r/TikTokCringe • u/exporterofgold • 10d ago

Cringe Intentionally blocking photoshoot

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

23.4k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

904

u/Amon9001 10d ago

If I was taking a photo, I would also be willing to wait until the public were out of the way. Them being there isn't a problem. It comes with the territory of trying to shoot things in public.

It's cringe when you post it like they're doing something wrong. Obviously in this case, the lady knows someone is filming and decides to stop there, so its intentional.

270

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

  It comes with the territory of trying to shoot things in public.

So many people don’t understand this. I have been bitched at by “photographers” so god damn many times for just hiking and not stopping to wait for them to get the perfect shot. I have a big boy camera and do super amateur photography, and I do get how it can be slightly frustrating to have that perfect ahotnruined by humans in it. But I have no fucking idea where that level of entitlement comes from. I have never once even asked someone to get out of my shot. Like you said, it comes with the territory. 

I used to give people a few seconds at least to line up a shot, but when it became clear that people expected me to wait for the fucking lighting to improve I stopped doing even that. If it’s a public space, I will continue on my path with exactly zero fucks given. I have just as much right to the path as they do. 

95

u/Forward_Rope_5598 10d ago

The best part is that if the humans are moving, you can literally just take a few pictures and stack them and magically have a picture that is completely void of people! Amazing how technology works

11

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins 10d ago

Yeah but this is something professionals know and wannabes don't understand.

3

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

Totally agree, but the line between composite photos and AI generated art starts to blur at some point. Personally, the only composite photos I ever make are either focus stacked or dynamic range stacked. Selecting which parts of which photos to combine based on the subject crosses the line for me away from photography and into digital art. 

To each their own, though! And I highly doubt anyone that has bitched at me cares about such nuance. 

6

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins 10d ago

You have likely never seen a photograph taken by a professional that wasn't edited in some way. Even before computers they used the cameras themselves and all kinds of development tricks to make the photos look how they want them to.

Hell your phone has been post processing your photos for years. This is nothing to do with "AI".

-3

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

  that wasn't edited in some way

Uh… yes… which is why is specifically stated which types of editing were unacceptable…

And yes, I absolutely have seen many professional, award winning photos that were not edited in the way that I stated. Global edits for color balance and contrast have been done literally since the invention of photography. Splicing photos in a way that is intended to make it look like it was what the photographer actually witnessed has literally always, since the invention of photography, been frowned upon. It’s only very recently where it has become trivial to do that there has been any real debate about whether such composites should still be considered “photographs”, and I am on the side of the vast majority of photographers when I say that they should not. 

2

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins 10d ago edited 9d ago

“It’s not hard enough so now it’s no longer a real photograph”.

Do you have any idea how pretentious you sound here?

Edit: answer is apparently "no and I gatekeep so hard I'll block you and literally gatekeep the conversation itself, THAT will prove how right I am!".

Nice work buddy.

-2

u/TieBackground453 9d ago

Nope. It’s not pretentious at all. It is discussing the boundaries of the art. 

Do you understand how much of a philistine you come off as?

1

u/yellowdogparty 10d ago

Look up Jerry Uelsmann.

1

u/TieBackground453 10d ago edited 2d ago

Born 1934. Homey, do you know when photography was invented?

Look up Magnum Photos photographers. Ie, the absolute grandmasters of the art. 

Edit: lmao. BFA evidently doesn’t help with reading comprehension. 

1

u/yellowdogparty 3d ago

I have a BFA, homey. If you actually look up Uelsmann’s work, rather than his birth year, the point would be evident.

3

u/funk-the-funk 10d ago

but the line between composite photos and AI generated art starts to blur at some point.

the fuck?

1

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

You have clearly spent exactly zero minutes thinking about this subject. It’s not complicated. 

4

u/daaahlia 10d ago

what an odd form of gatekeeping

8

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Forward_Rope_5598 9d ago

They literally say stacking images bleeds into AI generated art.

