I didn't get any free stuff, either. Maybe that was because I was there only in the afternoon.
This year was especially low.
I got a few postcards of Tropico 6, a Pip Boy mask from Bethesda (which I have no use for, I'm afraid), several pins (?) from 1C, the Publisher of the recent King's Bounty series.
P.S. : See my Fallout 76 report here : https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1061524658&postcount=42
Okay, a few pictures by me, too.
Note : I don't take photos of people. I really don't if I can do that.
Note : I don't take photos of people. I really don't if I can do that.
Attachments
Next Batch. Almost all from the Spider Man game booth.
Attachments
E
Eye
Guest
I try to restrict myself to the people getting paid to be there.
But when giving a taste of what it was like, it is difficult to stick to that principle.
As for those, I have chosen the pics which contain the least amount of (recognizable) faces directed at the camera.
Zloth
I smell a... wumpus!?
Errr, why? It's a public place, not an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. You're not even looking to making money off the images. Must be one of those "which side of the pond" issues.
E
Eye
Guest
In my country, the Netherlands, you have to get permission if your spreading somebody’s picture, whether it is a public space or not. It is the same in the rest of Europe.
The famous GDPR: general data protection regulation.
Taking the photos is no problem, spreading them is. Before the GDPR there was a difference between public space and private space, but now there is not.
Recently there was a funny discussion in my country.
There is going to be a big bazaar, where all sorts of food are presented. The organization asked people that are planning to visit the place to stick a red round label at their forehead, available at the entrance, to ensure that the professional photographers that will be hired will know whose faces they should blur when publishing the pics.
Lots of people objected to that ridiculous opt-out.
So basically Alrik acted right and I acted wrongly.
I frankly forgot all about this GDPR when posting the photos, it is rather new.
When posting I only though of how I would like to be treated when photographed in public…
The famous GDPR: general data protection regulation.
Taking the photos is no problem, spreading them is. Before the GDPR there was a difference between public space and private space, but now there is not.
Recently there was a funny discussion in my country.
There is going to be a big bazaar, where all sorts of food are presented. The organization asked people that are planning to visit the place to stick a red round label at their forehead, available at the entrance, to ensure that the professional photographers that will be hired will know whose faces they should blur when publishing the pics.
Lots of people objected to that ridiculous opt-out.
So basically Alrik acted right and I acted wrongly.
I frankly forgot all about this GDPR when posting the photos, it is rather new.
When posting I only though of how I would like to be treated when photographed in public…
Cacheperl
SasqWatch
- Joined
- May 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,315
Is there a reason you added a close up shot of Ceres to that batch?
Really reminded me of that image:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres...-DwarfPlanet-HighResolution-Dawn-20170920.jpg
- Joined
- May 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,315
No, it's an artistic decision by me : I never take photos with people on them, if I can.
What are you talking about ? My main focus was to have pictures of the things they had built for that.
Ceres … Roman Goddess of fertility … A moon of the planet … I think it was Jupiter, or Saturn in RL …
Edit : Oh, NOW I understand you ! :lol:
In USA you can take pictures of anyone you want in public places and post them. I think it is rude to take compromising pictures but hey if there is a large group at something like a game expo it is hard to take a meaningful picture does doesn't have a few people somewhere at the venue. I'm ok with the USA law but it can be abused. Naturally Gamescom was a European event and I presume European laws apply; or maybe it is determine by the website which is also hosted in Europe. However, for the reason stated above I think perhaps the law goes too far as to be unreasonable ?
The new GDPR makes it limiting for photographers to take pictures of people as you need a written agreement of everyone who is recognisable on the photo. There is a conditional exception for journalists. Before GDPR it was easier, depending on the country. Germany was more strict compared to The Netherlands. Belgium had no real laws, but had some rulings, which put it on the same level as The Netherlands. The UK had something similar as The Netherlands, but allowed a bit more.
The reason why it is an issue now, is that someone’s face is personal information under GDPR and all personal information that is processed or made public needs a written approval for the purpose it is used for. In essence that is a very good idea.
The reason why it is an issue now, is that someone’s face is personal information under GDPR and all personal information that is processed or made public needs a written approval for the purpose it is used for. In essence that is a very good idea.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 11,223
Zloth
I smell a... wumpus!?
Ah, I was wondering if it was something like that. Interesting. I, uh, think I'll let you folks work out the finer points of that aspect of privacy law before stating my opinion.
Me, I just didn't want any personal in my photos since I was a teenager. And because that, since then - when I was a teenager - I tried my very best to not get any people on my photos at all.