|
View Poll Results: Does Danielle shooting or not shooting in public have an effect on you? | |||
I could go either way....yes or no. | 3 | 14.29% | |
Public shoots have never been my thing so no it doesn't bother me. | 6 | 28.57% | |
I will not continue being a member if there are no more public scenes. | 0 | 0% | |
I really enjoy the public scenes and hope that she will continue doing them. | 12 | 57.14% | |
Voters: 21. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
02-10-2013, 07:10 AM | #1 |
Administrator
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 3,321
|
Poll - Public Scenes
I was in the news (article) recently for public porn. My concern about shooting in public has always been that I would get caught and arrested by the police. This article has intensified my fears and has made me ambivalent about shooting in public again. It's unfortunate because I love the way that video and photos look when shot outside. I also love the variety of locations I can pick from and the fact that I don't have to spend $200 to $500 to rent a resort room for shoots. I do think that I will continue to shoot in public but that is also going to depend on my photographer as well. If he isn't comfortable shooting outside (which he really wasn't to begin with) especially after this news article comes out then I'm not going to be able to shoot in public. I'm curious to see what the opinions are on this.
__________________
XOXO Danielle FTV Last edited by danielle_ftv; 02-10-2013 at 07:17 AM. |
02-10-2013, 11:56 AM | #2 |
Dreaming of Danielle
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 61
|
Public Scenes
I guess they'll be on the lookout for this sort of thing in the future. It's hardly worth getting busted for it. You can post lookouts but some "concerned citizen" is almost sure to spot something. I would urge caution. What about getting out of town? Love your giggle.
|
02-10-2013, 12:40 PM | #3 |
Danielle's Biggest Fan
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Near Orlando, Fl
Posts: 468
|
I like the lighting of being outside but if its not on your private property (covered/fenced in backyard, etc.) then i find that the model (you or someone else) is distracted trying not to get caught and makes it tougher for them to get off. or the scene is getting very good and then gets cut short because someone approaches. so it has never been my favorite. i would rather see a model really get into the moment and loose herself more than seeing her outside.
__________________
Once a king, always a king Once a knight is never enough |
02-10-2013, 12:49 PM | #4 | |
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,015
|
Quote:
I stated earlier that I like your public shots, but you should only do them when it's safe for you. Right now with that media attention, I think it would be wise to stop public shootings for, say, half a year, until the currently blown dust settles. People tend to forget after a while. I assume Rob will continue shooting in (semi) public places, presumably with heightened awareness and attention to the surroundings. I'd wait for his experiences in the future before considering whether to pick up public shootings. The public flashing had brought me to FTVGirls and to DanielleFTV, but I can live without that, especially knowing it would endanger someone I love. What I find a bit puzzling is that mostly women complained in the comments. There were a couple of men chiming in, but also a couple of them stating they were o.k. with it. Not a single woman, though. |
|
02-10-2013, 02:53 PM | #5 |
Danielle's Biggest Fan
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 383
|
I like outdoor shoot but whether they are public or not I really don't care. Personally I would like to see scenes in the great outdoors. But I realize the extra expense involved may prohibit that. But some b/g in the local desert would be nice.
e83 |
02-10-2013, 05:50 PM | #6 |
Danielle Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 28
|
I say if you're uncomfortable with it, don't do it.
|
02-10-2013, 11:09 PM | #7 |
Administrator
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 3,321
|
Thanks for the input everyone. I really appreciate the fact that you guys took the time to tell me your feelings and thoughts on this topic. It's something that I've been thinking about quite a bit for the past several months. I will still continue doing public scenes. Let's hope that I never get caught. Send positive "look the other way" energy my way.
__________________
XOXO Danielle FTV |
02-12-2013, 03:22 PM | #8 | |
Danielle's Biggest Fan
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 383
|
Quote:
e83 |
|
02-15-2013, 08:40 AM | #9 |
Danielle's Biggest Fan
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tucson, between the forceps and the stone.