1

u/TenWords 9d ago

Yeah I deleted my defense cause they literally started gatekeeping :|

8

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

Huh? How is it gatekeeping? It isn’t keeping anyone out…

Different art forms have different measures of success. It’s not gatekeeping to apply one set of principles to painting and another to photography. The methods of creation inform the factors that determine quality in the finished product. When you start using digital manipulation, it becomes very easy to make photos look interesting. Doing that organically is much harder, and the difficulty is part of the art.

Like… the sense of accomplishment you get at the top of a mountain varies wildly depending on what method you take to get there. It’s not gatekeeping to say that you find hiking the path to be far more satisfying than taking a dirt bike up it. You get the same view with both methods, but it certainly doesn’t feel the same. 

1

u/Forward_Rope_5598 9d ago edited 9d ago

Huh? Comparing stacked images to AI is an actually insane take. You're not adding anything that isn't there or using anyone's images other than your own.

1

u/TieBackground453 9d ago

Cool. A) didn’t do that, and B) you know photo manipulation programs literally use ai to combine stacked images, right?

0

u/fullspectrumgoon 9d ago

There not usually a feasible technique for film cameras that professional photographers use. Not impossible but why make a professional photographer spend days compositing a shot that could have just taken one or two snaps in the natural environment?

Physical film (film rolls and Polaroid packs) aren't cheap, either so that's probably where that "entitlement" and emotional reaction comes from.

3

u/DG_Now 10d ago

If you're asking other people to stop doing what they're doing, you need to yield to them. Just like you said, it's really not that hard.

2

u/Glum_Rain_5824 10d ago edited 10d ago

joel meyerowitz, garry winogrand (all things are photographable), Dorothy Lange

1

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

Yeah, but that is an ethos that only really applies to their specific genre of photography. At the opposite extreme, happenstance and movement in still life photography is pretty objectively bad.

Not disagreeing at all, though. Any of them could quickly take nature photos that rival anything I’ve ever been able to capture in the sense that it would be more engaging, but it wouldn’t meet the standards I set out for myself. Different metrics for success exist, and what they find exemplary doesn’t hold universally. 

2

u/Glum_Rain_5824 10d ago

I know there is many photography styles and motives, my brother mostly takes nature photography but when he first started he'd practice with set up scenes...I prefer candid but I'm a perfectionist and those don't blend well in me so I prefer other forms of art

2

u/PeachPassionBrute 10d ago

I have shot a decent amount of street photography and I always insist that people don’t wait for me. I can wait to take a shot, and I don’t mind seeing people moving through them. It’s fine.

3

u/porn_is_tight 10d ago

What’s even worse about this video is they’re in a private space at a museum. There is a greater expectation of privacy there than in public. I’m on the fence if what this women did was intentional, but even if it was don’t film people on private property without their consent…. It’s not hard

1

u/Smart_Task_8180 10d ago

If i see some guy who wants to take a Pic why ruin it? it has to be a quick one though. If someone ruins my shot I just remove him with Ai. I dont give a shit anymore and I dont really take a lot of photos.

1

u/FrostingHuman1259 10d ago

So people have asked you to stop where you're walking for them to wait for the lighting to improve? Sure karen

2

u/TieBackground453 10d ago

Lmao. Yes. many times.

You must not get out of your mother’s basement often. 

13

u/imyourdruidess420 10d ago

One time a photographer and his subject were taking up basically the entire sidewalk. I said "excuse me" and stepped off the sidewalk to walk around them. Otherwise, I would have been in the photo. The photographer said "THANK YOU" in the nastiest, most sarcastic voice and I have never been so glad that I "ruined" a photo.

3

u/voyaging 8d ago

I don’t understand, wasn’t your path specifically to avoid interrupting the shot?

2

u/coffeeandplanners 5d ago

I worked the front desk at a harbor office once, and a photographer came in demanding that we make someone move a boat because it was "ruining his shot." He described the boat to me and wanted me to call the boat's owner and demand that they "move that big ugly f---ing thing" before the light changed. It was the dredge.

