On 7/10/06, Erinn Clark <erinn@debian.org> wrote:Maybe one of them actually doing their jobs? That would at least be relevant. But I guess it wouldn't be "sexy" and thus not sell as much (though I would at least buy a copy of /that/).Yes, that kind of calendar would be good but unfortunately many (if not most) employees would scream at the thought of someonephotographing the screen of their CTO, security expert, software architect,QA expert etc. when the person is going their actual work.
From the photographer's point of view, the typical IT workplace is not an ideal setting for good-looking portraits. You would have to bring a lighting kit or be really creative in the way you use the ambient lighting. And the end result would not look authtentic to a trained eye. Typical authentic look: being lit from below by a laptop screen, or lit from above by slightly green fluorescent lights. Yes, those are stereotypes, too. But they are more authentic than settings with a traditional, more flattering lighting. When the film industry depicts hacking, they usually make most things up, to make it look better or cooler. That makes us cringe, but the broader public perception is not like ours. Hacking is cool. But it is not photogenic. -- Herman Robak