New York Daily Photo Analytics

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Über Peek

Honesty can be a good policy and honestly, after a stressful holiday weekend with all the preparations and travel, I did not have the energy this morning to do a posting. So I perused my photos with disappointment and tried to figure out how to spin straw into gold, or at least silver. The photos of the window display of Disrespectacles Eyewear at 82 Christopher Street was always interesting to me but had been previously nixed as not worthy. But in doing an online search for this store, interesting things popped up. Like using the singular Disrespectacle returned only 5 items from Google, while the plural returned 2450 - quite unusual. Typically, the singular brings back more than the plural (?). I also found a website on lovewords that defined Disrespectacle as: "To be publicly disrespected." Finally, I arrived at the store's website - you can link to it here. I found descriptions of their product line like funky, trend-setting, hip, über-sleek, industrial-sleek, high fashion, hard-to-find, and ultra high-end boutique, with features and reviews from all the top fashion publications.
Retailing is very competitive - merchants must be increasingly creative to stay alive in a crowded marketplace. And they are protective of their efforts. I am more and more frequently told I can not take photographs in stores - in some cases (like restaurants) this is to protect the privacy of patrons, but often it is due to paranoia - i.e. that others will steal their ideas for displays and decor. All the newer, trendy establishments which are hyper-designed are like this. Pinkberry (a new frozen dessert place) is a good example - they have a no photography icon on their windows. In shooting from the street through the windows at the French restaurant Balthazar in SoHo, I had a waiter inside waving his arms at me to signal that no photos are to be taken. So, from time to time, when I can manage to take a photo surreptitiously, I will offer you über-peeks of the verboten...


Lucy said...

I still find it rude that people won't let you photograph a public establishment. But I have seen people taking pictures of fashion displays looking like they were going to copy the clothes kind of thing, which is awful -- but not like taking a photo of the interior of a restaurant.
Interesting bunch of links you found, I will check out the love words site when I get a mo...

Anonymous said...

You said it..."paranoia"...I have photographer friends who are faced with this same "no photo" issue, and I find it absolutely ridiculous.

How in the world could these people/establishments ever find themselves in the mindset that they have something SO special or unique that a simple photo will be their downfall?

If that's the case, they've got a long road ahead in their business endeavors (or, I guess I should say, a very short road, if a photo is going to make or break them).

Let's blame this on Bush. ; ) The level of fear that has been instilled in this society today, is quite sad.