Now what you shot with your personal camera is your business and I think if a individual is going to take some pictures that may be a bit on the risque side that maybe it is time for a digital camera.
But recently my wife shot some film when her and here girlfriends were out on the town with a 35mm camera. But it turns out that Walmart thought the pictures were to risque. Turns out one image showed a little more cleavage than there internal censors
She received a flyer in the pack of pictures mentioning that some of them were deemed inappropriate, and have not been printed. You will still pay the same, but won’t get the pictures they screened.
I think it was funny that they thought some cleavage was inappropriate but showed nothing but skin.
It is a bit weird but I wonder if they left that decision to a 17 yr old kid getting paid minimum wage. Not real sure on the music part though. The pictures apparently had a little to much flesh although a 15yr old teenager may have gave the photo a second look to see if there was anything more to be seen.
From an European point of view, more than just a bit strange. Here, the photos you want them to print are looked at during the print process, and the rest is your business. Exception: If you photographed illegal stuff (very very especially child pornography), they’ll call the police, but it would be strange if they didn’t.
But what about WalMart? I heard they also censor the selection of music CDs they are selling? Looks like there is a list of “inappropiate artists, lycris and songs”, and no matter if this is a Top 40 album or not, you won’t find it there – is that still so?