You spoke about “added contributions” regarding source code, but the same can apply to art. For example, check my tutorials (http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/?s=creativecommons) about video color grading, based on a single frame (I usually use CC-BY pictures for that). If your picture was CC-BY-NC instead of CC-BY-NC-ND I could have used this picture as a TUTORIAL, to TEACH other people about color grading.

So please reconsider at least the ND clause. I understand the need for NC, but the ND, is a bit too restrictive.

I’m using it as my background now and it looks great! ;-)

Thanks!

@Eugenia: Because I do not want commercial work based on my photography without my prior approval. As an artist, I like to have some control over my work.

Note that this is opposite to my view on sharing in software: there I highly prefer f/oss, because I believe that the added contributions of other developers will result in higher quality software.

In photography, this will not be the case, I will not become a better photographer, nor will my photography workflow improve, by giving my work away for free commercial publishing.