Re: A few Steamfreight Pics

[Roy Wilke <royboy@bit.net.au>]

Michael, I think you're taking a child's sandcastle here and constructing a
full-scale replica of Mount Kosciousko out of it.

If your photo is like Craig's, then the old man isn't very noticeable unless
someone goes and points him out to the average viewer. He's wearing a
dark-brown shirt/jacket/cardigan (delete whichever doesn't apply), and tends
to be almost invisible with the tree behind him. Now, if he were wearing a
day-glo orange safety vest it would be a different matter entirely.

Okay, to *you* he stands out like a sore thumb. That's because you apparently
felt rather cranky over the issue at the time. To people who weren't there,
aren't familiar with the situation and get a chance to see the picture/s that
result from the event, the old man in the picture is almost invisible. The
subject of the photo, after all, is the train crossing the bridge.

>From what I can see of the picture, the photographers are standing in a
paddock (private land - I hope you all got permission to enter), while the
aforementioned old fellow and children are in the watercourse over which the
bridge crosses (public land).

You probably travelled some miles for the weekend. The old man probably lives
in the region, and was taking his grandchildren (I assume they were his
grandchildren) out for a treat to see the steam-trains - something which
isn't exactly an everyday sight. Now, I'd say that if they'd encountered nice
people over the weekend, there may have been a couple of new railway
enthusiasts by the Monday. But if what they encountered was a mob of gunzel
tourists in the paddock telling them to get out of the way and that they had
no right to be walking around their own neighbourhood, then it is likely that
there'll be a couple of kids who will consider anything associated with
railways to be the epitome of things 'uncool.'

Roy.


Michael wrote:

> David,
>
> When you line up at a bank or a supermarket do you just accept it as
> normal when someone jumps the queue to right in front of you? I am sure
> you wouldn't. Why should this be any different? The yelling (at the old
> man) was only because the train was coming and we were set up to take our
> photos, he was quite some distance away, surely he couldn't hear us if we
> whispered could he?
>
> Surely in a bank or supermarket situation, it is still public, and you
> don't have to yell because the person is within whisper distance anyway.
> What that old man did was rude and totally inconsiderate. We were there
> first, and as the old saying goes: first come first served. If you want
> to challenge that, push in front of someone at your supermarket today and
> see how far you go.
>
> In other news, I got all my photos back yesterday, and most of them
> turned out great :-) One day perhaps I will be able to scan them and put
> them online. With the said shot mentioned below, I also managed to hide
> peter fairly well in the shot (Once again, thanks for your co-operation
> Peter! :)) but the old man with his fleabags in action stood out like a
> sore thumb. Better luck next year i guess :)
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> David Langley scribbled something on 23/07/1999 in
> <37985950.2483DA6A@ancc.com.au>:
>
> >Craig Haber wrote:
> >
> >> In the bottom photo, note the previously discussed old guy and his
> >> kids in the picture.  What you can't see (unless you know where to
> >> look) is Peter Sweetten, who co-operated with us (thanks Peter!).
> >
> >Now having read about the fuss made by photographers and viewing this
> >photo, I remain of the opinion that it is a public affair and if the
> >general public "get in the road" well then bad luck. If polite
> >conversation gets them to move then OK but yelling at them, even if they
> >appear at the last minute, is just bad manners. What is needed perhaps
> >is the American idea of photographers charter trains operating without
> >local advertising.
> >
> >Other than that, the pics looked fine and the railway looks worth a
> >visit.
> >
> >David.
> >
> >