dubstepforum.com
worldwide dubstep community

The Wiggle Baron wrote:
Wouldnt mind hearing the justification for this. Sure its just me being a twat end, but does remind me of the whole rinse claiming copyright to their shows to stop deapoh putting em up on barefiles.

thats exactly what i though right away. they fucking think theyre royalty or somthing. fuck right off. head too big for venue? i think sooo...

i978 wrote:I can't think of one reason for not allowing cameras in the club. And don't give me any "the flash distracts the deehjhays as they mix" bullshit. Seems it was perfectly acceptable for photos to be taken (and posted on the forum) when some free publicity was needed to hype up the night. Do the precious artists need to "protect their image" perhaps? Inflated sense of self importance methinks.

Dubstep used to be something everyone cold feel part of. Seems to me Rinse/Fwd are trying to turn it into something you consume.

I was going to go tonight but I can't bring myself to hand over my cash to people who seem to be acting more and more like stnuc.

init. majority of stuff i hear about them makes me think "what stnuc."

So what's this all about then?

Prince must be making a guest appearance.

So at first I was like

"No CCTV tonight"

which would help me get away with toking in there...

Then I thought, thats not very secure.

Then I read the thread and thought what the fuck?

Everyone has a camera on the back of their phone!

Am I allowed to send a text message? Or might that look like I was taking a sneaky JPEG.

WTF.

Fwd. End? Fix up.



I can't go anyway, gotta babysit. Pah!!!

Stupid.

i must admit i find it slightly annoying when you go out only to be surrounded by groups of people taking bare photos for their facebook/myspace/blogs. But this is fucking ridiculous, people are paying whatever it is on the door and you're not letting them document their night. bit of a piss take really i think

maybe whoever recently read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... 63,00.html

to be fair, it can be pretty annoying if you've got flashes all night.

whats the reasoning for this exactly?

ridiculous rule - you should be ashamed FWD

this is nuts. people getting chucked out for wanting to document their night out? fuck me.

Makes me wanna get on a plane, cross the pond just so I can turn around at the door. Or maybe just build one of these in the club.

No cameras.. pfff... That's some uppity shit right there. How about asking people to not use flash if that's the problem? Y'know, politely and stuff.

Are patrons allowed to remember their night, or is there a retinal release form as well?

Big up MC Blair, DJ Cheney and the fascist massive! Going strong, undocumented!

i'm from spain... i pay 100 euros or more to get a plane, and affor some nights in a hostel, and pay the ticket, and go to a party just to live a really big dubstep show, and now i can't take photos of me and my friends on the party?

i think this is not fair

on september i will go to DMZ i wish i can take some photos there.

Cristal and Mastercard in association with Sony proudly present P Diddy's Red Bull FWD Birthday Party*

Featuring DJ Battles:

Sienna Miller vs. N-TYPE
Lindsay Lohan vs. Youngster
and:
funky house Geeneus vs. original Geeneus







*No cameras allowed, rights have been sold to Hello Magazine

Ha! What a crock of old shite, good ol LDN eh? Video cameras I can understand, doing video work and photography I've been in situations where I've been asked to stop filming cos the artists are contracted to a certain media company or they're playing purely dubs and dont want the sound recorded - but photos? You've got to have your head so far up your own arse you're licking ears to have a contract like that....or of course it could be the venue, but that makes even less sense unless there's been a banning order like they're trying to do in NYC (which still wouldnt effect a night like this) Or someone's paying a photographer to come in and dont want anyone else to have coverage of the event - RWD? Guardian? Times?. It's all bullshit at the end of the day...

Jamie wrote:....or of course it could be the venue

"we have asked the end to keep the venue camera free for us for tonight"

definitely not the venue.

still absolutely baffled by this. surely it would have been common sense/courtesy for the FWD camp to include the reasons behind it in the original statement?

Sounds a bit shifty but might it have something to do with the smoking ban?

You know, if a high profile club wants to go easy on the smokers then maybe loads of cameras at a night aren't such a good idea. Just a thought.

I think I'm being way too generous innit.

scoz wrote:maybe whoever recently read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... 63,00.html

give that guy the pulitzer.

guerillaeye wrote:

scoz wrote:maybe whoever recently read http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... 63,00.html

give that guy the pulitzer.

u can tell that bloke has been through some traumas