steve67

Yes, it is a sad sight, some guests treated like mythical creatures, others like abandoned cats. On Saturday afternoon I sat above the autograph tables in one of the restaurants and watched this play out for some time. Constant long queue for Brent Spiner, good business for Harry Melling and Natalia Tena, but next to nothing for Dave Prowse, Kenny Baker, Garrick Hagon, the "Star Wars" walk-ons (not knocking "Star Wars", I love it, but that's how it was going). Even some boys from "Harry Potter" had nothing to do. Devon Murray was sat at an empty table for a good while, with only an occassional girl or two coming up to ask for a hug before scurrying away. He did seem to be enjoying himself though. Maybe more differentiation in the pricing structure could help to spread the love around a bit?

I'd rather pay £20 to hear someone talk for 45 minutes on their film career than for them to scrawl their signature on a photo in 45 seconds!

I got 2 at different times, my first is also slightly out of focus, I think it was an issue with a group of ppl at the start which is a big shame, but they still look ok, i might be more upset had I not of paid for 2 shoots) but yer is annoying and a shame. no issues with the second, as I said i think it occurred to a few ppl at the start, so golds and the first lot of normal tickets? Very lucky you have a "reserve" shot to compensate for the blurry one! I attended the event solely for the shoot, and it was a birthday present for someone; if the print had come back blurred I would have been absolutely horrified. It may just be a few people out of hundreds who got a bad picture, and maybe they don't mind about it for some reason, personally I think getting a photo that's in focus shouldn't be too much for them to expect!

The Tardis prop was pretty weak anyway, so I'm glad only a small section of it appeared in the photo (and I'm even going to Photoshop that a touch to make it look better). I'm starting to feel a bit lucky about how well my single photo turned out. Is my eyesight going or is the Karen Gillan photo posted above not even in focus?! I've seen a message elsewhere with someone saying their photo is out of focus too, that would have been awful because there's just no way to solve the problem. About the DeLorean shoot, Christopher Lloyd's shirt actually was a costume I believe.

I mentioned this very problem in another thread so won't retell it all here, except to say that you definitely have a point.

