Filming in Peckham Rye Park?

[Nigello]

I just passed a film crew at Dulwich Picture Gallery. Unfortunately, Penguin68, at least one was not adhering to the basics, which supports my thoughts. It is human nature to want to break free, to not mask all the time, and to think that the rules don't apply to you if you are one of the few groups of people that are being allowed to work in groups and teams, much like they did before the restrictions were in place.

[Penguin68]

at least one was not adhering to the basics

In what way? Not wearing a mask? (may have been clinically exempted). Too close? May have been in a bubble. Many, perhaps most professional film crews are tested before coming together to work - and during a job if it lasts over a day; so the risk may have been quite low. This is a very different set of circumstances to a bunch of people meeting randomly together. Most crews are freelance, so if they get infected they are losing work and pay - so they have a huge incentive not to - as they will be tested for it.

[Ossito]

Unless you have had sight of their risk assessment and operating protocols, I?m not sure how anyone can pass judgement of how compliant someone working at the moment is being.

[Nigello]

I doubt that any operating protocol would negate the basics, especially when the offender was off site and amongst non-staff members.

[RoundTable]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree with RoundTable and am glad they are

> earning and paying taxes but would add that the

> very fact that they are being allowed to work in

> this way, when many are not, may suggest they are

> somehow special and that could, unconsciously,

> lead to their not wearing masks, getting too

> close, being excited to be seeing colleagues, etc.

> I fear that complacency can easily set in in such

> circumstances though choose to give them the

> benefit of the doubt because I have no evidence

> that this is the case. (This applies to all of us

> - laxness is easy to slip into: just look at how

> many people are out and about this time compared

> to the first lockdown, when we had a less

> transmissable strain and good weather. We stayed

> in in our droves, unlike now...)

By your logic supermarkets should be closed too. The whole point is that the crew can form a work bubble because they have the same fixed number of people day in day out. Supermarkets cannot do this (yet they are but then we do need to eat), neither can hotels, pubs, restaurants, concert venues, sport stadiums...see?

[RoundTable]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I just passed a film crew at Dulwich Picture

> Gallery. Unfortunately, Penguin68, at least one

> was not adhering to the basics, which supports my

> thoughts. It is human nature to want to break

> free, to not mask all the time, and to think that

> the rules don't apply to you if you are one of the

> few groups of people that are being allowed to

> work in groups and teams, much like they did

> before the restrictions were in place.

'I just accidentally passed through the filming site which may or may not have been a necessary journey but since my curtain doesn't twitch that far and it is a hot topic on the forum I just couldn't help myself from going over to see if I can catch somebody out so I can rush back and report on it'. There, I fixed that for you.

[RoundTable]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I doubt that any operating protocol would negate

> the basics, especially when the offender was off

> site and amongst non-staff members.

And did the offender have a big sign around his/her/their neck saying 'I am part of the film crew' for you to know that he/she/they are off site and therefore mingling with non-staff members? And did the people he was amongst have a sign around their neck saying 'we are non-staff members'?

[Siduhe]

I know a couple of people who are film/magazine support (make up artist/stylists etc). From everything they say and what I've seen on their social media, the organisations they work with take current shoots extremely seriously. One of them was scheduled to do an all day magazine shoot last week, all of the (reduced) team were tested at the client's expense 24 hours before, then tested again on the day of the shoot, and when one person tested positive on the day (having tested negative a day earlier), the shoot was immediately shut down and postponed for five days in case any one who attended the morning test on the day of the shoot then tested positive.

I'm sure that there are variations in compliance in this industry - like there are across all industries and sectors - but we are all still watching TV, demanding new content not repeats, and companies are still trying to sell products, and bring new products to market, which requires advertising, so I don't see that shutting this activity down entirely is realistic.

[JohnL]

Siduhe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I'm sure that there are variations in compliance

> in this industry - like there are across all

> industries and sectors - but we are all still

> watching TV, demanding new content not repeats,

> and companies are still trying to sell products,

> and bring new products to market, which requires

> advertising, so I don't see that shutting this

> activity down entirely is realistic.

Oh yes - we all want to watch new shows on Netflix.

The last in the series of Blacklist had cartoon inserts - didn't really work for me.

[RoundTable]

Siduhe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I know a couple of people who are film/magazine

> support (make up artist/stylists etc). From

> everything they say and what I've seen on their

> social media, the organisations they work with

> take current shoots extremely seriously. One of

> them was scheduled to do an all day magazine shoot

> last week, all of the (reduced) team were tested

> at the client's expense 24 hours before, then

> tested again on the day of the shoot, and when one

> person tested positive on the day (having tested

> negative a day earlier), the shoot was immediately

> shut down and postponed for five days in case any

> one who attended the morning test on the day of

> the shoot then tested positive.

>

> I'm sure that there are variations in compliance

> in this industry - like there are across all

> industries and sectors - but we are all still

> watching TV, demanding new content not repeats,

> and companies are still trying to sell products,

> and bring new products to market, which requires

> advertising, so I don't see that shutting this

> activity down entirely is realistic.

Well said. It's not just about keeping us entertained though. There are thousands of people scrambling trying to make a living in dire circumstances with no safety net, doing the best they can with the very limited options they have. Ultimately, people need to eat and not everybody has a guaranteed monthly income.

[tllm2]

The end result featuring Waveney Ave' ......

https://www.youtube.com/user/Halifax

[Earl Aelfheah]

Do adverts for banks actually increase the number of customers they attract? Who opens an account off the back of a TV advert featuring a horse riding across a beach?

[DuncanW]

I guess they most do, they have been running similar ad's for decades...

[JohnL]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do adverts for banks actually increase the number

> of customers they attract? Who opens an account

> off the back of a TV advert featuring a horse

> riding across a beach?

One of the few times I got questioned about money by a market research company - they said name a pension company. "Scottish Widows" I said - she replied "Everyone says that"

[KidKruger]

40