mulvee Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 ...you may enjoy http://www.walfredo.com/phish_wedding.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gentlemonkey Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 Good pics. Trey looks like he just stepped off the set of L.A. LAW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 I don't know about you guys, but I don't feel right looking into someone's private wedding to catch a glimpse of phish. Someone obviously stole those pics. Pretty sleazy IMO. I've heard the Jason is pretty pissed about all of the whooo-ahhh.Whatever...i'm not a holier than thou guy. I just think it lacks a little bit of integrity (supporting that type of activity I mean). If I had my way, the sanctuary would delete such personal intrusions, and really set itself apart from all the scaggy phish forums out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gentlemonkey Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 You really think so? hmm. i don't know. I don't think it matters. the pictures were obviously taken by somebody in the party. If anyone is practicing sketchy morals, its that person, who made them available to all the phans in cyberspace.. and it's kind of neat to see phish in that small setting. There isn't even anyone but phish in the pics. I mean if there was a drunken bride writhing on the mic stand, that'd be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giggles Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 I'm w/ you hood. If those pic's have been stolen that's super shady. I won't look at the pic's, I'll wait for the real deal when the boys are smilin' at a crowd of thousands..... Giggles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 I don't know Monkey, I think that if I was invited to the wedding, then I should be privy to the action there. We all weren't invited for a reason. I think whoever took the shots and threw them into cyberspace is shady, and a scagg. That's something you just don't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gentlemonkey Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 If there isn't any shots of anything besides the band, i don't see a problem. It looks like a situation where the band could've said no pictures, but they didn't. This guy is taking shots about an inch from their face. They do however say that at their shows, but somehow thats alright? Is it shady to stick a camera in your underpaants to get it into a show and get pics? (stirring the shit a little harder) I think images should be shared- especially when they are directly related to the NAME of this website. I don't feel like I've been to this dude's wedding, but i do feel like I've seen what phish looks like as a wedding band. And it's not like the pictures are hosted/posted here, it's a link. you have the choice not too look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 all i know is that jason was pissed about it, and it was his wedding.-let me revise this: this is what one of jason's close friends told me (that he was upset about it all), however, maybe he's not actually that upset that his wedding is featured on every web site in the world now, but that that's what his wedding is going to be remembered for...the last time phish played, or the time when phish played while on hiatus or it could be the fact that his personal private party is no longer personal and private. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpua Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 Dont mind me, I just like to argue:Well, the pictures have nothing to do with what his wedding will be remembered as, the reports about Phish playing came out a long time ago, also until that happened, not many people outside phish circles even knew who he was. Didn't you yourself in fact think that he was some sort of Phish artist or something.I think he should talk to his "friend" who took the pictures and complain to him. Like the room looks empty so it shouldn't be too hard to figure that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giggles Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 I don't know how these photo's became public. I happen to think (IMO) that the phish wedding reunion was for the bride and groom and the lucky folks who attended. The songs were a request by the bride after all. I can understand your points harpua and monkey, I just think it's an invasion of privacy and if Jason is upset w/ the recent happenings than I totally disagree w/ viewing the pics. But for thoses bringing up the argument of Phish saying "No photo's please" at the wedding..........LET'S GET SERIOUS! Who the fuck goes into rockstar mode and requests "no photos" at a wedding? That request just screams "Look at me, look at me, i'm super dooper". Thats exactly what Phish was/is trying to avoid. They can request it at their show...it's their shows, but the wedding....... Giggles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 thanks for the help giggler...good points. also harpua, don't mind me, as we all know i just like to argue as well for the sake of it. jason was an artist for phish, and is actually the Head of all artists for phish now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giggles Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 Also, Jason is closly involved in the artistic aspect for Phish.....let's not jump on hood for that....I'm surprised the guy can remember his own name half the time....tee hee hee... Giggles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpua Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 Ok guys, but if the