Urbex exploring: Chateau D'or castle

Great location!
Nice to read another article by you, it must have been a special discovery.

I’m looking forward to your next article!

If the castle isn't listed, its owner can do whatever they want with it. Not that I agree with it, but that's just how it is. The heirs apparently don't see themselves renovating the castle. That costs an enormous amount of money and apparently there isn't any. A property developer does see an opportunity to acquire it cheaply as a demolition property, build apartments there and then sell them for a fortune. Again, I don't approve of it. What I also don't approve of is entering a property without the owner's permission or knowledge. In my view, entering the building should therefore be considered trespassing. That is punishable by law. If the youth wrecks the place, that doesn't give you the right to enter the building as well and photograph private property there. Apparently, the distinction between what is mine and what is yours no longer applies.
I know it's considered a sport to illegally enter a property or building. I live on an estate with buildings from the first half of the 18th century and from the 19th century. I don't even want to think about hordes of photographers roaming around here all the time, claiming the right to take photos without permission.
I think it would be a disaster if the castle from the article were to be lost.

Donald Willemsen wrote on Monday 5 July 2021 at 00:26  | reply

@ Kim, urbex is a beautiful branch of photography if it is done legally. Moreover, it can also be dangerous due to, for example, a collapse, which could injure someone or even worse. Not all locations are well covered by a mobile network, so it may be that you cannot call for help.
I am sure that urbex photography can also be done legally. However, I get the impression that for many it is not so much about the photography, but about the thrill of the illegality. Of course, I do not want to generalize, but I do hear and read things now and then, and then you do start thinking about it.
I am not even talking about stealing or destroying something. I am merely stating that urbex photography is usually practiced illegally simply and solely because a location is usually visited without the owner's permission. But if you have permission from an owner, the fun is very quickly gone for many, because the tension and the thrill are gone.
If I were to visit an urbex location legally, I would go there to create a photographic story about the decay of a location. To show that it is a shame that a once beautiful location has fallen into disrepair, and also that the decay itself can produce beautiful images. I do not need the thrill of illegality or the thrill of possibly getting caught or the thrill of danger. All I care about is coming home with beautiful photos that can tell a story about that location.
You are not hurting anyone? Do not be so sure about that. An owner can be very angry if they catch you, or if something unexpectedly happened to you because, for example, you fell through a floor, down stairs or something similar and got injured.

Donald Willemsen wrote on Monday 5 July 2021 at 13:51  | reply

@Kim, of course I respect you and your opinion too. But critical opinions are of course allowed as well. Thinking about what you are doing can never hurt. Ultimately, everyone decides for themselves and bears the responsibility themselves.
Kim, we are and will remain equally good photo friends with respect for each other. The fact that I pay attention to your story proves that I like reading your contributions