TransPhoto

Снимките се публикуват на сайта така, както са и нямат за цел да промотират каквато и да е политическа и/или идеологическа позиция.

Материалите се предоставят от потребителите и не отразяват мнението на администрацията на сайта.

Затвори
Грудзёндз, Konstal 2N № 36
  ГрудзёндзKonstal 2N № 36 
Zajezdnia tramwajowa

Автор: focus1965 · Антверпен           Дата: 5 август 2024 г., понеделник

Покажи мястото на снимката на картата

Статистика

Лиценз: Copyright ©
Публикувано 21.08.2024 16:23 UTC
Разглеждан — 216

Подробна информация

Грудзёндз, Konstal 2N № 36

Депо/Парк:Miejski Zakład Komunikacji sp. z o.o.
От...:1994
Модел:Konstal 2N
Построен:1992
Текущо състояние:Действащ
Назначение:Служебен
Забележка:До 1994 — Быдгощ, 450

Параметри на камерата и снимката

Модель камеры:Canon EOS 80D
Время съёмки:05.08.2024 13:49
Выдержка:1/250 с
Диафрагменное число:9
Чувствительность ISO:160
Фокусное расстояние:50 мм
Показване на всички EXIF тагове

Коментари · 3

24.08.2024 23:01 UTC
Връзка
Tramwajooo · Пабянице
Снимка: 336
They didn't mind you taking pictures? Because if nothing has changed (I was in Grudziądz 12.07.2024), there are signs with prohibiting photography.
0
+0 / –0
25.08.2024 14:43 UTC
Връзка
focus1965 · Антверпен
Снимка: 8492 · Заместник администратор / Превод на сайта (EN/FR)
Quote (Tramwajooo, 25.08.2024):
> there are signs with prohibiting photography

Indeed, I saw a sign on the administrative building with blinded windows. Of course, I did not photograph that sign.
Otherwise and to my knowledge, I didn't break any law by photographing an old tram depot with an almost equally old tram - from the street and without entering the private grounds.
I can also put such a sign in front of my house. Question is what I can do if someone would take a picture, from that sign or my house...
0
+0 / –0
13.09.2024 07:24 UTC
Връзка
Ymtram · Ист-Хейвен - Бранфорд
Снимка: 20000 · Модератор неавторски снимки / Фотомодератор / Общ редактор / Редактор новини / Превод на сайта (EN)
Generally the Western 'school of law' (and most certainly the English 'school of law') attributes permissiveness of photography with where the photo is taken from, e.g. whether the photographer is standing on a 'free' public ground, or on a private ground where access rights or conditions of conduct can be restricted by that private party. Thus photography permissiveness is not associated with the subject of photography itself. That is, if a photo of a nuclear submarine is taken through a hole in a fence of a military base, while the photographer was standing on public land outside the fence - it is perfectly legal.

Some question such approach, but it is definitely the clearest and most obvious way to sort out legal issues related to photography. For one thing, it is not possible to post the 'no photo' signs on all objects where photos are unwanted. Thus often confusion and misunderstanding exists in the 'East' (pardon my generalization), where photography rights are associated with the subject / object of the photo, when some obscure rules about photography exist, but there is no way the photographer can know about them. You often find out about the rules when the militia or security approach you, and it is already too late :( While in the 'West' the laws are immediately clear through land attribution of the ground the photo was taken from.

And yes, I also remember that strange sign in Grudziądz :)
+1
+1 / –0

Ваш коментар

За обсъждане на политика, ще получите едномесечен бан и няма да можете да публикувате.
Вие не сте влезли в сайта.
Коментари могат да пишат само регистрирани потребители.