I'm asking myself why Tom & Ed (or the label) forbid the journalist to take pictures during some concert of the We Are The Night tour ?

I remember that during the Main Square Festival they were able to photograph Underworld And Justice but not the Chemical. Why ? It look like a bit stupid, but they must have some reason...

because it would ruin the magic

jeez

For me to see picts of Tom & Ed playing can do everything except ruin the magic :P

Hum

hmm...in my opinion, that's not right.

http://diepresse.com...399813/index.do

this was a festival i went last year seeing the chems.

if you klick through the pics at the end you'll see a bunch of chemspix

I'm sure brother_ging ;)

I was in front of the journalist, and it was written that they weren't able to take pictures...

And their is an article in a newspaper (La Voix Du Nord) that talked about it...

I don't like the comments next to the pics, brother_ging. Was it that lame?

the newspaper "die presse" is very conservative, csar means they have a stick in their arse. was a wonderful gig!!

maybe they shouldn't photograph Justice: http://www.synthtopi...e-unplugged.jpg

Anyways, artists have contracts and it's rather common that part of the deal with musicians/venues is that they don't want anyone to take a photo for ownership reasons, for unflattering reasons, and/or because the artists/venue have designated photographers who will provide decent photos from the show and occasionally sell them to publications.

Most musicians probably have standards/contracts with photography and so maybe it was something Justice would be cool with but something the Chems' representatives though was lame.

LOL @ the Justice pic. Hahahaha... nice.

Makes sense about the photos.

Haha! That's just sad!

They should put that on the screen when they do their next gig.

I'm going to have to agree with Biff here. This is likely a label thing and maybe there was some sort of conflict between the label and the venue. Who knows. I doubt these "don't take our picture!!" were orders from the Bros. From what I can tell, Tom and Ed don't mind having their pics taken - this website encouraged it actually, during the last tour you could upload your Chems related youtube and flickr stuff from the shows.

That said, I've seen a few pics of Tom and Ed that rival the Justice pic. The stage-"o"-face tends to plague most (if not all) performing musicians. It's just that we love Tom and Ed and think they're cuter. Admit it.

also for the record, let me repost the picture with some notable malfunctions:

http://4.bp.blogspot...0/unplugged.jpg

in case no one heard the scandal. People got mad because they though Justice were doing some Millie Vanillie stuff, but it'd be easy to plug in and fake the what have you. Also those damn USB plugs fall out super easy when you're playing music or printing a paper 5 minutes before it's due.

As long as I remember, it was written that it was better to live the concert that to watch pictures of it (which is true), and, therefore, journalists couldn't take pictures.

But I did, héhé...

I blame the rigging crew.

I mean, how can they screw that up? Does the entire crew know that they're not actually performing or using certain pieces of equipment?

Or is it alleged to have fallen out?

Maboul - sorry to say but you are incorrect. The Chems have said that it is better to live the concert than it would be to watch one of their live gigs on a DVD in your livingroom. That's why they never released a full length live DVD of one of their concerts. Ed also came on this board and said so. They never said anything about forbidding picture taking at their gigs. That's just silly.

So, the newspaper lied.

Huh...? Newspaper lied? I don't mean to argue. But I don't like to see anyone misinformed especially when it comes to fans being able to take pictures of their gigs because this website encouraged it (last tour, when this site had an active Live section and linked directly to peoples youtube and flickr accounts that had tagged Chems gig pics).

There's all sorts of online newspapers and associated blogs that have professional pictures of live gigs. Here's a couple samplings:

http://blogs.guardia...category/music/

http://www.stuff.co....tainment/291788

Maybe it is a contract thing as mentioned earlier, and it depends on venue and publication.

Biff's post makes the most sense and offers the best explanation to what chemicalmat is referring to:

"Anyways, artists have contracts and it's rather common that part of the deal with musicians/venues is that they don't want anyone to take a photo for ownership reasons, for unflattering reasons, and/or because the artists/venue have designated photographers who will provide decent photos from the show and occasionally sell them to publications.

Most musicians probably have standards/contracts with photography and so maybe it was something Justice would be cool with but something the Chems' representatives though was lame."

The day after that festival, the newspaper (La Voix du Nord) explained that journalists weren't allowed to take pictures because the Chems didn't want so. It was a lie !

Not a lie ;). It was written to the bottom of the stage.

Hmmm. Well, maybe Tom was having a bad hair day or something!