It somehow manages to seem somehow exploitative (the bikinis were necessary why?) without mustering up any titillation whatsoever (all that skin and they made music with only handshakes and high fives?). I suppose that can be considered a remarkable achievement, at least in the sense that I felt a need to remark on it.
@jdale: It's because he knew it was going to be extremely boring and not as exciting as it was hyped to be. Having chicks in bikinis made us kind of look passed it but obviously he didn't have enough chicks cause we still saw the flaws.
Jesus
While I think shots one and five have some pictorial value I doubt you would have been able to get the same shots with a DSLR which is more obvious. When I photograph people on the streets I try to introduce myself and make it less stalker like. You are in a very grey area especially putting them in this public a forum, and the age thing comes into question.
@Die Fledermaus: You introduce yourself to make photos? What kind of photographer are you? I take photos with my DSLR in public all the time, taking candid shots of anything or anyone interesting.
I'm afraid that "Stalking" doesn't mean what you think it means.
@Jesus Diaz: No I said more stalker like. Yes I do introduce myself at times especially with the homeless series I am working on right now. When I introduce myself I get better pictures much less suspicion a form of understanding gets built. Also the subject will tell me if they are not comfortable with me taking there picture and I will respect there privacy. I also take candid shots but I try to limit faces. Its one of these things I play by sight, I try to gauge the situation and respond appropriately. If I am shooting a public event then all bets are off and I do not have to ask, and I believe privacy is no longer an issue. Its the way I roll when I photograph people it has worked for me and I stand by my stated opinions above.
Just as a side note talking with people has let me photograph in places other could not, so it never hurts to be open and nice.
@angelzero: No, that's not true. It's because these girls are in a public place and don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy, nor are the photos outrages, or exploitative. Plus their picture was used for editorial comment that was not vulgar, not hate, and non-exploitative, so it's covered by free speech.
I mean, I'm not saying it is REALLY inappropriate to take photos of people on the subway, but this does sort of straddle a line. The thing you have to ask yourself is, if you had a full on DSLR and were taking the same pictures, would you have felt as comfortable taking these pictures without the girls' knowledge or consent?
It isn't illegal to take pictures of people in public areas, but even without identifying information, you have just placed two highly recognizable girls' photos on a widely trafficked website and I presume (as I don't know if you asked) that it was without their consent. What if these two girls, as blissful as they appear, were not supposed to be riding together, or in that part of the city (it's well known from Jesus' other posts that he lives in Billyburg and takes the L train)? Hopefully (and most likely) though, these girls are avid Giz readers and will see it and think "AWESOME WE WERE IN GIZMODO!!"
This is Pokémon Pinball! The one girl has the left flipper (Left on D-Pad) and the other has the right (A Button). A+ for those girls having good taste in video games.
09/10/09
09/09/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
07/30/09
While you're under no legal reason too, it's what a decent person would do.
07/30/09
Five of essentially the same thing? C'mon, Jesus. "Retards"? We're smarter than that, and so are you.
07/30/09
07/29/09
What? I'm talking about the Gameboy of course! :P
07/29/09
While I think shots one and five have some pictorial value I doubt you would have been able to get the same shots with a DSLR which is more obvious. When I photograph people on the streets I try to introduce myself and make it less stalker like. You are in a very grey area especially putting them in this public a forum, and the age thing comes into question.
07/29/09
07/29/09
I'm afraid that "Stalking" doesn't mean what you think it means.
07/29/09
Just as a side note talking with people has let me photograph in places other could not, so it never hurts to be open and nice.
07/30/09
07/29/09
07/29/09
It isn't illegal to take pictures of people in public areas, but even without identifying information, you have just placed two highly recognizable girls' photos on a widely trafficked website and I presume (as I don't know if you asked) that it was without their consent. What if these two girls, as blissful as they appear, were not supposed to be riding together, or in that part of the city (it's well known from Jesus' other posts that he lives in Billyburg and takes the L train)? Hopefully (and most likely) though, these girls are avid Giz readers and will see it and think "AWESOME WE WERE IN GIZMODO!!"
07/30/09
That's like saying you shouldn't film police beating the shit out of someone, because they might get in trouble.
07/29/09