No photographs allowed

On 2011-09-13 18:31:45 -0700, "Charles E. Hardwidge"
said:


"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...

Nice 1911, and nice holster, anyway.

It can't be a Real American Gun (TM) because it doesn't have "Made in China"
stamped on it. :-p

Naah! Wouldn't find too many Chinese handguns in this market. Italian,
Swiss, German, Austrian, Brazilian, Czech, even Korean.

That is a Kimber, made in the USA. Actually made in New York State.
http://www.kimberamerica.com/1911/cdp-ii

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 9/12/2011 10:56 PM, tony cooper wrote:

[ ... ]


Also asked before taking this one the same day:

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...1-30-02-X2.jpg


Shows a lot a character. Wonder what caused their sadness. Kids with
painted faces don't usually look that sad, unless mom just said something
like: "two ice cream cones are enough."



I think they both just realized the girl's face-paint job seemed to make her
awfully familiar-looking.

Where's Bert Lahr when you need him?

http://withfriendship.com/images/h/3...Lahr-image.jpg

Ngaaah-ngaaah-ngaaah.


--
Frank ess

On 2011-09-13 19:14:59 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2011-09-13 18:31:45 -0700, "Charles E. Hardwidge"
said:


"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...

Nice 1911, and nice holster, anyway.

It can't be a Real American Gun (TM) because it doesn't have "Made in China"
stamped on it. :-p

Naah! Wouldn't find too many Chinese handguns in this market. Italian,
Swiss, German, Austrian, Brazilian, Czech, even Korean.

That is a Kimber, made in the USA. Actually made in New York State.
http://www.kimberamerica.com/1911/cdp-ii

BTW the holster is the work of a great English craftsman leatherworker,
Andy Arratoonian, who hand makes each holster one at a time, first
come, first serve. and runs about a 6-9 months backlog on orders. He
works out of his home at Ripon in Yorkshire.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:59:35 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/12/2011 7:47 AM, dadiOH wrote:
tony cooper wrote:
Someone pulled that on me today. I took my grandchildren to a
shooting range where a group of "Cowboy Shooters" meet once a month.
We spent a couple of hours watching these hobbyists fire six-shooters,
rifles, and shotguns with genuine or replica frontier-era weapons.

Nice group of people. Several took the time to explain what was going
on to my six and seven year-old grandchildren, showed them their
weapons, and one even allowed the boys to dry fire his six-shooter.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...fGQnLTS-X3.jpg

Some good shots of the grandchildren today, but nothing that isn't
just a snapshot. Mostly, the view is the back of people. Not too
good standing in front of them since they are using live ammo.

The shooting is scored on time minus misses, so the person standing
behind this shooter is timing him.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...fLmj27p-X3.jpg

In another area was a group of people taking instruction on modern
small weapons from an instructor. I took a couple of snaps and the
instructor came over and said "No photographs allowed".

My answer was the short form: "Bull****". I was far behind them with
a 200mm lens and out of ear range of the shutter click, so I wasn't
disturbing anything.

The instructor got shirty with me and said it was against the law to
take a photograph of someone without their permission. This made me
laugh. He had an NRA patch on his shirt, so I asked him how he would
feel if I started making up laws about guns. He just turned and
walked away.

The subject matter wasn't interesting, so I left after just a couple
of snaps. What gets me the most is the hypocrisy of the instructor.
There is no group in this country that spends more time, energy, and
money to ensure that their right to pursue their own hobby is not
abridged than gun owners who are in the NRA. Yet, this guy wanted to
deny me my right to pursue my own hobby.

The little would-be tyrant:

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their wishes
should be respected. YMMV


I completely agree with you. So does Tony. IIRC somewhere in this thread
he said he would not take someone's picture if asked not to. In this
case I understand the NRA guy ws tell him no pictures of anybody was
allowed.

Where Tony Cooper and I disagree is that I will ask, implicitly or
explicity. In the case of a child I will not shoot without asking the
supervising adult if it is OK.


[Jerry]
No one has mentioned the issue of GEOTAGGING. Altho your
Nikon D40 doesn't have GPS built in there is a GPS unit
available for it.... and in general the range officer
wouldn't know if GPS tagging was being used.
The NRA may not want the location of their private
shooting range broadcast all over the Internet by EXIF
geotags in digital pictures. When it comes to guns they
certainly have reason to be cautious nowadays.
In general I think geotagging has raised a whole new
issue on the legality of photographing unsuspecting
subjects..

On 9/14/2011 6:00 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:59:35 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/12/2011 7:47 AM, dadiOH wrote:
tony cooper wrote:
Someone pulled that on me today. I took my grandchildren to a
shooting range where a group of "Cowboy Shooters" meet once a month.
We spent a couple of hours watching these hobbyists fire six-shooters,
rifles, and shotguns with genuine or replica frontier-era weapons.

Nice group of people. Several took the time to explain what was going
on to my six and seven year-old grandchildren, showed them their
weapons, and one even allowed the boys to dry fire his six-shooter.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...fGQnLTS-X3.jpg

Some good shots of the grandchildren today, but nothing that isn't
just a snapshot. Mostly, the view is the back of people. Not too
good standing in front of them since they are using live ammo.

The shooting is scored on time minus misses, so the person standing
behind this shooter is timing him.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...fLmj27p-X3.jpg

In another area was a group of people taking instruction on modern
small weapons from an instructor. I took a couple of snaps and the
instructor came over and said "No photographs allowed".

My answer was the short form: "Bull****". I was far behind them with
a 200mm lens and out of ear range of the shutter click, so I wasn't
disturbing anything.

The instructor got shirty with me and said it was against the law to
take a photograph of someone without their permission. This made me
laugh. He had an NRA patch on his shirt, so I asked him how he would
feel if I started making up laws about guns. He just turned and
walked away.

The subject matter wasn't interesting, so I left after just a couple
of snaps. What gets me the most is the hypocrisy of the instructor.
There is no group in this country that spends more time, energy, and
money to ensure that their right to pursue their own hobby is not
abridged than gun owners who are in the NRA. Yet, this guy wanted to
deny me my right to pursue my own hobby.

The little would-be tyrant:

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their wishes
should be respected. YMMV


I completely agree with you. So does Tony. IIRC somewhere in this thread
he said he would not take someone's picture if asked not to. In this
case I understand the NRA guy ws tell him no pictures of anybody was
allowed.

Where Tony Cooper and I disagree is that I will ask, implicitly or
explicity. In the case of a child I will not shoot without asking the
supervising adult if it is OK.


[Jerry]
No one has mentioned the issue of GEOTAGGING. Altho your
Nikon D40 doesn't have GPS built in there is a GPS unit
available for it.... and in general the range officer
wouldn't know if GPS tagging was being used.
The NRA may not want the location of their private
shooting range broadcast all over the Internet by EXIF
geotags in digital pictures. When it comes to guns they
certainly have reason to be cautious nowadays.
In general I think geotagging has raised a whole new
issue on the legality of photographing unsuspecting
subjects..

Several errors in your statement:
It was a public range
What makes you think the NRA has private shooting ranges.
I have never shot with a D40 in my life.
There is nothing wrong with geotagging.



--
Peter

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:12:15 -0400, PeterN
wrote:



Where Tony Cooper and I disagree is that I will ask, implicitly or
explicity. In the case of a child I will not shoot without asking the
supervising adult if it is OK.


[Jerry]
No one has mentioned the issue of GEOTAGGING. Altho your
Nikon D40 doesn't have GPS built in there is a GPS unit
available for it.... and in general the range officer
wouldn't know if GPS tagging was being used.
The NRA may not want the location of their private
shooting range broadcast all over the Internet by EXIF
geotags in digital pictures. When it comes to guns they
certainly have reason to be cautious nowadays.
In general I think geotagging has raised a whole new
issue on the legality of photographing unsuspecting
subjects..

Several errors in your statement:
It was a public range

[Jerry]
Oh

What makes you think the NRA has private shooting ranges.

[Jerry]
Just a guess intuitively obvious t a casual observer.

I have never shot with a D40 in my life.

[Jerry]
The EXIF files on your photos viewed with IrfanView says one
of the pics was shot with a Nikon D40 and two of them shot
with a Nikion D60... probably an IrfanView glitch... most
likely all 3 shot with a D60 on 2011:9:11 about 11:44:56


There is nothing wrong with geotagging.

[Jerry]
That's what you think, but increasingly television
reports are mentioning stalking, burgleries, home invasions
and sex crimes enabled by Internet posted pics containing
geotags. I've taken to cleaning all photos of geotags
before forwarding them by email or posting them. Most
instances of crime are caused by people with smartphones who
forget or don't know how to shut off the geotagging switch.

On 2011-09-14 16:08:02 -0700, Jerry said:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:12:15 -0400, PeterN
wrote:



Where Tony Cooper and I disagree is that I will ask, implicitly or
explicity. In the case of a child I will not shoot without asking the
supervising adult if it is OK.


[Jerry]
No one has mentioned the issue of GEOTAGGING. Altho your
Nikon D40 doesn't have GPS built in there is a GPS unit
available for it.... and in general the range officer
wouldn't know if GPS tagging was being used.
The NRA may not want the location of their private
shooting range broadcast all over the Internet by EXIF
geotags in digital pictures. When it comes to guns they
certainly have reason to be cautious nowadays.
In general I think geotagging has raised a whole new
issue on the legality of photographing unsuspecting
subjects..

Several errors in your statement:
It was a public range

[Jerry]
Oh

What makes you think the NRA has private shooting ranges.

[Jerry]
Just a guess intuitively obvious t a casual observer.

You do realize that the locations of 99.9% of accessible ranges are
well documented?
ttp://www.wheretoshoot.org/Find_Range/


I have never shot with a D40 in my life.

[Jerry]
The EXIF files on your photos viewed with IrfanView says one
of the pics was shot with a Nikon D40 and two of them shot
with a Nikion D60... probably an IrfanView glitch... most
likely all 3 shot with a D60 on 2011:9:11 about 11:44:56

Well I am glad that you are finding your new software entertaining.
Here is a GPS tagged image for you to play with. Perhaps you would care
to have a gang of thieves rush off to that location to steal the item
depicted.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/P38-5400fEWcw.jpg



There is nothing wrong with geotagging.

[Jerry]
That's what you think, but increasingly television
reports are mentioning stalking, burgleries, home invasions
and sex crimes enabled by Internet posted pics containing
geotags.

Where are all these reports of geotag facilitated images from the internet?
Please cite.

I've taken to cleaning all photos of geotags
before forwarding them by email or posting them.

That's nice. However that is your paranoia not ours.

Most
instances of crime are caused by people with smartphones who
forget or don't know how to shut off the geotagging switch.

"Most instances of crime"??

Sir, you know not of which you speak.
After 25 years in Law enforcement I have yet to investigate of have any
of my currently active acquaintances in Law enforcement educate me as
to the trend you fear.

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to where you are getting this information.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-09-14 15:12:15 -0700, PeterN said:

On 9/14/2011 6:00 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:59:35 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/12/2011 7:47 AM, dadiOH wrote:
tony cooper wrote:
Someone pulled that on me today. I took my grandchildren to a
shooting range where a group of "Cowboy Shooters" meet once a month.
We spent a couple of hours watching these hobbyists fire six-shooters,
rifles, and shotguns with genuine or replica frontier-era weapons.

Nice group of people. Several took the time to explain what was going
on to my six and seven year-old grandchildren, showed them their
weapons, and one even allowed the boys to dry fire his six-shooter.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...fGQnLTS-X3.jpg

Some good shots of the grandchildren today, but nothing that isn't
just a snapshot. Mostly, the view is the back of people. Not too
good standing in front of them since they are using live ammo.

The shooting is scored on time minus misses, so the person standing
behind this shooter is timing him.

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/photos...fLmj27p-X3.jpg

In another area was a group of people taking instruction on modern
small weapons from an instructor. I took a couple of snaps and the
instructor came over and said "No photographs allowed".

My answer was the short form: "Bull****". I was far behind them with
a 200mm lens and out of ear range of the shutter click, so I wasn't
disturbing anything.

The instructor got shirty with me and said it was against the law to
take a photograph of someone without their permission. This made me
laugh. He had an NRA patch on his shirt, so I asked him how he would
feel if I started making up laws about guns. He just turned and
walked away.

The subject matter wasn't interesting, so I left after just a couple
of snaps. What gets me the most is the hypocrisy of the instructor.
There is no group in this country that spends more time, energy, and
money to ensure that their right to pursue their own hobby is not
abridged than gun owners who are in the NRA. Yet, this guy wanted to
deny me my right to pursue my own hobby.

The little would-be tyrant:

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their wishes
should be respected. YMMV


I completely agree with you. So does Tony. IIRC somewhere in this thread
he said he would not take someone's picture if asked not to. In this
case I understand the NRA guy ws tell him no pictures of anybody was
allowed.

Where Tony Cooper and I disagree is that I will ask, implicitly or
explicity. In the case of a child I will not shoot without asking the
supervising adult if it is OK.


[Jerry]
No one has mentioned the issue of GEOTAGGING. Altho your
Nikon D40 doesn't have GPS built in there is a GPS unit
available for it.... and in general the range officer
wouldn't know if GPS tagging was being used.
The NRA may not want the location of their private
shooting range broadcast all over the Internet by EXIF
geotags in digital pictures. When it comes to guns they
certainly have reason to be cautious nowadays.
In general I think geotagging has raised a whole new
issue on the legality of photographing unsuspecting
subjects..

Several errors in your statement:
It was a public range
What makes you think the NRA has private shooting ranges.
I have never shot with a D40 in my life.
There is nothing wrong with geotagging.

I think our newcomer, Jerry has associated Tony's shots with you. I
believe Tony has used a D40 and/or a D60.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:08:02 -0400, Jerry wrote:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:12:15 -0400, PeterN
wrote:



Where Tony Cooper and I disagree is that I will ask, implicitly or
explicity. In the case of a child I will not shoot without asking the
supervising adult if it is OK.


[Jerry]
No one has mentioned the issue of GEOTAGGING. Altho your
Nikon D40 doesn't have GPS built in there is a GPS unit
available for it.... and in general the range officer
wouldn't know if GPS tagging was being used.
The NRA may not want the location of their private
shooting range broadcast all over the Internet by EXIF
geotags in digital pictures. When it comes to guns they
certainly have reason to be cautious nowadays.
In general I think geotagging has raised a whole new
issue on the legality of photographing unsuspecting
subjects..

Several errors in your statement:
It was a public range

[Jerry]
Oh

What makes you think the NRA has private shooting ranges.

[Jerry]
Just a guess intuitively obvious t a casual observer.

If you read the posts, I stated that it is a public range on
county-owned property that is primarily used by the various police
departments in the county. Anyone can rent range use for the day if a
range is available. The instructor rented range use.

The instructor is a member of NRA according to the patch he had on his
shirt, but he is not an employee of the NRA. He just pays money to
belong. Anyone can join the NRA.


I have never shot with a D40 in my life.

[Jerry]
The EXIF files on your photos viewed with IrfanView says one
of the pics was shot with a Nikon D40 and two of them shot
with a Nikion D60... probably an IrfanView glitch... most
likely all 3 shot with a D60 on 2011:9:11 about 11:44:56

The EXIF is correct. I have a D60 and a D40 body. When I go to
something like this, I have the 18-55 mounted on one body and the
55-200 on the other body. I use whichever camera suits the shot.
That's much easier than switching lenses.

Awhile back, I took some test shots with a Tamron 18-270, but wasn't
pleased with the results. It would be nice to have one lens with that
kind of range.

There is nothing wrong with geotagging.

[Jerry]
That's what you think, but increasingly television
reports are mentioning stalking, burgleries, home invasions
and sex crimes enabled by Internet posted pics containing
geotags. I've taken to cleaning all photos of geotags
before forwarding them by email or posting them. Most
instances of crime are caused by people with smartphones who
forget or don't know how to shut off the geotagging switch.

Had those photographs been geotagged, all you would know was the
location at which they were taken. That's about an hour with light
Sunday traffic from my house, and who knows where the other subjects
live.




--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:34:23 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

Most
instances of crime are caused by people with smartphones who
forget or don't know how to shut off the geotagging switch.

"Most instances of crime"??

Sir, you know not of which you speak.
After 25 years in Law enforcement I have yet to investigate of have any
of my currently active acquaintances in Law enforcement educate me as
to the trend you fear.

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to where you are getting this information.

He asks fellow airline passengers. The current leading source of
misinformation is now the coach section of any airplane.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida