# Central London indoor photogenic locations?



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

Anyone got any recommendations for central London indoor locations that are (1) photogenic and (2) have a decent amount of light, so that no flash is necessary* and ideally (3) you don't get told off for taking pictures?

The British Museum is an obvious one -- quite a bit of light for an indoor location. Any other good ones... Galleries, museums, anything touristy...?

Edit: also, I guess, Borough Market.

Thanks.

*i.e. where you can get away with using ISO 800/1000.


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 14, 2009)

St Pancras?


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> St Pancras?



Isn't taking pics in train stations with SLR sized camera, while not illegal, a bit hairy? Jobsworths and PCSOs, etc.


----------



## tim (Aug 14, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Isn't taking pics in train stations with SLR sized camera, while not illegal, a bit hairy? Jobsworths and PCSOs, etc.



I thought these forums were only for dangerous anarchist types!


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 14, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Isn't taking pics in train stations with SLR sized camera, while not illegal, a bit hairy? Jobsworths and PCSOs, etc.



Well it could be, but i think where people have had problems like that, they tend to be fairly isolated incidents.


----------



## paolo (Aug 14, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Isn't taking pics in train stations with SLR sized camera, while not illegal, a bit hairy? Jobsworths and PCSOs, etc.



Dunno about now, but when the 'new' St Pancras first opened, it was overrun with people with SLRs, none getting bothered.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

tim said:


> I thought these forums were only for dangerous anarchist types!



Ha ha. Yeah.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Dunno about now, but when the 'new' St Pancras first opened, it was overrun with people with SLRs, none getting bothered.



Yes -- I suppose the more "photogenic" the station the less likely you are to get hassled. I used to use St Pancras and Paddington a lot in the 1990s when they were like a WH Smiths, a pub, ticket office and some platforms. Full stop.  I can't really believe what they are like now. Small towns!


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 14, 2009)

> Photography
> 
> You can take photographs at stations provided you do not sell them. However, you are not allowed to take photographs of security related equipment, such as CCTV cameras.
> 
> ...



http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/777.aspx


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/777.aspx



Ta for that...


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 14, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Ta for that...



No worries  Print it out and take it with you for pwning the jobsworths


----------



## spitfire (Aug 14, 2009)

Royal Festival Hall, Barbican Centre would be two I can think of. Especially the RFH.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> No worries  Print it out and take it with you for pwning the jobsworths



Yes, I also have a copy of the latest met office guidance printed...

I photograph quite a lot and have had more or less zero jobsworth hassle, but it's good to have those sort of documents on you. Despite the many horrible stories about people with big cameras getting challenged by PCSOs, etc. central London is probably the place I feel most relaxed about photographing in, what with the huge numbers of people walking around with SLRs.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 14, 2009)

spitfire said:


> Royal Festival Hall, Barbican Centre would be two I can think of. Especially the RFH.



Thanks. Fan of brutalist architecture?!


----------



## spitfire (Aug 14, 2009)

Hmmm, 'spose so. 

If you want a modern location, the Unilever building on Blackfriars Bridge has the largest atrium in Europe. It's a listed building so the general public are allowed into the atrium (although they try and make it seem like a private building). Although I wouldn't make a special trip for it, if you're passing by it's worth a look.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 14, 2009)

Turbine Hall at Tate Modern?

Houses of Parliament?


----------



## paolo (Aug 14, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Turbine Hall at Tate Modern?
> 
> Houses of Parliament?



I may be imagining this, but I think photography isn't permitted in the Turbine Hall. Not seen it enforced though.


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 14, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Yes, I also have a copy of the latest met office guidance printed...



in case it rains?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 14, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> I may be imagining this, but I think photography isn't permitted in the Turbine Hall. Not seen it enforced though.



er...































A certain urbanite has obviously flouted the rules then


----------



## teuchter (Aug 14, 2009)

Maybe covent garden in the inside bit? Also perhaps the pavillion at the serpentine gallery (not technically indoors i guess)


----------



## paolo (Aug 14, 2009)

I've spent ages in there with mine too. 

Maybe I'm talking shit.


----------



## cesare (Aug 15, 2009)

I've taken photos in the Turbine Hall as well. 

How about the Globe Theatre?


----------



## laptop (Aug 15, 2009)

Smithfield Market


Euston station - no, really, brutalist modernism at 6am


----------



## cesare (Aug 15, 2009)

Spitalfields Market (old and new)

Harrods Food Hall


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 15, 2009)

Royal Courts of Justice

Westminster Abbey


----------



## teuchter (Aug 15, 2009)

You should try in elephant and castle shopping centre. Not sure if you'd have problems with jobsworth security types or not. You'd get some good shots there. It would suit your style I think.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

spitfire said:


> Hmmm, 'spose so.
> 
> If you want a modern location, the Unilever building on Blackfriars Bridge has the largest atrium in Europe. It's a listed building so the general public are allowed into the atrium (although they try and make it seem like a private building). Although I wouldn't make a special trip for it, if you're passing by it's worth a look.



Thanks for that. I will have a look inside the Unilever building sometimes.

I have wandered around the ground floor RFH occasionally. Are all levels open to the public, or are they just for performances?


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> I may be imagining this, but I think photography isn't permitted in the Turbine Hall. Not seen it enforced though.



The only thing I could see on the Tate website is pretty vague.

"Photography and video filming are not normally allowed at Tate."

But, yes, I've never seen anyone stopped in the Turbine Hall, and there's always a zillion people taking pics. I think they're stricter where the exhibitions "proper" are.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Royal Courts of Justice
> 
> Westminster Abbey



Ta, but Westminster Abbey costs about £15 to get in, doesn't it?


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

teuchter said:


> You should try in elephant and castle shopping centre. Not sure if you'd have problems with jobsworth security types or not. You'd get some good shots there. It would suit your style I think.






laptop said:


> Smithfield Market
> 
> 
> Euston station - no, really, brutalist modernism at 6am






cesare said:


> Spitalfields Market (old and new)
> 
> Harrods Food Hall



Thanks for those. I bet I wouldn't last long in the E&C shopping centre. I think I would prefer to get chucked out of Harrods!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 16, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Ta, but Westminster Abbey costs about £15 to get in, doesn't it?




don't go into the Abbey itself.  Go into the cloisters area and say you're just having a cup of tea


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 16, 2009)

act like a professional if you are going to play professional. ask for permission. if you don't, then expect to be treated like a twat because you'll be acting like one. if this goes on to be published, or is purposely shot for publication, expect worse to follow if you haven't. 

There are plenty plenty plenty places you can shoot interiors in if you scout in advance, & approach those you need to speak to, courteously, IME.


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 16, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> don't go into the Abbey itself.  Go into the cloisters area and say you're just having a cup of tea




 I would especially be careful of taking any photographs in any place connected with Religion.

They are places of G-dly reflection not play areas.

But aguin if you are a twat... then go4it.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> don't go into the Abbey itself.  Go into the cloisters area and say you're just having a cup of tea



Oh yeah, and photography is also not allowed there...


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> I would especially be careful of taking any photographs in any place connected with Religion.
> 
> They are places of G-dly reflection not play areas.
> 
> But aguin if you are a twat... then go4it.



Ha ha. Don't worry, I have no intention of taking pictures inside Westminster Abbey or wherever...


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 16, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Ha ha. Don't worry



kewl_kewl... I didn't thunx you would tbh.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 16, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> I would especially be careful of taking any photographs in any place connected with Religion.
> 
> They are places of G-dly reflection not play areas.
> 
> But aguin if you are a twat... then go4it.





Paul Russell said:


> Oh yeah, and photography is also not allowed there...





Paul Russell said:


> Ha ha. Don't worry, I have no intention of taking pictures inside Westminster Abbey or wherever...




Yes, but who obeys rules?


----------



## cesare (Aug 16, 2009)

Taking photos inside religious places seems to be a lot more frowned on here than abroad. Possibly because there seems to be more for sale here by way of postcards etc.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 16, 2009)

cesare said:


> Taking photos inside religious places seems to be a lot more frowned on here than abroad. Possibly because there seems to be more for sale here by way of postcards etc.



Yeah, why let tourists take photos when you can sell them a brochure for £10 

I was quite annoyed when I went to Buckingham Palace and the Banqueting Room was set up and I thought there'd be a picture in the brochure and there wasn't 


I wonder if you can take photos of the Banqueting House in Whitehall?


----------



## Belushi (Aug 16, 2009)

Leadenhall Market


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 16, 2009)

Belushi said:


> Leadenhall Market




I used to work opposite there


How about Temple Church or any of the areas around the Inns of Court?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 16, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Ha ha. Don't worry, I have no intention of taking pictures inside Westminster Abbey or wherever...




Houses of Parliament and the hammerbeam roof in Westminster Hall?


----------



## Cid (Aug 16, 2009)

Not sure what rules they have, but the Royal Opera House would be good (the glass atrium bit that is).

Stairs in the Sainsbury Wing of the national gallery have a glass wall on one side, so that might be worth a look.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 16, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> act like a professional if you are going to play professional. ask for permission. if you don't, then expect to be treated like a twat because you'll be acting like one. if this goes on to be published, or is purposely shot for publication, expect worse to follow if you haven't.



Twat... Hmmm... 

Just to clarify.

*O b v i o u s l y*, in the unlikely event that I found the funds (living in Dorset) and interest to invest some time at one London location, say the British Museum or one market, or a train station, etc., I would contact the PR department, etc., primarily to check that I could potentially use the pictures for publication (so I wasn't wasting my time) and to stop getting hassled by security, if that might be a problem at that location.

In present-day reality (and why I started this thread), I spend a couple of days a month in London. I meander around taking pictures and wander into the usual places like Tate Modern, British Museum, etc. and take some snaps. The chance nature of those wanderings suits me (I don't spend a lot of time in one place) and I wondered if there were any more photogenic indoor locations.

In the unlikely event that shots taken in privately owned spaces ever come near publication I would contact them and ask them if I could use the picture for that particular project.

For example, I might wander into that Unilever building and a few other places that I've learnt about here, but obviously I'm not going contact their press department in advance on the off-chance that I might stumble across a good shot, whether or not photography is technically, ahem, allowed or not. They can always say "no" later...

Even the suggestions on this thread that seem unsuitable for photography due to point (3) of my original post -- getting told off (i.e. illegal or whatever) -- are places that I would be interested to *see*. As someone who likes wandering, I'm aware that I tend to fall into the same old patterns.


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> act like a professional if you are going to play professional. ask for permission. if you don't, then expect to be treated like a twat because you'll be acting like one. if this goes on to be published, or is purposely shot for publication, expect worse to follow if you haven't.



Worse to follow?

Between me and my fellow chums who take photos in off limits places, we've had loads published. Been doing it for years.

What's going to happen to us bosky? Do tell.


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Worse to follow?
> 
> Between me and my fellow chums who take photos in off limits places, we've had loads published. Been doing it for years.
> 
> What's going to happen to us bosky? Do tell.



you could be taken to court by the Crown Estate for one... £10K was a standard fine if you shot without the £150 permit...I've been arrested a few times...the last time was on Marble Arch & got to spend the day in the cell in Weliington Arch at Hyde Park Corner.

Paul...so you are wanting to take pictures of interior details...not the backs of people heads... or is it you wish for both? 


Your OP sounded like you were/are looking for a "location"... not a random places to visit request... so there!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> you could be taken to court by the Crown Estate for one... £10K was a standard fine if you shot without the £150 permit...I've been arrested a few times...the last time was on Marble Arch & got to spend the day in the cell in Weliington Arch at Hyde Park Corner.




Yeah, but at least you get to boast about spending the day in a cell in Wellington Arch


----------



## teuchter (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> you could be taken to court by the Crown Estate for one... £10K was a standard fine if you shot without the £150 permit...I've been arrested a few times...the last time was on Marble Arch & got to spend the day in the cell in Weliington Arch at Hyde Park Corner.



You were thrown in a cell for taking a photo of Marble Arch?


----------



## cesare (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> You were thrown in a cell for taking a photo of Marble Arch?



You've not encountered Crown Estates?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 17, 2009)

cesare said:


> You've not encountered Crown Estates?



I've got a load of photos of Windsor Great Park on flickr. Not to mention hundreds of photos with crown foreshore in them.

Am I going to be sent to prison?


----------



## cesare (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> I've got a load of photos of Windsor Great Park on flickr. Not to mention hundreds of photos with crown foreshore in them.
> 
> Am I going to be sent to prison?



Probably not. They are a bit jobsworth on their properties though.


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> You were thrown in a cell for taking a photo of Marble Arch?



it was a Wonderbra shoot.


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 17, 2009)

Marble Arch is not Crown Estates property. You wouldn't be making this up would you bosky?


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Marble Arch is not Crown Estates property. You wouldn't be making this up would you bosky?




no...so fuck off


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> you could be taken to court by the Crown Estate for one... £10K was a standard fine if you shot without the £150 permit...I've been arrested a few times...the last time was on Marble Arch & got to spend the day in the cell in Weliington Arch at Hyde Park Corner.




"Good news. They've arrested that frightful photographer man. Yes, he's in that arch thingy now."


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> no...so fuck off


 

Tetchy today bosky.  Is it because it's Monday?


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> no...so fuck off



you are, aren't you? being put in the cells for not having a photographic permit is the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard.


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 17, 2009)

and erm.....cells?? in wellington arch? An English Heritage-run monument???


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 17, 2009)

royal courts of justice. but you'll have to be careful not top get caught taking pictures


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 17, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> and erm.....cells?? in wellington arch? An English Heritage-run monument???



Look at Wikipedia -- it used to contain the second smallest police station in Britain or something.


----------



## cesare (Aug 17, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> and erm.....cells?? in wellington arch? An English Heritage-run monument???



I dunno why you're doing this _pH_. Wellington Arch was only taken over by English Heritage in the late 90s - before that it did have a tiny police station in it.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

Wow, I never realised it was that big inside


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 17, 2009)

cesare said:


> I dunno why you're doing this _pH_. Wellington Arch was only taken over by English Heritage in the late 90s - before that it did have a tiny police station in it.



Yeah I accept that bit now having read up on it. But the whole story seems utterly ludicrous.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Look at Wikipedia -- it used to contain the second smallest police station in Britain or something.


 

and sleeping quarters of the oldest police station in London

*Burton Room* 
The Burton Room sits within the heart of the Arch. It leads directly from the Ante Room and the two inter-linked rooms work well together. Originally the sleeping quarters of the oldest police station in London, it now houses a modern exhibition of the history of the Arch and has a mezzanine gallery. This contemporary space is a perfect gathering place for pre-dinner drinks or to gaze down on the social scene below.


----------



## cesare (Aug 17, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Yeah I accept that bit now having read up on it. But the whole story seems utterly ludicrous.



I can't see any reason for him to make it up.


----------



## _pH_ (Aug 17, 2009)

whatever.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Royal Courts of Justice
> 
> Westminster Abbey


 


Pickman's model said:


> royal courts of justice. but you'll have to be careful not top get caught taking pictures


 



Old Bailey?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

Ex-copper



> *Talking of humour - there was the lovely afternoon when a very drunk scotsman decided to urinate in the lee of the big gates of the Arch.................*
> 
> *He was painting quite a pretty pattern when, mid stream, he became aware that several uniformed policemen had crept out and were watching his performance ..........and yes he was nicked! *
> 
> *Of course nicking people created something of a problem because we had absolutely nowhere to put a prisoner and 'AD' were not always the quickest of the mark with transport for them!*


 
Not sure what years he was there though


----------



## teuchter (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> it was a Wonderbra shoot.



So, were you thrown in a cell for taking pictures of Marble Arch, or weren't you thrown in a cell for taking pictures of Marble Arch?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> So, were you thrown in a cell for taking pictures of Marble Arch, or weren't you thrown in a cell for taking pictures of Marble Arch?


 

Maybe he was thrown in a cell for wearing a wonderbra in public, although I'm not sure bosky's that way inclined


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> So, were you thrown in a cell for taking pictures of Marble Arch, or weren't you thrown in a cell for taking pictures of Marble Arch?



I was "thrown" in the cell of Wellington Arch having been caught taking photographs of a model in lingerie on Marble Arch with Marble Arch in the background of the shot.

I wasn't fined or prosecuted because I was already _known_ to the necessary authorities...my day in the cell was more taking the piss because I took the piss.

As it happens I had been a house guest of the controller of Crown Estate Photography permits a year or two before & was also often employed as a London location scout for many.

I liked my job. I was good at it. I got paid a lot of money for doing it.

blahblahblahblah


If you take shots you intend or potentially consider maybe for publication there are considerations to be made, permits to request & permissions to be granted etc etc.

Some call it "professionalism".

As I have alluded already I regard Paul Russell as a professional photographer, of sorts. 

Obviously you must regard him as something else.

What is the point you are trying to make?




@Minnie... I'm night fishing for red mullet at the moment...still!...got week off after Tuesday eve... so have nothing else better to do...& I've already had a few hours on the beach.... if you wanna see where I live there is a Royal Academy exhibition on of a mate of mine on atm... I think I'm in a couple of littl'uns of harbour scenes..http://www.royalacademy.org.uk/exhi...ls-of-london-venice-and-cornwall,287,RAL.html  depends on which one's he's exhibiting this year.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Aug 17, 2009)

I was going to suggest the often overlooked Wallace Collection. But, it seems they're doing works and stuff...

http://www.wallacecollection.org/visiting


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 17, 2009)

Stanley Edwards said:


> I was going to suggest the often overlooked Wallace Collection. But, it seems they're doing works and stuff...
> 
> http://www.wallacecollection.org/visiting



Funnily enough, that was on my list of places to visit on Saturday, as I have never been, but I ran out of time.

I also took a boat up the river to take a look at some of the Waterhouse paintings at Tate Britain. On the way, I was thinking -- I bet they're all out on loan -- and sure enough they are all at The Royal Academy until September... Plenty of other things to see, obviously, but I couldn't quite believe it.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> I was "thrown" in the cell of Wellington Arch having been caught taking photographs of a model in lingerie on Marble Arch with Marble Arch in the background of the shot.
> 
> I wasn't fined or prosecuted because I was already _known_ to the necessary authorities...my day in the cell was more taking the piss because I took the piss.
> 
> ...





You were saying that Paul R would be a "twat" to show up somewhere to take a few photos, if it was somewhere where you are technically required to have a permit or whatever. I thought that was more than a little insulting; firstly calling him a twat and secondly the implication that he's too niave or stupid to understand the risks involved in doing what he's doing. 

In reality the risks are: being told off by some security person or the like, or, perhaps, some difficulties using those images commercially at a later date. The idea that he's likely to get arrested or thrown into a cell is silly - as becomes obvious seeing the actual details of your marble arch experience.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Aug 17, 2009)

Good indoor space at Kew also of course.

e2a; Oh, you said 'central' London 

I'm bored. Waiting for the rain to go away so I can go paint.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 17, 2009)

Stanley Edwards said:


> Good indoor space at Kew also of course.
> 
> e2a; Oh, you said 'central' London
> 
> I'm bored. Waiting for the rain to go away so I can go paint.



Yeah, never been to Kew (as far as I can remember). Would love to go -- inside and outside -- photography/non-photography.


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> You were saying that Paul R would be a "twat" to show up somewhere to take a few photos, if it was somewhere where you are technically required to have a permit or whatever. I thought that was more than a little insulting; firstly calling him a twat and secondly the implication that he's too niave or stupid to understand the risks involved in doing what he's doing.
> 
> In reality the risks are: being told off by some security person or the like, or, perhaps, some difficulties using those images commercially at a later date. The idea that he's likely to get arrested or thrown into a cell is silly - as becomes obvious seeing the actual details of your marble arch experience.



or another way of saying what I've already said is that I am neither naive or stupid to understand what he is requesting.

