Should I admire guys like these as risk-taking photographic artists, or consider them as the ultimate vapid millenials, since the end goal seems to be merely a selfie and social media celebrity?
https://youtu.be/x_0k_KW6Xbk
>>2813007
Do what you have to do to get the shot. That said, the photos that come about from these risky climbs are usually not very good, however for them it's more about the experience and the photographs and videos are just there to document it for them.
I very much enjoy watching these videos though, really cool. Gets my palms sweating every time
>>2813018
>This
I just love that they cover their faces during the whole footage, yet they give their names and surnames at the end of the video. Made me laugh.
Why don't they buy a fucking DJI Phantom
>>2813007
Most legit urban explorers (rooftopping and crane climbing are both part of which) resent the overly-narcissistic direction the hobby is going. Especially with the rise of Instagram, and people like Seph Lawless who only do it for viral fame.
>>2815882
>legit urban explorers
>implying there's anything "legit" about urban exploration
It's hilarious how they try to fancy up trespassing and make it sound all cool and exciting.
>>2815885
Victimless crimes.
>>2815887
>It is cool and exciting though, at the very least its exciting. Try it sometime.
I've got a mustard stain on my jump wings and have been in combat enough times that I lost count. Standing on top of a building isn't something that gets my blood pressure up.
>>2815892
>Victimless crimes.
Who complained about the legality of it? I just find it amusing that they have to dress it up in some exciting sounding name to lend it any legitimacy.
>>2815896
"People fucking around in abandoned buildings" is too broad for some, apparently. The term was coined sometime in the 90s and for whatever reason became the modern term for it, but people have been going into off-limit areas - be it a hobby or other reasons (Richard Nickel, etc.) - for centuries.
>>2813007
>since the end goal seems to be merely a selfie and social media celebrity?
You're retarded. This is how the majority of society today relates and communicates with one another. Corporations pay millions to get that level of exposure to certain audiences. Art that no one sees is not art, btw.
>>2815913
Eh, why not call it what it is though? "Tresspassing".
>>2813073
Doesn't fly high enough. Limited to 150m normally.
>>2815920
Fucked if I know, also too broad of a term?
>>2815960
Nah, it's pretty specific.
>>2815957
>Limited to 150m normally.
lolwut?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfA79gb7zMU
They're now legally limited to around that high and manufacturers are now artificially limiting the height they can fly to, but there's nothing otherwise about a drone that limits it in such a way.
>>2815916
wow he's really high up. that's the best art i've ever seen
>>2815920
Because it's only tresspassing if there's an express purpose for you not to be there
If it's some abandoned place nobody gives a shit about it's hardly tresspassing
>>2816591
Nope. Not the case at all.
>>2813007
whatever their intention is, this photograph is amazing and disorienting and I love it
>>2816601
It's not even a criminal offence and even if they take it to civil court they have to somehow prove damages
If it's an old abandoned building and someone catches you the most they'll do is try to report you to whoever owns the property
>>2816606
Might want to work on shoring up your wannabe lawyer degree.
>>2816607
Might want to actually get out in the world instead of being afraid to leave your basement out of fear for going to prison for walking around an abandoned building
>>2816610
I don't live in fear of going to prison for walking around abandoned buildings.
That said, I'm not an idiot who thinks he knows the law everywhere (fun fact: there are places you can be shot and killed for trespassing, even if it appears a building is abandoned!) and is claiming that it's always a civil matter. Shit is far more complicated than your retarded ass thinks, depending highly on where exactly you are.
>>2816616
>(fun fact: there are places you can be shot and killed for trespassing, even if it appears a building is abandoned!)
Yes because they would rather deal with hiring armed snipers that shoot first and ask questions later than installing a fence with a lock
>Shit is far more complicated than your retarded ass thinks
Really? Because you're the one telling me that I'm going to get shot and killed if I just step onto property that is not mine
>depending highly on where exactly you are
Yes exactly I figured i didn't need to explain the obvious that most power facilities or government facilities can net you criminal tresspassing charges. I'm referring strictly to urban exploration where they explore abandoned buildings because like another anon said before it's pretty much victimless
Also are you completely deluded to think that someone is going to shoot at you for just walking around? What third world country do you live in?
Have any of you ever asked to visit a facility to take photos? There's a bunch of really neat industrial buildings near where I live and some of them would make for some neat photos but I'm not sure how to ask if I can walk around and take photos
>>2816618
They don't hire snipers, but often, seemingly "abandoned" buildings are guarded...and here's a fun little read for you on that topic:
https://www.revealnews.org/article/shootings-by-security-guards-rarely-reported-let-alone-investigated/
Now the fact of the matter that even if guarded likely it's one guy who is going around a few dozen such buildings and is just a CYA move by whatever owner there is (I'm pretty sure you're not the kind who bothers to determine if a building is actually abandoned and not just unused) as a nominal measure for insurance purposes.
>I figured I didn't need to explain the obvious
So obvious that your initial statement of "it's not even criminal and they have to prove whatever bit of stupidity if they take you to civil court" basically isn't true anywhere.
You have no idea what legal ground you're on and really need to stop pretending you do.
>>2816628
Oh, and to be clear, I don't give the slightest damn that you and people like you like crawling around old buildings.
It's the right daft belief that what you're doing is legal or entirely free of repercussions that I take issue with. It doesn't matter if you believe the crime is victimless. Law doesn't work that way.
>>2816618
>Also are you completely deluded to think that someone is going to shoot at you for just walking around? What third world country do you live in?
USA USA USA
>>2816628
>>2816631
>Xiong and Golden Dragon Patrol supervisor Moua Vang had begun fighting with two young men who refused to leave a shopping center parking lot
Yeah because a shopping center parking lot is a seemingly abandoned building and they'll shoot you on sight without just asking you to leave first
>I'm pretty sure you're not the kind who bothers to determine if a building is actually abandoned and not just unused)
What made you so salty? That's the first thing I'd do
>You have no idea what legal ground you're on and really need to stop pretending you do
And you do? I never said I was some sort of lawyer I'm just telling you my personal experience pertaining to this
>It's the right daft belief that what you're doing is legal or entirely free of repercussions that I take issue with. It doesn't matter if you believe the crime is victimless. Law doesn't work that way.
They also wont throw you in prison or shoot you the second you break an incredibly minor law. I never said there were no repercussions but you're jumping to the extremes here. At most you'll get told to leave and worst case you'll get fined
>It's the right daft belief that what you're doing is legal or entirely free of repercussions that I take issue with. It doesn't matter if you believe the crime is victimless. Law doesn't work that way.
now who's the armchair lawyer
>>2816636
>missing the point of the article
>that's the first thing I'd do
Really? Tell me how to tell the difference between a building that's been unused for 35 years and one that's abandoned.
>And you do?
Actually I do. I've had to become more well acquainted with the legal side of this bullshit than I'd wish on anyone.
>I'm just telling you my personal experience.
No, you're talking about the law and what's legal and what's not. What's in this thread could actually get you sued for practicing law while not being a lawyer.
They won't throw you in prison or shoot you the second you break an incredibly minor law
>Humphrey and his friends had trespassed on the Carib Cement Company premises in Rockfort, St Andrew, to play football.
>Luther Lewis, a security guard employed to Marksman, ordered them off the premises.
>Humphrey said they obeyed and while they were walking away, he heard an explosion before feeling a burning sensation to the back of his head with blood flowing from the area. He lost consciousness and woke up in the Kingston Public Hospital where he was admitted for 13 days.
Oh really now?
And yes, in some areas, your ass can and will end up in jail for trespassing.
>>2816637
Yes, because law cares about how you feel or what you believe.
>>2816638
>What's in this thread could actually get you sued for practicing law while not being a lawyer.
HAHAHAHAHAH. Alright whatever you say chief. Now I know you're a fucking moron
>>2816640
Why do you think so many things that talk about the law include that boilerplate "This shall not be construed as legal advice or legal counsel blah blah blah" homie?
>>2816642
Ok sue me
Do it
>>2816638
>No, you're talking about the law and what's legal and what's not. What's in this thread could actually get you sued for practicing law while not being a lawyer.
talking about law is not practicing it
>>2816643
Because that's precisely what I meant and I wasn't just using the fact that you were talking about legal issues in such a way that is considered rendering legal advice as a counter to you claiming you're not speaking about matters legal. Gotcha.
And don't think it's escaped me that you latched onto one carelessly worded point and can't address any of the others.
>>2816646
Sure thing buddy.
>>2816647
>and don't think it's escaped me that you latched onto one carelessly worded point and can't address any of the others
All of your points are carelessly worded
>>2816656
Nope.
This one was really neat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJkuCzgg7fo
They definitely have some amazing drone shots and the videos are done well
>>2816669
They're awesome!
>>2816622
Most of them if not all of them will tell you know. This is because not only are you a liability, but they're actually concerned with competing industries "spying" on them.
>>2815882
this. plus i HATE these horrible photos of people feet dangling off of stuff. Zero interest in the genre.
Basejumpers = nuts
http://www.bossroyal.com/lifestyle/base-jumpers/
>>2817071
BASEjumpers
fucking get it right.
>>2817008
Some feet-dangling is OK.
>>2817157
And normal standing up is OK too.
>>2816938
Is there a good way to get resources to sign a release and an NDA?
Like afterward if I could show all the stuff I took to make sure none of them are bad
>>2815896
legitimacy? amusing? You are are fucking lame photographer. Its fucking cool you lame ass.
>>2817417
Possibly. Edward Burtnsky has done it, but he had representatives to help get him through those doors. Maybe you could email and ask him how he pulled it off?
>>2817419
Sheit well I'll give it a shot
I'd like to stay legal in what I do even if it means dealing with bureaucrats and red tape
It just sucks because I cant even scope out some good locations because of the huge fences
>>2817422
I hear you 100%. I have had all sorts of issues trying to photograph into/around industries. And I think that it's gotten even harder with all the terrorist fervor going around. I sometimes can't even drive into a parking garage, pay to park my car ther, and then photograph from the top because it's "lol loitering" or some similar bullshit.
I think it's really unfortunate too, because they are genuinely so many rich photographic opportunities to be had in the industrial and urban environments, that only get crushed by bureaucracy and other things.
instagram.com/oliver.kissinger
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT Lens Size 75.00 - 300.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 1.0.1 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 0520300235 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:16 08:34:59 Exposure Time 4 sec F-Number f/16.0 Exposure Program Shutter Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/16.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 75.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3456 Image Height 2304 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Tv-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness High Saturation High Contrast High Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Camera Actuations 864157802 Color Matrix 0
Photos from today, Milwaukee
instagram.com/oliver.kissinger
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT Lens Size 75.00 - 300.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 1.0.1 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 0520300235 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:16 08:41:30 Exposure Time 0.6 sec F-Number f/4.0 Exposure Program Shutter Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/4.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 75.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3456 Image Height 2304 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Tv-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness High Saturation High Contrast High Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Camera Actuations 864157812 Color Matrix 0
>>2817434
mke represent
instagram.com/oliver.kissinger
>>2817436
yes
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT Lens Size 75.00 - 300.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 1.0.1 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 0520300235 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:16 08:31:19 Exposure Time 5 sec F-Number f/13.0 Exposure Program Shutter Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/13.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 75.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3456 Image Height 2304 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Tv-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness High Saturation High Contrast High Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Camera Actuations 864157799 Color Matrix 0
>>2817438
You know any good urbex places in south milwaukee?
I'd prefer not to get robbed though
instagram.com/oliver.kissinger
>>2817440
I know of some. I'll think
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT Lens Size 75.00 - 300.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware 1.0.1 Owner Name unknown Serial Number 0520300235 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:16 08:35:38 Exposure Time 4 sec F-Number f/5.0 Exposure Program Shutter Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/5.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 75.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3456 Image Height 2304 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Tv-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness High Saturation High Contrast High Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Camera Actuations 864157803 Color Matrix 0
instagram.com/oliver.kissinger
>>2817440
For starters, there's solvay, but the police will catch you. And the photos are lame.
There's a million places to climb thru ladders in the port of Milwaukee harbor, but there's a gang presence.
Most urbex is abandoned slums. Which are okay. The best is to climb something though.
>>2816631
I can assure you people who do this are fully aware of the legalities and potential repercussions for it, regardless of whatever the fuck it's called. Calm your tits and stay on the sidewalk if it doesn't interest you.
>>2816622
I've had luck with a couple permission spots: an abandoned hotel, and a shuttered gelatin factory. One was owned by the municipality (and has since been refurb'd), the latter was privately owned and I was able to shoot it twice by signing a liability waiver.
>>2817454
Police are watching Solvay? I thought that place was like the Damen Silos in Chicago, where nobody gave a fuck.
>>2817467
I resized ur moms cunt last night ;)
If you want me to resize your asshole too then come to milwaukee and I will murder you.
>>2817471
All of those complaints were perfectly valid
>>2815892
>exploiting security vulnerabilities to the public
>causing property damage
>increasing insurance liability
>promoting reckless behavior
>influencing young and inexperienced kids
>leading to injuries or death that is paid for by public health insurance
>using up valuable security resources
>using up valuable police resources
>endangering welfare of workers and pedestrians
>desensitizing people from suspicious behavior
>causing transportation delays and inconveniencing commuters
>victimless
>>2816628
>You have no idea what legal ground you're on and really need to stop pretending you do.
Your continued harping on this subject is, quite frankly, hilarious, so I'll do you a favour and clear up the major misconception which lies at the heart of your useless waffling. Don't bother to thank me or argue, because I'm not interested in getting into a lengthy "round the houses" discussion with a barrack-room lawyer on the internet.
The principle of all law comes from common law which states that you cannot be punished for an offense you are unaware of. Thus, you must be warned you are making a mistake and continue to make the same mistake for it to be a crime, excepting those crimes which common sense tells you are wrong, such as rape, theft and murder.
Trespass comes from the Old French, "tres pas", or three passes (before the gaze of reason). The first "pass" is not when you invade private property, as most people think, but when you are seen doing so (thus causing the "distress and alarm" which constitutes the lawful reason for objection). The second pass is when you are informed this is the case...the famous "OY...get off my property". The third pass, and the point at which an offense is committed, is willful ignorance, or the refusal to leave immediately by the nearest route, or one specified by the owner or agent.
So, in plain English, unless you are seen on the property, and asked to leave, you simply are not even trespassing. Signs saying "No Trespassing" count for nothing, as the invader may not be able to read, may be mentally impaired in some fashion, or may not even have seen the sign.
Geographical considerations notwithstanding, this is a common law principle, and is universally applied, regardless of the legal considerations of a particular country.
Yo what are the legalities for going to the roofs of hotels? Anyone know? Just want to get some long exposures of Boston and other cool shit
>>2817473
>exploiting security vulnerabilities to the public
There was a recent article about this... the association of exploring with security threats/terrorism is a tiring delusion of law enforcement and the media. Nobody in their right mind would ever share security weaknesses with people they don't know, let alone online.
>causing property damage
Uncommon and generally frowned upon between "ethics" and the fact B&E is a felony, trespassing is not.
>increasing insurance liability
Nobody who does this with any shred of integrity would litigate against a property owner if their stupid ass got hurt or killed. Not to mention the suit would never fly on a count of the obvious...
>promoting reckless behavior
>influencing young and inexperienced kids
Gotta learn somehow...
>leading to injuries or death that is paid for by public health insurance
No comment.
>using up valuable security resources
Few property owners use "valuable security resources" beyond Lowe's-special locks, lumber, and motion sensors tied into an ADT system. Most high-profile spots might throw some razorwire up, or hire college kids/failed cops as security guards.
>using up valuable police resources
>Ignores the fact that explorers will oft find and report bodies/meth labs/other caca that the police weren't looking for.
>endangering welfare of workers and pedestrians
Only the stupid ones will.
>desensitizing people from suspicious behavior
If they know what they're doing, there's no behavior for anyone to be suspicious about.
>causing transportation delays and inconveniencing commuters
Unheard of.
What the fuck post-9/11 paranoia bubble are you living in?
>>2817481
>you cannot be punished for an offense you are unaware of.
HAHAHAHHA
Yeah, no. You seriously don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about. You think you do, but you're like one of those people who talk about finding the magic loophole that allows them to never pay property tax again or some other "barrack's room lawyer" misconception.
>>2817482
Don't get caught.
>>2817484
>You seriously don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about.
>This is /b/...hurr durr..(post dick pics pls)
The purpose of any court of law is to establish responsibility, not guilt. Part of that investigation is to ascertain whether the accused is culpable. If there is no legal challenge there can be no response, thus no responsibility. This is basic law. They teach it on day one.
But as I've already said, I'm not interested in arguing this on the web.
If you're so interested in law, why not go to law school, instead of posting irrelevant opinions on an outer mongolian pictogram board?
>>2817490
They also are pretty quick to tell you that in most countries, we've moved pretty far away from common law and have allowed assumptions of what a reasonable man would know, but aside from that, the sheer idea that ignorance is a defense is so laughable as to be absurd.
Any court? Nope, that's mainly a function of civil court and only a function of criminal court insofar as is needed to establish guilt...what, you weren't able to last long enough for them to cover mens rea? Kinda surprising since it's a common law topic and you're such the expert.
Nah, the real reason you don't want to debate the law is you have already exhausted all of the knowledge your prelaw roommate got through to you.
>>2817491
>mens rea
Which, as stated, is the reason for holding a court.
It's why the accused is asked if he/she understands what they've done wrong.
The latin is..."actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea". Thus, if the accused is unaware a crime has been committed, and cannot be shown to see this in court, they are not guilty. The questioning in court forms the second part of the test of culpability, or understanding.
What part of "common law PRINCIPLE" are you having difficulty with? Perhaps your legal qualification came from the bottom of a cereal box?
I'm done with this now. I've given you two responses more than I intended, and you've burbled through both without digestion. Law is not memorization.
For anyone else following this thread, Trespass isn't a crime until you commit it. Just being on someone else's property isn't trespass. Refusing to leave when asked to do so IS.
>>2817493
Lovely, you can't even stay consistent in your argument (mainly because you're googling shit up and not understanding it).
>Just being on someone else's property isn't trespass. Refusing to leave when asked to do so IS.
If you had one scintilla the knowledge that you are pretending to have (or so delusional to believe you have), you would know that this patently is untrue for all or even most jurisdictions.
>>2817493
>The latin is..."actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea". Thus, if the accused is unaware a crime has been committed, and cannot be shown to see this in court, they are not guilty.
But this is the modern age, in the US at least, so to say you "didn't know you couldn't do that" wouldn't be enough to get you off the hook in a court of law. Especially considering that "abandoned" buildings often are fenced off or have some sort of sign somewhere, which even if left open, are going to be held as evidence against you.
>Trespass isn't a crime until you commit it. Just being on someone else's property isn't trespass. Refusing to leave when asked to do so IS.
Have fun getting shot first, and asked what you are doing later.
>>2817505
>American law applies everywhere
Idiot.
>>2817508
Oh you want to talk about omnipresence of legal systems now? Then you should be aware that more countries use a version of Napoleonic code than common law (which is basically confined to the UK, UK protectorates, and the US).
Guess you didn't make it through the first week of of prelaw.
I'm impressed by the effort but most stunt photography is shit.
>>2817433
like this one
>>2815916
>This is how the majority of society today relates and communicates with one another
>imblying that the majority is always right
>>2817482
High-rise roofs are tricky in Boston. They're almost always locked, so you either gotta pick it (bad idea) or cut it (worse idea). If the door is unlocked, you probably won't end up in jail unless you get caught by a cop who thinks you're a terrorist. Try not to be seen, and obviously don't bring any weapons, tools, spraypaint, etc.
Have you tried parking garages? There's quite a few around town, and nobody will look twice at you taking the elevator to the top level. Obviously it's not gonna be 20 floors tall, but it's something.
>>2813018
palms sweaty already
moms spaghetti
