'Ghost House' Dublin

mehfesto

I was over on Abandoned Ireland and was looking at the Ghost house:
http://www.abandonedireland.com/Ghost_House.html

Does anyone know here this is? Or if you're permitted into places like this? Looking for interesting places for shoots, and this could be great if it checks out!

kelly1

Great website! Very handy for picking a location for band/fashion shoots.

smash

I doubt you could just walk in, if you could I'd say there'd be squatters in there, or at least half the stuff would be robbed.

Einstein

Very cool pics

magicbastarder

kelly1 wrote: »

Great website! Very handy for picking a location for band/fashion shoots.

he has a book out at the moment - seems to be doing well.

T-rev

where exactly is that place? Would love to go see it.

Effects

steve06 wrote: »

I doubt you could just walk in, if you could I'd say there'd be squatters in there, or at least half the stuff would be robbed.

You really think squatters would live in a place like that? As for half the stuff being robbed, practically everything left there is worthless anyway.

Effects

Found this on archiseek by chance.

I think you'll find that the "Ghost House, Dublin" is actually Coolaught House (1790) in Cloghbaun, a small village near Clonroche, Co. Wexford.

MZmata

Yeah, great website with the most hostile owner in the whole world. Hope he makes enough money on his book and chokes on it. People would like to visit those places cos they're interested you're moron, not cos they want an after party.

DaireQuinlan

MZmata wrote: »

Yeah, great website with the most hostile owner in the whole world. Hope he makes enough money on his book and chokes on it. People would like to visit those places cos they're interested you're moron, not cos they want an after party.

Zombies gotta hate

pullandbang

MZmata wrote: »

Yeah, great website with the most hostile owner in the whole world. Hope he makes enough money on his book and chokes on it. People would like to visit those places cos they're interested you're moron, not cos they want an after party.

What a lovely pleasant first post.
Welcome to boards and we look forward to even more erudite, well written and informative contributions to the photography forum.

MZmata

Thanks very much, just trying to sort out an urban location for a photo shoot and found some photographers (including Tarquin Blake) unpleasantly secretive and distant. We're all in the same business in a quite small country and some of them out there behave as if by using a location they had discovered someone else would get the credit for their own work. Assuming that photographers want to wreck the place not only useless but disrespectful as well.
So I hope those photographers will be treated the same way they treat others and I really hope they will get as much help as they offer for others. It's only nice to share information and doesn't cost a penny.

DaireQuinlan

MZmata wrote: »

Thanks very much, just trying to sort out an urban location for a photo shoot and found some photographers (including Tarquin Blake) unpleasantly secretive and distant. We're all in the same business in a quite small country and some of them out there behave as if by using a location they had discovered someone else would get the credit for their own work. Assuming that photographers want to wreck the place not only useless but disrespectful as well.
So I hope those photographers will be treated the same way they treat others and I really hope they will get as much help as they offer for others. It's only nice to share information and doesn't cost a penny.

This is one of those situations though where I'd imagine too many people traipsing to one place would probably result in it being locked down or an increased security presence. If by 'a photo shoot' you mean models, lights, MUAs and all that I'd understand how someone might be reluctant to divulge details.
At the end of the day it's his call, no sense getting aggrieved about it. Do some legwork yourself and it might stand you in good stead.

MZmata

I have done my homework roaming around Dublin, going to Wicklow tomorrow and Kildare on Sunday. No, it's not a commercial shoot (no lights involved just a model, an assistant with a reflector and a designer), and the model is leaving next Friday. I had spent the last week trying to get in to places. Climbed, trespassed, researched. Just expected a bit of courtesy, that's all. It's just seem to be too precious to some of them out there not to share any information.

ScumLord

MZmata wrote: »

found some photographers (including Tarquin Blake) unpleasantly secretive and distant.

Maybe he's the ghost? :eek:

pullandbang

MZmata wrote: »

It's just seem to be too precious to some of them out there not to share any information.

Who may I ask are "they"? Who did you ask - apart from TB?

Stellaluna

Disclosing locations (or not) is a nice little can of worms within the exploring community. Generally speaking though, only sharing information with those you already know and trust is the norm; most likely for reasons already mentioned such as protecting the site from excessive footfall, damage, theft and lockdown that might not otherwise have occurred.

I imagine TB has had endless requests for location details as a result of his books and website, hence the frosty reception. I'm sure landowners of some of the sites he has featured are less than delighted about the increased number of people traipsing across their land.

Research is the way to go, there's plenty of good online resources in addition to walking/driving around. There's no doubt it can be a slog and a significant time sink - which is likely to be another reason why people are reluctant to share locations with someone they don't know.

MZmata

I asked everybody that comes up when you Google derelict sites in Ireland.

MZmata

I still think sharing is the way to go. Look at science, where would we be if all scientists would have had to do the research and discover Vitamin-C?
I didn't ask any of them to put it out on their site or make it public and attached a link to my work so I think it's just simply being a dick. I get your point though, I just disagree.

Corkbah

MZmata wrote: »

I still think sharing is the way to go. Look at science, where would we be if all scientists would have had to do the research and discover Vitamin-C?
I didn't ask any of them to put it out on their site or make it public and attached a link to my work so I think it's just simply being a dick. I get your point though, I just disagree.

really ?? dont throw science into this ... because this is just wrong !!

you do realise how many companies invest heavily into R&D (research and development) , pharmaceutical companies dont share their information/research for several years and only do so because a patent expires .... not because they want to advance medicines but because they want to maximise their own profit and make their own returns on the millions spent on R&D, this is how/why we have "generic" brand drugs....so if you wish to put that into photography terms.

if people put out the information displaying where the abandoned houses are ...how many people will go there, how many people will try to shoot it, how safe will the structure be and how safe will the lands and wildlife be around it....just because you are one photographer looking for the information doesn't mean because you are both photographers that they will/should tell you, if they did, how many other requests will they have to respond to.

they dont know you and cannot trust that you will not reveal the location to others, nor the "crew" that will be with you .... most photographers find their own locations to do shoots instead of copying others, or goto well known locations which are often the scene of photoshoots.

you do realise that google is only a search engine - it doesn't know everything. (yet)

MZmata

I said I didn't expect them to share the information publicly. And sorry but I'm not talking about companies but individuals. That would be really said if it was true that people don't share information with each other in the scientic world or only share it because they have to. They don't have to and they do share. But you're right, this isn't science and for some reason (which I'll never be able to understand) people are just selfish sometimes

Corkbah

MZmata wrote: »

I said I didn't expect them to share the information publicly. And sorry but I'm not talking about companies but individuals. That would be really said if it was true that people don't share information with each other in the scientic world or only share it because they have to. They don't have to and they do share. But you're right, this isn't science and for some reason (which I'll never be able to understand) people are just selfish sometimes

maybe you are missing my point .... if the photographer tells you in private, and someone see's your image and wants to know where it was taken .... do you tell them ? or do you say "its private" .... if you do tell them then more people know and the area risks getting damaged, if you don't tell then you are no better than the person you are complaining about right now.

or if someone asks the model if she/he knows of a location where they could do a shoot....and she remembers this abandoned place you brought her to ... she is then showing it to another "crew" and that photographer takes a different model to the location and before you know it ..... the place suffers some damage (usually by ignorance/accident)

In regards to science .... most scientists keep their research to themselves and any scientist I know in R&D will only release the information they know if it is beneficial (when the other person is a respected and well known professional whom they have already made sign a non-disclosure agreement) .... how many people out there are studying how to cure cancer ? thousands ... how many are posting their research online showing their work to help other scientists cure cancer...NONE (that I know of). if a cure is invented it will be marketed and sold.... and the information will not be released for others to re-create.

magicbastarder

i vaguely remember reading that there is a general rule of thumb that the chance of a secret becoming public is proportional to the square of the number of people who know it.

Splinters

You don't expect it to be made public knowlege, but expect him to tell any stranger who asks.....well thats totally different.

Corkbah

Splinters wrote: »

You don't expect it to be made public knowlege, but expect him to tell any stranger who asks.....well thats totally different.

you forgot the rolley-eyes :rolleyes:

Stellaluna

I understand where you're coming from - you just want to visit a derelict/abandoned place for this particular shoot and you just want a small piece of information from another photographer.

However, finding and visiting abandoned or seldom seen places is a hobby in its own right. A lot of us take photographs of the places we visit to record it as it was on the day but others don't. These buildings/sites are places to explore, research and appreciate - they're not just places to do photo shoots. The longer you've been doing the hobby, the less likely you are to share information with anyone you don't know and trust within the community. Partly, as has been said, to protect the site, protect yourself and because of the amount of personal time and effort put into finding and successfully visiting a place. Believe me, it's no fun doing hours of research and driving hundreds of miles only to find that somewhere doesn't exist any more, has been repurposed or is now inaccessible.

I used to have a blog with named sites (I know, I know, naive/stupid etc. a few good things did come of it though) but took it down after it became apparent it was being used as a shopping list and I had no control over where the information ended up. One site in particular has been subjected to some of the worst HDR/tone mapping I've ever seen (by someone in business as a photographer no less) - at least it's still standing though.

Anyway, as people are saying, do more research. Broaden your search terms, there are a few databases and lists out there that will surely throw out potential sites for you. Other than that, if you know the type of place you want, try getting permission - there're some cracking old houses out there that might have the look you're after. This approach has worked well in the past.

Splinters

The thing to remember is Tarquin Blake is not preventing you from using any of these locations. Nor was he born with an inherited knowledge of theses places. He had to research and find them himself so theres no reason you can't do the same.

Its obviously a passion for him, as is the preservation of these locations. As others have said surely you can understand how easily it can snowball if their locations become common knowledge. You shoot there, somebody asks you, or the model, or the MUA and they tell. Then they tell somebody else and so on. You cannot possibly argue that the more these places are used, visited etc the more chance the higher the chances of potential damages or access being completely cut off.

If you even do a quick search on here you'll find tons of people recommending cool locations to shoot in. Thats their choice to do so, but not their obligation. Basically what I'm saying is do your own research, appreciate the knowledge thats already been shared and don't whine if somebody opts not to share their own hard work with you

Jonnykitedude

Clearly you didn't search enough, I'm involved in urbex, along with a lot of others in this thread and I'm sure if you had of searched one of us would of popped up!

TB is hounded with requests about locations...go do your homework and you'll find most of them, its part of the fun when exploring the locations!

MZmata

If I had a location and another photographer (that sends me his work, proving that he is indeed a photographer) yes, I would give the address in private to him and I don't see what's wrong with that.
And as I said I did my homework, crawled, jumped, etc and yes, found abandoned places but not good enough places.

Jonnykitedude

MZmata wrote: »

If I had a location and another photographer (that sends me his work, proving that he is indeed a photographer) yes, I would give the address in private to him and I don't see what's wrong with that.
And as I said I did my homework, crawled, jumped, etc and yes, found abandoned places but not good enough places.

This is just a job for you right?

See this is a hobby for us, I'll give you an example. The Pigeon House was a fantastic site to photograph which i was planning on returning to.....I cant now as another fashion/strobist tog brought models,smoke machines lights etc on a number of occasions, now the whole site is locked down. This is what urban explorers don't want happening hence why most of us are very secretive on locations.

MZmata

You don't get permission to places like the Magdalene Laundries (or other listed buildings), I have tried it. Might worth trespassing though but as I said I can't expect the model to jump and climb 2 meter high fences for fun.
Anyway, I do get the point, you don't want people to ruin the places you found, you want to preserve it as it is.
But let me just add two things:
-assuming that someone, just because he/she would like to visit a place that has been visited before wants to wreck the place is a little bit paranoid, nevertheless rude.
-this project in particular is not a commercial one. I'm trying to add a few shots to my, the makeup artist and the model's portfolio. For free. Nobody gets paid. No big crowd, no huge unit involved.

Went to Wicklow today with my girlfriend and found places but non of them was good for this shoot. Took pics though and enjoyed my day out but this is not about me and not about finding abandon places but about going somewhere with a particular look to take pictures. Two different ballgames.
And yes, I'd definitely share the info with another photographer, cos sharing is ...

