|
Wait for all the complaints from tourists. Once they get sick of telling people not to shoot they'll allow it again. Such a stupid ruling as you say.
Maybe it's time to organise a Strobist outing...
Anyone free on 2.1.2008? :-)
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
saw this too and my heart sank. been there before and it's a wonderfully photogenic and interesting place.
i think they'll find it pretty hard to enforce - if not impossible. You have to travel a fair bit to get out there, I suspect there will be quite a few miffed punters turning up.
As for photoepilepsy, why not just ban flash photography - or hold 'photographer only' events?
Originally posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
stevefaeembra edited this topic 66 months ago.
|
|
The guy was on the BBC being a bit apologetic about the whole thing. He was pointing out all the potential trip hazards and what not.
But with all things like this, I figure if your stupid enough to walk and shoot in that sort of a tight and bumpy space, then you deserve a mouth full of 15th Century limestone.
I think this has more to do with litigious assholes then photographers. Or at least, more to do with insurance companies blaming litigious assholes so they can up insurance premiums..
Bah mumble grr harumpf....
Originally posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
mcsherryp edited this topic 66 months ago.
|
|
I blame the 10-20mm Sigma mysel........ooofffff!
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
It's absolute nonsense, and I wonder how much "HSE" is being used as an excuse... When it's really about controlling photographs, sales etc...
Two I got in October, this being an excuse to upload them!
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
robert - if it's like last year, they were closed on the 2nd Jan. I wanted to go on my birthday, was met with an empty, snowy carpark. disappointed.
I guess they can do what they want though, they're rich now, have enough money to fix the roof (oh, yeah, sorry, once it dries out properly). From experience, it;s the vidcam @ssholes the need to sort out, no they DO wlak about pointing and not looking where they're going.
Anyways, I'm drunk, just having a rant, bed time now.
See you when you all look less blurry.
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Feeling better now Scott?
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
you mean after the rant? or after the alcohol has magically left the shell of a man in its wake?
Aye, ahm good mate, wee bit of a sair heid. Nothing Photoshop's Smart Sharpen can't fix.
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Found one explanation why Rosslyn Chapel's director might be a bit traumatised by photography...
edinburghnews.scotsman.com/ViewArticle.aspx?articleid=283...
Thanks Paul for summing up my sentiments so aptly! I'm very much with you on the "a mouthful of 15th century limestone for litigious assholes" front!
If it was just about preventing injuries though why not ban stupid footwear? As far as I know they are not stopping silly women from clambering about on the scaffolding in stilettos?
Is it down to trying to maximise the sale of over-priced postcards to those poor sods who trecked all the way out there only to find that's the only way to take back a souvenir?
I'm more than happy not to use a flash when it comes to protecting light-sensitive objects in a museum or in spaces where photoepilepsy might be an issue, but banning cameras to drive revenue in the gift shop just sucks!
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Everything should be banned.
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Somewhat depressing. That, and photographers are the best subject in the chapel.
 -- from Duncan_Smith - (?)
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
The real problem is trying to take photographs while standing on only two legs. Good photographs need three legs :-)
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
It is a bit of an HSE leglislation being used as a blanket excuse for banning things... and its getting really boring. I'm used to not being able to use flash in places such as that, but when the real reason isnt stated, and a poor excuse substituted....well its a bit lame isnt it? and its damn expensive to get in!
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
One of my friends attends that "church" and it's even more expensive as a parishioner (whatever they're called!) Having to extract a large percentage of your income (in addition to their official membership fee) is right out of order... but who said religion was interested in being correct?
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
It will be a real shame if you can't take pictures inside any more. Here's one of my favourites:
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
This is H & S being used as an excuse so that photos can be sold in the shop, wait and see. Is it too sensible to ban flash and tripod photography and have a disclaimer??
Best way to deal with this is complain to Rosslyn Trust by e-mail as follows
mail@rosslynchapel.com
And hope that sense prevails over commercialism.
They Trust has recently received £7 million of funding how much more do we have to pay??
Disneyland has come to Scotland. The Trust Rules All.........
Posted 66 months ago.
(permalink)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
Edinburgh Photographers /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Edinburgh Photographers discussion threads