andybarton Posted March 25, 2018 Share #81 Posted March 25, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) And there was me thinking that the bags were in extremely poor taste... 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 Hi andybarton, Take a look here Luxury Camera Bags by Thorsten von Overgaard. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
david strachan Posted March 25, 2018 Share #82 Posted March 25, 2018 By the way...i stick to conventional meat. Haven't ever tasted crocodile or emu. Kangaroo is good, last i had it a decade ago or so. Wild goat and water buffalo were good too at various times. ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 25, 2018 Share #83 Posted March 25, 2018 I only tasted Crocodile once. In my innocent youth, thirty-five years ago. Cured me for life... I'm not a vegetarian, but I rarely eat meat. I guess I like animals too much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pope Posted March 25, 2018 Share #84 Posted March 25, 2018 Definitely not my cup of tea, even if I could afford it. You can buy a lot of gear for the price of a crocodile "von". As far as the materials used to make these bags are concerned, I find it hard to believe that the skin comes from elephants that have "died from natural causes". Sadly, the sort of people who are likely to be the target market probably won't give a damn about how the materials are sourced. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcg Posted March 25, 2018 Share #85 Posted March 25, 2018 Sadly, the sort of people who are likely to be the target market probably won't give a damn about how the materials are sourced. ... or the people who sell it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NERICSSON Posted March 25, 2018 Share #86 Posted March 25, 2018 Some added info on Thorsten page, not that it changes my view of this but anyway: "The sourcing of elephant skin is from elephants that died of natural causes, from governed reserves where the sale of skin goes into managing the reserve. Elephants can be a controversial subject as elephants are one of our endangered species. The reason it is endangered is not illegal hunting, but the legal use of elephants that brought down the numbers from 6,000,000 elephants worldwide about 100 years ago, to somewhat 500,000 today. Then then legal use of ivory was for billiard balls, piano keys (just a thin layer on top; since 1972 replaced by plastic) and many other products. The issue of course becomes controversal these days as 35,000 elephants are killed illegally every year for the ivory. In any case, the elephants skin for this bag is not from legal hunting or illegal killing, but from reserves that sells the skin of elephants that died of natural causes." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 25, 2018 Share #87 Posted March 25, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Still missing the points of piggybacking illegal trade and the ethical aspect of using a creature that is on a similar intellectual level as we are. Does he serve Dolphin steaks on his table? This is where allegedly "legal" and "harvested" Elephant skin comes from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2017/oct/09/elephant-skin-trade-the-animals-latest-existential-threat Laundering illegal animal products is even easier than laundering money. Reason why the im- and export of ALL Elephant products is still prohibited in many civilized countries. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted March 25, 2018 Share #88 Posted March 25, 2018 Still missing the points of piggybacking illegal trade and the ethical aspect of using a creature that is on a similar intellectual level as we are. Does he serve Dolphin steaks on his table? Quite. It is one of those things where the law is only a faint reflection of the ethics of the situation. And of course we can disagree about ethics, but by that token, we are free to express our feelings about things that disgust us, as Thorsten's use of dead elephants for profit does. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted March 25, 2018 Share #89 Posted March 25, 2018 Some added info on Thorsten page, not that it changes my view of this but anyway: "The sourcing of elephant skin is from elephants that died of natural causes, from governed reserves where the sale of skin goes into managing the reserve. Elephants can be a controversial subject as elephants are one of our endangered species. The reason it is endangered is not illegal hunting, but the legal use of elephants that brought down the numbers from 6,000,000 elephants worldwide about 100 years ago, to somewhat 500,000 today. Then then legal use of ivory was for billiard balls, piano keys (just a thin layer on top; since 1972 replaced by plastic) and many other products. The issue of course becomes controversal these days as 35,000 elephants are killed illegally every year for the ivory. In any case, the elephants skin for this bag is not from legal hunting or illegal killing, but from reserves that sells the skin of elephants that died of natural causes." I guess he's reading this thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 25, 2018 Share #90 Posted March 25, 2018 And responding to all the Unsubscribe reasons from his newsletter. A better response, IMHO, would be to hold his hands up and say “Mea culpa” and immediately stop using the skins of endangered species for his bags. Regardless of how legal he considers the source. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted March 25, 2018 Share #91 Posted March 25, 2018 He can use the word "legal" as much as he wants... what about "moral"? 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 25, 2018 Share #92 Posted March 25, 2018 I bet he saw the thread, with numerous pages of responses and thought, Wow, what a great demand for my bags! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted March 25, 2018 Share #93 Posted March 25, 2018 I emailed Thorsten and he's explained that he's working on a new range of bags made out of skins of homeless people. Some have tattoos which add a nice unique touch to the bags. Seriously though, he's on another planet with all this. His bags might appeal to the sort of person who spends a lot of money to go and shoot elephants I guess, assuming they want a camera bag that looks like granny's hand bag. I'm shocked, appalled, amused and bemused in equal measure. Exactly. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-trophy-hunting-import-ban-tusks-obama-son-elephants-big-game-a8243361.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 25, 2018 Share #94 Posted March 25, 2018 His bags might appeal to the sort of person who spends a lot of money to go and shoot elephants I guess, assuming they want a camera bag that looks like granny's hand bag. "One's man has to carry one's cameras in something when in the bush don't you know. Important for one's man to record one with one's trophies after a hard day outdoor and all that killing stuff." Should have produced the 'bad taste' bag, a safari version to complete the set. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted March 25, 2018 Share #95 Posted March 25, 2018 Without wishing to make it look like I’m defending him, there are forum rules regarding behaviour towards other forum members. He’s already been criticised for his religion, now he’s being criticised directly. Either the rules apply or they don’t. 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 25, 2018 Share #96 Posted March 25, 2018 Indeed. Let's keep religion out of this. And let's not start flinging insults. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 25, 2018 Share #97 Posted March 25, 2018 I never got his newsletter ... Neither did I. Is it worth subscribing with a view to unsubscribing and giving him a piece of my mind? Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 25, 2018 Share #98 Posted March 25, 2018 Indeed. Let's keep religion out of this. Ad hominem posts are also uncalled for. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 25, 2018 Share #99 Posted March 25, 2018 (edited) Without wishing to make it look like I’m defending him, there are forum rules regarding behaviour towards other forum members. He’s already been criticised for his religion, now he’s being criticised directly. Either the rules apply or they don’t. You have a good point. There are no doubt many examples of indefensible products being used in luxury goods. I suppose that the problem here is that its not simply about the materials but also the indirect labelling of us, as Leica users, as being within the sphere of influence of such unpalatable luxury items, which has created the furore. And with it have come rather personal comments because we as the people whom Thorsten has directly targeted in the past, initially in terms of photographic tuition (which was fine), then lens hoods (no problems here either) but now these highly dubious items which are far removed from his earlier marketing. I suppose that may be some feeling of 'betrayal' (perhaps too strong a word) which has caused the anger? Personally I find it to be somewhat depressing. Edited March 25, 2018 by pgk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobert Posted March 25, 2018 Share #100 Posted March 25, 2018 Without wishing to make it look like I’m defending him, there are forum rules regarding behaviour towards other forum members. He’s already been criticised for his religion, now he’s being criticised directly. Either the rules apply or they don’t. I have to agree to this. The limits of acceptable behavior have been passed by some participants to the discussion. It would be much better to stick to the discussion without getting into a kind of a personal attack. Completely unnecessary. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts