What were they thinking?
The museum The Winston Churchill’s Britain at War Experience has taken a PC stance on Winston Churchill’s penchant for good Havana cigars by turning the great man into a non-smoker. Full story in the Daily Telegraph As Sigmund Freud once said, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Now I wonder what he would have thought of Winston’s Tommy gun?
But as R. Kipling saw it, “…a woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke.”
Received this email from my West Australian colleague, Tony McDonough of RAW Images, last week. Yet another example of the rampant and unreasonable paranoia infecting society.
“I have just finished a shoot in Perth’s northern suburbs. Nothing fancy, a pic of a shopping centre and some surrounding streets. Job booked and shot at 10:30 am.
For those of you who are not in Perth or have not seen the news lately, there was an alleged child abduction in the “northern suburbs” a few days ago. Now the scene is set.
While walking down a street with my camera over my shoulder and the person who briefed the shoot ( a lovely lady ). I happened to walk past a school. I didn’t look at the school, just a glance, I judged that there was no picture to be had using the school so we continued walking ( we did not stop ) I did not at any time, touch my camera while passing the school except to adjust the strap which was slipping off my shoulder as they sometimes do when a 200 mm lens is attached. I did not put the camera to my eye.
I was even unaware that my companion was not alongside me anymore when I reached an intersection. I stopped and looked around, she was chatting to someone, so I walked back to join in. The stranger was wearing a school name tag, and was enquiring just what we where doing walking past the school. Unfortunately the conversation was over by the time I got there, and all I heard was “…. you can’t be too careful ….” as the busy-body returned 100 meters to her rightful spot.
I only wish she had stopped me 
. I could have asked her if she had indeed asked the two other men over the road, they had motorbikes, perhaps the vanguard of a criminal gang scoping out the area to sell drugs. Or I could have asked her if she would so willingly have stopped a plumber carrying a wrench, or perhaps a muslim, because they may have been planning a bombing raid, but sadly I missed my opportunity to chat to this guardian as she scurried back to her vantage point within the school fence.
She obviously has a keen eye for for dodgy characters , her first clue would have been the camera, because it is a well know fact amongst our protectors that people who want to do mischief, often carry cameras worth upwards of $12,000.
What is wrong with our society that people feel a need to question people going about their lawful business? Why didn’t she at least ask me? Why do people immediately feel threatened by people with big cameras, or indeed anyone who carries a camera in public, when almost everybody today carries a smaller camera or a phone camera ? Why should I feel guilty just for carrying a camera?
What have we become? I was and still am really disappointed and upset that I was singled out for his treatment. Do I drive a white van (there was one mentioned in an alert) or was there one parked nearby? No. Did I fit the description of the alleged offender? No. Did I carry a camera past a school? Yes.”….
Writer/photographer Ross Barnett has long been active in bringing attention to the ridiculous regulations that govern photography in Australia’s so-called “national” parks. Here he asks some questions of Peter Garrett, the minister responsible and gets some answers that seem to indicate either the minister is evading the questions, or that he lacks the intelligence to grasp the idea that freedom of expression is a value worth embracing in modern Australia.
Standard bearer for the Light Horse Regiment at the Cenotaph, Sydney, 1980 © Rob Walls
Back in the days before the Australian flag was hijacked by psuedo-patriots and hypocritical xenophobes, I, along with several other photographers, took part in a black and white documentation of Anzac Day. I came to it with the standard biased left-wing, anti-war views of the day…and came away with a profound respect for the shared experience and quiet cameraderie that was demonstrated. Would I feel the same about today’s jingoistic displays at Gallipoli and elsewhere attended by flag-wrapped youth using the event to display false pride and a misplaced sense of history? I doubt it. Back then it was a commemoration, today it has become a celebration. Few take the time to think about the difference…
Veterans watching the march, Anzac Day, 1980 © Rob Walls
No sense of irony? A Naval Bass drummer wearing the skin of Australia's national icon. Anzac Day, Sydney, 1980 © Rob Walls
Colonel Bogey March sheet music, Sydney 1981 © Rob Walls
Boy wearing father;s medals at the dawn service in Martin Place, Sydney, 1981 © Rob Walls
Naval cadets from HMAS Huskisson, Anzac Day, 1981
Ghost of the Light Horse Regiment at the Dawn Service, Martin PLace, Sydney 1980 © Rob Walls
Naval bandsmen waiting for the start of the march in George Street, Sydney1980 © Rob Walls
And soon after sunrise the politicians were already at work co-opting the day with Liberal Senator Patrick Baume handing out portraits of the Queen at the dawn service breakfast, Callala Bay RSL, NSW, 1981 © Rob Walls
Writer, Bob Ellis encapsulates my feelings about Anzac Day here, Battles Lost, Minds Won.
No matter what your sentiments may be about this, “the one day of the year”, in the end it’s still all just about this…
Art deco lettering on the memorial hall at New Norfolk, Tasmania, © Rob Walls 2007
Filed under Australian, Opinion, Photographer, Photography, Photojournalism, Rob Walls
In lock-step conformity with all the other intellectual property bandits around the world, Tourism Australia makes the by now, traditional rights grab in conjunction with their new “There’s Nothing Like Australia” photography competition.
(From the terms and conditions of entry)
11. By entering the Promotion, Eligible Entrants absolutely and unconditionally assign (and agree to use their best endeavours to procure any relevant third parties to absolutely and unconditionally assign) to the Promoter all right, title and interest in all intellectual property rights in their entry, including ownership of intellectual property rights in any photograph that forms part of an entry.
12. By entering the Promotion, Eligible Entrants acknowledge that their entry may be used by the Promoter, the Promoter’s related entities, agencies engaged by the Promoter, or any other third party nominated by the Promoter, for the Promoter’s current and future promotional and marketing purposes without further reference or compensation to them. Eligible Entrants unconditionally and irrevocably:
(a) consent to any act or omission that would otherwise infringe any of their moral rights in their entry (as defined in Part IX of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)) and present and future rights of a similar nature conferred by statute anywhere in the world whether occurring before or after this consent is given (Moral Rights); and
(b) waive all Moral Rights in their entry that arise outside Australia.
Why someone doesn’t warn them about the amount of ill-will and bad PR this will generate in the photographic community, before the terms and conditions are published, astonishes me. In order for them to have unlimited use of a picture, there is absolutely no need for them to grab the copyright. Ownership and use of a picture can be sliced and diced in any number of ways without them wresting ownership from the author. Wake up Tourism Australia! Sense of fairplay? Where the bloody hell are ya?
UPDATE: If you wish to express your opinion of the Terms and Conditions of this competition you can do so by going to:
http://nothinglikeaustralia.com
Filed under Australian, Digital photography, News, Opinion, Photographers' rights, Photography, travel
Anti-Vietnam War demonstration, Grosvenor Square, London 1968. The way it was. A picture that reflected the mood of the police and protestors before the attempted storming of the US Embassy. © Rob Walls
“Ev’rywhere I hear the sound of marching, charging feet, boy
‘Cause summer’s here and the time is right for fighting in the street, boy...” Street Fighting Man, Mick Jagger & Keith Richards
Watching the creeping prohibitions on photography in Britain prompted me to go to the archive for these pictures. I made them on Sunday, 17th March 1968, almost exactly 42 years ago. They are from the anti-Vietnam protest in London’s Grosvenor Square that became known as The Battle of Grosvenor Square. It was the inspiration for The Rolling Stones‘ “Street Fighting Man”. Grosvenor Square was the target of the march because this was the address of the United States Embassy.
With the crowd squeezed into the relatively confined area of the square, it was hard to estimate the number of demonstrators but reports at the time claimed they numbered between 6,000 and 10,000. At first the police handled the protest with a certain amount good-will and calm. Up until the point that is, where the protestors tried to storm the embassy.
I had forgotten how fierce the conflict between police and protestors had been until I revisited the video news coverage online.
Even without the benefit of modern riot gear it can be seen that the lads of the Met were not reluctant to put the boot in. According to the Friends of the Metropolitan Police, an organisation dedicated to recording the history of the Met, “on that day There were 86 demonstrators treated by St Johns Ambulance, and 117 officers injured, with 45 protesters and 4 officers hospitalised (vide Hansard). Of those arrested, 246 were charged with various public order offences. Thirteen windows in the Embassy were broken.”
As a journalist, I would think the disparity between police and demonstrator injuries questionable. I’m not saying that there were no police hurt. I witnessed injuries on both sides. But with the prospect of time off or other compensation members of the force would have had something to gain from reporting injured. On the other hand protesters injured in the melee would have been more likely to write off their contusions to the “revolution” and experience.
Ironically, before he became one of the ruling class, the former head of Britian’s security agency MI6, Sir John Scarlett, was one of the demonstrators on that day. He was quoted as saying of the riot:
“I twice saw policemen charge quite strongly at very few demonstrators who were doing absolutely nothing and both times people were heavily clubbed over the head while one of my friends saw a girl being viciously clubbed for no reason at all.”
The way it became. Police arrest demonstrators outside the US Embassy, Grosvenor Square, London 1968
For some balance, Peter Hitchen’s Daily Mail report on the 40th anniversary of the riot is worth reading. However, in 1968, much as they would have liked to, the Metropolitan Police weren’t quite ready to prevent photojournalists from doing their job. But back then the official NUJ press card still carried some weight. Producing it would usually ensure their grudging co-operation.
Not so today! More and more photojournalists are being harassed by police using the stop-and-search powers available to them under anti-terrorist legislation. According to The Guardian newspaper, the use of these powers has grown fourfold, from 33,177 times in 2004 to more than 117,200 in 2008.
On the 14th January, 2010, the weekly journal, Police Professional, under the headline Section 44 ‘breaches human rights’ quotes solicitor advocate, Simon McKay as saying that Section 44 “…has failed on legal certainty and proportionality grounds. It is ambiguous and its use was, and is always going to be, vulnerable to the indiscriminate exercise of discretion by police officers; not necessarily deliberately, but through a process of natural evolution. It is the equivalent of the erosion of rights by osmosis.”
In January this year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the arbitrary use of Section 44 stop-and-search powers are illegal. The UK Home Office is set to appeal against the ruling. More here. (opens in new window)
Could it happen here? There are signs that it may. For the sake of a free press it is imperative that we in Australia remain vigilant against any erosion of our right to document our society.
Now; in the mood for a little music? Then you could do worse than spend a few toe-tapping minutes of your day with this Big Brother re-mix of Talking Heads, Born Under Punches-The Heat Goes on. It would be funny…if the accompanying video was not so chillingly relevant:
As it says: “1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual”
The trouble with working in a craft that seems glamorous is that every dreamer with a DSLR wants your job. Ask them why and the answer will invariably be that they are “passionate about photography”. Apart from the fact that they have obviously never been taught about hyperbole at school, most of them will throw common-sense to the winds to get work. They will abandon rationality, a not uncommon characteristic of the passionate, and work for nothing in order to be able to indulge this “passion”. This syndrome was never better illustrated than in this bitingly funny scene from the 1960′s cult classic, Putney Swope:
Filed under Opinion, Photographer, Photography, Photojournalism, Rob Walls
A lifetime ago, when I had just landed my first professional photography job, I was best man at a friend’s wedding. During the reception he said, “You know you ought to give up this photojournalism lark and take up wedding photographer. That’s where the money is. Come out and have a look at the cars these guys are driving.” The photographers had an Aston Martin and a very new Jaguar.
I knew he was right, but the idea of shooting saccharine, sentimental pictures weekend after weekend and then laughing all the way to the bank, held no attraction for me. I couldn’t think of a faster way to get to hate photography than turning it into a repetitive task. Despite my friend’s gratuitous get-rich advice, I stubbornly maintained my course and have no regrets, even though along the way photojournalism has delivered some pretty lean times amongst the good.
It would be hypocritical of me, as a professional photographer, to say that photography has never been about money. After all money is still a pretty good measure of success. But the reality is that the camera, and an ability to use it with reasonable skill, has been for me, the key to life-experience and I value that far more. Where photojournalism fell short on the cash front, it more than made up for it in adventure.
This is just a preamble to say, I don’t do weddings…except as a favour for family and a few close friends. Still the few weddings I’ve photographed have provided me with some very satisfying photographs. Sure I’ll do the expected pictures to keep everyone happy; the traditional exchange of vows; register signing; cake cutting cliches and so on, but I always try to find at least one picture that goes beneath the surface of the event. Most of the time there is something there that will lift a wedding coverage out of the ordinary. Here are a three of my favourites…two from two weddings I shot within a couple of weeks last December, which just about fills my quota for the next twenty years. (Family and friends, please note!)
The wedding of my sister-in-law, Maylyn Lam to James Button in Melbourne.
This is one of my favourite wedding photos. I shot this about twenty years ago when I was invited by an orthodox Jewish rabbi I knew to photograph his wedding. With a nod to the author of Four Weddings and a Funeral, I call it Four Rabbis and a Wedding.
This is from the wedding of my old friend, Bruce Best’s (see In the eye of the beholder and The eye of the beholder part 2) daughter Kate, in Sydney last December.
Filed under Australian, Opinion, Photographer, Photography, Photojournalism, Rob Walls
This week The Economist voted Melbourne the world’s third most liveable city in the world, narrowly beaten by Vancouver and Vienna. The Melbourne newspapers have run hot with the news, mainly with the emphasis that the city beat Sydney, which had to share ninth place with Zurich. As far as I can tell, the Melbourne/Sydney rivalry is only in the mind of Melbournites. Sydney, blessed with its magnificent harbour, draped with the arch of the Harbour Bridge and the Sydney Opera House, doesn’t even have to try.
The blogs and newspaper commentaries have been running even hotter with commentary, for and against, mostly from Melbourne residents. Those against complain about the transport system; those for, seem to place a rather strange emphasis on the quality of Melbourne coffee. It’s as though they believe urban sophistication can be attributed to the quality of the bean roast and the skill of its baristas. Is this why Vienna beat them on the leader board?
One particular commentator, wrote this:
“I call Melbourne BLACK, BLAND MELBOURNE. Just walk into the city whether winter or summer and all you see is men and particularly women dressed in black. Go into a department store or any restaurant or any shop for that matter and every employee is wearing black. Boring and bland. Go to Paris and women wear all colours, hardly any funeral black. So Melbourne needs to brighten up.”
This prompted me to dive to my picture files. I was in Melbourne two weeks ago and took these picture. I love Melbourne, it’s a bright, colourful city, but that writer is right, there is a pre-occupation amongst its inhabitants to wear black. If only Melburnians would learn to relax…but it must be hard when you are continually being pumped with all that caffiene…
In an article in the Los Angeles Times, James Rainey paints a gloomy picture for photographers and graphic artists. Perhaps he’s not saying anything we didn’t already know, but I’m kind of glad that I’m now at the back end of my career, rather than just starting out. This must be what it was like to be a portrait painter around the time of the invention of photography…as artist Paul Delaroche is (probably apocryphally) supposed to have said in 1839, on seeing a Daguerrotype, “From today painting is dead!” (a more balanced view of Delaroche’s opinion can be found here in Robert Leggat’s “History of Photography”.)
Filed under News, Opinion, Photography
Tasmanian Times