Join for FREE | Take the Tour Lost Password?
[x]

deviantART

 

Plateau Point, Grand Canyon by ~StarTyger:iconStarTyger:

Categories Photography > Animals, Plants & Nature > Landscapes

©2008-2010 ~StarTyger
:iconstartyger:

Artist's Comments

A few words about this image after this question:
for publication purposes, who in this image would need to sign a release?
I'll mention this again at the end.

The hike to Plateau Point is Grand Canyon's ultimate day hike: 6 mi / 9.6 km each way with an elevation change of around 3400 ft / 1000+ m. There is water along the Bright Angel Trail (Apr-Nov) and a wonderful permanent oasis at Indian Garden.

The view, however, is at Plateau Point, a relatively flat 1.5 mi / 2 km from IG. This image is just one of the many stellar views from the point (river included). Here you see three great Grand Canyon temples: (r to l) Zoroaster, Brahma, Deva. How different will be the perspective the next time one views these huge rock monuments from up top!

Please read my journal on Grand Canyon hiking. This photo is referenced in Section 9.


About the photo releases...
Even though this image has been published (twice),
no releases were required.
First of all, it was used in Arizona Highways publications. Since the magazine and its related products are operated by the Arizona Department of Transportation, it considers itself 'editorial'. Thus it becomes much like a newspaper.

However, suppose I wished to sell it to a company who wants to put it up on a billboard advertising beer along the freeway. This may well change matters regarding the release requirements.
Unfortunately, this to some extent is a gray area. The course I took on stock photography used the criteria of "recogniseable face". Thus, the two people sitting in the foreground do not need to be released, but the people standing around the fence probably should. However, this where divergence of opinion sets in. Since this is a public viewpoint, some say, then there is no expectation of privacy. Consequently, no release needed. And, indeed, there is something to this. A Popular Photography editor used a picture he had taken of several hundred people at a tennis match (with their heads all in one direction) as a point of discussion on releases. He said that one of his agencies asked him he had obtained the release of all in the picture. He thought this absurd and wrote a whole column about it.

The point is, if you have an image with someone in it, you really need to think about getting a release. Otherwise, your efforts to use the image could be stymied. Still, better to be stymied than to face a lawsuit

Comments


love 0 0 joy 0 0 wow 0 0 mad 0 0 sad 0 0 fear 0 0 neutral 0 0
:iconkkart:
^kkart Jan 26, 2009, 2:47:38 AM
Love your description, have been thinking about actually submitting some work to them for awhile myself now. Really an outstanding shot, what is your gear set up? I know only recently AH started accepting digital files, I am guessing this one isn't film, though I may be wrong

--
John, your deviantART Gallery Moderator of Photography>Animals, Plants & Nature
jdebordphoto.com my website
:iconstartyger:
~StarTyger Jan 26, 2009, 9:00:38 AM
Thanks very much for your comment
and the :+fav:

This is film - Fuji Velvia 50 -
taken on a 4x5 Linhof Technika 3 view camera.
I'm pretty sure I used the 150mm Schneider lens
(the 'normal' lens for 4x5) -
the lens that actually came with the camera.
The image, itself, dates from around 1996-98.

I'm flattered that you thought this might be digital
because I scan images myself,
sometimes only with mixed success.

I think HiWays might have been slower to publicly embrace digital,
since I imagine there was a real fear on the part of the photo editor
that his mailbox would become flooded with all the images
people had ever taken of Grand Canyon, Sedona, the Navaho Rez. et al. Before the digital age,
people had to go to the trouble
of packaging their work
and shipping it via UPS or FedEx
which kept things manageable.

At the time I took this,
a photographer looking for publication in HiWays
would be competing with the likes of
Jack Dykinga, David Muench, and Larry Ulrich for space,
who all shot in large format.
These photographers and some others are still submitting
(I heard that Jack Dykinga stocked up
with as much Velvia 50 as he could obtain before discontinuance).

While digital is undoubtedly gaining at the magazine,
there remains a competitive problem:
looking at a large format transparency (4x5, 5x7, 8x10)
on a light table blows everything else away.

Finally, your comment about my description deserves mention.
HiWays claims to have rejected images
that would otherwise have been used
because the photographer failed to provide
an adequate description.
Thus with this image, for example,
simply calling it "Grand Canyon" is insufficient.
"Grand Canyon, South Rim" only marginally improves things.
"Grand Canyon, South Rim, Plateau Point" is starting to work.
"Grand Canyon, 1000m below the South Rim at Plateau Point"
gets more to the crux of the matter.
I mention this as I see many images submitted to dART
with only a "..." in the description.
It's better to be too wordy
(as I am being here) :)

Thanks again :nod:
:iconsupaiman:
~Supaiman Apr 14, 2009, 7:03:14 AM
Before I learned how you were I was already impressed that you identified your photos with the right place names, although too bad "Molly's Nipple" has been renamed by the Park Service to appease the prudish.
:iconsupaiman:
~Supaiman Apr 14, 2009, 7:04:51 AM
Wish there was a redo button because I meant:

Before I learned WHO you were I was already impressed that you identified your photos with the right place names, although too bad "Molly's Nipple" has been renamed by the Park Service to appease the prudish.
:iconstartyger:
~StarTyger Apr 16, 2009, 7:28:45 AM
Yes....
It is good you know who I am...
because now, your enemies will become my enemies
and people will fear you
(a tip-of-the-hat there to Don Corleone :) )

Accurate AND adequate captioning are often missing on dART submissions.
An advantage to large format photography is that
the is plenty of room to provide detailed captioning with your image.
Indeed, Arizona Highways claims to have rejected
otherwise publishable images because of captioning deficiencies.

Additionally, I always found it beneficial to know what I was shooting.
It is one thing to photograph THE Grand Canyon,
but much better to photograph Vishnu Temple or the Tower Of Ra.
:iconsupaiman:
~Supaiman Apr 16, 2009, 9:30:45 AM
You wrote: "Accurate AND adequate captioning are often missing on dART submissions."

Perhaps you're the right candidate to take on the (probably) thankless task of addressing this topic. I'd like to see an article in DA about it. I offer my assistance in finding DA examples if you're interested in this either now or later.
:iconstartyger:
~StarTyger Apr 20, 2009, 8:57:26 AM
Well, I don't think I am the right candidate,
however, I passed your suggestion along to kkart
who has a much wider viewing audience than I do.
:iconstartyger:
~StarTyger Apr 20, 2009, 2:59:13 PM
Here is a link to kkart's journal on the subject: [link]
Previous Page12Next Page

Details

November 20, 2008
13.2 MB
129 KB
600×508

Statistics

16
20 [who?]
451 (0 today)
0 (0 today)

Share

Link
Embed
Thumb

Site Map

©2010 deviantART. All rights reserved
About Us | Contact Us | Site Tour | Help & FAQ Advertise | Services Etiquette | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Copyright Policy