Posts: 336
|
"Look the other way" energy from BipolarWitchy Babes coven straight to you hoo hoo...BayyybeeeDoll >
__________________
If God is watching us, the least we can do is be entertaining. Last edited by STAR; 02-15-2013 at 08:43 AM. |
02-15-2013, 11:19 AM | #10 |
Danielle's Biggest Fan
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tucson, between the forceps and the stone.
Posts: 336
|
I'm with e83 and Anoree. Shoot outdoors all you like but cool it in public. You're hot in more ways than one right now.
__________________
If God is watching us, the least we can do is be entertaining. |
02-15-2013, 02:51 PM | #11 |
Just Visiting
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6
|
Sadly it may be time for you to look for another place to live and work.
|
02-15-2013, 06:29 PM | #12 |
Just Visiting
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1
|
No, stay right here in AZ...I know lots of nice remote places just an hour outside of Phoenix...cum up north for a great outdoors POV, heavy cumm on command...
|
02-17-2013, 11:09 PM | #13 |
Administrator
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 3,321
|
That's not going to happen. I love Arizona. My family is here. Moving to a different state and trying to find a new photographer who is on par with my current photographer just sounds like an awful idea.
__________________
XOXO Danielle FTV |
02-17-2013, 11:09 PM | #14 |
Administrator
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 3,321
|
If I can get my photographer to agree to drive an hour for a shoot then sure.
__________________
XOXO Danielle FTV |
08-05-2014, 06:16 AM | #15 |
In Love with Danielle
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 189
|
Legal puzzles to ponder
Hi Dani,
I only now examined the 2013 Phoenix Fox TV article you cited on "public porn" and it got me thinking. I thought it interesting that the authorities (and maybe even at least one of the reporters) found it unfortunate that NO ONE had ever lodged a complaint about anything you or the others working ever did in public! Am I the only one who thinks they were egging on people to complain - which, of course, implies they would get additional BUSINESS, supporting their employment levels and compensation rates. To start, I think its useful to see what Arizona law says. I warn readers that I am not a lawyer, but like everyone else, I have to understand the law well enough to obey it! 13-1402. Indecent exposure; exception; classification states: 41-1443. Breast-feeding; public place; public accommodation adds: A mother is entitled to breast-feed in any area of a public place or a place of public accommodation where the mother is otherwise lawfully present.13-2904. Disorderly conduct; classification explains: A. A person commits disorderly conduct if, with intent to disturb the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family or person, or with knowledge of doing so, such person:The law turns on subtleties, which courts and their officers are obliged to address and even exploit to advantage. I'd start by asking what "exposes" and "present" means in 13-1402. Since people rarely wear garments like wet suits, their nipples, areaolae and anus are almost always exposed to the air (or water/milk/whatever, if immersed). If we then stipulate that "exposes" means "visually exposes," we are still left with many questions. If I stand between my spouse and a stranger, turn to my spouse (or photographer), and visually expose the prohibited areas to that person, can the stranger "reasonably" object with the force of law? If so, is there a threshold distance or threshold barrier between me and the stranger, i.e. what does "present" mean? Now, clothing is not totally opaque. If one of my prohibited areas faces a stranger, closer than some "reasonable" threshold distance, how transparent may my clothing be before that person can object with the force of law? Starting circa 1970, and continuing for at least a decade thereafter, it was common (if not ubiquitous) in cities throughout the United States for a non-trivial fraction of pretty young women to appear in public places wearing top covers so shear that every detail of their breasts could be as well described to a hypothetical police sketch artist as if they had been top-free. I don't recall ANY reports of police action against this, although it sometimes led to insulting remarks from members of the public who viewed such sights. The statute is mute on this point; what case law (if any) in Arizona exists to address this? Then, let us assume clothing is so opaque that according to some "reasonable" threshold the coloring of the person's prohibited body areas is not visible. Is it still "exposure" if the clothing (or opaque paint!) is so shear that the SHAPE of said areas is as visible as if it was uncovered? And if not, what if the covering (e.g. paint) exactly replicated the coloring of the underlying body areas, making it appear these areas were totally unclad? Does that constitute illicit exposure? If not, how does the state prove a party charged under the law was not so attired, unless detained (rather than cited) and examined? And if it constitutes indecent exposure, what if a woman made her areola appear larger by ringing it with body paint which exactly shared its color? Would exposing that ring be illegal? Presumably not, which provides a potential defense against an exposure charge if someone complains that another party exposed PART of her areola. Her areola varies in size and color depending on ambient temperature, emotional state and so on; could a cellphone snapshot by the complaining party be necessary and prove sufficient to overturn the potential defense? I think the law concerning the breast-feeding exemption is poorly written. It does not specify that the woman doing the feeding is the mother OF the party being fed (or even that the latter party is a human infant), only that she IS a mother (of SOMEONE). Apparently, a mother can safely breast-feed her 27-year-old child, her "underage" (e.g. 12-year-old) "boyfriend," or even her pet Chihuahua! (During World War II, we spoke of "Gold Star Mothers" whose (possibly only) child had been killed, so presumably a woman who has any non-still birth remains a mother for life. But interesting questions include whether step-mothers and women who abort/miscarry qualify under the law at issue.) The law does not address the issue of time, so a mother can presumably expose her breast's nipple and areola for a non-zero interval of time when preparing or persisting to breast-feed. Is there any case law to establish a "reasonable" limit to this time, and if not, does this then provide a defense for a mother who can claim she was intending to undertake the breastfeeding of SOMEONE? Please note that it is NOT especially odd to forgo mandating that a mother feed her own child to enjoy protection from prosecution. In centuries past, the European upper classes would engage a lower class woman who was lactating to feed their infants; recall that Shakespeare's 13-year-old Juliette was accompanied by her ("wet") "nurse," who had nursed her in infancy. (This sort of relationship also gave rise to the name anglophones use to refer to a physician's assistant; the Germans use "(sick)sister" (as in R.C. nun) and the French "auxiliaries" instead.) As for the question of age, lately it has become rather fashionable to undertake "attachment parenting" in the US, whereby children are breast-fed by their mother long after infancy has ended. (According to a book written by a Nordic explorer which I read long decades ago, it was not exotic for tribal Arctic women to feed children until they reach puberty.) And the famous Steinbeck novel The Grapes of Wrath even includes an act of so-called Roman Charity. I could go on and on. There certainly are many open questions with the laws as written, at least for a limited number of acts which might disturb some of the most sensitive residents of Arizona. Needless to say, things are not the same everywhere. For a generation, North American women present in Ontario or New York State have had the right to go top-free any place a man could (and implicitly, without regard to their age). And in Munich, Germany people can sun themselves entirely nude in the public park - although some minimal clothing is required when using public transit. May one have an orgasm in public? How about an audible one? At least under the laws above, there is no prohibition, although one wonders if other laws address such potential types of "indecent" behaviour. In fact, woman can sometimes orgasm when nursing; do they have any protection in Arizona because they are undertaking the act of nursing? I won't explore the issue of eliminations (#1, #2, period-flow, sneezing, spitting) in public. All sorts of curious questions arise in these matters when one looks in any detail at them! Last edited by RonTheLogician; 08-05-2014 at 06:52 AM. Reason: add section on elimination |
08-18-2014, 02:55 PM | #16 |
Danielle's Imaginary Boyfriend
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The TARDIS
Posts: 503
|
Nah. Screw it, he watchdogs are on the freaking lookout. Unless your cam guy is also a lawyer, you can always go off-town, as Mr. hardpleasercum suggested. Just saying.
|
08-22-2014, 02:21 PM | #17 |
In Love with Danielle
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 189
|
Go West, young woman?
This week I saw the Arizona episode of Aerial America from the Smithsonian Channel. What interesting settings many of the places surveyed could prove for a video - including a porn video. Of course, travel and related expenses are an impediment. But how about some Old-West-themed shoots? Ride 'em, cowgirl!
|
|
|