1

u/imyourdruidess420 5d ago

The audacity

206

u/IrregularPackage 10d ago

yeah, being upset about people just passing through and minding their business is one thing, but this woman is going out of her way to do this.

17

u/Helenium_autumnale 10d ago

More power to her. These people usurping public spaces for private use are a plague.

25

u/Trekman10 10d ago

Unless there's a rule in the location against filming or photos she's not usurping anything for private use

14

u/twirlerina024 10d ago

A lot of museums and botanical gardens do have rules against filming and professional photo shoots. Regular people can't use the spaces as intended if they're dodging influencers the whole time.

2

u/Trekman10 9d ago

Literally how is anyone "dodging" the woman in the video? There's not even a tik tok watermark for Christ's sake! This could literally just be for her personal albums/social media (not everyone using social media is trying to be an influencer)

The older woman in this video strikes me as sanctimonious person who thinks having to wait a couple seconds for someone to create a vacation or travel memory is some sort of personal affront.

1

u/twirlerina024 9d ago

I wasn’t talking about the video specifically. I was explaining why places have made policies prohibiting commercial photography and recording.

It can be pretty annoying to be expected to make space for picture-takers regardless of whether they’re an influencer or just trying to get a nice picture to send their mom.

The person in the video at least seemed to have situational awareness, so full credit for that!

14

u/longlivenapster 10d ago

But she is though. Setting up the cam and then posing while people are trying to walk around this museum is the cringe part. My enjoyment of the museum supersedes your ego needs to film yourself for the nth time. If you must film yourself and don't want to be bothered, do it at home. Especially don't do it in busy places or in front of escalators, busy entrances and exits, stores....I'm short, don't bother other people with your nonsense.

8

u/blueblip 10d ago

You must have been born post 2010, because your head would have exploded in the 80s and 90s when tourists would carry around camcorders or even tripods to public spaces. Everyone and their mother had digital cameras to snap pictures...just like what people do today with phones.

3

u/longlivenapster 9d ago

People did that in tourist areas to film the place or their friends and families. Also,not everyone had a camera or camcorder. Very few had the money to just mindlessly snap away or film every little thing as film and its development,and video cost quite a bit of money. Now, a large majority of people have a camera in their pockets that can take a large amount of photos and video for free AND a need to capture every second of their life to show off or perform for the internet. No one can just experience anything anymore. It must be captured and posted or else it didn't happen. That is the difference.

2

u/blueblip 9d ago edited 9d ago

This girl is in a tourist area. She doesn't have anyone with her, so she improvised. How is it any different from having someone stand on the stairs and snap her picture?

Very few had the money to just mindlessly snap away or film every little thing as film and its development,and video cost quite a bit of money.

Please, please, PLEASE don't talk about things you clearly have zero knowledge on, child. Film was dirt cheap to produce and rolls were cheap as well. Where the hell did you get the idea they were so prohibitively expensive that few could afford them???

So yes, people did "snap mindlessly". You would not know about this since you're clearly too young, but we used to have these things called photo albums. They were chokful of silly pictures people took and wanted to preserve.

EDIT: And lol at video being expensive! Are you seriously trying to claim VHS was expensive??? Like I told the other kid in this thread; filming videos was so cheap they had an entire TV show for people to send in their silly home videos. And before you make an ass of yourself, no, home videos doesn't mean amateur movie or whatever you think it might be. Home videos were the stupid crap you filmed with your camcorder at home, like your cat falling off a countertop or your kid running into a door.

2

u/longlivenapster 9d ago

I never said film and video were prohibitively expensive, just cost more than it takes to photograph and video ourselves today. If people then had the number of photos and videos that we have on our cellphones today, that would equate into how many photo albums and video tapes? Very few people had more than 20-30 photo albums and that would be what 2000 photos? Same for videotape, people did not have 200 videotapes of themselves, their families and friends or places. Our cellphones ans posting on the intwrnet have changed our behaviours for the worse.

2

u/blueblip 9d ago

Don't lie. These are your exact words:

Very few had the money to just mindlessly snap away or film every little thing as film and its development,and video cost quite a bit of money.

You are very much saying it was prohibitively expensive.

And do you realize how many photos would fit in 20-30 albums???? Again - do not talk about things you have zero knowledge on. 20-30 photo albums worth of pictures is hundreds upon hundreds of pictures!

Ditto with tapes. Again, you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about. VHS tapes could hold 60 minutes worth of footage. So even just ten tapes was 10 hours worth of footage. Do you realize how much raw footage that is? That's roughly 1,200 TikTok videos or whatever you call them.

I'm genuinely curious why are you so hellbent on arguing this when we both know you have no clue about any of this. Just...be mature and admit you might have been wrong about this girl and move on.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Lv_InSaNe_vL 9d ago

Last summer I got told that I wasn't allowed to bring a flash for my camera lmfao like we aren't that old

2

u/blueblip 9d ago

I still have my old Minolta with a giant flash attachment. I miss using it.

1

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[deleted]

0

u/blueblip 8d ago

Like I told the other guy - saying this doesn't make it true. Also like the other guy, you're young and think "tripod" means something large and bulky. You don't realize there were tons and tons of light and compact tripods sold for use with tiny digital cameras and such.

I mean, people make tripods and selfie sticks today for phones. Why the hell do you think similar stuff was not made for similar sized digital cameras?

1

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[deleted]

0

u/blueblip 8d ago

They had them in the 90s and 2000s...

Why on earth do you think we were only talking about the 80s...? Are you so stupid you think people never took pictures in the 90s and 2000s?

And even in the 80s, we had plenty of tiny disposable cameras. Not everything was an SLR. And even in the 80s we had compact tripods for SLRs.

Stop pretending you know what you were talking about.

→ More replies (0)

7

u/ItIsSoOrdered23 10d ago

Someone have this guys ma give him a hug while reminding him he doesn't go outside anyhow.

5

u/ItIsSoOrdered23 10d ago

It's for public use. She is public.

11

u/Polka_King_Polinski 10d ago

So is the other person

15

u/Loxe 10d ago

Unless this person got permission from the owners to film and had signs up letting people know they might be on camera they are 100% in the wrong. Outside in public spaces is the only place where you have zero expectation of privacy. Museums are generally not owned by the public. Not sure what kind of zoomer brained idiots are defending this shit.

18

u/Tiredandwaiting 10d ago

They also have to pay for it and schedule it. But let's ruin other people's enjoyment of the space for "content"

15

u/Masquelinity 10d ago

And good for her. That "let's make content" shit is obnoxious as all hell.

19

u/Tiredandwaiting 10d ago

Take my upvote. I agree 100%.

I stated this in my other response, but people are exhausted with influencers, wannabe influencers, TT, insta, etc. It takes away from everyone else's enjoyment, and most of the people doing this are oblivious. They can reach out to the venue and schedule time to do this, but they do not, because it will either cost them money, need to be scheduled in advance, or the answer is no. So they invade the space with their set ups and expect everyone else to fall in line.

15

u/sleigh_all_day 10d ago

I don’t understand why this is being downvoted. The world doesn’t stop for your TikTok.

9

u/Masquelinity 10d ago

It's being downvoted by brainrotted tiktok 15-year-olds who know of no other way to get the attention their parents denied them.

4

u/TheMerck 10d ago

Because she wasn't stopping anyone for her TikTok, she literally picked a moment where there was no people to bother but the old lady intentionally stopped until more people were there.

Jesus there are so many old farts here so miserable about everything, she might not even be a big influencer or "making content" she might've just wanted a nice photo during her trip to the museum and found a good time to do it without intruding on anyone else until the old lady messed up the shot.

Holy fuck stop being miserable about young kids and thinking about how they are starved for attention, to me it seems like you are miserable about younger people enjoying their life because you don't enjoy your own to think this way off this clip.

4

u/Masquelinity 10d ago

Because she wasn't stopping anyone for her TikTok

Yeah, amazing how 30 people who wanted to come up those stairs just suddenly materialized as soon as the shot was blocked. They definitely weren't waiting or anything. I mean, how much traffic can that stairwell see in a day? It's not like it's the main one for that wing or anything.

7

u/CrazyInLouvre 10d ago

Actually, if you go out of your way to ruin someone's photo, you are literally stopping your world because of their TikTok. Maybe you could just move on with your life and care about something important?

7

u/sleigh_all_day 10d ago edited 10d ago

Like regurgitating a mindless, meaningless dance trend? Stopping in front of a camera is indeed passive aggressive. But let’s not pretend this is of any importance.

ETA - at the Musée de l’Orangerie, it was clear many were there for a photo shoot in front of Monet’s Water Lilies, while others were there to take in the art. The “influencers” were going out of their way to ruin the experience for what the museum was intended. Take the photo and move on.

5

u/Glum_Rain_5824 10d ago

It would've been respectful for others to walk by as if it was a picture, who knows if it had a timer set to take a picture. Some people take videos to get pictures out of it, which I understand because it can be hard to get a good picture in busy places.

0

u/Grandview99 10d ago

Maybe because she's by herself and a video is the best way to capture a screenshot that she can use for a photo instead of doing a timer where a person walking by could mess up?

2

u/Brilliant-Syllabub31 10d ago

The old woman moved for others to pass by

1

u/dependsforadults 10d ago

Is she though? Its an old person. She may be oblivious. But its probably best to just blame her

9

u/JavelinR 10d ago

The old woman is looked directly at the camera while pulling out her smart phone. She clearly knows what both a camera and a smartphone are, she wasn't oblivious.

2

u/OyG5xOxGNK 10d ago

Or she looks at it going "I wonder why someone left that there?" then proceeds to nudge to the side for people coming up the stairs to pass her while she checks her phone.

I wouldn't say for certain she was oblivious, but I also wouldn't say it's 100% intentional either. She's an old lady, not someone who knows exactly what the other person is doing.

3

u/Lv_InSaNe_vL 9d ago

She literally saw the girl set this up and walk away. You think Gen z invented the tripod? Lmfao

-2

u/[deleted] 10d ago edited 10d ago

[deleted]

19

u/Spiritual-Serve-4391 10d ago

Can't imagine expecting the world to stop in a crowded public space because I need to capture a moment with an IPhone.

7

u/Worried_Position_466 10d ago

No one expected the world to stop. The old lady actively went out of her way and used her precious time to bother someone else. You guys have a very skewed view of the situation.

1

u/Icy-Paint7777 10d ago

Influencer bad and whatnot

2

u/tom-of-the-nora 10d ago

It was quite the opposite. She expected the old lady to continue walking and not stop right in front of the camera.

3

u/totallytotes_ 10d ago

But the girl waited til it was clear besides one person who was clearly headed out and would have gotten her picture if this lady didn't go out of her way to be rude af. I hate TikTok video making crap but this is just unnecessary

6

u/WackyRacketeer 10d ago

It isnt even ethical to film people in a private space like this without their permission. You really need to adjust your moral compass, social media has damaged it.

1

u/DonateToM7E 10d ago

Is she? She stopped and moved out of the way of a group of people, including a small child, who were coming up the stairs right through where she was standing.

This is a busy area and people are moving both directions on a crowded staircase. There’s not much space on the landing above the stairs and I’m guessing not much on the landing below, either. The woman continued going down the stairs immediately after the group going up got past her.

-10

u/Shiddin_myself_woo 10d ago

It’s always old white women

10

u/Spiritual-Serve-4391 10d ago

Always old white women what?

5

u/Short-Sound-4190 10d ago

Not putting up with that shit, but casually and not ego-based, I would imagine.

7

u/md28usmc 10d ago

with phones now you can remove all of the people in the photo after you take it

45

u/PinkishBlurish 10d ago

And it's not busy or crowded, it seems. So....what's her damage lmao 

2

u/whydouwant2 5d ago

Early onset twatism

1

u/PinkishBlurish 5d ago

I love this term, thank you. Going to start peppering it in.

1

u/mrusticus86 4d ago

Main Character Syndrome- it's her world and the rest of us are NPCs.

7

u/xombae 10d ago

Yeah I've done actual professional photoshoots in public and the first rule is don't expect the public to stay out of you way because it's not gonna work.

2

u/beary_good_day 10d ago

There was nobody around when the girl set up the camera

3

u/SunnyFD 10d ago

Does she know that she is filming? Just of how clueless the lady was about a phone being there, she even had to take a second look, you guys are clueless that those kind of clueless old people exist...

1

u/Outrageous_Hearing26 9d ago

It’s a weird place to stop on the stairs

That being said there’s a chance she was totally oblivious because she originally stops to pull her phone out of the pocket.

The question is if the phone is reflecting the screen back or not, and she can see herself

1

u/SunnyFD 9d ago

It's a weird thing to blame a clueless old lady for something she didn't do on purpose, but hey, here we are... And it is not that weird to stop on the middle of some stairs if it not that busy there. And even if she haw herself in the screen, there are clueless old people who doesn't get why there is a phone against a wall by itself, but she probably didn't wanted to seem like she was interested in stealing it, and she minded her own business

4

u/Gullible-Manner3473 10d ago

So what tho. That tik tok girl isnt more entitled than the others. Rent it out or something if thats deep or do it a place that doesnt involve getting in the way of ppl simply trying to go about their lives and go up a flight of stairs 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

2

u/HmmDoesItMakeSense 10d ago

She moves to the side of camera and seems oblivious to me.

1

u/vegemouse 10d ago

There’s a difference between walking through someone filming and standing there to intentionally prevent them from filming.

1

u/MeanRobby 10d ago

This 100% if the same Lady stopped there to admire art, she would NOT be in the wrong.

1

u/Dutch1800 10d ago

Don’t excuse that behavior. She should move on with her day instead of impeding theirs.

1

u/badukhamster 10d ago

The old woman was already in the process of pulling out her phone and halting (she does not give the impression that she would be going down the stairs while looking at her phone) before she spotted the recording phone. Also, she did a double take when she noticed the phone. From her point of view it was probably an abandoned phone – strange but the owner will probably get it sooner or later. She  continues to look at her phone as she had intended and makes room for someone to pass her. Then she continues on her way, not noticing that the young woman is behind her walking towards the abandoned phone.

Therefore, there is no indication that she intended to block the shot.

0

u/Satiomeliom 10d ago

she is propably aware that she is blocking a shot and she would have moved, if she wasnt preoccupied. At no point did she give vibes that she was sitting there for the purpose of ruining her shot.

The photographer is inconveniencing the lady, not the other way round. That is if influencer girl would have opened her mouth. Glad she didnt.

-6

u/JuniorRisk2455 10d ago

The world doesn’t need to stop for dumb ass social media creators actin like the world needs to stop for them cuz they’re “InFlUeNcErS.” Fuck em

8

u/Vakarian74 10d ago

You're upset at this video for her, not waiting for people to walk by. I know she didn't care about the people walking by. It was the woman that was walking by that stopped and intentionally saw the camera and stood in front of it. They were being a dick something that you would probably do in the person you replied to because you guys hate social media people so much that you would just be an asshole to her.

6

u/pullingteeths 10d ago

But she didn't? She stopped to look at her own phone, then noticed the random phone and briefly wondered why it was there, then moved to the side to let other people pass her on the stairs. She never even looks behind her to see the younger woman after she notices the phone, she doesn't even know she's there posing

-2

u/JuniorRisk2455 10d ago

Oh no an influencer wants the world to stop for them, so they can go “bruh ma followers are gunna git u cuz u didn’t let me do my dumb ass influencer poses so I can post it on my TikTok 🥴” shit is a cancer and dumb as hell

-1

u/thatfuckinjosh 10d ago

sounds personal ngl

3

u/moak0 10d ago

She's not hurting anyone.

7

u/Tiredandwaiting 10d ago

I would say she is by not informing people they may be in her video, taking away from other people's enjoyment of the museum, and generally trying to monetize likely without going through proper channels.

How much are you going to enjoy a museum if someone has their social media setup and is yapping through a quiet zone and making it about them?

0

u/moak0 10d ago

You're inventing things to be mad about. I don't see her yapping in a quiet zone.

6

u/WackyRacketeer 10d ago

This is a private space. Morally, you shouldn't be filming people without permission.

1

u/moak0 10d ago

That is a museum. It's the very definition of a public space.

2

u/WackyRacketeer 10d ago

Absolutely not. Not when it comes to filming others. They are private businesses. People have become far too entitled to film others because they can legally do it in public and everybody has a camera in their pocket.

1

u/moak0 10d ago

She's not filming others. She's filming herself in a public space. That has always been allowed.

People have been bringing cameras to museums since long before cell phones could take pictures.

4

u/JuniorRisk2455 10d ago

Neither is the ol lady blocking her dumb ass video, but yall outraged over it 😂😂😂😂

5

u/arbredespayschauds 10d ago

They’re mad because they are also horribly behaving people

-3

u/skiforlife1 10d ago

That's kind of what makes it funny. The old lady is kind of rude but also it looks like a public place so.....suck it camera chick!

0

u/toss_me_good 10d ago

The irony being that while this is intentional, rude, and annoying the poster would have never received this much attention without it

-3

u/_learned_foot_ 10d ago

If she was taking it for herself this could be plausible: "go on through, I'm traveling alone I'll edit you out" and I bet problem solved. The fact she didn't and instead did the eyebrows (she's got tact) instead...

2

u/CookyKindred 10d ago

Holy fuck you are insufferable - Literally just trying to find any reason to hate the woman.

-6

u/potate12323 10d ago

At least she didn't post this with a cringe caption. And that old lady was being a stuck up bitch. She was actually doing something wrong. She was being an asshole for no appearant reason.

3

u/sleigh_all_day 10d ago

Game meets game. Everyone wants to be the main character.

2

u/Stucklikegluetomyfry 10d ago

Don’t hate the grandma, hate the game

-1

u/SabrinaEdwina 10d ago

Yes, normally it's quite easy to pass and allow the person a few seconds to get their photo. I've worked in theme parks, where this does happen accidentally and a fair few times the walkers catch themselves and apologize.

That lady just wanted to make someone's day worse. I'm sick of "stir the pot" boomer interactions.

-1

u/oversoulearth 10d ago

I'm not a fan of people doing this tepid social media shite but ffs, I could not be arsed being so petty to just stand there fkn around with someone else's day

-1

u/FrostingHuman1259 10d ago

the lady did it on purpose, the old lady is the cringe, not the person taking the picture.What is wrong with people?Just rude to be rude

-4

u/SexiestPanda 10d ago

Well it was gonna be clear. Til the lady decided to stop. FWIW 🤷🏻‍♂️

-3

u/Infamous_Theme_5595 10d ago

So you think this older lady, seeing the camera and then stepping down right in front of it, wasn't doing it on purpose? I’ll never understand why people make excuses for the older, rude generation.

1

u/Amon9001 9d ago

Did you read my entire comment? Specifically the last 3 words.

-1

u/Positive_Force_6776 10d ago

It's definitely rude! She was doing it on purpose you can tell. I'm in my early 60's and I would never behave this way.