Pixiq

Um, if they didn’t want to be interrupted, maybe they shouldn’t have been doing the photo shoot in the middle of a public sidewalk.

The entertainment value of this clip is over the top. On so many levels too.

“Goober!”

I laughed so hard I almost fell outta my chair!!
Peter Greene recently posted..Lake Oswego Chefs Grow and Gather Dinnerjpg by Peter Greene

Unfortunate decisions all around. Why did the girl and group have to shoot in public? Why did the vigilante bicyclist have to get involved? And why did the videographer have to assert his right in such a rude way?

Reading the title I was thinking I was about to read about this horrible NY pig, but he did nothing wrong and everyone that confronted the man filming was in the wrong.
Rob recently posted..Chief of Police Will Not Answer Questions About Hiring Practices

That was awesome.

Confuse me? I’m pretty sure she said “you know i’m seventeen years old!” at the videographer which makes me wonder why she was posing for such saucy photos in public.

Goober!

@ Mathias I get a little rude to when people wrongly tell me I can’t do something.

Title suggestion “NYC videographer asserts his rights” OR “NYC videographer VS impromptu sidewalk photo shoot”

Wow, that guy with the camera was a major league A-hole.

Typical misogynistic responses. Of course, the girl was "asking for it". She was attempting to capture her artistry on film. Instead of lambasting this disgusting camera man, other men defend him. Sure, she was holding ballet positions for a still shot. That is not overtly sexual. The camera man's actions have a name: sexual harassment. And sexual harassment is not legal.

Filming that close to Times Square certainly voids any reasonable expectation of privacy .. The videographer was in his rights to film but he certainly didn’t handle things very well …

Myself, I studied ballet myself, but they made me quit .. Seems I didn’t fit into a toutou and they didn’t have a fourfour or a sixsix .. (*insert groan here*)

Hey Carlos….

I understand what you are saying but I don’t agree with the way you went about it…… Sure the cyclist really didn’t have anything to do with it, but name called and antagonizing him didn’t put you or your cause in the best light. The older woman I assume was the teens mother(?), if so, what the hell was she doing – selling her daughter’s body to public? I don’t know, but she didn’t legally have the right to stop you, but morally I think you were both wrong!

Yes, you have aright to film in public – but wrong place wrong time I believe mate. Filming her buttocks and open legs you know full well was morally questionable. Legal? Well that depends how old she was. If she was under age, you, her mother and all the photography crew could have been in trouble for a potential child pornography or abuse charges. Just a question, did you know how old she was before you started filiming?

I know that you are trying to stand up for civil rights, yes I disagree whole heartedly with the young girl doing what she was in a public place – there could have been young children around that exposure to what the teen girl was doing and you having a scuffle in public to me are both unacceptable. There could also have been some serious sexual offenders watching and what the teen girl was doing could have triggered them to going out and attacking a child or worse – we just don’t know do we?

The cyclist in your recent video was, as you say a “goober” and had no reason other than he wanted to get involved…. ok, how about we photographers / videogaphers say hey, you can’t ride your bike on the road in those girly bike shorts as I find it offensive that I can see your male bits at the front! You are in a public place and kids don’t need to see you strutting around in your body hugging clothes and having to show off your man bits. I don’t think he would say “Oh, ok”. He’s going to say “P–s off”. But name calling wasn’t helping was it, you were just trying to get him more worked up and maybe to the point of assualt, like running over yor foot with his bike wheel.

The woman (the teen’s mother???) in your face that was telling you can’t film just because she wanted what SHE wanted i.e. you to leave. You do have the right to film in public …. but I don’t think you have to ram it down people’s throats. I don’t think anyone has the right to take potentially lurid photos of a teen girl in public or in my opinion anywhere! The woman (teen’s mother???) and the photgraphy crew I think should not have been doing what they did in public.

You could have opted to gets some “decent” and not so morally questionable video footage and gone about it quietly. When you were asked to leave you could have back off a bit and filmed, naybe come back in a bit closer, you have said calmly to the cyclist that you have a right to film in public and walked away from him, even if it took multiple times. If kept in your face you could have called the cops and had him charged with haressment maybe?

Shelley from Australia left a comment that she thought are a creep. Well your actions did suggest that you are. But having said this so were the photographer and the woman (teen’s mother?) for doing what they did in public! BTW 99% of Australians do know what a Goober is!

Yes, civil rights for everyone… but you don’t force it down people’s throats……

Ahem-Goober started with Andy Griffith–WTF is going on in this blog?!? I faintly recall being forced to memorize the words to “Eating Goober Peas” in a history class in a land far away. It was a rebel Civil War song. They apparently didn’t care much for this being their main staple (preferring much to letting out loud woops and ambushing errant Yankees ). OK, Andy was a bit of a good ‘ol boy, tho. Through many improbable translations, goober became synonymous temporary residents in your nasal cavity. Green when you’re a kid, and spiked with nasal hairs as you get older. Bike rider was an obvious goober.
with

@CamCam Man, that was not Carlos.

If you don’t want people taking pictures or taping your ass or body in general you should probably stay inside. Oh and if you are the mother of a 17 year old taking photos in downtown New York, maybe you ask her to wear some longer pants.

Everyone is a jackass. You know the guy taping it is just being stupid on purpose.

The camera man has his rights to tape in public, but you also have your right to sit your ass inside your home.

original: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Es-6GEkBvM

Joey’s an ass.

I think everyone missed the point here. The filming crew most probably had payed the girl to film her whereas the other guy obviously didn’t. Had he gone to the queue, wait for is turn and payed before starting to film her, I’m 99,9% sure that we wouldn’t be writing these comments right now…!

Maybe someone can help me out here. What was the purpose of doing the photo shoot there? If they’re going for some artistic thing of getting her with a times square background, I would have though they would use a better costume than grey shorts and black tank top.

Remember to repeat the word “goober”at least once a day for the next three weeks. That will give it a chance to integrate itself into your chosen linguistic patterns. Give the word to the world and let it infect others in their everyday conversations. In three months it will show up in a Two and a Half Men diatribe. Just remember it all started right here…

He may HAVE the right…. but that doesn’t make what he is doing right.

Bicycle guy is awesome.

Like others have said, you can be legally right and an ass at the same time. The videographer had the right to film and the bicyclist had the right to block him. The assistant was wrong in telling the video guy he cannot shoot her butt.

NY only requires a permit if the crew requires exclusive use of the property. They obviously did not have a permit nor did they need one.

http://modelingwiki.com/index.php?title=Photography_permit#New_York_Cities

The idiots that organised the shoot should have realised that was the risk they were taking. If they wanted to prevent that happening then they should have gone to a more controlled environment.

It’s not like he immediately walked up and started talking. He stayed out of the shot to be kind and he was doing what he wanted, haha. First Amendment….they’re in public.

1st of all, I viewed the video and did not find it perverted at all. However, once someone suggests the word ‘Pervert’, this inference is automatically taken up by most people and it provokes a negative reaction. 2ndly, I think this girl is quite inapropriately dressed (eg., shorts) to dance in public. Also, when someone balet dances and does the split, for example, one’s eyes are automatically looking at all parts of the dancer, and if the crutch shows, then one sees and looks at that as well. A judge also has to assess (by looking at her crutch as well) whether her pose and muscle control is correct. So I don’t see where and why this photographer is automatically called ‘pervert’.
I suspect that the mother stepped in to stop his video is that perhaps she was afraid to lose money if he published it. People, people, … … use your heads … if someone spreads their legs, it is natural to look … has anyone ever experienced sitting in a train or bus, faced with an embarrassed situation where a woman sits with her legs apart? You just hate yourself but you can’t help looking at her inapropriate stance and wonder if she is purposely sitting like that or not? Hmmm… ….

“Well, the guy with the video was certainly getting into “upskirt” territory which is NOT a right, even in public.”

If the woman was showing her private parts publicly, that’s called public lewdness and she should get charged with that.

i’ll kill this guy in a heartbeat, me being a stranger or not to that lady.

having the ‘right’ to videograph anything in public is not synonymous to having the ‘right’ to record one’s ass unless permited by the subject.

I think in the US they talk too much about people’s rights, and too little about ethics and morale.

Mylie Cyrus was unavailable?

Carlos Miller – I’m a fan of yours from now on.

Biker = asshole. Anyone against the video dude = asshole.

Americans have lost their minds. They cheer on cops tasering everyone.

They champion a police state with archaic laws in the 21st century that persecute adults for doing adult acts.

Only the mentally ill suffering intense effects, a deep psychosis from indoctrination, have the compulsion to meddle into the affairs of adults.

You’re all going to die, anyway. No one lives forever. Lighten up.

Hipocrits, the same ones that were against the camera guy from filming her crot, were the ones that loves Tmz and pictures of celebs on candid positions…

That was funny!!!

Watch Live Tv Sports

Entourage.

Where are the horrible close-up shots of her crotch that I keep hearing about?

He mainly just shot her, the surroundings, and yeah, a little zoomed in on her buttocks but still nothing that would grant anyone to call him a pervert.

I’m sorry, but I can not see the horrible things that people say he is doing. Sure, he is a bit rude to the older woman, but he wasn’t videotaping her in a creepy fashion.

The biker was way off though, provoking and even interfering with the cameraman.

I saw this via an article on Gizmodo.com.

They had the right to have a photo shoot in public?, yes. The “crep” has the right to shoot video of her ass in public?, yes, do the shooters and bikers in the street have the right to attack the creep?, no. Solution, leave and do the photo session another day.

He is a creep, I agree, but he didn’t assault her, he didn’t force her to do anything, and the solution was quite simple, leave and continue later.

I HATE FOREIGNERS AND THIS IS ONE FCKIN REASON WHY.

I AM SICK OF THEM.

NEVER WA SRACIST BEFORE.

I AM NOW.

I AM DONE.

IF YOU ARE NOT AMERICAN IF YOU HAVE A FCKIN ACCENT,

FU

GO BACK HOME YOU ILLEGAL PERVERTS!!

KUDOS TO THE CYCLIST, WHAT A STAND UP GUY FOR THIS CHILD OF 17 YRS. OLD.

FU GOOBER-FOREIGN SAND N*GGER

AHAHAHA! In Europe, You would be politely asked to stop and if you don’t you get punched in the face, your camera will be thrown against the wall and memory removed and it’ll be your fault for being an impolite jackass…

lol I love how some people even say that this is pornography… yeah right and Bush is Adolf Hitler and I’m marrying the pop tomorrow.

Comon guys the videographer is basicaly doing the SAME THING as the photographers. The exact same thing… Exept that for some reason one of the parties think they have the moral high-ground cause they’re not zooming on her a$$ hellllooo what was he going to zoom on? the chair?

It’s like building a public lavatory and then blaming people for dumping a load.

The stupidity of it all is mind boggling.
EasyE recently posted..Ante-Sano

I have to say I agree with the guy videotaping, it’s in public.. if you don’t want other people to see something then keep it on private property.

This is America, Land of the f**ked up people.

And that is not towards the guy video taping, that is towards the other people.

People are in public, not a private place, so It is ok to be videotaped.

The “Goober” cyclist thought that girl is cute, so he wanted to be the all American hero and block the guy from videotaping just because he is a dumb American like the rest of them. If it was an ugly guy, the cyclist would not have bothered one bit.

The girl was heard close to the end saying “…I am only 17…” So does that mean that you can wear slutty cloth, spread your legs, and show your cleavage all in public, but since you are “17″ people can’t look at you?

what do you expect if you pose in public people are going to film you
tell me how do you know somebody is filming your crotch unless your looking in the view finder
she wants attention she got it
try better fitting shorts that dont need ajusting next time and if you dont feel dirty about what your doing dont asumume everybody else is

But I guess he DOES have the right to take videos of her “ass”, right?
I’m not sure legally,But I think he’s right, he’s in the public, he can photograph whatever he wants. If the girl doesn’t want to be photographed, then she should stay home.

It’s so offensive that this man actually took a video of a young legal age female who was displaying herself and posing in public. We all know it’s wrong for anyone to look at another person when the possibility of them finding that person arousing exists, unless they are in the privacy of their own homes.

Bystanders should enforce their personal moral code on those around them and interfere with any action that they just to not be completely pure.
Thank god for the old bag imposing her sexual morals on that man.

Does goober have a fan site yet?

Well, the guy with the video was certainly getting into “upskirt” territory which is NOT a right, even in public.

As for the argument that the photographer was doing the same, Um, no. He was shooting from a totally different angle and we have no idea what his framed shots look like.

Actually, the videographer might end up in hot water over this one.

Stop arguing about rights and the law. You don’t stick a camera where it’s going to offend an innocent young girl. Grow the hell up.

Then ALL paparazzi are not allowed to take photo’s or videos as well.

I am a professional photographer with experience doing shoots very near this location. In my opinion the photographer doing this shoot brought the problem down on herself by not getting a permit and setting up the area appropriately. This is Times Square, and it is reasonable to expect that a photo shoot is going to draw a lot of attention no matter what it is. A shoot of an attractive young female in what many people perceive as provocative poses is going to draw even more attention, and it is also reasonable to expect that some of that attention is going to be from people who are at the very least disrespectful.

In order to provide a controlled shooting environment, as well as to provide security and comfort for my models, I *always* get the necessary permits to cordon off the area where I am working. When I feel it is needed I also hire security personnel. Does it stop people from taking their own photos/videos? Of course not, it is indeed their right to do that in a public venue. But as a professional it is an integral part of my job to establish a work environment that is safe, secure, and as comfortable as possible for the people who work with and for me. The models especially. This photographer had other priorities, and this is the result. This is a particularly aggregious oversight considering that the model is a minor.

The world is full of people like this videographer, and like the bicyclist. Right or wrong, they are out there. It is a simple fact of life. Those of us who are not like them have to be prepared to deal with them appropriately and effectively whenever we are in public. Why this photographer thought she would be magically exempt from that during an unsecured photoshoot is beyond me. It is beyond unprofessional, it is inexcusable. She will be lucky to not get sued by the model’s parents for reckless endangerment.

shows ya how stupid the biker is, really, more than anything.

“hey, we’re doing something in a public space, how dare you do something in a public space too!”

Maybe if the videographer wasn’t such a douche from the very beginning there wouldn’t have been a problem, but no… he starts out by calling the lady an “old bag” and it goes downhill from there. Typical douche with a big mouth and nothing to back it up. Can he legally tape in public? Unfortunately that whole argument gets lost because of his raging douche baggedness.