rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

First off, Cany, the photos are very well done. As for documentation, photo documentation is much more efficient and less tedious than simply notes translated to a meaningful document.
--Bob

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

Umm.... gonna have to disagree to some extent, Bob. Photo documentation helps provide a visual overview of site context, and will, once I get done with it, provide details of the rock art that the human eye literally cannot not see, but full, proper, and correct site documentation requires a complete listing of everything --from geomorphic stuff (natural land routes, access to water, tool stone, etc.) to particular rock/soil layer assessment; to an itemization of every potential food, medicinal, or utilitarian resource, both plant and animal; to climate norms and extremes, to.... In effect, a complete listing of each and every resource that would or could have been required/desired by people of the time. And these are then placed within a regional/temporal context, as well as those can be known. The devil's in the details, and when details don't get included --as used to be the case--, you (or we, in this case we) used to end up with 'documentation' that consisted of an often misplaced dot on a map and either a bad polaroid or a Xerox of a bad polaroid. And nobody learned anything. Luckily, this is a very minor site, so there'll be no physical archaeology necessary (i.e., no stratigraphic digging, no charcoal samples to send off for C14 dating, etc.) so the paperwork probably won't go beyond 50 pages or so. The writing is for science, not for tourists or casual use; do it enough and whatever tediousness there is takes no time at all, and can even be written in factual but fun and evocative language.

But there's no reason not to have highlights and shadow areas under control, and not to include photos that inform in a 'technically pleasing' manner.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Weird trivia, I did teach history after all. In the days of the early New England colonies lobsters were so plentiful, easy to catch and big that they were looked down on as "Poor people's food."

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Yep. I don't remember the details but something about a law that limited the number of days per week that a slave owner could feed lobster to his/her slaves.

fbeaston Loc: Vermont

You crack me up ... & the lobstah & buttah ... are waiting ... however you still have to pull yourself out of Oootah. ;)

fbeaston Loc: Vermont

Damn, this party is getting rough!!!! Think I'm going to go hide under my desk. ;)

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Here, take this grenade with you for protection, I'll keep the pin so it doesn't weigh so much or catch on your clothing.

fbeaston Loc: Vermont

That was funny ... been there ... done that ... will let you keep that!!!! Thanks for the chuckle.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

You are welcome.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Cany, although it wasn't expressed, as for most of what you wrote I wholeheartedly agree. My initial reply was written during a short break at work and didn't include a lot of the similar thoughts you expressed. My main point was that the documentation along with well-done photos creates an invaluable report, article, or paper depending on the final form. So, we're pretty much in agreement.
--Bob

Bill_de Loc: US

What ever the reason for taking the pictures the came out beautifully.

---

UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT

More of your good work with rock art, Jim!

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

Thanks, Mike. But on other topics..... loose in the Paloose, are you, eh? Looking forward to see what moose or goose or juice you might've noosed out there.