MZmata

The Pigeon House is locked down, because they're destroying the building, not because the photographer, went down 2 days ago and spoke to the security. The council has brought the land and building something there.

Jonnykitedude

MZmata wrote: »

The Pigeon House is locked down, because they're destroying the building, not because the photographer, went down 2 days ago and spoke to the security. The council has brought the land and building something there.

Nope your wrong on that one. OPW own the land and building. They had plans for turning it into a museum but with the new sewerage plant next door that killed the plans.

Unfortunately its not being paranoid or rude, because it happens!


I guess you have to keep looking so!

MZmata

I'm going to keep looking anyway obviously, because I'm not getting any help from any forums that discusses abandoned places in Ireland:)

But before everyone would rip my head off for asking, please note that finding abandoned places is not my passion. Photography is (and as I see from the thread this is a place to discuss photography). That doesn't mean that I'm disrespectful towards these places or I'm going to arrange an MDMA party there. Assuming that I am is in fact rude. I know it might have happened before but just because your car has failed to start once, you won't start your day by getting it towed to the mechanic, do you?

Stellaluna

All we can do is take what you say about yourself at face value. You're probably of the same 'take only photographs, leave only footprints' kind of person that most explorers are. Even so, I still wouldn't give out the information to someone I've never met or at least corresponded with over a period of time. Just because you're a good egg doesn't mean everyone who asks us also has good intentions. We don't know how many people will end up with the information - an increase in footfall to a vulnerable location increases the likelihood of folks being caught and the site being locked down or indeed damaged when the information eventually reaches thiefs or vandals.

What you're likely to find is that explorers are not keen on being used as location scouts. We take the good locations with the bad, it's not fair to expect us to to all the ground work and then give out details of the sites that most appeal to photographers. I've visited my fair share of uninspiring places which have taken just as much time and effort to find as the more interesting ones.

I generally don't have permission when exploring but on the few occasions that I have, they were listed sites that were no longer in use but were being well looked after in terms of keeping people, and the weather, out. Don't completely discount this option. Also, don't discount listed/protected sites - a lot of them are in various states of abandonment. The protected structure status really only comes into play if someone wants to buy/renovate/redevelop the site - then the council can come in and make demands for what restoration or conservation works must be carried out and to what specifications - otherwise they are left to crumble. (That's how it appears to me at least).

It might be worth considering that the site you want to visit may no longer be in the condition in which you have seen it in the photographs on the internet. Abandoned buildings can change very quickly, especially if they're discovered by vandals or thiefs in the interim. Or, the weather might have gotten the best of the place and all the floors have collapsed. Or, it's been demolished or restored. Then again you might be lucky and it's just as it was. Them's the breaks.

I hope you find what you're looking for. I'm sorry that we have appeared to you to be rude and selfish but hopefully you can appreciate the reasons. I generally wouldn't ask another explorer for location information if I did not know them or hadn't met them - I wouldn't expect them to give me the information if I asked either. I either want to find new locations that I haven't seen photographs from before or figure out where others have been without having to ask.

5uspect

magicbastarder wrote: »

i vaguely remember reading that there is a general rule of thumb that the chance of a secret becoming public is proportional to the square of the number of people who know it.

Just the square? I would have expected a higher exponent.
I should do an experiment on the secret wifi network in work...

AI

That Tarquin Blake is a scoundrel

Farmlife

Take the positive out of him not telling you. Look at the Samuel Beckett Bridge, nearly everyone with a DSLR has taking a picture of it, so now it’s boring. Imagine how interesting it would be if nobody knew about it and you had the only picture of it.

Now if you put the time into finding the location, and it’s successful you can sleep sound knowing the only other person that knows hasn’t got loose lips.

There’s also a Google map’s link floating about on boards somewhere with great locations

mitosis

Unless you have permission to be there it is trespass.

Jonnykitedude

MZmata wrote: »

I asked everybody that comes up when you Google derelict sites in Ireland.

Did you ask NAMA........cant believe I'm only coming up with that now.