Open Exposure

Lane Hartwell has turned a great exposure possibility into a "I won't give your work another look" instance.

Let us get a grip on this situation. If...IF... a Hartwell image was being used to create an income stream for a separate party then I can understand Lane's objections. In the instance of the Bubble video there was no attempt to capitalize on the work of any given individual.

I see this as a litigious moment. "I can raise a stink because the letter of the law supports my sanctimonious position." Let common sense take a back seat to my egotistical "concerns".

So here is the laughable part of this whole thing.... if... IF Lane Hartwell had acknowledged the use of her photograph and... AND... didn't make a whiny mess... people would have surfed to her site in droves. Perhaps evens spending a few dollars on her photography.

As it stands now... "I won't give your work another look" regardless of the quality - you see, I can stand on the pinnacle of principle too. (But I won't lose any money on the deal. So sorry.)