Diamond Jubilee - no "professional" cameras allowed.

sturisoma said:
you mean 'full-stops' right? Americans say 'periods' so unless you are American...:D
Click to expand...

Well, my wife is Canadian, so my pure (hem hem) English has become a little contaminated. ;)

However, Wiki would have it that:

The full stop symbol derives from Aristophanes of Byzantium who invented the system of punctuation where the height of placement of a dot on the line determined its meaning. The high dot (˙) was called a "periodos" and indicated a finished thought or sentence, the middle dot (·) was called a "kolon" and indicated part of a complete thought, while the low dot (.) was called a "telia" and also indicated part of a complete thought.
Click to expand...

So it's actually a 'telia'!
 
jon ryan said:
Try not to worry about it. Many people have similar problems and are able to cope with them. Perhaps you could get some remedial coaching?
Click to expand...

its too late for me. my lazyness of using the apostrophe has taken over completely.
 
actually sometimes i get very very lazy and use no punctuation whatsoever, i blame it on word and the auto correct facility :lol:
 
sturisoma said:
actually sometimes i get very very lazy and use no punctuation whatsoever, i blame it on word and the auto correct facility :lol:
Click to expand...

Try reading Trainspotting!!
 
HMansfield said:
Lens_Critter_Blue_Street_Monster_medium2.jpg


Camera disguise!
Click to expand...

now why didnt i think of that,good idea.
 
Steelmagnet said:
Can't believe anyone is even interested in this elitist drivel.

This is an unelected ruler, worth untold billions, presiding over a country where there are children with almost nothing to eat.

How dare she dictate what type of equipment the tax paying public use to photographer her with.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming this to be tongue in cheek so will respond accordingly.

1. The old adage about comparing the hereditory monarch with any elected politician, in any nation, still holds good. Think you'll find that the last lot under Mr Bliar then one-eyed Gordie introduced more nanny-state drivel than any previous bunch of similar leeches.

2. Her untold billions aren't actually untold. If you need to know just look at last weekend's Times. Will you get your butler to pop out for a copy or shall I send one of my proletarian comrades to commandeer a horse in the name of the revolution and rifle through my recycling bin?

3. As we don't have a President in the UK, HM cannot, de facto be presiding over it. Watch out north of Hadrian's Wall: you might be in line for one if Al Salmon gets his way.

4. These starving urchins: who's getting the Child Benefit for them and what are they spending it on then?

5. You don't really imagine that HM is the slightest bit bothered about what kind of cameras her subjects use (unless it's the Canon/Nikon question)? Most of them will be using the cameras built into their mobile phones and equipped with artificial shutter-click noises. Fact is that it's the jobsworths who say you can't take a camera into a Royal Park, same camera you can't take to the Olympic venues where beer will be £7.52 a pint and you cannot take in bottled water or a picnic hamper. A pro tog friend of mine regularly snaps away at the Royals at play and they never once mistake his long lens for a bazooka or a starving child. Now, if only someone would ban peurile USA-style woo-wooing and screaming every time someone once seen on the telly hoves into view...

I'm going back to sleep now...
 
jon ryan said:
I quite agree. This is as reprehensible as people who are ignorant of how to punctuate contractions such as 'it's' and 'don't', and who don't know when to use capitals and periods. Such poorly educated people we have on here!
Click to expand...

May I draw your attention to the incomplete sentence which you have provided us with and the resultant incorrect punctuation? I'm wondering "Such poorly educated people we have on here" what?

:naughty::naughty::naughty::naughty::naughty:
 
tikkathreebarrel said:
May I draw your attention to the incomplete sentence which you have provided us with and the resultant incorrect punctuation? I'm wondering "Such poorly educated people we have on here" what?

:naughty::naughty::naughty::naughty::naughty:
Click to expand...

Ah, well, the statement should be taken gestalticly, with the terminal dembanger implying a pseudo-apotheotic brocard for jocous effect.

hope thats' clear, now. :geek:
 
If we're harping on about accuracy here, it's perfectly possible for HM to preside over the country, although rule is a much better verb:

2. (intransitive) To exercise authority or control, oversit.
 
Forgive me but I thought this thread was about the use of "Professional" cameras, not a debate regarding the pros and cons of the monarchy.
 
I should imagine this is due to "Crown Copyright" as it is with their palaces and other events, though of course, compacts can breach copyright too!

(Apologies for bringing this off the off topic but back on topic....)
 
Last edited:
simonblue said:
Did something happen this weekend ?,have I missed something :suspect:
Click to expand...
I'm sure you didn't miss the extra two days off! ;)
 
odd jim said:
I should imagine this is due to "Crown Copyright" as it is with their palaces and other events, though of course, compacts can breach copyright too!

(Apologies for bringing this off the off topic but back on topic....)
Click to expand...

You're right any sort of camera can breach copyright

:)
 
technically cameras don't breach copyright - its what the photographer does with the resultant image that does that.
 
It's not copyright. It comes under one of the plethora of Royal Parks Regulations (Acts).
 
As the OP for this thread I thought I'd let everyone know about what went on.

BTW thanks to all those who hijacked the thread for pro or anti-monarchist reasons.....if you'd actually read the original few posts you'd have realised that this was not intended to take a pop at the Royals (or indeed for anyone to take a pro-Royal stance. This was simply about being allowed to take a camera to an event.

As it turned out I arrived without DSLR and armed with a couple of point and shoots to find that no-one seemed to mind in the slightest about anyone having a "professional" camera or lenses. Indeed it seemed that quite a few individuals did have DSLRs and reasonably long lenses with them.

That peeved me a bit.................particularly when the chap sitting a few rows down from me who had a Canon of some description and obviously having no idea how to use it resorted to holding the pop-up flash down with his hand........

Ho hum......
 
Mountkeen said:
As the OP for this thread I thought I'd let everyone know about what went on.

BTW thanks to all those who hijacked the thread for pro or anti-monarchist reasons.....if you'd actually read the original few posts you'd have realised that this was not intended to take a pop at the Royals (or indeed for anyone to take a pro-Royal stance. This was simply about being allowed to take a camera to an event.

As it turned out I arrived without DSLR and armed with a couple of point and shoots to find that no-one seemed to mind in the slightest about anyone having a "professional" camera or lenses. Indeed it seemed that quite a few individuals did have DSLRs and reasonably long lenses with them.

That peeved me a bit.................particularly when the chap sitting a few rows down from me who had a Canon of some description and obviously having no idea how to use it resorted to holding the pop-up flash down with his hand........

Ho hum......
Click to expand...

I was watching it on TV and saw about 5 or 6 people in the crowd using them, and that was only those close to cameras, I remembered this thread and did chuckle a bit, it clearly wasn't being 'policed' in anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top