Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: michael on January 29, 2010, 06:48:35 pm
-
Mr. Warren Mars has been banned from this site.
Earlier today he posted an insulting message, targeting me and other members of this forum, because a topic which he had started had been closed. His obnoxious post has been deleted.
There's no room on forum site for rudeness.
Michael
-
Thank you. I enjoy this forum a lot, even if I can't contribute with much worthwhile information. Banning obnoxious users keep things pleasant.
{}
Roger
-
Whew!! For a minute there, I thought they voted to ban the planet Mars
.
I mean, there it was last night all up in the moons face so I naturally thought there had been a fight.
That was Mars next to the full moon, wasn't it??
-
That was Mars next to the full moon, wasn't it??
It was indeed. You can clearly see the red tint that identifies it as Mars.
The Moonrise last night was stunning. Last night's full Moon was the biggest (+14%) and brightest (+30%) full Moon of 2010
I didn't shoot it since my longest lens is a 200, but the view through my binoculars was incredible.
I use www.spaceweather.com to check up on what's up, up there. : )
-
Yeah, that moon was amazing last night even tho it was only about 5 degrees out. At least the winds had died down by then and it was the typical crisp, clean cold night with a full moon to light up the landscape. Gotta love it!!
-
Mr. Warren Mars has been banned from this site.
Earlier today he posted an insulting message, targeting me and other members of this forum, because a topic which he had started had been closed. His obnoxious post has been deleted.
There's no room on forum site for rudeness.
Michael
Ad hominem attacks are certainly inappropriate on the forum and are used by those who can not put forth a logical argument. Unfortunately, Mr. Mars is not the only one on these forums resorting to such methods.
Bill
-
Ad hominem attacks are certainly inappropriate on the forum and are used by those who can not put forth a logical argument. Unfortunately, Mr. Mars is not the only one on these forums resorting to such methods.
Bill
Did you see Mr. Mars' last post? (And, yeah, you're right.)
-
In all fairness, Venus should also be banned (Oops! There's no member named Venus.)
-
In all fairness, Venus should also be banned (Oops! There's no member named Venus.)
And just like that I have a Bananarama song going through my head. Thanks.
-
There's no member named Venus.
The potential for double entendres is almost infinite!
Jeremy
-
The potential for double entendres is almost infinite!
Jeremy
There you go, undermining your own argument by slipping in a conditional; courage of conviction!
I wonder if tennis players read this site? Oh, of course not, they have been flung asunder...
Awake! for morning in the Bowl of Night
Has flung the Stone that puts the Stars to Flight:
And Lo! the Hunter of the East has caught
The Sultan's Turret in a Noose of Light.
Omar Khayyám
Ain't a heap that's new...
Rob C
-
I think we all owe Mr. Mars (and Ms. Venus? and Mr. Khayyám?) a vote of thanks for the intemperate remarks that made possible this rather silly but somewhat amusing thread.
Eric
-
For those that might not be aware, He original posted a link to KR's website with the text "Ken Rockwell is Right". This helps KR in the search engines and since Google reads the text and associates it with the link, Google might actually start thinking that he IS right!
So in this situation, please don't quote the original post since this adds yet another link for Google to crawl with the offending text.
-
Remember – a clock is right twice a day.
Michael
-
a "stopped" clock
-
I hadn't had my second coffee yet. Indeed – a stopped clock.
Michael
-
Michael... thanks for not banning me for frankenthreading your post. I just couldn't help myself!!
-
There you go, undermining your own argument by slipping in a conditional; courage of conviction!
I'm simply too busy to verify that there is an infinite number of double entendres.
Jeremy
-
I'm simply too busy to verify that there is an infinite number of double entendres.
Jeremy
Damn, Jeremy; now, on top of everything else, I feel envious!
Rob C
-
I will step in here and point out this is a pathetic response from "michael".
Don't caste me aside as a non-poster immediately, I may not write often but I have been reading daily for years, and over that time have bought several DVD's as well as downloads. Let's keep things objective therefore.
This site has changed, period. Anyone arguing otherwise is blind.
MR's photography has always been rather average but the travel stories and various reviews have been interesting enough that I've spent my money on the various products offered (a few at least). Let's be honest, in the past year or so the quality and quantity of updates have been disappointing.
