Re: PC gone mad
From: Tom McDonald (tmcdonald2672_at_charter.net)
Date: 06/03/04
- Next message: Doug Weller: "Re: Is London really based on Troy?"
- Previous message: David Christainsen: "Re: Is London really based on Troy?"
- In reply to: Ken Down: "PC gone mad"
- Next in thread: Ken Down: "Re: PC gone mad"
- Reply: Ken Down: "Re: PC gone mad"
- Reply: Joe Jefferson: "Re: PC gone mad"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:55:26 -0500
Ken Down wrote:
> Recently I was in London and popped along to the Museum of London where a
> charming young lady from the Press Office was kind enough to stand in front
> of my camera and talk about her favourite exhibits. On the basis of a subtle
> hint from me, one of those "favourites" was the recently discovered Roman
> burial which was in the news a year or so back.
>
> After she had done her thing I moved in for detailed shots of the limestone
> sarcophagus and the skeleton and was surprised to find the damsel hovering
> anxiously at my elbow. I lined up the shot to show the full skeleton and,
> because of lack of space from any other angle, did so with the feet in the
> foreground and the skull furthest away.
>
> "You can't do that!" the girl exclaimed, all but putting her hand in front
> of the lens in her eagerness to stop me taking the picture.
>
> "Oh?" I was eager to please but puzzled at the prohibition.
>
> "We have to be careful about pictures of the dead," she explained. "There
> are <hiss>issues</hiss> about showing the pelvic area."
>
> I shrugged and zoomed in to show just the rib-cage and skull. "Is that
> better?"
>
> She checked in the viewfinder and cleared the shot. What I forgot
> (honestly!) is that the viewfinder shows what would appear on a television
> screen, which is cropped slightly. The actual shot includes a certain amount
> on each side and, naturally, the full picture appears on the computer
> screen. When I came to edit the film I was purturbed to see that the
> offending region is visible in the picture (not because it disturbs me, but
> because I don't want to get the obliging young lady into trouble).
>
> Anyway, if any of you lusty young chaps are tired of looking at the
> pneumatic beauties so fully depicted in Playboy and Mayfair - to say nothing
> of FM and Loaded - do pop along to http://www.nwtv.co.uk and have a look at
> the film of the Museum of London. Not only will you get an idea of somewhere
> to take the family on your holidays but, <hushed voice> you might even catch
> a glimpse of what would have made you seriously short-sighted 1,900 years
> ago.</hushed voice>
>
> PC. Bah.
>
> Ken Down
>
Ken,
Interesting video. Do you know who it is that has 'issues'
with showing skeletal naughty bits? If the pelvis is
off-limits, why not the rib cage. Fwoorrr, mate. Get a gander
at those!
Is this a return to Victorian sensibilities? Do pianos in
London have to have little skirts covering their legs?
Tom McDonald
- Next message: Doug Weller: "Re: Is London really based on Troy?"
- Previous message: David Christainsen: "Re: Is London really based on Troy?"
- In reply to: Ken Down: "PC gone mad"
- Next in thread: Ken Down: "Re: PC gone mad"
- Reply: Ken Down: "Re: PC gone mad"
- Reply: Joe Jefferson: "Re: PC gone mad"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
