How Topless Princess Photos were taken
Posts: 9,731
Threads: 1,965
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
6
This makes my blood boil but here's how the topless photos of the princess were taken. Basically, the photos were taken from a public road, approximately 800m to 1.3km away (roughly 0.5 to 0.8 of a mile). They are suggesting that a 600mm lens with 2x teleconverter could have been used.
http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/celeb...261a1.html
I think it's very poor form - if they are in a private residence, it's an invasion of their privacy whether it's someone 1m away with a cellphone or 1km away with a long lens. Someone should do the same with these "photographers" and their families in their own backyards, and post the photos all over the internet and see how they like the treatment. Ironically, they would probably be charged with invasion of privacy and stalking.
Posts: 1,716
Threads: 125
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation:
0
[plays devil's advocate]
Nope, she was outside, naked, "in full view of the road."
Fair game!
[/plays devil's advocate]
_______________________________________
Everybody got to elevate from the norm!
Posts: 9,325
Threads: 4,038
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation:
5
This is commercial exploitation, not just exploitation. Anyway, I don't see it. The female breast is hardly indecent or pornographic anymore. It's everywhere. Why would a magazine pay so much for such trivia?
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Posts: 3,694
Threads: 243
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation:
11
I'm with Slej, she should know better.
Posts: 3,291
Threads: 306
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation:
0
(Sep 17, 2012, 07:59)Don Schaeffer Wrote: Why would a magazine pay so much for such trivia?
Because she is very probably the future Queen of England and as such sells.
But I am also with Slej inasmuch as any celebrity should, if they do not want anyone to see them naked, should keep their clothes on. Apart from sun being a health risk (so we are told) there are plenty of fake tans, if you want a tan.
It is not so long since Prince Harry was 'unveiled' and as for the royal security, someone named Fagan was caught sitting on the Queens bed in Buckingham Palace, within the last 10 years or so. Don't they ever learn. 
Lumix LX5.
Canon 350 D.+ 18-55 Kit lens + Tamron 70-300 macro. + Canon 50mm f1.8 + Manfrotto tripod, in bag.
Posts: 3,694
Threads: 243
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation:
11
Your sense of time is Slipping NT... Michael Fagan was in the very early 80's, I was still in school.
Rather than her topless, security should be more worried that a highly skilled sniper could as easily made that shot and taken out the prince.
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation:
0
Given that Prince Harry's minders weren't up to the job when he was on a ripper of a party in the US, it certainly was a shock to think that a photographer could get that shot of Kate.n They just don't make minders like they used to.
Posts: 160
Threads: 23
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation:
1
That's AMAZING! I have one guy in my photo group who takes photos of the space station from the ground with a camera that's basically a telescope.... Crazy what technology can do!
Posts: 418
Threads: 36
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation:
0
Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author
Replies
Views
Last Post
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
|
