doug_broussard

"With regard to material you include in a public album, you grant a non-exclusive, world-wide, royalty free license to modify, publish and reproduce said material solely for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting photo.net."

I am not a lawyer, but my layman's interpretation is:

photo.net is granted permission to modify, reproduce or display the photo for promotional purposes.

I'm not sure if that extends to individual users of photo.net, but as members of a community, it's comforting to know that some members will be polite and offer to honor the photographer's wishes.

Jeff was very gracious and more than accomodating when I asked him not to modify my work; I reviewed p.net's agreement, and as I interpret it, it's agreeable.

Many folks don't mind creative suggestions expressed in modification of their work, but since I have registered my work, I also need to act to protect it when it is compromised; otherwise I could set a dangerous precedent of not defending my own copyright. It's the holder's responsibility to defend the copyright, or it may be considered relinquished.

No, not the stuff you make pie crusts out of.

Shortening the tonal scale of this photograph like Jeff suggests is a very valid idea. However...let me explain why I chose the exposure and development I used for this photograph.

Compositional elements aside, the scene was very 'hot' that day. I was in the high desert with harsh light shining into the elevator clutch housing.

Because I knew I'd likely print this negative both in the darkroom (I use a fixed-contrast cold light head) and digitally, I chose to expose normally and to indicate development that would produce a long tonal scale. Adherents of the Zone system may be familiar with this methodology.

I think that Jeff's suggestion has merit. It's a good way to present the subject as a more "gritty" piece. However, a suggestion like Jeff's would not have been possible witout a long-scale negative to begin with.

So, I guess the lesson here is that shortening the tonal scale is easy once the negative has been scanned - but I rather like the more quiet and contemplative look of the longer scale print - which is why I posted the .jpg as it appears above!

While I appreciate the comments and constructive criticism, I'd appreciate it if folks don't reproduce or alter my images. I'm quite knowledgeable about digital printing using Photoshop and color management. I output to, devices like the Lightjet 5000 and Piezography, and I've spent many hours in darkrooms as well! Thanks for the suggestions.

These photographs have been registered with the U.S. copyright office because of problems I had a few months ago with people copying my images and altering them without my permission. Forgive me if I seem touchy about it - it's nothing personal, but I have to cover my bases, and protecting my copyright is one aspect of that!

Thanks for all the compliments and constructive criticism. I'll try to answer some questions that have been posed here.

1. I don't know how the elves came up with this. Really. I think the elves may have had a bit of Scotch whiskey. I checked my e-mail with my Ricochet modem and was happy to find I'd been picked. I guess I struck someone's chord!
2. Yes, I've tried Tri-X. No, I haven't tried XP-5. I've spent four years dialing in T-Max 100, and while I won't discount films, my learning curve has been very smooth and progressive with Kodak's slower T-grain film. I find that T-Max 100 and T-Max RS developer reward the patient photographer who takes suggestions for what they are - not gospel, but suggestions. Controlled and noted experimentation pays off.
3. Why did I choose this subject? Why didn't I choose any of the others?

   It's my vision. I won't apologize for the composition, and frankly, I discount all rules of composition. While I wouldn't dare compare myself to any of them, most great artists of the past 500 years broke rules too.

   I encourage all photographers to ignore the "rule of thirds", the pressure of peers, and anything that gets in the way of expressing their personal vision.

4. This photograph was made in a high desert area, just past midday, on a subject that was exposed to open daylight. No filters were used.
5. Many posts seem to be ponder the focal point or subject of the photograph. The focal point is the photograph.
6. No cropping. While I'm not a member of "croppers anonymous", the first photographic enlargements I ever made as a kid were on a VGC 3600 (?)copy enlarger - a copy stand, enlarger, and photo lab in one big ol' box. The VGC was expensive to run, so making sure that the enlargement or copy was correct the first time was important. For that reason, I think I tend to be resistant to cropping - sometimes to a fault.
7. While I do my best ot expose and develop properly, adhering to my own experience and the Zone system, the photograph you see here and the others in my folder are translated to bits with skill by West Coast Imaging. I've known the photographers who make up their staff for a few years, and the scans I get from them help me articulate my vision in alternative processes without the hassle of renting or finding a wet darkroom.
8. This photograph is about a machine that has endured as forged art. The machine started out as a tool to enable extraction. It now stands as a testament to the endurance of man as an aspect of nature. Don't mistake the photograph as this statement; I was merely motivated to photograph the elevator clutch because it is a statement.

   Anything that any photograph, including this one "speaks" to you is spoken in an unfamiliar language by another photographer.

   That language is translated by your own experience.

Thanks for the compliments and constructive criticism, everyone. I'm flattered by the comments, and energized by the criticism.

It's easier to see in the 24X36.