We (my young niece and I) attended on Saturday, neither of us have ever been to one of these events. The Karen Gillan photoshoot was the sole reason for our visit, so some comments on that. After a trip to the "Doctor Who Experience" first, which is great BTW, we arrived a bit after 2pm and joined the photo queue (and had a sneaky chuckle at the crew member who told us "Yes, this is the queue for Karen Jillum"). The queue moved along quickly enough, we probably waited no more than half an hour. I noticed signs saying "All items left at owner's risk" alongside a long table of many untagged bags, available to anyone who wanted to walk past and pick one up; my immediate thought was "******** to that!". We both had largish bags with us, mine with a pricey camera in, putting them down in a hall of 20,000 people and then walking away wasn't going to happen! When we reached the front of the queue, I did not offer the bags and no-one asked for them, so scene avoided. Then we turned the corner past the dividing wall and my heart sank a bit as I saw the Tardis - it was not what I would call a good replica. Contrary to some comments I've seen of people wishing more of the Tardis appeared on their photos, I'm very pleased that there is only a small part visible on ours! Yes, it was recognisably a Tardis, but any tall blue box with windows is going to look at least something like a Tardis. Could have been much better. Karen herself was doing well, as an ex-model and "Doctor Who" star I guess she is very experienced at being photographed for hours on end and also at meeting crowds of fans. All credit to her, because it must be very wearing working through that constant stream of people (and there must be at least a few oddballs in there too, I just read about the idiot who pulled a knife on Brent Spiner.) So we then had a couple of hours to kill before the photo would be ready, not too much of a problem with a young girl in a hall full of cute little things to buy! She was delighted with some funky little bracelets (made of tape measures and other odd items) and spent her money there. I would have bought her some more stuff if both cash machines in the hall hadn't been out of action. More of a failing of the venue than the organisers I suppose, but with thousands of people in a hall selling thousands of expensive items, the need to refill cash machines should be anticipated. Who knows how much business the dealers missed out on, or how many extra autographs might have been sold? Peeped into one of the stages for a few minutes as we passed, saw several girls in long blue wigs doing little dance routines. No idea what characters they were playing, but they looked to be having a great time and it was really very sweet. The replica Batmobile was a lovely car, unfortunately the tape barrier was so close to it that a decent photo was impossible. We had to get out of the hall for a bit of a break so went upstairs to grab a coffee, unfortunately their coffee machine had broken down. So just Pepsi and a much needed sit down directly above the long autograph tables, which allowed us to watch the comings and goings on both sides. Brent Spiner looked extremely busy but was taking some time with each person. Things were pretty slow for the "Star Wars" guests, but I guess that's because they've been at this game for thirty years and everyone has already met them! We went to collect the photo and to be honest, the arrangement here was completely useless. No way to tell upfront which photos are where on the very long table, because it's completely obscured by a crowd of people in front of you all trying to look over the heads of the people in front of them. So you just pick a spot in the crowd and start edging in; eventually you get through to the front and discover that, as was very likely, your photo isn't right there in front of you - it might be down the other end of the table somewhere though. But you can hardly get away from the table to go and start the whole process again because now the pressing crowd is behind you. The photos were also not carefully handled, I saw some getting absolutely smothered in fingerprints, and that was just the crew laying them out on the table! I heard one woman phoning to her husband and saying there was no way she could get her photo herself, he would have to come and help. Small people, those with children, anyone in a wheelchair, must have had a nightmare there. Would it really be so hard to avoid the whole mess somehow? Maybe numbers given out sequentially to everyone after their photo is taken, with the printed photos then laid out in that order (even approximately), and some signposts visible over people's heads saying where blocks of numbers are, would make collection much more straightforward. (It would also negate the need to write lengthy descriptions in order to have photos posted on later, because you just use the number). An even simpler way could be a queue which files past the table to let people spot their photos - it would get everyone through much quicker than a mob laying siege to a table! The whole rest of the venue was full of queues so why the principle went out of the window here is beyond me. And before anyone makes an excuse about Karen Gillan being so popular - that's no excuse! All her photos were pre-sold, so the volume to be dealt with was known well in advance. The photo itself looks fine, and that's the main thing of course, so overall a successful outcome to the day. Having just the one objective meant achieving it could be my sole focus, I would not like to have had a shopping list of photos and autographs to get through!

If Karen's first tickets were allocated by a lucky dip (say from batches of 20 or so) rather than sequentially then there would be no incentive to run at all.

The phrase up to almost always turns out to mean less than, as in "save up to £100", "seats up to six people", "grow up to 12 inches" etc etc.

Thanks for clarification, hope I can get there for Friday. Do feel sorry though for two of the guests signing freebies while their fellows are raking it in!

I thought I might take a look in on Friday (just to get an idea of what's where before I bring my niece along for a visit on Saturday), so I was checking the lfcc website for details and saw this: Never having attended one of these events, it's all unfamiliar to me and I realise I could be misunderstanding something, but it looks like a pretty plain and clear statement that these guests will be there Friday night. One or two of those guests would be of interest to me but I wouldn't subject my own young guest to queueing for them on the Saturday - nice birthday treat that would be, lining up to see someone you never heard of! So what's Buck Rogers doing Friday night? (Now there's a question I never expected to ask in my life!)

Even a photo isn't conclusive proof. Someone could photograph a celeb signing a 10x8, then later copy the signature on to an identical 10x8. They could sell that copy as authentic - with a photo to "prove" it. A very easy way to get some cash and keep the original autograph too! And the same trick could be played multiple times on different buyers, using the same photo as "proof" on each occasion. Yes, it's hideously immoral but so simple it must go on. When the FBI investigated the sale of sports autographs they found that 70% were fake. What's the ratio for actors I wonder? Really knowing an autograph is 100% authentic is next to impossible if you don't see it signed with your own eyes.

Sorry, only 4 cars made for the show and confirmesd by George Barris (the original designer and builder himself). This car is something of a strong suit of mine...This fansite will confirm the details. http://www.1966batmobile.com/replica.htm Ok, ok, cut me some slack i'm only just 26! Lol, the point was I knew there was more than 1, could this be any one of them? Sorry young'un! You get like this at 46! Like I said, I have every intention of getting as much of an eyefull of it as possible, because it appears to be a very well made replica indeed. I am not missing out on seeing one in the flesh (or fibre-glass, or whatever!), but I just doubt that it is a series original car as the creator has the #1 car and the three others have all been in private U.S. ownership for a very long time. And this car has a British reg number so would appear to be a UK made replica.

I've never paid for someone's autograph in my life - when I were a lad (cue Dvorak's "New World" ) guests signed for free. This whole modern "autograph battery farm" scene is new to me, I only recently discovered it because I bought a Karen Gillan photo as a present for someone else. Being old school as I am, the idea of paying someone to sign an autograph is sort of distasteful, but I've browsed the threads about last week's event and seen everyone having a good time and coming away happy so I guess a greater good can come from celeb's charging for signatures. Anyway, the other day I was idly pondering the question of whether anyone would be a big enough draw to get me to attend an event and stump up for their sig on a picture. Eventually I came up with three people, and a fourth as a maybe. The three were George Lucas, Neil Armstrong, and Stan Lee. The fourth place "maybe" was Christopher Lee. So, Stan Lee could be enough to stir this non-autograph hunter from his apathy. Maybe Christopher Lee too. BUT I would need to be sure of one thing first: a personalised signature. I've read that popular guests sometimes will NOT personalise due to pressure of time. IMO, time would need to be effectively managed to allow for autographs to be personalised or I'm not interested. A couple of factors would seem important in achieving this. First of course is the price - paying a premium would reduce overall demand. Second, the number of autographs per person. How about one each? I''m sure that would be a horrifying prospect to anyone planning on bringing their entire DVD or comic collection to be signed! But at its most fundamental, isn't an autograph ultimately a memento of meeting a person? And isn't that criteria fulfilled by a single personalised signature? Giving that to as many people as possible should be the guiding principle IMO. For those wanting a second signature, they could collect a "second chance" ticket after getting their first sig. Then they go through the queue again later, after the first timers have had their chance. If there's time. I do appreciate that is not what people are used to, but after reading about attendees' varying experiences last weekend with Alex Kingston it would seem that the most in-demand guests do require a different approach.

"photoshoots aren't set up for aesthetic reasons" OK, this does worry me a bit! Wouldn't that be a pretty strange approach? Quick doesn't have to mean bad. I might not have been clear before in regard to the backdrop so these pics (randomly grabbed via Google) will hopefully demonstrate what I mean. Backdrop shot RIGHT: Backdrop shot WRONG: I expect most people would appreciate the aesthetic difference between the soft glowing nebula effect of the first pic and the drab crinkled cloth in the second. The subjects just need to be positioned a little way away from the backdrop, instead of right against it. Result, much better looking photos for no extra time or effort - just a little bit of space. As Karen will have a Tardis as backdrop her shoot will have different requirements; it will need to be IN focus rather than diffuse. I doubt the shots could be framed to get the whole Tardis in as it might leave the people a bit small, a Tardis is probably 9 feet tall after all! The presence of a Tardis will mean that particular photo area will HAVE to be allocated a reasonable bit of space. But if a professional photographer is coming in to do other shoots too, it might be worth giving the guy a bit of room to work in when laying out the floorplan, and everyone could get a better product at the end of it.

This is a question that has occurred to me too, and it has me a little concerned. Looking at hi-res photoshoot images that have been posted from Collectormania, it seems that there was very little space allocated to the photographer and unfortunately it is to the detriment of the photos. The problem is that people in the photos are standing much too close to the backdrop. The people should be in focus and the painted backdrop slightly out of focus (achieved by setting the camera aperture to create the required depth of field). But it is apparently so close that there's no separation from the people, and *everything* is in sharp focus. So instead of creating a diffuse background to dramatically accentuate the foreground subjects of the photo, the backdrop looks exactly what it is - a large creased-up sheet of cloth.