Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: Dale Villeponteaux on January 11, 2017, 09:35:32 am
-
I regret that Andrew Rodney appears to be no longer participating in this forum.
Regards,
Dale V.
-
Maybe but this place is one of the few 'sane' and semi-professional places for this type of discussion (vs. the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview).
-
Maybe but this place is one of the few 'sane' and semi-professional places for this type of discussion (vs. the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview).
Most of his posts on dpreview that I've run across are trying to clarify what is required to print and soft proof well. To be fair to the variety of skills (or lack thereof) at dpreview, it's not an easy process but his website videos, which are free, are quite good. I've had good discourse here with Andrew once he becomes aware you aren't completely ignorant of the issues surrounding the complexities of color management.
It must be a bit frustrating to him over on dpreview with so much misinformation bandied about but they would be well advised to watch his videos and, perhaps review much of the work available at color.org. I don't see him posting as much there recently ether. Perhaps he is busy, or just tired of it.
-
If you go to his profile in the members section of the Forum, it says:
Signature:
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
I'm out of here.
I don't know what the "I'm out of here" is all about, but I would hope it's not permanent. Andrew does this once he's had enough of a particular discussion, but it has never been intended as a permanent exit from the site.
-
Nothing wrong w/ stepping away from all this for a while and
Shoot! Calibrate! Print! ;)
and enjoy vs arguing w/ some wanna-be expert
-
I regret that Andrew Rodney appears to be no longer participating in this forum.
Regards,
Dale V.
Well, you've got all those searches to conduct to read pretty much what Andrew keeps talking about over and over. What new information do you expect to get from him that he hasn't already posted on.
Or do you like the way he argues with people who offer information based on real world experience (see something, say something) rather than just rely on theory.
Maybe he's just tired of beating a dead horse for over ten years.
I know of other LuLa contributors who work just as hard barely get a mention or thanks for their efforts.
-
Maybe but this place is one of the few 'sane' and semi-professional places for this type of discussion (vs. the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview).
I think the alligators of that swamp, are the people who run it. Too bad so many people have been sucked in.
-
Well, you've got all those searches to conduct to read pretty much what Andrew keeps talking about over and over. What new information do you expect to get from him that he hasn't already posted on.
Or do you like the way he argues with people who offer information based on real world experience (see something, say something) rather than just rely on theory.
Maybe he's just tired of beating a dead horse for over ten years.
I know of other LuLa contributors who work just as hard barely get a mention or thanks for their efforts.
Tim, sorry, but Andrew has made a large number of very useful, substantive contributions to this website and Forum over the years, and if he has really decided to withdraw, I look upon it as a truly unfortunate loss. Furthermore, I don't think that diminishing the value of what he has contributed will do much to encourage his return, and I suspect that many more members of this Forum would prefer to see him here than not here.
-
I think the alligators of that swamp, are the people who run it. Too bad so many people have been sucked in.
while it is true that dpreview forums have poor S/N, you just need to read topics where selected posters are participating (so I just check new posting from those people using saved urls that go directly to their stats instead of visiting forums in a normal manner) and then for certain set of subjects it is way better than anything here... Eric Fossum for example.
-
I think the alligators of that swamp, are the people who run it. Too bad so many people have been sucked in.
People don't get sucked in, they suck themselves in. Everyone has a free choice to enter that website or not as they see fit, and to evaluate what they choose to read. Regardless of who runs it, it's an open forum and the quality of what gets posted there ranges from useless to insightful. It's a totally different construct from LuLa - I wouldn't even begin to compare them, nor am I prepared to write them off because I have found useful stuff there.
-
Tim, sorry, but Andrew has made a large number of very useful, substantive contributions to this website and Forum over the years, and if he has really decided to withdraw, I look upon it as a truly unfortunate loss. Furthermore, I don't think that diminishing the value of what he has contributed will do much to encourage his return, and I suspect that many more members of this Forum would prefer to see him here than not here.
I didn't say Andrew didn't offer substantive contributions, Mark. Where did you read in my response where I said otherwise? Or did you read into what I didn't say? We don't need anymore misinformation and misinterpreting as it is.
I'm just saying WE ARE A COMMUNITY which means not to be only considerate for ONE PERSON.
