely known. Ask Scott Hogg why I tried so hard to get him to change his mind on leaving!  I was defending the SWPP as well, and feel strongly that folk should be allowed to have different opinions on such things and have freedom to choose whether to see nudity or not.
I know many others think the same but maybe aren't brave enough to say so on here for fear of being shot down.
I also think you are right to defend yourself if you feel you are being wrongly accused of something.

It's something that clearly needs discussed before the next event and maybe it's good that it has come up.

Let's not all fall out, let's just listen to everyone and go on to make things even better in the future!

[McGillicuddy]

Yeah and that is good, but it's also fair that others can have an opinion as well?

I just don't want people talking about stuff for the wrong reasons that's all.

These folk are dying to down swpp at any opportunity and it makes me mad.

J


And by standing up for my belief, HONESTLY and OPENLY I'm defending not only my reputation but the forward thinking and progressive manor the SWPP have adopted.

Its the fact that the SWPP is so SUCCESSFUL that people want to have a "Pop" and try and take a piece of the "Pie" that Phil & Juls have bust a gut to achieve.

John, sometimes a man just has to draw a line in the sand and say enough! I wont appologise for defending myself or the SWPP rep both were hard won. Both Phil and Juls know I'm SWPP through and through. I've never professed to get everything right all the time, but as a professional courtesy I don't expect to be whispered about behind my back... period

I don't have a problem with that at all. I also have been SWPP through and through and it's widely known. Ask Scott Hogg why I tried so hard to get him to change his mind on leaving!  I was defending the SWPP as well, and feel strongly that folk should be allowed to have different opinions on such things and have freedom to choose whether to see nudity or not.
I know many others think the same but maybe aren't brave enough to say so on here for fear of being shot down.
I also think you are right to defend yourself if you feel you are being wrongly accused of something.

It's something that clearly needs discussed before the next event and maybe it's good that it has come up.

Let's not all fall out, let's just listen to everyone and go on to make things even better in the future!

John it genuinely isn't my intention to drag this out, I really have other things to do. I don't want to sway opinion my way and yes all points of view are valid and should be listened to.

You seem to have missed the point though... my problem was being "Discussed" in a negative manor, in effect in secret, without the right of reply. I can tell you straight that really annoyed me. It wasn't what was done or the opinion but rather how it was done.

I hope that clarifies my position and can put the matter to bed

[John Baikie]

Fair comment.