Quality? MR forgets what he's already written. Eg arca cube. Or plain memory loss. MR promises many articles "will be here online next week" or "soon" and nothing eventuates. I cannot be the only one to notice?
Let's call it how it is. Since the opening of the economic money-pit (oops I mean the LL gallery) the entire site has changed. As MR admitted in the gallery/economics/finance article (video?) there is no way for that to pay, short of 'other usage' and that means shooting space for training videos, or space for workshop-type events. Hence the recent push towards constant training dvd's and the recent trip to shoot even more. Where are the travel workshops? The trips? All gone, thanks, and now a much MUCH more boring site.
And let's not talk about the response to MR workshops. Days/weeks of reminders about how there's still space available, whereas those run by other noteworthy types (workshops being promoted/sold through LL) are sold out quickly. Geeze man,. take a hint. Ahem!
I really think the whole gallery thing is a major strategic blunder as you took your most unique selling proposition, that put you in the place where people like me were forking out $$ for your dvd's (or downloads) and you replaced this with 'training dvd' offers for software. Hmm real unique and original. You may have replaced us LL Journal devotees with training dvd downloaders but in the long term we would have kept buying each and every new edition whereas you will soon run dry on those needing a lightroom instruction tape. LR 3 is here? How long to 4? Silly silly silly. Food for though, ignore me now, remember me when sales drop. Seriously. This could be the best business-model wake-up you get.
And why? Rich, retired, no need to work, and you take on a huge cost to satisfy your ego. Good for you. And the site suffered (and suffers) because of it. A stupid decision.
Sure some will say "I miss the old LL journal" but here it is hard, clear, and in the flesh. You ruined a good idea. I am brave enough to say so. The rest are pathetic for not saying so.
Yes go for it, defenders of MR jump to the rescue but I am gone, and my $$$, and more than a few are nodding in agreement with me even as you are rushing to throw praise upon the god-li-ness of MR. Now that this is a commercial-sales-dependant-site (don't kid yourselves that it's not) this is important.
As for the recent Leica letter re the M9 you really think you have any business acumen? How on earth did you ever get patents etc (presumably the source of your wealth)? To have such patents, and experience with a listed company and an IPO, suggests some real corporate experience. Based on your recent proposals however I conclude that you were a technical type riding on the coat-tails of others. Good for you, you still made the money, but it doesn't make you a business guru. To suggest Leica should walk away from the sole thing that differentiates it's products, and therefore protects the high MSRP of its products, and suggest "hey take on Panasonic/Other Japanese Giants making a 'me-too' EVF camera"... you must have rocks in your head.
Actually, I think you pulled a Ken Rockwell and deliberately wrote a bunch of BS just to get your site ratings up.
You should be applauded for your original website idea/plan regarding photographic instruction. I learnt a lot, and it's a great resource. You have gained many thousands of readers as a result of that good model. No doubt, however, those who have not read this far are already tearing strips off me for my horrible criticism, no problem for me they can go for it. Like I care what forum threads say about me. But you have thrown it (the concept) away and I can't understand why. Surely you realise whilst you have earnt your living from photography you're not all that good at it? Your photos v others from the Amazon trip were embarrassing for you, to say the least. But there are enough MR sychophants to make you feel good about every front page image you post I guess(some of us nearly dry-retch at those posts). \
And let's not talk about the embarassing "uber-camera" which you spent enough to buy a car or something on, then used once and announced (quietly) how you had realised the hasselblad MF digital thing was "more suited" (or close to that)... ahem... what a way to demonstrate the rich-wanker syndrome. I have done the same, not on so quite a public level however!!!
To summarise you have killed off a great idea (your original website premise) and changed it into self-promoting nonsense.
Now the flames can begin, I don't really care I will not visit here again. You can dispatch me as a fool, or a nut, or whatever, but in the back of your mind you will remember (and your records can verify) that your original idea had me opening my wallet to buy your products, and yet here we are, after some development of your site/vision I will never return nor buy your products again. I am up-front enough to tell you what I think, and you surely realise if there's me there's more than one and we speak with our spending habits.
Despite everything I've expressed here I wish you well in your various endeavours, my personal and business opinion is that you've made some serious mistakes, and should I be proven wrong then so be it.
Cheers...
Chris.
-
Would it not have been better to speak your mind rather than pussy footing around? All this nonsense just to attack poor old Ken? A fellow countryman of Mars, I hope the two of you enjoy your banishment together. BTW despite stating that you won't be back - I certainly hope not - I see you are still lurking in the member's list at the bottom of the screen.
-
Would it not have been better to speak your mind rather than pussy footing around? All this nonsense just to attack poor old Ken? A fellow countryman of Mars, I hope the two of you enjoy your banishment together.
I don't see how I will be 'banished' when I was not rude, just direct, and my post was point at no-one except for Michael.
I will watch the responses with amusement, but will stop reading the site. Given a day or two for the predictable responses the fun will be over and I will be gone, no loss to the site for sure, except financially, and perhaps a few will realise I am in the right.
I don't know who 'mars' is but perhaps we share a similar thought pattern.
Best wishes (yours was not rude nor confrontational in anyway, I don't want you to think I am firing at all and sundry).
Chris.
-
BTW despite stating that you won't be back - I certainly hope not - I see you are still lurking in the member's list at the bottom of the screen.
Purely an oversight I had the tag closed (Opera) yet was still logged in apparently.
You have a keen eye for detail!
-
A fellow countryman of Mars, I hope the two of you enjoy your banishment together.
Funny thing I went to the member list and looked under "warren" to find there is no "Warren Mars". Perhaps I searched poorly. Or, perhaps he is truly banished!
Perhaps for my honesty I shall suffer the same fate?
However given this predicament I don't know if Warren and myself share the same location. I never read his posts, perhaps he was not as direct/honest/polite as I was?
-
Funny thing I went to the member list and looked under "warren" to find there is no "Warren Mars". Perhaps I searched poorly. Or, perhaps he is truly banished!
Perhaps for my honesty I shall suffer the same fate?
However given this predicament I don't know if Warren and myself share the same location. I never read his posts, perhaps he was not as direct/honest/polite as I was?
Did you not read the first post in the thread? He was barred for being rude among other things and you chose to launch your "appraisal" in the same thread. A coincidence?
Quote
Actually, I think you pulled a Ken Rockwell and deliberately wrote a bunch of BS just to get your site ratings up.
Unquote
I think that many will regard this as being rude? Possibly not in Australia but elsewhere in the world?
-
Hmmm...
For leaving and never coming back, you're sure hanging around an awful lot. Don't go away mad, just go away.
Troll.
-
No need to ban you. You haven't been rude. Simply poorly informed.
If you don't want to come back, that's just fine with me.
Michael
-
i think cgf just needs a hug.
-
A lot of what CGF said is bullshit, but some isn't. I also perceive a lack of intensity that we used to have, not on Michael's part, but in the forum as a whole, and think perhaps that has to do with the slowing of the digital revolution. A few years ago, something revolutionary was popping up every five minutes, it seemed -- but now, we're back in the days when an F5 was a revolution, and yet many people stuck with their F4s. How many people really dumped their D300's to get a D300s? I think we may see the same lack of zeal when the Canon 1DsIV replaces the III.
This lack of intrinsic excitement may mean that this site -- the most valuable of the web's technical sites, IMHO - may need a tune up, and perhaps even a restructuring. For example, we have separate forums for Lightroom and Aperture, because even though they are conceptually similar, the details of operation are significantly different. The same now applies to cameras, and I think it might now be useful to have separate forums for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Leica, m4/3, and Pentax, and, perhaps, "others." And though the site calls itself "Luminous Landscape," it has been a long time since it has been only about landscape, and perhaps forums on Portraiture and Street would be interesting.
On the other hand, people talk about the problems of watering down brands, so these changes may not be desirable. I don't know -- but something to think about.
The "stopped clock" comment made me realize that stopped clock is more accurate, in some sense, (right on twice a day) than my very expensive Rolex, which is almost never right on...8-)
-
The "stopped clock" comment made me realize that stopped clock is more accurate, in some sense, (right on twice a day) than my very expensive Rolex, which is almost never right on...8-)
John, I set mine at midnight on New Year's Eve. In 12 days it managed to lose 20 minutes. It has been serviced maybe three times since '72 when I think I remember buying it, has only lost time but never gone fast, and is obviously badly in need of further attention. (Is it a watch I speak of or myself?) Trouble is, each time it goes off to the Rolex dealer to get fixed it remains lost for months on end. I sometimes hope it will remain lost and they will replace it with a new one...
Having said all that I still believe the Submariner to be the most beautiful bit of watch design ever - the Leica of the time world. Shame a cheap alarm clock keeps better time. But at least it may not drown where an electric alarm clock might and I certainly would.
Regarding LuLa - I have no idea about the other guy's points, but I think that what happens has little to do with Michael or anything in the system. I think what happens is that we regulars just get too regular - and old. We seem to have written most of what we had inside us, and in the end, I don't come here for the tech, though I have had much help on that; rather I find pleasure in the sparring and chat. I enjoy reading about other photographers' lives, work and problems - our buddy in Detroit and the other one in three cities at once all provide great work and comment. Unfortunately, the demands of making a living must surely get in the way of their posting much more than they do, but perhaps that even adds to their appeal. Some others are great writers and I enjoy them too because of it.
But perhaps you are right regarding the lack of freshness in the digital impact or perhaps even more people are starting to see it all as a bit of a con where tiny changes are dropped into new models, yet still cutting the feet and monetary value of the last one. This was brought into very sharp focus for me the other day when I was doing my latest insurance policy info. How can it be that an immaculate D200 can't even be traded in? So now there it lies, beside a new D700 and as likely ever to get used again as, well, let's not go there!
Maybe the magic is no longer doing its stuff; perhaps we take it all as a given now - we can all produce an image without knowing very much about photography any more. What's to rave about any longer?
Rob C
-
John,
I don't disagree with anything that you've said. I fact I have been concerned about the state of the site and especially the forum for the past couple of years.
Therefore, about 8 months ago we hired a senior system developer to create a new site which will be dramatically enhanced over what we have had here till now. Not just cosmetic changes, but structural ones. More community involvement, more authors, and many others things which I won't go into now, but which will, I believe, bring LuLa into its second decade.
No speculation please, because I won't respond to questions – yet. But folks can expect to see the beginnings of the changes that we'll be making within the next couple of months. We will at that time be polling forum members and others for input and feedback. The full evolution will take about a year after that till completion, with new features added over the months, and scope for lots of community feedback.
Michael
-
That's good to hear Michael.
Further to the "where are the women" thread elsewhere (where I mentioned that all the long drawn-out discussions about gear are, to me, of relatively little interest), anything that promotes the composition/art/subject matter of photography would be welcomed by me. The articles you publish do a sterling job on that front, but seem to evoke relatively little interest in the forum.
-
I don't disagree with anything that you've said. I fact I have been concerned about the state of the site and especially the forum for the past couple of years.
One option that could be interesting for forums (and I am speaking in general, not specifically about here) would be to limit member's posts to something like 3 per day or so. After all, not many of us can come up with more than a few genuinely interesting contributions in a single day. Knowing that we are limited would encourage us to make better points. Disputes about details would not degenerate into rhetorical duels, etc... Such a limit would still allow the occasional congratulatory messages, digressions or puns that make human communications lively, but in a more reasonable way.
In the age of twitter, this is probably wishful thinking. But on sites that do not depend on click-through-rates, the model could be viable.
-
one feature that might be of interest is to solicit more articles from forum members. Some of the people here provide virtual 'reviews' and essays. They are difficult to follow and yet are quite thoughtful.
Obviously that puts an editorial burden on Michael and staff..but one alternative is 'peer review' (NOT an editorial board) The forum members could volunteer to write or just be peer reviewers as in scientific journals (works well, and I have seen it for over 40 years--for all the negatives it is the best at homing in on good stuff.
A thought anyway...
regards
Victor
-
No speculation please, because I won't respond to questions – yet. But folks can expect to see the beginnings of the changes that we'll be making within the next couple of months. We will at that time be polling forum members and others for input and feedback. The full evolution will take about a year after that till completion, with new features added over the months, and scope for lots of community feedback.
Michael
Michael,
Thanks for the update. I find the site invaluable for many reasons. As you move closer to implementing changes I would suggest a separate section of the website where we can post suggestions regarding content, etc. If that's what you mean by polling I support it.
-
The early excitement of digital process is gone, and art rather than technology is back in it's rightful place. After a time, the whizz-bang toys don't impress, and the creative results are what are left to consider.
I think this site has and continues to be a terrific educational and informative resource. There certainly is room and a need for the gear to be discussed....I would only say that in one area where this site is weak is in photo review/critique. I would like to see a monthly article (at least) working through the creative editing choices, the artistic directions one pushes a photograph toward. A lot of us never learned in a classroom or workplace environment with critique (criticism!) readily available.
I'd also like to see more frequent guest portfolios of, say, 10 photos with discussion of composition in capture and processing...
-
As a very long time reader of the site, but not feeling the need to engage in the forum, this thread ultimately had me submit my forum application to the mods in order to render a personal opinion.
Some of the comments made in this thread as they relate to Michael as a person, as host of this site and forum, and further of Michael as a photographer are frankly over the top and blatantly disgusting.
Some folks feel that internet forums are somehow bastions of free speech.
They're not, nor were they ever designed or intended to be.
Visitors to LL for example essentially visit for free, on Michaels buck as it were........they have in effect been invited by Michael to spend some time in his living room/studio with others interested in similar topics as they are.
Much of what's been posted in this thread would never have been spoken directly to Michaels face, especially sitting in his own living room as one of his guests. (and if you were inclined to speak out loud to Michaels face what some have written about him in this thread, society generally would consider you a troubled, angry and somewhat anti-social person.......certainly never to be invited back for tea).
Veiled attacks on Michael as a person deserve nothing less than a permanent banning from the forums.......there's no room for it and there's certainly no need for it.
Declaring your post "honest" rather than an open attack doesn't mask the fact that it is, in fact, nothing more than an open and highly personal attack on the owner of the forum/web site.
I've had this site bookmarked, and I've visited every couple of days for many years now, and have seen changes in the site........although nothing near as drastic as some here would declare.
Note to Michael:
It's always a good idea to stand back and look at what your original mission was when the site first went live.
I got hooked on this site as a result of the premise of Landscape Photography, and the fact that LL was the most well presented of any site proposing to discuss landscape photography.
I'd love to see the focus shifted back to landscapes of the world, something that LL has done better than any other photo web site available.
The Video Magazines have been routinely excellent, but should remain focused on Landscapes, and not get too wound up in equipment and software reviews, or interviews with people too far removed from the world of Landscape Photography.
I have no issue with all the training videos related to software and workflow instruction, but suggest that they go to a dedicated area of the site.
These videos are a welcome addition to the outstanding LL Video Magazine, and having recently downloaded the brilliant Seth Resnick video on workflow, they're videos that continue to inspire and instruct as well, or better than any other photography video instruction DVD's I've yet discovered.
And so:
Banning those who seek to harass, insult, attack, and essentially poke a pencil in the eye of the host and the his efforts to run a free website combined with the need to also run a business and make a profit..........well banning those folks serves and benefits all users of the Luminous Landscape.
I have no desire or interest in anything posted (or deleted) by miscreants who declare their "honesty", all the while laying out highly structured and planned attacked on the forum host/owner (or any other member of the forum).
There are posts in this thread (still) that have absolutely nothing to do with "honesty", and everything to do with little more than nasty attacks on the forums host, and the guy who makes all this tick.................for free.
-
Visitors to LL for example essentially visit for free, on Michaels buck as it were........they have in effect been invited by Michael to spend some time in his living room/studio with others interested in similar topics as they are.
Rem acu tetigisti.
-
Could't help noticing how "rogermorris" post sounds a lot like the Cerberus-in-Chief's alter ego (i.e., when he occasionally gets up on the right side of the bed) . Also, funny how those "long-time lurkers, first-time posters" tend to introduce themselves through a verbal diarrhea. Let the witch burning (i.e., banning) begin!
-
Rem acu tetigisti.
Now THAT takes me back! A favourite saying of P.G. Wodehouse's Jeeves in the Jeeves and Wooster stories.
-
That's funny, I just finished reading Jeeves in the Offing, literally 2 hours ago, heck I was spouting 'Rem Acu Tecegisti' to my teachers when I was 14 years old, no doubt they thought me odd. I wonder if kids these days would enjoy PG Wodehouse like I did when being 14 years old still had a sense of innocence..
-
I don't disagree with anything that you've said. I fact I have been concerned about the state of the site and especially the forum for the past couple of years.
Michael
[/quote]
Design wise, an overhaul of the LL site and forum is greatly overdue. Being in the creative fields we all know that self review, changing up approaches, responding to new trends in the marketplace are always needed. Even those with the most unique visions have had to change up. So the news about the site on that point is very good to hear.
But I am afraid there is more that has changed over time than just the need for a revitalized structure. I have been in this business, photography, for more than thirty years (now semi-retired-not by choice I might add) and have participated in many trade groups, organizations and forums, including this one for years. What they all end up being degraded by is the inevitable bickering and personal attacks which tends drive some of the more talented and experienced members and deter the entry of younger more fragile newbies. I have seen some of the finest shooters on these site/groups attacked because they take "just pictures of pretty woman" or of "just rocks" or they use this camera or that. I have seen forum members who had immense production skills - which if you are really in this business are extremely important - decried for talking of extensive budgets or equipment logistics. I have seen some very very proficient software pioneers who have participated in this forum (and still do thank God)being attacked for the silliest of things. I have seen members whose language is not English contribute the best they can and being pedantically corrected on form not substance. Even though these sites are somewhat "verbal exchanges" they require writing skills in which sometimes sarcasm does not translate well, especially from culture to culture language to language resulting in many a bruise.
I have gained the most incalculable growth and knowledge from many of the members of these forum both experts and amateurs. One of the most joyous aspects of being in photography is you never stop learning, there is always some insight, some technique some mindset which opens up a whole new way of "seeing" something or of better understanding. Photography has always involved a certain level of technical skill as well as aesthetic approach. I think that is one of the addictive things about it - it requires many different abilities. There is also a sliding scale of required talent - I have seen some who can't mount a lens on a camera who can take the most wondrous pictures. On the other end I have worked with those that can grind their own lens, make their own film and yet can't shoot worth squat. They have all had something to offer even though many of them have egos which in a creative situation you are always going to deal with both positive and negative.
Many of these very capable people have been driven away by various situations.
I have grieved the loss of these members" because it has denied me the joy of learning from them, listening to their stories and feel their absence tugging down the level of discussion.
On a stimulating active site, with many participants, it is impossible to monitor everything.
We will always have the contributors who want to know what F/stop you shot that at and were you holding it in your left hand or right and was that a Billingsley bag you were carrying. We always have the over anxious new comer wanting to show their latest creations good bad or indifferent We will always have some one of one philosophical or fundamentalist bend - whether it be of chemistry, physics, or theosophy. We will always have people who work in different markets and niches with different values.
How one handles/moderates such sites/members is one of the most confounding management questions imaginable. It killed the Galbraith Site - it has devalued others.
Entering into a site like this is entering to a community.We all come here for a need or a reason. Whether it is to determine how to do something, sell something, share something, promote something. Anyone who creates a site does it for a need or a reason. A person may not even be aware of the real reason one starts a site or participates in one. Anyone who takes on creating a site like this one is taking on a momentous if maybe impossible task. I do not know nor have ever met M. Reichmann. I think he does an admirable job.
Whatever be the future of this site I hope that the ability to maintain the participation of experienced voices and the encouragement of new voices is the goal and focus.
With Respect,
"Shutters"
-
Whatever be the future of this site I hope that the ability to maintain the participation of experienced voices and the encouragement of new voices is the goal and focus.
Well said!
Paul
-
I have followed LuLa forums for over five years. I have learned a great deal. I have helped a few people myself.
Two observations
* Collaboration has given way to authority. It seems to me that three years ago we were learning to push the limits of the technology. To this end, we collaborated to figure out the best ways...you might call them best practices...to push digital technology and realize our vision. Today, we fall back on accepted mantras like expose to the right, for example. People come to the site asking questions of the great oracle (Michael, presumably) like "What is the best camera?"
* People don't post as many inspiring images as they once did. Critique and commentary on each others work has fallen by the wayside.
-
I don't think many will complain about a well-done restructuring of the site and forum, but I'll go ahead and say that I have found myself coming to this site less and less over the years. There was a time about five years ago while I was living in Africa where there was rarely available internet access and yet I devoured every word written on the site and browsed the forums as regularly as I could.
Since that time, the frequency of LLVJ's has slowed to non-existent and the published content has declined to the point where I am rarely interested. It seems to me that there were at one time very frequent articles on new and better ways to process images, get better prints, sharpen images, streamline workflow, etc. Recent articles and article series by guest writers, while they might be well-written and useful to some, have been illustrated with lackluster (to me) and seen-so-many-times-before images by the authors. Product reviews were more varied and more, well, interesting (to me).
This is not a personal attack on you, Michael, nor is it uncalled for. I, like many here, have purchased almost all of the offered products in the LL Store. Simply stated, you may not care that of the last ten or so articles on the home page, I've read five, but it should worry you as a business person that there hasn't been a single item in the LL Store that I've considered purchasing in almost a year.
John,
I don't disagree with anything that you've said. I fact I have been concerned about the state of the site and especially the forum for the past couple of years.
Therefore, about 8 months ago we hired a senior system developer to create a new site which will be dramatically enhanced over what we have had here till now. Not just cosmetic changes, but structural ones. More community involvement, more authors, and many others things which I won't go into now, but which will, I believe, bring LuLa into its second decade.
No speculation please, because I won't respond to questions – yet. But folks can expect to see the beginnings of the changes that we'll be making within the next couple of months. We will at that time be polling forum members and others for input and feedback. The full evolution will take about a year after that till completion, with new features added over the months, and scope for lots of community feedback.
Michael
-
That's funny, I just finished reading Jeeves in the Offing, literally 2 hours ago, heck I was spouting 'Rem Acu Tecegisti' to my teachers when I was 14 years old, no doubt they thought me odd. I wonder if kids these days would enjoy PG Wodehouse like I did when being 14 years old still had a sense of innocence..
I remember being terribly disappointed as a teenager when I discovered that P.G. Wodehouse had died and there would be no more stories
-
Could't help noticing how "rogermorris" post sounds a lot like the Cerberus-in-Chief's alter ego (i.e., when he occasionally gets up on the right side of the bed) . Also, funny how those "long-time lurkers, first-time posters" tend to introduce themselves through a verbal diarrhea. Let the witch burning (i.e., banning) begin!
I live and spend my time on the wrong coast (West) for your conspiracy theory to function as reality.
Not every internet forum is (or needs to be) the wild west in terms of people being free to "do" or say anything they want.
It also goes without saying that attacking your host in a public forum such as this one is an open invitation (almost an open request) to be banned.
-
The one thing I've learned from running this site for the past 11 years is that old saw about "pleasing some of the people.... but not all of the people all of the time". As a consequence rather than trying to please others, I simply try and please myself.
This isn't as a result of arrogance, simply experience that has shown me that no matter what I do or write I will please some people and displease others.
I also don't think that some people have any idea how much effort is involved in producing a site that publishes between 8 and 12 new articles each month, month in and month out, year in and year out. And how much work it is for one person to shoot, edit, and sound mix the Video Journals and tutorials that we produce.
Chris and I do the best we can, which also includes maintaining the site, running the online store, dealing with orders, forum registrations, technical issues, finances and so on. Oh yes, I also teach workshops, write magazine articles, run a photography gallery, and do consulting.
This is all stated just to illustrate that if the video journals don't come as often as some would wish, or some of the submitted articles are not to ones liking, it's because this entire site has been built as a labour of love. Nothing more. Nothing less. And if and when it stops being fun, it will end.
Just had to get that off my chest after some of the wingeing that this thread has produced.
Michael
-
I really appreciate what you are doing Michael. I know people that run forums and the workload is unbelievable. You are definitely not doing it for the money, as you could work at McDonalds and make $ more per hour.
There are always people that see it differently and that usually keeps it interesting. If everyone had the same thought process, the world would be a boring place. Do what you think is right and 95% of us will be very happy.