-
If anyone's interested Andrew's been doing the pop-in over at Photo.net whenever there's a discussion on what's the best display under XXX amount of dollars and other subjects related to camera profiles and Adobe software. That was at least in the past several weeks or so. I don't know where he's at now since I don't follow Andrew online, but then I don't follow anyone. I'm more of an equal opportunity lurker.
I actually spend more time doing experimental/exploratory photography and digital audio manipulation for fun. But I mean REALLY.. who cares what I do? No one seems interested anyway. Everyone's a channel surfer online interested only on what's coming up on the next click.
-
I didn't say Andrew didn't offer substantive contributions, Mark. Where did you read in my response where I said otherwise? Or did you read into what I didn't say? We don't need anymore misinformation and misinterpreting as it is.
I'm just saying WE ARE A COMMUNITY which means not to be only considerate for ONE PERSON.
I agree we don't need misinformation and misinterpretation, so for the record I was not reinterpreting what you said. I was stating my opinion about the value of Andrew's contributions to the LuLa community over the years.
-
I didn't say Andrew didn't offer substantive contributions, Mark. Where did you read in my response where I said otherwise? Or did you read into what I didn't say? We don't need anymore misinformation and misinterpreting as it is.
I'm just saying WE ARE A COMMUNITY which means not to be only considerate for ONE PERSON.
I agree we don't need misinformation and misinterpretation, so for the record I was not reinterpreting what you said. I was stating my opinion about the value of Andrew's contributions to the LuLa community over the years.
-
For whatever reason, I think people have gotten more snarky over the past few months. This is best exemplified by looking as the Hasselblad thread that was in response to a post that Kevin did about two weeks ago (as a result of that one, a couple of valued contributors indicated they would be leaving or reducing their presence). I didn't know that Andrew wasn't posting as I mainly look at the printer & paper thread and the articles on the Home Page. I'm disappointed that the collaborative nature of this website has diminished, maybe it was the introduction of the membership fee or Michael's passing. I'm not sure but there sure is something different these days and it's not good.
-
For whatever reason, I think people have gotten more snarky over the past few months. This is best exemplified by looking as the Hasselblad thread that was in response to a post that Kevin did about two weeks ago (as a result of that one, a couple of valued contributors indicated they would be leaving or reducing their presence). I didn't know that Andrew wasn't posting as I mainly look at the printer & paper thread and the articles on the Home Page. I'm disappointed that the collaborative nature of this website has diminished, maybe it was the introduction of the membership fee or Michael's passing. I'm not sure but there sure is something different these days and it's not good.
Can you link the specific thread you mention?
-
For whatever reason, I think people have gotten more snarky over the past few months. This is best exemplified by looking as the Hasselblad thread that was in response to a post that Kevin did about two weeks ago (as a result of that one, a couple of valued contributors indicated they would be leaving or reducing their presence). I didn't know that Andrew wasn't posting as I mainly look at the printer & paper thread and the articles on the Home Page. I'm disappointed that the collaborative nature of this website has diminished, maybe it was the introduction of the membership fee or Michael's passing. I'm not sure but there sure is something different these days and it's not good.
+1 I've noticed it too.
I think it's the "Trump effect". It seems, with some people at least, it is now more acceptable to be quick with abrupt, poorly thought-out "shots from the lip". Sad really. I see it on media sites, FB and, sadly, here. Hopefully, they are just a vocal minority.
[ed]
Mark - I know you're looking for an exact example to support Alan's claim and, if I felt like spending the time, I could put my finger on a few threads, but really, it's a change in tone that, obviously, I, too, have picked up on. And, as I said, it's not just here, but elsewhere as well.
-
I think it's the "Trump effect". It seems, with some people at least, it is now more acceptable to be quick with abrupt, poorly thought-out "shots from the lip". Sad really. I see it on media sites, FB and, sadly, here. Hopefully, they are just a vocal minority.
Perhaps you should look in the mirror on this if you want to talk about abrupt, poorly thought-out mouth sounds.
It's gonna be a loooong 4 years for the left at this rate. Gonna need a lot of Formula 409 to clean up all the brains that have/will explode.
-
Can you link the specific thread you mention?
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=115479.0 though there are a couple of others on the same forum that address the issue as well.
-
What I have seen on this forum and others is quite disappointing sometimes. I have grown thick skin and continue to push on because this is my passion. If you agree fine if you don't fine. What disappoints me and Chris is that contributors to the forum have made personal attacks to those posting. We monitor this and if we get notifications to the moderator we deal with it. Chris and I did a major clean up of offenders a few months ago. A number of people were banned after being warned repeated times. LuLa is a resource for photographers and a community for photographers that have a passion for the craft. The only way this gets stronger is to have people participate. If someone does a personal attack on another then it should be reported and the moderator will intervene. Sometimes there will be heated arguments on a topic and that is fine but a personal attack or name calling is not right.
I know more of the other content providers for photography and we meet at times at press events and such. We share beers and talk about photography and what we are seeing. Many of these sites allow comments after an article. They tell me that they are editing heavily and deciding what makes it to the comments. So, much of the time you don't even see the negative and just downright offensive comments. Some of the people I know have even been threatened.
What we see here is not because we went to a membership fee for the site. That was a separate decision. It just seems people like to hide behind their keyboards and be rude.
Join with me to fix this and participate in a positive way. Ignore the negatives and don't respond to them and fan the flame. Also, report to moderator if you feel it is out of hand.
I love this site and what we are doing and how the community shares. Let's try to set an example and all of us try harder. Feel free to PM me if you'd like to comment personally.
-
@Kevin - very good post. I think what is happening is general to many other blog sites. I know of a number that either switched to full moderation or just ended the comments section completely. I only visit LuLa for photography as I have found it to cover all the things I'm interested in and don't want to spend all day going back and forth between various photography sites. Keep doing the good work!
-
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=115479.0 though there are a couple of others on the same forum that address the issue as well.
Alan,
Thanks very much for the link - that was very helpful; I wanted to read it and the parent article to get a first-hand feel for the evidence of what some members are observing. As you know, this Forum is "moderation light", or "moderate as necessary", which is how it always has been, is the most practical approach for its size and diversity, and assures its openness to a full range of views on any given topic as well as to the posting of new topics themselves. It's a really useful "let the flowers bloom" approach. But clearly, not everything that gets posted is "flowers". The Forum does have a set of guidelines which make sense and, yes, there some folks who need to be reminded of them before they post. Of course, the freedom to post within the guidelines is also accompanied by the freedom not to read. So I find it regrettable that several valued members have chosen to withdraw, rather than simply skipping over what they don't like. It deprives them of useful content (and there is still lots) and it deprives other members of their valued insights, so I think it's a net lose-lose. I'm more in favour of win-win. To those who don't respect the letter and intent of the Forum guidelines, I would encourage them to keep those in mind as they write, and to those who get frustrated with content they find unappealing, I would encourage them to "chill out" and move on to the next topic, or as Kevin says above, report egregious behaviour. It is in the interest of all the members that we keep this Forum civil and informative, which in large measure I believe most of us are doing.
-
I think it's the "Trump effect". It seems, with some people at least, it is now more acceptable to be quick with abrupt, poorly thought-out "shots from the lip". Sad really. I see it on media sites, FB and, sadly, here. Hopefully, they are just a vocal minority.
Perhaps you should look in the mirror on this if you want to talk about abrupt, poorly thought-out mouth sounds.
It's gonna be a loooong 4 years for the left at this rate. Gonna need a lot of Formula 409 to clean up all the brains that have/will explode.
You've definitely got the wrong person here Howard and it has nothing to do with left or right. It has everything to do with common decency, respect and thoughtful dialogue.
-
I'll give you that.
-
Maybe but this place is one of the few 'sane' and semi-professional places for this type of discussion (vs. the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview).
Speaking as one who "hangs out" on DPreview I find your comment insulting at the very least.
Not that we would expect you to retract your provocation of course (trolls never do).
-
Speaking as one who "hangs out" on DPreview I find your comment insulting at the very least.
Not that we would expect you to retract your provocation of course (trolls never do).
There is a rule on this Forum not to engage in personal insults, so I strongly recommend that all such conversation cease immediately. Note I am not a moderator - just another member reminding that we can all be moderated and there can be consequences for breaking the rules.
-
What membership fee? What does it get you?
-
a year or so ago, they instituted a $12/y fee. It includes access to all videos and other materials. The forums are/have been zero cost.
-
What membership fee? What does it get you?
Not sure how the issue of membership fee is relevant to this thread, but anyhow - for your information: it costs a lot of money and consumes ALL of several peoples' time to keep this website in operation. The fee income is a necessary source of income to pay the bills, without which Luminous-Landscape would cease to exist; so if you like being able to benefit from all the information and knowledge made available here, that's the entry price - a few coffees a year.
-
Maybe but this place is one of the few 'sane' and semi-professional places for this type of discussion (vs. the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview).
Unfortunately, he appears to have moved to that very same fever swamp, now posting as "digidog" and is currently snapping at people's heels there in his usual manner. ;)
Pops up occasionally on CiC too, to keep them folks straight when needed . .
-
I don't know or care what your issue is but I'm not Andrew.
-
I don't know or care what your issue is . . .
Sorry to hear that.
. . . but I'm not Andrew.
Obviously.
I should have made it clearer that I was referring to the subject of this thread, namely Andrew aka "DigiDog".
-
There is a rule on this Forum not to engage in personal insults, so I strongly recommend that all such conversation cease immediately. Note I am not a moderator - just another member reminding that we can all be moderated and there can be consequences for breaking the rules.
I withdraw my own comment re: provocation and trolls and thank you for your vigilance.
Meanwhile, the dear departed Dog is wreaking havoc among the "swamp-dwelling trolls" at DPR.
For example: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59101514
Hopefully that is not regarded here as a "personal insult" . . . ;)
-
I withdraw my own comment re: provocation and trolls and thank you for your vigilance.
Meanwhile, the dear departed Dog is wreaking havoc among the "swamp-dwelling trolls" at DPR.
For example: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59101514
Hopefully that is not regarded here as a "personal insult" . . . ;)
You don't think the many thousands of people who go to DPReview wouldn't be insulted by you labeling them as "swamp-dwelling trolls"?
-
Sorry to hear that.
Meh. I see you as some nasty old man w/ an axe to grind, along w/ most of the other know-nothings.
If I want to experience that, I can just chat w/ my dad.
So yea, I don't really care :)
And on that, I'm outta this thread.
Have a nice day!
-
You don't think the many thousands of people who go to DPReview wouldn't be insulted by you labeling them as "swamp-dwelling trolls"?
I was quoting @howardm who said it in the first place, voila "Maybe but this place is one of the few 'sane' and semi-professional places for this type of discussion (vs. the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview)."
Perhaps you have already forgotten your post #25 where you took me to task for commenting on that little jewel.
Like the perpetrator of the phrase mentioned above, I am also "out of here".
So, please try to read and remember stuff and kindly get off of my case.
-
In post 25 I referred to "all such conversation" - that means whoever it comes from, whoever started it - doesn't matter, it doesn't need to be resurrected and prolonged. That's my "case", and glad you have both decided to drop it.
-
In post 25 I referred to "all such conversation" - that means whoever it comes from, whoever started it - doesn't matter, it doesn't need to be resurrected and prolonged. That's my "case", and glad you have both decided to drop it.
I asked you to get off my case, both both and not Howard's.
I would like you to retract your statement made earlier which implies that I was the originator of the "the fever swamp of trolls that hang out on dpreview" phrase.
You said "You don't think the many thousands of people who go to DPReview wouldn't be insulted by you labeling them as 'swamp-dwelling trolls'?"
I did not label them thus, someone else did. Please acknowledge that, for the record. For me, it does matter who said what because your statement clearly makes me the bad guy.
-
For avoidance of doubt, Howard issued this unfortunate expression in Reply #1, and you reiterated it in Reply #32, which triggered my response in Replies 25 and 33. I now consider this matter closed and shall not be responding it henceforth - life is too short for this. I think my point about maintaining civility on the Forum is understood and that is all I wanted to achieve.
-
For avoidance of doubt, Howard issued this unfortunate expression in Reply #1, and you reiterated it in Reply #32, which triggered my response in Replies 25 and 33. I now consider this matter closed and shall not be responding it henceforth - life is too short for this. I think my point about maintaining civility on the Forum is understood and that is all I wanted to achieve.
For further avoidance of any lingering doubt here, using quotes is not "re-iterating".
I now consider this matter closed too.
-
I am distressed by the possible loss of Andrew from our community, and heartened by the response of Kevin. This forum has been an unmatched resource, without peer anywhere online. The unique features include the caliber and expertise of the participants, and the absence of trolls. I credit Kevin for the latter, and support his continuing efforts to maintain this site as a resource for serious photographers, and an opportunity to share their expertise with the larger community.
-
I regret that Andrew Rodney appears to be no longer participating in this forum.
Regards,
Dale V.
Sorry for your loss.