bootlegs for those 3 songs every come out, you better cover your ears while everybody else listens to them. Like the damage has been done not looking at the pics makes no difference. Also: remember the Tom & Trey tracks that came out before they released the album, we had that and listened to it like crazy, even though everybody was mad it was stolen from the band. Why is this different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giggles Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 I wouldn't cover my ears because that would be a whole different thing. If taping was allowed, than I think it would be meant to be heard. The Trey and Tom tracks I had no idea were Trey and Tom tracks. I believe we thought they were track from the Bearsville sessions for Ghost and I didn't know they were Taboo untill I asked Fishman about that fucked up "My Situation" song. I also think your grasping at straws comparing a wedding to studio song outtakes......... That's it, y'all can argue all you want. I'm done, you know what I think and that's that. Giggles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 HAHA! I don't regret....my situatiooooon! how killer was that then! we must've listened to it a million times...but if you do recall, when I asked (i think i did, not you giggler) about that song, fish got kinda pissed off, and said someone stole it outta their studio. think how he'd react to this stuff...i mean the band must think we're all idiots busting into stuff they don't want us to...that they want private. they give enough to us, why is it we always try to take more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giggles Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 I was standing right beside you buddy.... Giggles -me or you, I don't really remember to well....he was upset about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted January 16, 2002 Report Share Posted January 16, 2002 ah, everybody chill mon... it's just 3 pictures, they need to chill out, we need to chill out -- it's unfortunately a fact of society that we are totally freaked on celebrity -- but this too will pass - it's pretty low on the scale of invasion - its not like stabbing harrison in the chest ... everybody rise above - if that means forgetting about it, or not looking at it, or realizing that a wedding should never be sullied by what a bunch of 'fans' think but rather what the friends and family attending felt -- he'll realize that as time passes and perspective of the whole wedding thing is gained.... (cuz weddings are too much usually anyway) just do what you can... and let others do what they can...now back to this question of ron wood ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 If you want an example of dispicable theft, read this article...http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicGeorgeHarrison/jan15_harrison-can.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 now there's a real SKAGG. unbelievable. some people's kids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimoe Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 I'd love to hear how Trey sounded playing that Telecaster at the wedding. Loving Cup must have sounded " particularly " Stonesy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 They're just shitty quality pics of 4 guys playing at a wedding. Do a search on weddings...you'll see pics of 'private' weddings everywhere. Sure, they may not be on walfredo.com, but if someone has taken pictures, it's entirely up to them what happens to them. If they aren't supposed to share them, then they shouldn't. If they are available to put up on walfredo.com, then I'm sure it's nothing to really get your panties in a bind. If you don't feel right looking at the following link to someone's wedding, don't click on it. http://home.att.net/~krsears/reception/reception.htmlAlso, there is a band in these wedding photos... Do you think it's ok for them to be displayed on the net cause they weren't in phish?http://www.coppit.org/homepage/photo_album/wedding/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treyter Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 i guess i just try to think from their perspective a bit too much. i mean, they quit to get these goddamn fans off their backs for a while, and do their own thing (that is what fishman says at least), and they can't even go to one of their best friends weddings and do something wonderful and private for him, without having some asshole send it out all over the web. price of fame i guess. doesn't mean that we have to subscribe to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weezy Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 Awesome link - cool pics. I've tried in my mind to make these pics controversial, but I just can't seem to do it... unless........ wait a minute.... is that Peter Criss on drums!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpua Posted January 17, 2002 Report Share Posted January 17, 2002 quote:Originally posted by treyter: , and they can't even go to one of their best friends weddings and do something wonderful and private for him, without having some asshole send it out all over the web.Actually, this "some asshole" probably is one of their best friends who posted it all over the web. I agree with the monky, as long as their aren't the drunken bride in the pictures or people from the wedding etc, I dont think its a big deal. I do know that if they dont want to have their picture taken, they will say so or prevent it. ie. try taking a picture of them backstage or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts