Paparazzi - your views?

gazedd

gazedd

Ding Dong
Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,068
Name
Gary Eddleston
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been thinking all day about paparazzi and how tuff but slightly rewarding it might be. I was recently watching a program about a guy who went out to the states and decided to "Pap" Britney Spears, he targeted her with guilt at first only because of the TV show, but as he continued through 2 weeks they became more and more adictive and he was even prepared to break the law on Camera for "that shot". Although in doing this he missed the shot and got nothing.

So my questions (an open view):
What are your views on Pap photography?
Is it a form of photography that you would or have taken up?
Is it morally wrong?

I'm sure its something that all will have different views on and some quite strong.
 
Not something I would do and I can take the moral high ground because I diont read a red top or any of the mags that the paps sell to.

Having said that I also have little sympathy for many of the "Celebrities" stalked by the paps,they want the shots taken on their terms ,well sorry but thats the price of fame
 
I think taking photos of celebs when there out and about is fine, putting on a 800mm lens to take a photo of them sunbathing in their garden is crossing the line for me (possibly because i have no interest in celebs lives). I also have no sympathy for togs that get grief when they go after the celebs children its not the kids fault the parents are famous.
 
I saw a bit of that program as well but was feeling slightly sick by the end. I think there's nothing wrong with the concept of paparazzi photography, but it is taken way too far. So it goes from being just another form of togging to an extreme invasion of privacy. It's easy to see why. That one shot may be worth thousands and some people will obviously go to any lengths to get it. Certainly not something for me. There's no art in it. Bleugh.
 
i'm quite open minded about the whole subject and agree with you both, i could do it - i wouldnt be interested in the "stars" who are lets face it talentless most of the time. But chasing the kids/family and harrassing them maybe a little to far.

But i bet when you get "that shot" its worth it :)
 
I don't have any problems with paparazzi-type photography, the majority of the people that are targeted by the paps have put themselves in the public spotlight and have courted the self-same photographers for their own ends, so I can't see anything morally wrong with it.

I'm not so sure about pictures of celebs kids etc being taken, I feel that's a step too far, but the celebs themselves are fair game.

Would I do it? Yes, if the opportunity presented itself.
 
The first lab I worked at one of the guys there gave up papping as he didn't feel right about it any more. He was making good money and used to work with Jason Frazer but in the end couldn't stomach it. His biggest moment was getting the first shots of Koo Stark after news about her and Prince Andrew broke. He also got nicked for hiding in the bushes in Buckingham Palace.

Dave Hogan is at the other end of the scale, no chasing, just (back then) standing outside clubs, restaurants, etc. and one of the nicest blokes I've ever met. He used to be a regular at Joe's E6 about 20 years ago when I worked there.

Another bloke who worked the same shift as me was struggling to make ends meet as a glamour tog, then he lucked out when the Spice Girls became famous, he'd taken the topless shots of Geri and made a mint, bought his own studio in London and now does very well shooting for adult mags.

Another guy who used to come into Joe's, Gordon Ramone (not his real name), used to work for the Sunday Sport. He came up with the story about people getting their dole cheques delivered to Spain. He found a PO bag when he was on holiday, took a few snaps and made the whole thing up. Not really a pap but another press tog who was a great bloke and who'd while away the hours over a coffee in Joe's.

Every one of them is a nice bloke but the only real "pap" amongst them jacked it in because he felt wrong doing it. Sure there's big money to be made but it's a dog eat dog world and morally questionable. The paper's say the photos are in the public interest but they are generating the interest in the first place.

The paps that chase, stalk, etc. are invading the private life of the celebs to make money and it's morally questionable IMO. People like Jason Frazer are tipped off by the celebs because they want the coverage, also morally questionable but for different reasons (ie, celebs using their kids to get the coverage). But then I'm a bloke and I couldn't care about pictures of so and so with sweaty armpits, wardobe malfunctions, etc.
 
Closest I've come to it is in the paddock at the British Grand Prix - whenever a driver or other celebrity walked in there'd be a massive scrum, people pushing and shoving and bashing into people and firing away to get a shot. Not something I enjoyed, and not why I do this job!
 
pxl8 said:
The first lab I worked at one of the guys there gave up papping as he didn't feel right about it any more. He was making good money and used to work with Jason Frazer but in the end couldn't stomach it. His biggest moment was getting the first shots of Koo Stark after news about her and Prince Andrew broke. He also got nicked for hiding in the bushes in Buckingham Palace.

Dave Hogan is at the other end of the scale, no chasing, just (back then) standing outside clubs, restaurants, etc. and one of the nicest blokes I've ever met. He used to be a regular at Joe's E6 about 20 years ago when I worked there.

Another bloke who worked the same shift as me was struggling to make ends meet as a glamour tog, then he lucked out when the Spice Girls became famous, he'd taken the topless shots of Geri and made a mint, bought his own studio in London and now does very well shooting for adult mags.

Another guy who used to come into Joe's, Gordon Ramone (not his real name), used to work for the Sunday Sport. He came up with the story about people getting their dole cheques delivered to Spain. He found a PO bag when he was on holiday, took a few snaps and made the whole thing up. Not really a pap but another press tog who was a great bloke and who'd while away the hours over a coffee in Joe's.

Every one of them is a nice bloke but the only real "pap" amongst them jacked it in because he felt wrong doing it. Sure there's big money to be made but it's a dog eat dog world and morally questionable. The paper's say the photos are in the public interest but they are generating the interest in the first place.

The paps that chase, stalk, etc. are invading the private life of the celebs to make money and it's morally questionable IMO. People like Jason Frazer are tipped off by the celebs because they want the coverage, also morally questionable but for different reasons (ie, celebs using their kids to get the coverage). But then I'm a bloke and I couldn't care about pictures of so and so with sweaty armpits, wardobe malfunctions, etc.
Click to expand...


quite an interesting read, scandle might be the way forwards to make money :)
 
It is a sad indictment of todays celebrity obsessed society. The papers and mags are prepared to pay obscene amounts of money for photos of whatever vacuuous, talentless non-entity happens to be in the "news" at the moment. I guess good old fashioned greed wins out nearly every time :(
 
I could never become a paparazzi tog. I don't know who's in coronation street or won big brother, I don't recognise anyone on the "celebrity do things" programs - I certainly would be no good at recognising them in the street. :shrug:

As to the morals - the celebs know what they're getting into, and the paps know that the right picture will make a tidy packet. No problems with it here.
 
whooshdemon said:
I could never become a paparazzi tog. I don't know who's in coronation street or won big brother, I don't recognise anyone on the "celebrity do things" programs - I certainly would be no good at recognising them in the street. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Just look for some eejit with big sunglasses and an inflated ego and then take their pic.....you'd have a 90% sucess rate :lol:

Those are goggles, not sunglasses in my avatar, before anyone says anything :razz:
 
I wouldn't take it up.
I do admit I know very little about the actual job.
Maybe there's a harmless way of papping, but from what I've seen a couple of years ago (when I completely stopped reading most newspapers), they do pretty much little else than disturb private lives of celebrities. Of course, if they also do the togging when the celebrities are on a catwalk or come to the first screening of their movie in a theatre, then I presume it's quite fine with everyone, as they probably expect photographers to take photos of them on such an occasion.
But stalking and doing a sneaky kind of photography is something I quite disagree with, especially if they're told to stop the stalking and they don't.

What's most disturbing on this whole thing is that there's actually demand for such photography and people buy those rubbish newspapers and magazines.
 
First off - I think the entire world of celebrity watching and adoration is wrong on many levels. The vast majority (the ones that fill the papers/magazines) are bad idols, and are worshipped for the wrong reasons. Look at that waste of space - err (I have actually forgotten her name)... ah! Paris Hilton. I'll never forget having the misfortune of watching a program she was in, one in which she had to do some work, that happened to be on a farm.

Her simple task was to fill some milk bottles, which, when having the equivalent intelligence of some burnt toast, was rather hard. So what did she do after spilling milk everywhere and only part filling the bottles? Top them all up with water! Made me want to spit, such disrespectful actions shown to millions, in the context of being funny and cool.

Secondly, who really cares if XYZ has a sweat mark? Surely there are more interesting things to read about.

Thirdly, it's totally invasive to these celebrities themselves to have people snapping them 24/7. The worst example are the (and I mean this literally) gutter trash who take pictures of females getting out of vehicles, from the pavement/gutter level. The only reason for this is to get shots of you-know-what. Disgusting behaviour, and the papers that buy and publish the pictures are the worst, as if they stopped buying, the pap would stop taking.

Sour subject for me, in case you didn't notice :¬)
 
rdh said:
First off - I think the entire world of celebrity watching and adoration is wrong on many levels. The vast majority (the ones that fill the papers/magazines) are bad idols, and are worshipped for the wrong reasons.
Click to expand...

The possible reason for that is, the good idols don't get pap'd . A pap can only make money if there are no other shots of the celebrity, and people like Clint Eastwood just come out of a restaurant and ask the tog where he should stand while they all get a shot, Tom Cruise has really sorted out how to dealt with the paps, talk to the fans for hours and let the fans take photos of you and Tom together then get Tom to phone your mum to say hello.

I saw a TV program years ago the paps where chasing some female actress down the street (everyone was walking/running not in cars) and she was trying to cover her face and hide all the time, I thought stand still you silly cow let them get a few shots and they'll leave you alone.


Now I could not do it, because as above I don't read the Red Tops or mags and don't know or care who these people are or what they do.
 
rdh said:
it's totally invasive to these celebrities themselves to have people snapping them 24/7. The worst example are the (and I mean this literally) gutter trash who take pictures of females getting out of vehicles, from the pavement/gutter level. The only reason for this is to get shots of you-know-what. Disgusting behaviour, and the papers that buy and publish the pictures are the worst, as if they stopped buying, the pap would stop taking.
Click to expand...

The majority of those who are papped court the the paps and revel in the publicity, until they get caught doing something they shouldn't, then they start whinging about invasion of privacy etc.

I have to agree about what you call the "gutter trash" though, those guys deserve to go on the sex offender's register.....
 
Supply and demand - the paps only have work because someone is prepared to buy and print their photos. The photos are only printed because someone is prepared to buy the newspapers and magazines. That someone is the great British public, well the female half anyway.

Celebrity is the new religion in this country, all kneel at the altar of Heat.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
I have to agree about what you call the "gutter trash" though, those guys deserve to go on the sex offender's register.....
Click to expand...

The other side of that argument of course is that if you go out wearing a belt and no knickers you should be done for indecent exposure, no pun intended. These folk know the score, if they don't want to be photographed like that they should be wearing nice sensible wooly thermals, problem sorted.

Like Wedding Hack says, it's simply supply and demand. The paps fulfil it. I don't have a lot of time for celebrities moaning about lack of privacy, even for their kids. There are plenty of them more than happy to use their kids to promote themselves in an effort to put forward a positive image.
 
It's the status that these people have that annoys me. VIP? No. A doctor, or a nurse is a very important person(s) - they change lives.

Then again the businesses that run this world, are based around a model of power, segregation and status (albeit personal or financial). What else can we expect :¬)
 
both paps and celebs fill a perceived void in the lives of the people who buy the publications that print their photos..... i'm not one of these people.

however, i could see myself trying it out as a part-time hobby.... celebs are fair game in public in my view.
 
I watched the paparazzi series on the biography channel, which was on for a few weeks, it mainly dealt with Darren Lyons "big picture" company, it struck me that he was making all the millions while the paps who worked for him seemed to make peanuts, it also struck me (and i may get slated for this) that these guys was,nt particularly good photographers, not much skill involved just being in the right place at the right time, and having the bottle to shove everyone else out of the way, not sure it's a job i would like to do as i don't think i would have the patience with getting shoved all over the place, i think i might end up in to many punch ups :lol:
 
rdh said:
It's the status that these people have that annoys me. VIP? No. A doctor, or a nurse is a very important person(s) - they change lives.
Click to expand...

That status is only granted them by the public, and the public are very fickle, it doesn't take much for them to crash and burn.

Then again the businesses that run this world, are based around a model of power, segregation and status (albeit personal or financial). What else can we expect :¬)
Click to expand...

When has society ever been different ? It's part of the human condition - there are only two types of people - leaders and followers, and the followers need the leaders as much as leaders need followers.
 
So you want to be a Pap?

Speaking as someone who worked in TV news for many years, try this:

Wait until it is raining, then go and stand in your garden for ten hours, in the rain and with no toilet breaks and.......just wait. If you can't do this, then you can't do the job, trust me on this one.
 
WeddingHack said:
That status is only granted them by the public, and the public are very fickle, it doesn't take much for them to crash and burn.
Click to expand...

Indeed true.

WeddingHack said:
When has society ever been different ? It's part of the human condition - there are only two types of people - leaders and followers, and the followers need the leaders as much as leaders need followers.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%, but no one said the leaders had to take the materialistic view upon the world. Not saying we should all run around hugging tree's, but there could easily be an even balance in the global workplace.

Everything we lay our eyes upon on this earth - everything - has a pound sign attached to it in some form. Even the passing away of family and relatives - it's quite awful if you take a step back and look at it as a whole business entity.

Essentially, our culture, which has developed from the early leaders in industry and trade, has guided (forced) us to work to pay for our own freedom. Sounds extreme, but the vast majority of people work, 9-5, 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year to buy their own freedom. Their own time to enjoy hobbies, read books, take photographs, express themselves creatively and go out and enjoy company with their family and friends. Very few, as a percentage, have the chance to express themselves in their job. Those who do should really count themselves lucky :¬)
 
JumboBeef said:
So you want to be a Pap?

Speaking as someone who worked in TV news for many years, try this:

Wait until it is raining, then go and stand in your garden for ten hours, in the rain and with no toilet breaks and.......just wait. If you can't do this, then you can't do the job, trust me on this one.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it is what i want to do, but certainly would be interesting. The waiting would be the hardest bit as you say. Some days would go without a shot. Which means that no money comes home. I guess the pap's know the score and understand the risk's! It did get me thinking though when i watched the program.
 
JumboBeef said:
Wait until it is raining, then go and stand in your garden for ten hours, in the rain and with no toilet breaks and.......just wait. If you can't do this, then you can't do the job, trust me on this one.
Click to expand...


Aha, a day in the life of an equine 'tog......:lol:
 
To be honest, I'm not a fan.

It'd drive me absolutely nuts if I was a celebrity and constantly being followed around and chased by the pap. So much so that i'd probably not want to be a celebrity.

Papparazzi, they chase celebrities around, stand about outside their homes, their work places, their local 'hang outs', just waiting for them to emerge so they can get a couple of snaps of them living their life to sell to a magazine, so that the few among us can read all about them.

I'm hoping i'm not the only one thinking this, but in ANY other situation, that's stalking.
 
rdh said:
Essentially, our culture, which has developed from the early leaders in industry and trade, has guided (forced) us to work to pay for our own freedom. Sounds extreme, but the vast majority of people work, 9-5, 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year to buy their own freedom. Their own time to enjoy hobbies, read books, take photographs, express themselves creatively and go out and enjoy company with their family and friends. Very few, as a percentage, have the chance to express themselves in their job. Those who do should really count themselves lucky :¬)
Click to expand...

