Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: Suitable locations to do Outdoor Nude shoots

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ortega
    hahaha, you do it all the time, your usual subjects are nude, yes?

    BTW, if the subject is a sexy young thing it will not disturb the peace, but if the subject is not ...... 999 lol
    You know me so well!

    And yes, my models are very often, sexy young female nymphs ... eventhough I do shoot the occassional macho nude male model!!!

  2. #22

    Default

    aiyah
    everything in singapore is illegal lah
    if you want something bad enough you'll take the risk, and hopefully get something refreshing and interesting out of it
    do it!

  3. #23

    Default

    5 Jan 2005
    Straits Times

    Couple fined for indecent act

    A couple who had oral sex at a staircase in Orchard Towers were each fined $500 yesterday for indecent behaviour.

    Singaporean Aruselvan Krishnadas, 32, a security officer, and Filipina Esmeralda Feliciano Dalida, 41, who works here as a maid, were caught in the act by a security guard.

    A magistrate's court heard that the pair had met on the afternoon of July 4 last year at a tea dance party at a pub in Middle Road.

    They went to Orchard Towers for dinner and later proceeded to the Level 3 staircase of the building to have oral sex.

    At about 7.30pm, a cleaner approached a security guard to report noises coming from the staircase.

    On checking, Mr Ramli Zakaria saw Dalida perform oral sex on Aruselvan. He shouted at them to stop and called the police.

    The maximum punishment for indecent behaviour, an offence under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, is a $1,000 fine or one month in jail.

    8 Jan 2005
    Straits Times Forum page
    Was indecent behaviour the correct charge?

    I read the report 'Couple fined for indecent act' (ST, Jan 5). The pair went to Orchard Towers and proceeded to the Level 3 staircase to have oral sex. A cleaner who heard noises from the staircase alerted a security guard who checked and caught the pair in the act. They were fined $500 each for indecent behaviour.

    What interests me is the term 'indecent behaviour' on which they were charged and convicted. According to the report, indecent behaviour comes under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act.

    It would be understandable if they were charged under the act forbidding oral sex. It would also be understandable if they were charged with committing such an act in a public place (the Level 3 staircase).

    What puzzles is the charge of indecent behaviour. Where does the indecency come in?

    Both oral sex and sex per se in a public place are covered by law and can be applied according to law.

    However, for something to be indecent it has to be witnessed by someone else who unwittingly passes the public area and is upset by the behaviour.

    As far as I see, the couple took pains to conceal themselves on a deserted third-level staircase. The act did not take place in an area of constant or regular public traffic, so as not to be seen by anyone.

    In other words, there was no intention to make a show of their actions. They were caught only because of a cleaner who informed a security guard.

    The guard went to the place where the action was taking place (as was his duty to investigate). He was not invited there, by the couple, to see the show. Under such circumstances, where concealment was the order of the day (or the night), where was the indecency?

    A thief who commits the felony of breaking into and entering a house with intent to steal is charged with the relevant felony, not with dishonest behaviour.

    In like manner, why were the couple not charged with oral sex or sex in a public area?

    An act without a spectator cannot be indecent because indecency arises from someone seeing it and being morally offended. There was no intention to display the action to the guard who encroached on the act and it was the intention, at all times, to avoid detection.

    Is a girl's modesty outraged if she is unaware of a naked man on a deserted staircase? There must be awareness before modesty is outraged.

    Dudley Au


    13 Jan 2005
    Straits Times Forum,page
    Indecent behaviour: Couple charged correctly

    I refer to the letter, 'Was indecent behaviour the correct charge?' (ST, Jan 8), by Mr Dudley Au.

    The couple pleaded guilty to indecent behaviour in a public place, an offence under Section 20 of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act.

    Mr Au takes the view that the charge was misconceived because the act was not witnessed by anyone.

    We do not agree with him. If the charge was misconceived, the court would not have convicted the accused.

    The couple carried out the indecent act at a staircase at Orchard Towers to which the public had access. They were in fact discovered by a member of the public. The staircase was also lit at all times.

    Cheng Howe Ming
    Head, Public Affairs Unit

    17 Jan 2005
    Straits Times Forum page
    Reply doesn't answer query on indecency charge

    The response ('Indecent behaviour: couple charged correctly', ST, Jan 13) from Mr Cheng Howe Ming, head of the Public Affairs Unit in the Attorney-General's Chambers, to my letter has left me bemused.

    The query in my letter, 'Was indecent behaviour the correct charge?' (ST, Jan 8), was how does indecency come into the picture? Sex per se is not indecent. It becomes indecent only when linked to other factors which offend morals.

    Mr Cheng states that if the charge was misconceived, the court would not have convicted. In any successful appeal, the usual result is to have the previous court's judgment overthrown. And if it is overthrown, then it can be reasonably said to have been misconceived.

    But how did we get embroiled in the infallibility of the court? All I asked was in what way was indecency supposed to be involved? This is a reasonable question, considering that the couple's intention was concealment not exhibition.

    The article said a cleaner heard noises and reported this to the security guard. The cleaner didn't see.

    To be discovered in such an act by a member of the public by accident would be indecent behaviour. To be discovered by the police, or anyone in authority who went specifically to unearth any unlawful action, is not the same.

    The Act on oral sex has not been repealed and I presume there is a statute against sex in a public place. Why use indecent behaviour when we have two other laws for conviction?

    Dudley Au
    I believe dudley au was commenting on the outrage of modesty case in the st forum a few weeks back, indecency is largely a state of mind, so it becomes very subjective as far as prosecution is involved.


    Section 20 of Miscellaneous Offences Act deals with the issue of public indecency


    so basically, are certain acts indecent when performed in a public place (with no one to see it), or are they indecent because someone saw it.


    Any person who is found guilty of any riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour in any public road or in any public place or place of public amusement or resort, or in the immediate vicinity of, or in, any court, public office, police station or place of worship, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month and, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction, to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months.
    so it seems the legal position is this, an act is indecent regardless of location , except it isn't a crime if its not performed in a public location, (thus public indecency is a crime while private indecency isn't...)

    --
    on the other hand...



    IS this public indecency... argh my eyes

    http://www.sgreefclub.com/forum/inde...pic=26893&st=0

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    www.whltelightphotographer.com
    Posts
    1,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Kahuna
    Rooftop of a building???
    I have such location if you are interested. PM me if you wish

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    www.whltelightphotographer.com
    Posts
    1,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    i am not abetting you to something against the tolerance of the general public here. the nature reserve setting eg. the more secluded parts of our reservoirs on very quiet days, like weekdays. but the risk of being 'caught' is something one has to weigh carefully.
    Nude photography is allow in singapore but not pronography. So just avoid public places with many people, as long no one complain. It should be no problem. The only thing when public complain it will view as a indecent expose that is a chargeable offend

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Del_CtrlnoAlt
    Reservoirs out... cos not big enough, constant trekkers lurking around... u use 50mm to capture, they use 300mm from behind snipe u... worse... they change angle from shooting bird @ 500mm x 2x to shoot cat @ that range...

    Nature reserve... need to hike very far out to be secluded...

    Lim Chu Kang / Kranji area... army lurking around... who knows a M16 might fire beside... but those places are quite good for shoots... cos normal ppl won't be lurking around that area... maybe now i should start going there to snipe ppl....

    Note: Models going to get bitten by mosquitoes...
    wah DCA, very well-versed on this topic hor

    Don't forget army also got a lot of "real" snipers who spot from at least 600m away

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Outside the Dry Box.
    Posts
    16,268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by knoxknocks
    wah DCA, very well-versed on this topic hor

    Don't forget army also got a lot of "real" snipers who spot from at least 600m away
    those are 1 shot 1 kill... without the need to set shutter & aperture... but they sure got steady hands even during the night shots...

    btw our 600mm lens is about 600m in real life?
    Logging Off. "You have 2,631 messages stored, of a total 400 allowed." don't PM me.

  8. #28

    Default

    Does anyone know if any permits have been issued for outdoor artistic shoots before?

    I remember that the production of Jeffrey Chung's semi-nude calendar was done outdoors, and it was publicised.

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feinwerkbau
    Does anyone know if any permits have been issued for outdoor artistic shoots before?

    I remember that the production of Jeffrey Chung's semi-nude calendar was done outdoors, and it was publicised.
    Jeffrey Chung's Model's shoot was not technically nude, they used towels etc to cover up.

    I think for these shoots they are probably wrapped up in a short while, maybe 1 hour or so.

    So if u really want to, find a spot and a time of the day, and take a gamble..lol


    FOUND it....
    http://motoring.asiaone.com.sg/raceq...41216_001.html

    Grassy Area in Pungol Marina... hmm...
    Can go check it out.
    Last edited by Winston; 8th February 2005 at 11:59 PM.

  10. #30

    Default

    Which was why I mentioned "semi-nude" ...

    However, I would not like to compare the two approaches ... that of a fine-arts shoot as opposed to a 'glam' shoot of a more 'tittallating and erotica' nature.

    Please don't start a flame war about definitions. The terms I used are generalisations of what I understand from my formal years of studying art history (which was about more than 20 years ago ... so I have forgotten most of the details, but not the essence!).

  11. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feinwerkbau
    Please don't start a flame war about definitions. The terms I used are generalisations of what I understand from my formal years of studying art history (which was about more than 20 years ago ... so I have forgotten most of the details, but not the essence!).
    Okie, I didnt catch that "semi" word...and ..Nope, I'm Not about to start any wars or whatever.....(only kids or adults with a kid's brain do that)

    Cheers.

  12. #32

    Default

    GONG XI FA CAI Winston!!!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •