| Would these be classed as private? 13:27 - Mar 7 with 4842 views | heavyweight |
Huge font in a public place - assuming this is genuine |  | | |  |
| Would these be classed as private? on 14:50 - Mar 7 with 4535 views | Garv |
Screams fake to me |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 14:55 - Mar 7 with 4501 views | DanTheMan |
| Would these be classed as private? on 14:50 - Mar 7 by Garv |
Screams fake to me |
I thought the same, but he's come out saying he's reviewing his legal options so turns out it's true.
|  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:31 - Mar 7 with 4364 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Would these be classed as private? on 14:50 - Mar 7 by Garv |
Screams fake to me |
As mentioned in X, the text screen is not cropped properly and goes over his jacket in the first photo. |  | | |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:41 - Mar 7 with 4331 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Would these be classed as private? on 14:55 - Mar 7 by DanTheMan |
I thought the same, but he's come out saying he's reviewing his legal options so turns out it's true.
|
Not sure he would have any legal recouse would he. If I can see it from public I can photograph it |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:42 - Mar 7 with 4317 views | Zx1988 |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:41 - Mar 7 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Not sure he would have any legal recouse would he. If I can see it from public I can photograph it |
That was my thinking. Surely no different to when photographers at Westminster have managed to snap details of poorly-carried documents (disregarding, of course, the possibility that said documents were deliberately visible...). | |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:15 - Mar 7 with 4196 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:41 - Mar 7 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Not sure he would have any legal recouse would he. If I can see it from public I can photograph it |
Only if taken from a public place. All stadia are regarded as private places. |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:21 - Mar 7 with 4157 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:41 - Mar 7 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Not sure he would have any legal recouse would he. If I can see it from public I can photograph it |
I would imagine he would if it is Photoshopped. |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:25 - Mar 7 with 4119 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:42 - Mar 7 by Zx1988 |
That was my thinking. Surely no different to when photographers at Westminster have managed to snap details of poorly-carried documents (disregarding, of course, the possibility that said documents were deliberately visible...). |
Again. All of your examples are taken from a public place.
The defining element under the law in this country is, "A reasonable expectation of privacy" | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:30 - Mar 7 with 4093 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:25 - Mar 7 by Cheltenham_Blue |
Again. All of your examples are taken from a public place.
The defining element under the law in this country is, "A reasonable expectation of privacy" |
Any lawyer worth his salt would surely argue that in a stadium with 10k people plus does not meet that threshold of reasonable expectation? | |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:46 - Mar 7 with 3997 views | LankHenners |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:30 - Mar 7 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Any lawyer worth his salt would surely argue that in a stadium with 10k people plus does not meet that threshold of reasonable expectation? |
They might but more to the point personal messages on a phone would be considered private and in this instance there isn't any public interest angle to justify taking pictures of them and sharing them. |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 17:55 - Mar 7 with 3834 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Would these be classed as private? on 16:30 - Mar 7 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Any lawyer worth his salt would surely argue that in a stadium with 10k people plus does not meet that threshold of reasonable expectation? |
As this image was taken on private property without permission to do so, there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
I mean, I'm only talking from the basis of 20 years in the industry having seen multiple cases of the same nature, and 10 years teaching in media ethics and law, so, make of that what you will. | |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 17:57 - Mar 7 with 3829 views | NthQldITFC |
| Would these be classed as private? on 15:31 - Mar 7 by Eireannach_gorm |
As mentioned in X, the text screen is not cropped properly and goes over his jacket in the first photo. |
I can see why they say that, but I think that's an artefact of the jpeg in this case - it looks real to me. |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 18:07 - Mar 7 with 3771 views | CaptainAhab |
| Would these be classed as private? on 17:57 - Mar 7 by NthQldITFC |
I can see why they say that, but I think that's an artefact of the jpeg in this case - it looks real to me. |
Zoom in on the bottom left of the phone screen, it's quite clearly been overlayed on top of the jacket/hood. There's a straight line where the curve of the hood should still be.
Also the angle of the text at the top doesn't seem quite right to me either.
Looks fake for sure | | | |
| Would these be classed as private? on 18:15 - Mar 7 with 3732 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Would these be classed as private? on 18:07 - Mar 7 by CaptainAhab |
Zoom in on the bottom left of the phone screen, it's quite clearly been overlayed on top of the jacket/hood. There's a straight line where the curve of the hood should still be.
Also the angle of the text at the top doesn't seem quite right to me either.
Looks fake for sure |
I'm not suggesting it isn't fake, but I'd be more inclined to go with that it looks massively over-sharpened. | |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 19:03 - Mar 7 with 3580 views | NthQldITFC |
| Would these be classed as private? on 18:07 - Mar 7 by CaptainAhab |
Zoom in on the bottom left of the phone screen, it's quite clearly been overlayed on top of the jacket/hood. There's a straight line where the curve of the hood should still be.
Also the angle of the text at the top doesn't seem quite right to me either.
Looks fake for sure |
I see that, but I strongly suspect there's an (actual, real world) fuzzy edge to the hood which some of the screen light passes through, and the compression algorithm used to create the jpeg has interpreted that in-between colour as the screen colour to increase compression ratio. | |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 19:29 - Mar 7 with 3485 views | CaptainAhab |
| Would these be classed as private? on 19:03 - Mar 7 by NthQldITFC |
I see that, but I strongly suspect there's an (actual, real world) fuzzy edge to the hood which some of the screen light passes through, and the compression algorithm used to create the jpeg has interpreted that in-between colour as the screen colour to increase compression ratio. |
Possible yeah. Still looks suss to me though | | | |
| Would these be classed as private? on 23:20 - Mar 7 with 3188 views | Guthrum |
| Would these be classed as private? on 17:57 - Mar 7 by NthQldITFC |
I can see why they say that, but I think that's an artefact of the jpeg in this case - it looks real to me. |
The biggest issue for me is accurate focus at all depths. You can see individual hairs on his head and read the text on the screen. Most phone cameras will fixate on a single point.
Cheltenham Blue might be the poster to ask, but what kind of lens would do that? How far away could the taker have been? |  |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 23:21 - Mar 7 with 3186 views | Guthrum |
| Would these be classed as private? on 18:15 - Mar 7 by Cheltenham_Blue |
I'm not suggesting it isn't fake, but I'd be more inclined to go with that it looks massively over-sharpened. |
Hadn't read your post when I wrote mine. | |
| |
| Would these be classed as private? on 23:34 - Mar 7 with 3162 views | mrfixit426 |
| Would these be classed as private? on 23:20 - Mar 7 by Guthrum |
The biggest issue for me is accurate focus at all depths. You can see individual hairs on his head and read the text on the screen. Most phone cameras will fixate on a single point.
Cheltenham Blue might be the poster to ask, but what kind of lens would do that? How far away could the taker have been? |
Putting phone graphics into phones in vfx shots is part of what I do for a job. Usually you would add some light bleed around the edges, but in this one it's super sharp.
However, it looks extremely digitally zoomed in and is also compressed. This does weird stuff to an image, particularly when you have super bright elements. |  | | |
| Would these be classed as private? on 09:17 - Mar 10 with 2634 views | NeedhamChris |
Well they weren't wrong about the manager having to go... | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
