Getting the Public Onside

[99 Change Hands]

Perhaps not at RAF Sandringham though:

Marham Enthusiasts Day 21st June 2018 (http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=81285)

[Pontius Navigator]

We had a photo shoot at Waddo once. The lesson we learnt was they wanted a clean aircraft, plenty of space around it so they could get clean shots, no barriers, no people wandering round the back, and of course a good selection.

Clearly that lesson was forgotten. The other lesson is that the photographers should make their needs clear before the event.

[glad rag]

That was hilarious.

Quote.

" It really felt to me like they've lost pride in themselves."

More, lions led by donkeys.

Still at least it wasn't too exciting

yDwEtzzLIGI

[Martin the Martian]

We had a photo shoot at Waddo once. The lesson we learnt was they wanted a clean aircraft, plenty of space around it so they could get clean shots, no barriers, no people wandering round the back, and of course a good selection.

Clearly that lesson was forgotten. The other lesson is that the photographers should make their needs clear before the event.

But did you ask them?

I went to a couple of the Brize Norton photocalls back in the early 1990s. An excellent selection of aircraft from Tristar to Chipmunk, excellently laid out on the southern taxiway with plenty of space and the sun behind the photographers. And for a much smaller sum of money than the rip off at Marham this week. I did not go, but if I had paid £50 for obstructed views of three aircraft and flypast over the next county I'd have been mighty pi$$ed off as well.

Compare it to the excellently-run regular night shoots at Northolt. £20 for a small selection of well chosen aircraft, including rarities that have included Securite Civile Turbo Trackers and Flygvapen Sabreliners, and a feeling that you're not there on sufferance.

[Pontius Navigator]

MtM, no we didn't ask them. The lessons came from feed back. The aim of the exercise was to tick the staishes 1369 promotion box. This predated your BZN experience. Clearly there was expertise in the RAF but in its inimical fashion no one sought to use it.

IIRC there was an article in Air Clues by Mike Retalack (sic?) who had run the St Mawgan air show for years. It was offered as a guide to organisers; is their an extent guide for photoshoots?

Photoshoots offer the aspiring stn cdr a cheap no-risk alternative to a full blown air show, but they must be done properly.

[Martin the Martian]

Fair enough, PN. Admittedly enthusiasts with cameras often want the moon, and I will count myself in that bracket.

I agree entirely that such events must be done properly. There is plenty of expertise out there in the enthusiast world, and any up and coming staish would do well to harness it -to say nothing of reading the overwhelmingly negative comments about how not to fleece £50 per person for what I can best describe as the emperor's new clothes.

[scarecrow450]

The early Brize and Waddo photo meets were partly organised by the RAF Aviation Society, so least photographers did help out.

[Nige321]

Catchy "click-bait" thread title, but not at all about the public at large, which must be about ooh, 100% of the population. Whereas the group you're talking about here represent what, maybe 0.001% of the public. If the spotters want to go on base and take their staged pictures of aircraft, then expect to pay for it - hopefully some of the cash will go to all the folk on base who this inconveniences (pisses off!).

Most of the photo's they produce, whilst technically brilliant, are in terms of atmosphere and relevance, crap. Witness screw-loose's staged pic's of museum pieces cluttering up the RAF 100 year photo thread. A picture of a Cosford training airframe set against some of the real historical shots that are on that thread - no contest.

BGG What an utterly pompous post. You really don't get it, do you...

[Pontius Navigator]

- hopefully some of the cash will go to all the folk on base who this inconveniences (pisses off!)
Now the first is pie in the sky and the second more accurate.

One pre-show I asked the mob, working weekend, show Saturday, FOD plod money, or everyone throw £20 quid in pot and weekend off?

No contest. The staish would have had £40,000, no risk, no effort all for charity.

PS, 65,000 enthusiasts.

[Nige321]

Oh dear, dear me. Someone has dared to disagree with the pprune plane spotting cognoscenti. Go on then. Which bit is pompous and what don’t I get. And please, please don’t reply with all of it and none of it.

I guess this puts you firmly in that 0.001% does it?

Do you really think the majority of the tax paying public gives a shiney ****e about any of this? If you do then you have a very poor grasp of reality fella.


When kids rock up here and insult the regulars it usually gets peoples backs up.

Nobody gives a toss what your opinion of the photos are.
This event was organised by the RAF, not the spotters.
They were promised things that weren't delivered.
At £50 a pop they have every right to have a moan.
You have a very poor grasp of reality 'fella'...

[Martin the Martian]

Actually, the enthusiasts' community is by and large incredibly supportive of the armed forces in general and the RAF in particular, and could well be considered to be 'onside', BGG. Unfortunately, being screwed like this has put something of a dent in the support of some of them. They don't expect to get something for nothing, but they do expect to get their money's worth -especially when they are promised things that do not occur.

[PDR1]

Oh dear, dear me. Someone has dared to disagree with the pprune plane spotting cognoscenti. Go on then. Which bit is pompous and what don’t I get. And please, please don’t reply with all of it and none of it.

I guess this puts you firmly in that 0.001% does it?

Do you really think the majority of the tax paying public gives a shiney ****e about any of this? If you do then you have a very poor grasp of reality fella.



Do you have to list your ego as a separate item in the weight&balance calcs? I'm just bemused at the degree of hubris required for someone to start throwing insults at those who are already supportive of Military Aviation...

PDR

[Regie Mental]

That’s the enthusiast community which counts amongst its ranks an individual who’s first thought on seeing someone die in a Hawk crash was to sell their images to the press. On forums other spotters jumped to his defence on the basis that ‘you see worse on the net’ and ‘he probably needed the money’.

Common human decency doesn’t extend toward those they ‘support’ it appears and the irony of the same individual attending this event was not lost on those serving at Marham I suspect.

And what does the support of the enthusiast community actually mean? Disclosing aircraft movements, trampling on farmers crops by airfields, resentful that they don’t get allowed into Families Days because ‘personnel sign up for the job and their families don’t deserve special treatment’?

Have also read some spotters arguing that the RAF is a busted flush because they don’t paint up their aircraft in pretty colour schemes as the Germans and Greeks do. RAF100 is a disgrace as a result for the same reason.

Now the event at Marham was very poor and those who paid are justified in their complaints that they didn’t get value for money. But if it has lost the RAF the support of the enthusiasts then I’m not sure anybody will lose any sleep.

[Jimlad1]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/991x1200/dgdeiqewkaujgv__6b3860fa72157ada8f508f762d1b4056c0ad442e.jpg
To be fair, its not just the RAF that has issues with spotters - saw this today on Twitter...

[Pontius Navigator]

Jimlad, quite right, why don't they use their now and stern thrusters, then they wouldn't need tugboats.








I know
Duffel coat, waders and
loudsqueeker

[XV490]

That’s the enthusiast community which counts amongst its ranks an individual who’s first thought on seeing someone die in a Hawk crash was to sell their images to the press. On forums other spotters jumped to his defence on the basis that ‘you see worse on the net’ and ‘he probably needed the money’.

Common human decency doesn’t extend toward those they ‘support’ it appears and the irony of the same individual attending this event was not lost on those serving at Marham I suspect.

Regie – please enlighten me. Was this snapper the same individual who led the complaints about the Marham event?

[PDR1]

oh good one PDR - I guess that’s an old one that you’ve had directed at you then? Insults - I had you down as one of the bathchair generation, not a modern day snowflake.

i made comparisons between the staged shots of museum pieces and the real historical shots that many have posted.

The prosecution rests. There is clearly no need for the jury to retire.

PDR

[Nige321]

That’s the enthusiast community which counts amongst its ranks an individual who’s first thought on seeing someone die in a Hawk crash was to sell their images to the press. On forums other spotters jumped to his defence on the basis that ‘you see worse on the net’ and ‘he probably needed the money’.

Common human decency doesn’t extend toward those they ‘support’ it appears and the irony of the same individual attending this event was not lost on those serving at Marham I suspect.

And what does the support of the enthusiast community actually mean? Disclosing aircraft movements, trampling on farmers crops by airfields, resentful that they don’t get allowed into Families Days because ‘personnel sign up for the job and their families don’t deserve special treatment’?

Have also read some spotters arguing that the RAF is a busted flush because they don’t paint up their aircraft in pretty colour schemes as the Germans and Greeks do. RAF100 is a disgrace as a result for the same reason.