I could list ooodles of places for such shots & could list oodles of reasons or possible complications of doing so.

But as Paul has now said he's not doing it for those reasons and isn't actually really bothered about a Central London location at all.

He's just a tourist who happens to be planning to visit London and may or may not take photographs, as is his will, obviously my point is redundant.

And so is yours or _ph_'s.


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Yeah, never been to Kew (as far as I can remember). Would love to go -- inside and outside -- photography/non-photography.




be prepared to acclimatise you camera if you do take it inside.

iirc doesn't the Barbican have rain foresty garden bit tooo?


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> He's just a tourist who happens to be planning to visit London and may or may not take photographs, as is his will, obviously my point is redundant.



Just being a tourist is an essential part of the photographic project. I could explain it to you, but you probably wouldn't be capable of understanding it, as it falls outside your rigid notions of "professional" photography. Just carry on being a condescending "know-it-all" then.


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 17, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Just being a tourist is an essential part of the photographic project. I could explain it to you, but you probably wouldn't be capable of understanding it, as it falls outside your rigid notions of "professional" photography. Just carry on being a condescending "know-it-all" then.



good luck in your "photographic project" & go fuck yourself Paul Russell.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Just being a tourist is an essential part of the photographic project. I could explain it to you, but you probably wouldn't be capable of understanding it, as it falls outside your rigid notions of "professional" photography. Just carry on being a condescending "know-it-all" then.





boskysquelch said:


> good luck in your "photographic project" & go fuck yourself Paul Russell.







I'd never have classed bosky as a condescending know-it-all and I'm surprised he's been so rude.  It's most unusual for him.  I reckon it's his time of the month


----------



## teuchter (Aug 17, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> It's most unusual for him.



hmm


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

boskysquelch said:


> @Minnie... I'm night fishing for red mullet at the moment...still!...got week off after Tuesday eve... so have nothing else better to do...& I've already had a few hours on the beach.... if you wanna see where I live there is a Royal Academy exhibition on of a mate of mine on atm... I think I'm in a couple of littl'uns of harbour scenes..http://www.royalacademy.org.uk/exhi...ls-of-london-venice-and-cornwall,287,RAL.html  depends on which one's he's exhibiting this year.




I'm sure you were fishing for red mullet a few weeks ago.  Haven't you caught anything yet?  

Would love to see some photos of where you live.  Why can't you just post some up on here?  You know I don't get out much


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> hmm




Well he's never rude to me.  He takes the piss out of me relentlessly but I take it on the cheek, 'cos I'm hard like that


----------



## teuchter (Aug 17, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well he's never rude to me.  He takes the piss out of me relentlessly but I take it on the cheek, 'cos I'm hard like that



Maybe he's scared of you. I know I would never take the risk of being rude to you.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 17, 2009)

teuchter said:


> Maybe he's scared of you. I know I would never take the risk of being rude to you.




Am I scary?


----------



## Cid (Aug 20, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Funnily enough, that was on my list of places to visit on Saturday, as I have never been, but I ran out of time.
> 
> I also took a boat up the river to take a look at some of the Waterhouse paintings at Tate Britain. On the way, I was thinking -- I bet they're all out on loan -- and sure enough they are all at The Royal Academy until September... Plenty of other things to see, obviously, but I couldn't quite believe it.



Well why didn't you just walk/get the bus to the RA? It's not exactly far...


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Aug 20, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> Isn't taking pics in train stations with SLR sized camera, while not illegal, a bit hairy? Jobsworths and PCSOs, etc.



Yes.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 20, 2009)

Cid said:


> Well why didn't you just walk/get the bus to the RA? It's not exactly far...



Yeah, but I had a vague itinerary. Plus the RA thing is £9 and I had already spent my money on Princess Diana and Queen Mum memorial plates.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 5, 2009)

Brixton Market.


----------