I went to a talk given by this bloke Charles Handy about 8 years ago, he's the author of a series of books examining business now and in the future. One thing he said really struck home - 'people should not be grateful to the company they work in for employing them, the companies should be grateful to the staff agreeing to sell their time to company'. Changed my whole attitude to work - my time is my own, and if I chose to sell it to someone else or to a company then that should be a choice I make, rather than feeling beholden to my employer.

Changed my attitude so much that four years later I was made redundant (i.e sacked with incentives) and I started working for myself lol.

Anyway, way off topic now, can the mods start a 'Talk Philosophy' section please ? :)
 
It's a bit like hunting... only for humans that's the only way to describe it.

My baser side thinks it could be a lot of fun for the chase alone, but I don't think I could do it really, a bit too intrusive and extreme to want to be a part of it.
 
WeddingHack said:
I went to a talk given by this bloke Charles Handy about 8 years ago, he's the author of a series of books examining business now and in the future. One thing he said really struck home - 'people should not be grateful to the company they work in for employing them, the companies should be grateful to the staff agreeing to sell their time to company'. Changed my whole attitude to work - my time is my own, and if I chose to sell it to someone else or to a company then that should be a choice I make, rather than feeling beholden to my employer.

Changed my attitude so much that four years later I was made redundant (i.e sacked with incentives) and I started working for myself lol.
Click to expand...

That's a very, very good perspective on work.

WeddingHack said:
Anyway, way off topic now, can the mods start a 'Talk Philosophy' section please ? :)
Click to expand...

:D
 
You guys should all watch the film 'Paparazzi', rather good and justice is done at the end!
 
rdh said:
Essentially, our culture, which has developed from the early leaders in industry and trade, has guided (forced) us to work to pay for our own freedom. Sounds extreme, but the vast majority of people work, 9-5, 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year to buy their own freedom. Their own time to enjoy hobbies, read books, take photographs, express themselves creatively and go out and enjoy company with their family and friends. Very few, as a percentage, have the chance to express themselves in their job. Those who do should really count themselves lucky :¬)
Click to expand...

It's quite an easy thing to get out of though, to be fair. People could quite conceivably work jobs whose wages paid only for their bare essentials, and they'd end up with a lot more free time: the problem is that people actually quite like plasma TVs, cars, computers and all the other things a materialistic lifestyle brings. I mean, there's a reason we stopped being subsistence farmers, and that's because living as a subsistence farmer is an objectively horrible existence.

Yes, there's a happy medium, but I think most people are actually at that happy medium already. Not workaholics who are in the office 100 hours a week, not subsistence farmers, but somewhere in-between—with enough money to go on holiday and buy occasional treats and enough free time to have hobbies and friends and the rest of it. I certainly wouldn't trade it for either extreme :)
 
Worst example of the paps I have seen recently was when Gary Glitter was on that flight out of Thailand, now I have no sympathy for him per se but the paps were rediculous! Climbing over seats (and other passengers) and sticking lenses a few inches from his face. The cabin crew should have done their jobs!
 
I recently heard about some filming being done in Oxford for a series that has some stars (if you want to call them that :)) that my son loves, so being that I dont live all that far away, we went and managed to find where they were filming, now asked a couple of the actors for pics of them with my son and they happily posed for me, but at one point one of the actors was standing around talking to his wife, child etc and I could have EASILY taken their pics as they were right in front of me - bit I didnt do, it felt SO wrong to invade their private time especially when they has been so nice :)

So thats my view on it, ask and if they say yes - ok, but not of their children, its wrong :nono:

Tracy.
 
chameleon said:
Worst example of the paps I have seen recently was when Gary Glitter was on that flight out of Thailand, now I have no sympathy for him per se but the paps were rediculous! Climbing over seats (and other passengers) and sticking lenses a few inches from his face. The cabin crew should have done their jobs!
Click to expand...

Sold them all over-priced drinks and tasteless food? :thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top