Photographs have the power to objectify and exploit. Do you notice a line, in your own photographing, between objectification of subjects (people, places, things, situations) and exploitation of them? How would you characterize the difference? Do you judge objectification negatively? Exploitation? Luca Remotti observed recently that all photographs probably objectify. In that sense, it does not seem a negative, just a part of photographing. But it's also a matter of degree. When objectification takes place without awareness and in such a way as to degrade or diminish the subject, it can be offensive. I intentionally objectify people sometimes. I try to do it with consciousness and to achieve something human. I "use" people and try to go beyond mere use. I hope I avoid base exploitation when I establish some sort of connection to my subject. (It can be a connection established just in the photograph, not necessarily verbally or directly with the subject). I think homeless people are too often objectified, used for immediate gratification of pathos, yet I've seen many fine photos of homeless people that connect me to them as individuals or that significantly document what is happening on our cities' streets. I think women (and men) are objectified in many nude photographs, yet I've seen fine photos of nude women and men that go beyond such objectification. And it doesn't always have to be by connecting me to the woman or man as a person. Some nude "studies" do it. This probably goes back to what kind of "gesture" the photograph or photographer seems to be making. When I first started photographing, I often hid in shadows snapping pics of people unaware. Aside from it giving me an uneasy feeling after a time, I noticed distance in my photos: not aesthetic distance . . . emotional distance. They felt static, lacking in a kind of kinetic (not necessarily literally moving . . .) energy I now seek.