TransPhoto

Fotografiile sunt publicate ca atare și nu au scopul de a promova vreo poziție politică și/sau ideologică.

Toate materialele sunt furnizate de către utilizatorii acestui site și nu reflectă opinia echipei de administrare a ste-ului

Închide
Grudziądz, Konstal 2N nr. 36
  GrudziądzKonstal 2N nr. 36 
Zajezdnia tramwajowa

Autor: focus1965 · Antwerpen           Dată: 5 august 2024 an, Luni

Afișează locația de fotografiere pe hartă

Statistici

Licență: Copyright ©
Publicat 21.08.2024 16:23 UTC
Vizualizări — 216

Informație detaliată

Grudziądz, Konstal 2N nr. 36

Depoul:Miejski Zakład Komunikacji sp. z o.o.
Începând cu...:1994
Model:Konstal 2N
Anul construcției:1992
Starea actuală:Operațional
Funcție:Vehicul de serviciu
Observație:1994 ex Bydgoszcz, 450

Setările camerei foto

Model:Canon EOS 80D
Date and Time:05.08.2024 13:49
Exposure Time:1/250 sec
Aperture Value:9
ISO Speed:160
Focal Length:50 mm
Arătați datele EXIF

Comentarii · 3

24.08.2024 23:01 UTC
Link
Tramwajooo · Pabianice
Fotografii: 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
Link
focus1965 · Antwerpen
Fotografii: 8492 · Administrator adjunct / Traducerea interfeței (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
Link
Ymtram · East Haven - Branford
Fotografii: 20000 · Moderatorul fotografiilor terțe / Moderatorul fotografiilor / Redactor general / Redactor al știrilor / Traducerea interfeței (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

Comentariul dumneavoastră

Vă rugăm să nu aduceți în discuție subiecte politice, altfel veți fi suspendat pentru cel puțin o lună!
Trebuie să vă conectați pentru a scrie comentarii.