Yamyam Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Glad you all liked the story! It's always made me smile, and also makes me rather wish I still lived in Oxford. Oh well Obsessed is such a strong word. I prefer to think of myself as "differently enthusiastic" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ionic Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 With the new season's footwear more evident out and about, there has been little news on the streetshot front and we can't have this thread dropping into archive status. And some of us know who has been out photographing in the middle of London, don't we?? Any chance of some uploads somewhere sometime soon? /I /I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 I didn't get very many good shots. Heelfan has a load of stils, some of them good but he doesn't know how to store/upload them yet. This one was taken with a matchbox camera on a crowded Liverpool Street Station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ionic Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 Heelfan has a load of stils, some of them good but he doesn't know how to store/upload them yet. ...and he is 10,000miles away, ok we can wait Your one success there at Liverpool St. is very clever though. /I /I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 I didn't think it was too good, but thanks. You've encouraged me to post another piece of action from Liverpool Street. The movies from my new finepix 410 with 14x zoom and 320x440 video resolution are going to be 10 times better than this though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 I took a few stills of stils while in London too. I'll send them up next week. Sorry, been rather too busy recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 Another streetheel site from Japan : Leg Angels Boots, fascinating footwear http://s70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/Boots_1956/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jo Posted October 19, 2003 Share Posted October 19, 2003 The Japanese seem to be quite heavily into that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 I'm just posting because we need to add on this Street-shots thread that Firefox has added a Street-fashions section to Jenny's High Stiletto Heels site, and anotherStreet-fashions section to the optional paysite on Jenny's same site. Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown Posted December 15, 2003 Share Posted December 15, 2003 This is an excellent topic. You want street-shots?! Very well. Stay tuned! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 The subject of street-shots has just reared it's head under "Your Favourite Pictures" with the news that the nice "Streetheels" website is about to be taken over and run as a pay-site under another name. I am therefore posting to bring this thread back up to the top, because it contains a listing of other street-shot sites. Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted April 13, 2004 Share Posted April 13, 2004 Here we are folks - a typical "today" pic from the Japanese "Walkroad" Digidigix Site! I mentioned this site and various others in my above posting in the thread of 1st August 2003. "Walkroad's URL is: http://digidigix.ktplan.ne.jp/walkroad/ Note: That will bring up their home page, then always click on "Today" and you will be able to enjoy a great new picture every day! Note that this girl is heading for disaster (grating dead ahead)! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul (North-East) Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Thanks Heelfan, That's a great photo for a mule loving guy like myself. I'll investigate the site pronto. Thanks again, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 As I always say - you can't beat street-shots! Here's another one - today's Digidigix offering from Japan. It's well worth keeping a daily watch on their site: Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted June 20, 2004 Share Posted June 20, 2004 Here's another nice offering p today's Digidix picture. Great if you share my admiration of slapping stiletto mules: Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul (North-East) Posted June 20, 2004 Share Posted June 20, 2004 Brilliant photo Heelfan, that style of mules are a deffinite favourite of mine. Thanks. Cheers, Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn HH Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Heelfan:-) Really great photos, Heelfan. I never wear fetish shoes as when I dress I want to present myself with the same outfits and heels that you would see a woman on the street going about her daily chores or to and from work would be wearing. This way I can blend in with everyone else that is out and about and be quite authentic in looks and manners. You don't see a normal woman wearing fetish heels to work and be standing in them all day. Cheers--- Dawn HH High Heeled Boots Forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Hi Everyone! I'm just refreshing this Streetshots thread to bring it back to the top of the heap, because Ellen-Jay has just started the same topic, and she may be interested to see that it has already had three pages of in-depth debate here. Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen-Jay Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Noted. No comment needed. Ellen-Jay --------------------------------------------------- The shoes aren't sensible, so why is the talk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trolldeg Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 not a very high heel (very low, rather), but nice to see some thigh high boots out and about... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raccoon Posted November 13, 2004 Share Posted November 13, 2004 I love fully exposed boots. Pity about the low heels indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn HH Posted November 14, 2004 Share Posted November 14, 2004 Most thigh boots have high heels. Unusual to see a pair with low heels. I don't ever see thigh boots around my area, not even in the shoe stores. Mickey and I saw a young girl in our local food store a couple of days ago wearing a short skirt, nude pantyhose, and a pair of black leather knee-high boots with a 2.5" block heel. You could hear the sound of her heels all over the entire store. Cheers--- Dawn HH High Heeled Boots Forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Hi Everyone! I'm just posting to bring this thread to the top of the Forum, because Jeff (our Webmaster) has posted a ruling that our streetshots must not include a recognisable face. If Jeff reads this thread and sees that under the law it is perfectly legal and acceptable to show faces (as supported by postings from Firefox and Laurieheels, two of his own moderators), it is my personal hope that he might consider