ThumperPaul wrote on 02/03/25 at 12:43:37:


Your answers made no sense whatsoever, and they are still not making any sense.    

Cameras are everywhere and watching you constantly, one more makes no difference, but I doubt you will ever be able to realize that.

blod wrote on 02/03/25 at 07:25:09:


This is the cafe section, so due to the rules, I can't really dive too deep and give a full answer, but a quick summary will suffice to answer your questions. I was raised Pentecostal, but parents didn't go to Church much at all. I was non-practicing and pretty much left Christianity. Identified as agnostic or no religion and lived a lifestyle that paid no heed to anything religious or spiritual. Years of research led to me accepting Jesus Christ's claim that He is God alongside the authority of the Roman Pontiff and here I am now. I haven't even been officially Catholic for a year. Sorry, I can't really give enough details on this thread/section. I would have to write a mini novel, and I wouldn't feel right doing so without listing my sources as well.

As for your hobby, the fact that you are not monetizing it does prevent many legal issues down the road. I will say though. The governments do not decide what is morally right or wrong. Walking up to people with a camera in their face has the potential to be harassment from a moral perspective. People don't like to be harassed or antagonized. There is always the potential for you to be attacked. There's a few Youtubers that drive around to different towns showcasing the town in a documentary format, interviewing people with their permission, etc. There is a right way to do it, and a wrong way to do it. I would recommend learning from people who already do it.

 I think when it comes down to filming in public, and specifically in public, the most defining parameter is general courtesy - which the filmmaker has no obligation to provide.  So yeah the public can just deal with it.

 I find that humans that film others that do not want to be filmed as a "documentary" of their area are really only documenting the general aversion the average human can have to being suddenly filmed - which is pretty universal and not unique to that town/city/location etc.  It becomes nothing more than a prank-style film and limits the ability for someone watching to see or learn anything about the area or people.

   Someone driving slow in the fast lane doesn't bother me at all, but I do not do the same using my lack of concern as an analogue for all humans.  I noticed once while helping a friend move film equipment that a man seemed very distraught at a pizza place, like severely panicked.  I assisted him in getting out a side door as he was literally panicked by all the camera equipment out front.  Turns out, as he fought back tears and thanked me - that he was forced to commit sex-acts on film as a boy.  So I guess we never know why someone doesn't want to be on camera - no matter how little it might bother us.

Eegore wrote on 02/04/25 at 07:42:43:


The documentary I am making in my local town is an unannounced  silent documentary.  It is a completely honest and unbiassed.
 The people decide for themselves how they will react, I offer no guidance.  

I have only just started the project, so far I have documented four business, three passed with flying colours, and I am sure they will be happy to be featured in  the documentary , one not  so much

So far the horse pigs have not been involved, but I doubt that will always be the case. If they do get involved they will also get the silent treatment

 Isn't it the power of the camera?  

 If you went in without the camera and remained silent would they have reacted the same you think?  I couldn't say.  

 We get a lot of "1st Amendment" audits looking for clout on YouTube in the US and many attribute their presence and questions to the reactions when I highly doubt that since there's essentially no hidden camera videos getting the same reactions.  It's the recording device that stirs people up.  

Eegore wrote on 02/05/25 at 11:05:56:

Eegore wrote on 02/07/25 at 05:42:32:


I do agree that they are mostly for loss prevention, but I will mention a small story because it's funny, but it does get around to surveillance cameras. When I was 18, I bought a phone. Used it for about 2 weeks. I did not like it, so I sold it. After I sold it to a lady, it was reported stolen to the phone networks. The lady I sold it to accused me of stealing it/purposely selling her a stolen phone. Well, anyways, I met up with her and local police at the AT&T store. I showed them email proof I had bought the phone from a private seller a few weeks prior. The seller was operating on Craigslist through email only. The lady was screwed. I did not have to give her the money back from the sale, per the police. She was strapped for cash (so was I), so I understand her frustration of being a victim. AT&T refused to give any information about the person who reported it stolen for privacy reasons. HOWEVER, they did tell the police that THE SAME PHONE was reported stolen about a dozen times over the course of a year. Yikes. Suspicious. . Well, the police agreed to assist her in finding the person who sold me the phone which was subsequently reported stolen. She went on craigslist and quickly find another phone the same seller had for sale. She set up a time and place to meet and buy the other phone. Police came in during the sale and detained the person selling stolen phones, as they already had decent enough proof. They unraveled a local ring. Multiple people ended up arrested. They were selling about 20-30 phones a month. Reporting them stolen 2-3 weeks after selling. The phone networks like AT&T would confiscate the phones and give them back. Free money. Every month.

Oh yeah, surveillance cameras. This AT&T store was across the street from a Walmart. Think about half a kilometer or so. Far enough for things to be really small on camera. I don't know how this conversation came up, but the police mentioned that they regularly get warrants to take Walmart surveillance camera footage. Apparently, Walmart surveillance cameras can zoom in clearly up to about a mile away from the Walmart. Very useful for crimes in the vicinity. Oh well, I don't know if this information is useful. I just wanted to mention that every time someone goes in public, the cameras can see them almost everywhere. Even if you are driving down the street past a Walmart, the camera can zoom in on your windshield and see details of your face. It can read your license plate number when driving by.

It's not the camera, but perhaps the awareness of it. Who knows. People are crazy sometimes.  

Eegore wrote on 02/07/25 at 06:24:22:


Well, I don't know exactly how clear it is, but only that it used for evidence. We had a case recently of a murder. The dude dumped a body off the  Mobile Bayway bridge. Basic traffic cameras gave clear enough view of the perp. He was arrested about 400 miles away in Central Florida within a day or so. I think good cameras has become standard. Except for gas stations. I swear gas stations have the cheapest cameras from 40 years ago.