• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

News: Thank goodness, rangefinders are not banned!

for me, same question : why? Why in public places, why DSLRs only, why not Camcorders? what's wrong with taking pictures in Kuwait? Religious : I can't see why. Moral? likely not...
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Bart,

Glad to know you can take this into Kuwait:

220px-Polish_destroyer%27s_range-finder.JPGG


Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Sandrine,

Ahahah :). But that's normal these shots just hurt your flesh. They don't hurt your feelings
Clever observation.

But that is not a cannon - it is a rangefinder. (Not a rangefinder camera - just a rangefinder!)

(I should have chosen a picture of one that made that more obvious, but I didn't take the required time!)

I always object to people using "rangefinder" to mean "rangefinder camera", which was behind my failed joke here.

Best regards,

Doug
 

John Angulat

pro member
Hi, Sandrine,


Clever observation.

But that is not a cannon - it is a rangefinder. (Not a rangefinder camera - just a rangefinder!)

(I should have chosen a picture of one that made that more obvious, but I didn't take the required time!)

I always object to people using "rangefinder" to mean "rangefinder camera", which was behind my failed joke here.

Best regards,

Doug

Hi Doug,
Joke's not lost on this old navy guy.
Thought you get a kick out of this:
Scroll down to page 86 of the .pdf.
http://www.eugeneleeslover.com/ENGINEERING/OP769/OP-769_Part1.pdf

BTW, great site all around - lots of optics stuff.
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
Multi ministry camera ban frustrates artists

Thought this was interesting . Wow ! no Canon or Nikon in Kuwait !!


KUWAIT: After the ban three ministries placed on photography, most Kuwaiti youth are a bit confused about what to do with their cameras if they can't use them in public and why such laws were implemented in the first place. The Ministry of Information, Ministry of Social Affairs and Ministry of Finance recently came to the conclusion that photography should be used for journalism purposes only. This has resulted in the ban of Digital Single Lens Reflex Cameras (DSLRs) in public, on the streets and in malls.



What most Kuwaiti photographers have come to wonder is how such a decision could be reached by authorities, especially considering that digital cameras and cell phone cameras have the same abilities. What most people think of photography as a hobby has become a bit misguided due to the fact that the country has so little exposure to art. While using a DSLR, passersby may wonder if the camera is being used for the wrong reasons.


http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MzAwMTg4ODg1
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Don,

Welcome to the news! :)

We've been puzzled by this too. They probably think that the large lenses can peer through clothes and lead to immodest images. T's true!

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Folks,

Apparently the article in the Kuwait Times has be retracted.

They claim that incorrect information was provided. What the real reason for the retraction is, we'll never know:
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MzAwMTg4ODg1

Cheers,
Bart

The ban on DSLR's being used by anyone other than journalists was reported in the Kuwat times, Nov 20th, 2010. It's now retracted, as of November 27th 2010 and the original article is still attributed to one, Abdullah Al-Qattan, Staff Writer. So, after one whole week with no reported ministry explanation, only the newspaper itself follows up and kills the story. There's no explanation as to what indeed did happen and who was responsible for the statement published. Likely, if it was in the USA, that person would be out of a job if they made up such a story or didn't confirm it. I have found nothing to suggest the journalist was at fault or has been disciplined.

Frankly, I don't think we have heard that's the whole story or perhaps, not even the truth. What newspaper would publish such information a conservative society where at a whim, their newspaper could be closed down? To me, it's as likely that the ministries were embarrassed by the affair and checked their reality meters. When they discovered that the ubiquitous cell phones would have to be banned too, the idea became so laughably foolish.

Having the newspaper retract the article, saves faces for the bureaucrats in the ministries.

Asher
 
Top