Now the event at Marham was very poor and those who paid are justified in their complaints that they didn’t get value for money. But if it has lost the RAF the support of the enthusiasts then I’m not sure anybody will lose any sleep.

To be fair the chap who sold the pictures of Valley was roundly villified at the time - I don't frequent hardcore spotters groups but the comments I saw on a couple of FB groups were not supportive.

[Pontius Navigator]

Nige, I spoke of lessons learnt from an earlier experience. Have any of these groups actor made an official complaint? Whinging in the pub is one thing but writing to the Stn Cdr should elicit a proper response. Maybe even a repeat session, who knows.

[Nige321]

Nige, I spoke of lessons learnt from an earlier experience. Have any of these groups actor made an official complaint? Whinging in the pub is one thing but writing to the Stn Cdr should elicit a proper response. Maybe even a repeat session, who knows.

I know no more than I read in the OPs post... At least one was penning a missive I think...

[Martin the Martian]

To be fair the chap who sold the pictures of Valley was roundly villified at the time - I don't frequent hardcore spotters groups but the comments I saw on a couple of FB groups were not supportive.

I have not seen one comment in support on any enthusiasts' forum, but a great many condemning him.

RM, don't let one buffoon tar all enthusiasts with the same brush.

[Regie Mental]

Well here's some of the sort of thing enthusiasts posted:

I've never understood the level of vitriol and hate which seems to get poured on people just because they happened to be 'in the right place at the right time' to film/ photograph a event. Pretty much ever since the camera was invented people have been taking photographs (and later film) of events which they felt were news worthy and might be of interest to other people who didn't witness the event in person.

Do the people who get their panties in such a knot switch off the tv if there is a documentary showing such clips as the Hindenburg crash or the Abraham Zapruder JFK assassination film or the myriad or documentaries there have been showing the Twin Towers day where nearly 3000 people lost their lives? I doubt it. So why the attacks on fotogs who have the 'good fortune' to be on the fence line when something more 'marketable' than usual happens.

I'm guessing its mainly down to jealousy that while they were stuck in the office someone else was having a day out and got to film something that they knew the 'red tops' would snap up for cash money. In my view there is no conflict of interest in being saddened that someone lost their life and recording the event in a photograph which someone subsequently buys off you. If you have a camera you should be recording the the important events and if you happen to record an event that others are interested in then you should be sharing those pictures. And if someone is willing to pay you for those photos then good luck to you.

If you think the photos being published is in bad taste then don't look at them and don't buy the product of those that do publish them.

And this:

As this thread has turned from reporting the death of the engineer and morphed into a discussion on the rights and wrongs of one photographer's actions......

To those of you complaining ( and worse ) about his actions :
Depending on your age :
What did you do when the events of '9/11' were unfolding, or when the photographs of the aircraft impacts ( and the people jumping from the building ) were published?
What did you do when the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise was being shown, or the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the events of Bradford, Heysel & Hillsborough were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
More recently, what did you do when the events in Grenfell were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the Air France Concorde incident was unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
There are many, many other similar events I could cite, but you should get my gist by now.

Did you turn off your televisions & complain about the published images?
If so, good for you.
If not, then in my opinion you're sanctimonious hypocrites.

Now, many did rightly criticise the actions of the photographer, but is it any surprise that having shown no obvious contrition for his actions or donating money to charity, the said individual and those who condone his actions have done damage to the view serving personnel have of enthusiasts in general.

[Pontius Navigator]

A lawyer was a passenger on the Seabourne ship that was attacked. He took photographs from his cabin when others had obeyed the order to go to muster stations. He then sold the pictures. I met two other passengers who deplored his opportunism.

[FAR CU]

Do you have to list your ego as a separate item in the weight&balance calcs? I'm just bemused at the degree of hubris required for someone to start throwing insults at those who are already supportive of Military Aviation...

PDR
When Gareth Evans was elected Senator for Victoria his staff at his university in Melbourne gave him a send-off at which he was presented with an airline ticket Melbourne _ Canberra. Gareth scornfully responded _ "Don't you know all my travel is now paid for by the Commonwealth?" "Of course we do Gareth. This ticket is for your ego."