relaxing this ruling. Constructively yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fogane Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 With this old thread resurrected, which has given me the chance to read it, I wanted to say one thing that comes to mind regarding a statement made twice by Heelfan: if the person is in a PUBLIC place, they have demonstrated their willingness to be seen by the public at large, and the law does not differenciate between their being seen 'in the flesh' by passers-by, or being seen on photographs taken by a passer-by. It seems to me that by appearing in a public place you can quite reasonably expect to be seen by the public, but this would be limited to hundreds/thousands of people and the image lasts only in their memories. A photograph, as in a physical photograph, is likely to be limited to a handful of people and maybe only a few copies. A digital photograph posted on the Internet has a potential audience of hundreds of millions, each of whom can make a permenant copy if they wish. With the power of the Internet a single image can be brought to the attention of half of the planet. Does the law cater to our modern electronic age? I see no reason to include someone's face when the objective of the picture is to bring attention to a group, that person's footwear. Trimming the shots or blurring the face seems like the right thing to do to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shafted Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I have to agree, simply out of respect for another individual. Shafted, the boots that is! View my gallery here http://www.hhplace.o...afteds-gallery/ or view my heeling thread here http://www.hhplace.org/topic/3850-new-pair-of-boots-starts-me-serious-street-heeling/ - Pm me if you want fashion advice or just need someone to talk to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heelfan Posted August 15, 2005 Share Posted August 15, 2005 Yes, I also agree to the extent that it is better, where possible to blur the face sufficiently to avoid embarrassing the person photographed. However, I am only pointing out that showing the faces of anyone photographed in public is firmly within the law, and I submit to Webmaster Jeff that it would be overly harsh to ban any otherwise brilliant street-shots simply because the face remained. I feel particularly passionate about trying to preserve the posting of full-length street-shots because only they give they illustrate the full picture of what high-heel-wearing is all about: The enhanced posture, walk and rhythm of the wearer and their whole persona. To a good number of us, all of this is lacking in the interminable indoor shots of (often seated) members posting shots showing little more than the shoes plus ankles and lower legs. That sort of shot is almost as impersonal as browsing through any old shoe catalogue! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Nation Posted August 16, 2005 Share Posted August 16, 2005 When you say 'within the law', whose law do you mean? Don't forget that we are a widespread community where the laws of one country can differ widely from those of another. For example, doesn't France have quite strict privacy laws? Emma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr1819 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 In the U.S., it's generally consider illegal to take anyone's picture without their consent if you're doing it to make a profit. Thus, a signed release is required. While it's not illegal to take someone's picture and post it on the Internet, they could sue you and probably win if they found out. The chances of their finding out, however, are exceedinly slim (like finding a particular grain of sand on a long beach!). Put simply, it's not very considerate/polite. However, I see nothing wrong with taking someone's picture provided it's their face is turned away and there's no other personally identifying information in the photograph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn HH Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 My sentiments exactly. I quite agree with Dr1819. Cheers--- Dawn HH High Heeled Boots Forever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Yes it depends on what country you are in. I think taking and posting street shots in public places is legal in the UK and US so long as they are not used commercially when you need a signed "model release". In France for example, I don't think street shots of people can be strictly legally taken. Well, that's the legal argument which is different to the moral argument. Morally you can argue that it is some kind of invasion of privacy and that permission should be sought or the faces blanked out but I don't think this is practical. For example, if you asked the person if it was OK with their face blanked out they might well even say "No". So merely blanking the faces out is not good enough if you follow the strict permission/privacy/moral argument. You would also have to ask the person in addtion about the use of their photo with a blanked face. Aside from that, what about the pictures taken in a newspaper of a football crowd or a street scene or footage shown on televison of individuals walking on the streets. The people are clearly distiguishable, the images preserved/archived, and they are seen by millions more people than would ever visit a specialist website like this one? Did the newspaper/TV ever ask all the people if it was OK to record and use their images. No they didn't. They took the shots and used them because the images were in a public place and it was within the law. Indeed, some people's privacy has certainly been infringed by such shots. What about the person who was seen at a football match on TV by his boss when he was supposed to be sick. Or the woman seen out on a date with her secret lover when she had told her husband she was going to the dentists. Do these people have any redress against the newspaper/TV company? No. Is a TV company recording archive footage of street scenes for public interest legally or morally any different to a hhplace reader recording fashion images for public interest or archival purposes? No. Is there a reason why it is OK for a newspaper to take photos and publish them but not for a hhplace reader? No So therefore, if your moral stance is that you don't like images with faces, then I respect that, but I reserve the right to differ. If you feel strongly about the issue then you could join a pressure group to lobby the Gov to change laws to forbid the printing of images taken in public where the face is identifiable, whether this be on TV, newspaper, or a private individual recording archive material. In the final analysis it's just not practical proposition, unless you want to completely change our way of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts