Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   General Cycling Discussion (http://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/)
-   -   Not one of you, I hope. (http://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/675631-not-one-you-i-hope.html)

SSwhite 08-28-10 06:09 AM

Not one of you, I hope.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4hKs20OaZw

I hope none of you are the bike messenger in this video.:twitchy:
The messenger comes in around 3:25

SunnyFlorida 08-28-10 06:51 AM

I don't know who was the most distasteful. The guy doing the video of the girl, the film crew who put her out there in that outfit or the girl letting herself be filmed in those shorts on a crowded NY street.

Infact, the only likable person was the bike messenger. He tried to be the hero but just got abuse. However, the filming did stop, at least at that location.

Too bad you couldn't shorten the video or can you? I could of done with less shots of the girl. I know I could of wind forward but I didn't want to miss how it started.

P.S. The jerk was right. He had the right to film the girl. It's a public street and she was basically put on public display. The only objection they could of used was that he was physically interfering with the shoot. It seems like he wasn't but they didn't like where his camera/phone/whatever was pointing.

Frankly, this viddie has very little to do with cycling and more with a creeping type of voyeurism.

annc 08-28-10 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SunnyFlorida (Post 11369175)
I don't know who was the most distasteful. The guy doing the video of the girl, the film crew who put her out there in that outfit or the girl letting herself be filmed in those shorts on a crowded NY street.

Infact, the only likable person was the bike messenger. He tried to be the hero but just got abuse. However, the filming did stop, at least at that location.

Too bad you couldn't shorten the video or can you? I could of done with less shots of the girl. I know I could of wind forward but I didn't want to miss how it started.

P.S. The jerk was right. He had the right to film the girl. It's a public street and she was basically put on public display. The only objection they could of used was that he was physically interfering with the shoot. It seems like he wasn't but they didn't like where his camera/phone/whatever was pointing.

Frankly, this viddie has very little to do with cycling and more with a creeping type of voyeurism.

Generally, people have a right to videotape in public for non-commercial purposes. If the videotaper was involved in putting the video on youtube or bootymotiontv.com (site no longer exists but it is probably was a site worthy of the name) then the girl and mom may have a case. Of course, I am not a lawyer and don't take law advice from the internet.

XR2 08-28-10 09:42 AM

And you were looking for ??? when you found that?

rogwilco 08-28-10 10:23 AM

What the hell is "pervert" about this photo shoot? And I'm not sure the woman is a teenager anyway, she looks more like a 20 something to me.

dcrowell 08-28-10 11:49 AM

This wasn't really cycling related. I was expecting stupid riding through the crowd. The guy had dismounted. He disagreed with what was going on. Does it matter that he had been on a bike?

Pretty much everyone involved in that video was acting poorly. I imagine the end result of the photo shoot wasn't even interesting.

mkellett 08-29-10 07:49 AM

I was doing a bridal photo shoot in D.C. at the Lincoln Memorial and ended up with a crowd of half a dozen or so tourists (mostly foreign folks just interested in the "American bride") following us around with still and video cameras. Fortunately, the bride was a D.C. local and used to the tourists thing, so it didn't bug her out. But in order to shoot in public, we had to apply (and pay) for a permit from the parks department.

Same thing in NYC. If you are a professional photographer, you're required to get a permit to shoot on the the street. The funny part is, in NYC and D.C. alike, the "permitted" photographer is limited by a huge set of rules, etc. of what you can/can't do, etc. and the number one rule is, you cannot interfere, impede, annoy, etc. any tourists, locals, etc. by your actions. Basically, John Q. Public can photograph anywhere and anything he wants, but a pro is held to a higher standard.

Personally, I think the "pro's" setup looked pretty lame, and the mother or whoever should have totally expected, let alone anticipated, that a crowd would gather and be taking their own photos/video, etc. But if that's the weirdest, wildest, sexiest thing that guy could find in Times Square to video, he wasn't trying very hard.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:01 PM.