Looking forward to the next 10 years on LL
-
LL is one of my favorite websites
many thanks
-
LL is one of my favorite websites
many thanks
+1
ADDENDUM: Content is everything! And content providing is the really hard work behind running a website. I'd strongly suggest to get more people involved in providing articles, tutorial videos and such. LL has a lot of very competent people listening and contributing to this site, be it technical skill, artistical competence, product knowledge, marketing knowledge, and, and, and .... It would be a pity not having utilized this to its full potential.
Cheers
~Chris
-
I very much enjoy the information and discussions on this site. I have learned a lot and sometimes can put in some information from my own experience.
About the Warren Mars post- I must say i found a lot of information there too, combined with a lot of foolish remarks.
I did not like the rude language that spoiled the discussion ( and Warren Mars was certainly one of them) as i do not like the Ken Rockwell teasers. It is too easy to jump on a single person with a whole bunch of people.
-
I'm member 230, I've been an infrequent contributor but a regular visitor over the past 7 years (almost to the day actually). How many members are there now? I don't know but I saw a post today from a member whose number was over 58,000.
Here's a simple question - where else will you go if you don't like what you see here?
Name another forum with the depth of knowledge of this one, and the willingness, as well as resilience, of the proprietor to continue to run it.
I do lots of seminars - I always recommend a trip to LL to find answers to photographic questions. Everyone I have sent has been amazed at the depth of information available for free.
LL rocks - in whatever form it takes from now on.
-
About the Warren Mars post- I must say i found a lot of information there too, combined with a lot of foolish remarks.
He has his own website ... you should visit him ...
He even has his own forums where you can discuss the new religion he has founded or his quest to get the Tolkien Estate to allow him to release and publish his musical take on the elvish poems of Tolkien's works.
Warren was like a guy who just learned about Einstein trying to explain his new found appreciation for gravity to a bunch of professional baseball players ... all while claiming to be THE world's leading expert on baseball.
-
I very much enjoy the information and discussions on this site. I have learned a lot and sometimes can put in some information from my own experience.
About the Warren Mars post- I must say i found a lot of information there too, combined with a lot of foolish remarks.
I did not like the rude language that spoiled the discussion ( and Warren Mars was certainly one of them) as i do not like the Ken Rockwell teasers. It is too easy to jump on a single person with a whole bunch of people.
I am sorry that you don't like me. I will try to improve in the future
-
I'm member 230, I've been an infrequent contributor but a regular visitor over the past 7 years (almost to the day actually). How many members are there now? I don't know but I saw a post today from a member whose number was over 58,000.
Here's a simple question - where else will you go if you don't like what you see here?
Name another forum with the depth of knowledge of this one, and the willingness, as well as resilience, of the proprietor to continue to run it.
I do lots of seminars - I always recommend a trip to LL to find answers to photographic questions. Everyone I have sent has been amazed at the depth of information available for free.
LL rocks - in whatever form it takes from now on.
Hey, that sums up my thoughts nicely!
Im relatively new here, reading since 2 or 3 years. There might indeed be some problems here, or it might have been better or more productive in past times. Whatever, I dont know so I can't compare. But still, in comparisations to other forums I know, there is a lot done right here, there are a lot of good things, a gathering of incredible knowledge and knowledgable people. (For example, only one thing, the way images are criticized here(Art section at the bottom) stands out in many ways compared to the shortsighted pixel-peeperisms you may read elsewhere.) So basically what I want to say, complaints/remarks about the situation here (neccessary as they are) are already on a quite high level. Nothing is perfect.
Cheers,
Christian
-
He has his own website ... you should visit him ...
He even has his own forums where you can discuss the new religion he has founded or his quest to get the Tolkien Estate to allow him to release and publish his musical take on the elvish poems of Tolkien's works.
Warren was like a guy who just learned about Einstein trying to explain his new found appreciation for gravity to a bunch of professional baseball players ... all while claiming to be THE world's leading expert on baseball.
Not visited/posted on here for a long while but this certainly an entertaining website. Albeit for all the wrong reasons.
Don't miss time lost arguing with the crazy people I have to say.
Good to see that LL may be getting an overhaul. Something I've always found incongruous about LL is a site devoted to excellence in imagery is that it is rather ugly, poorly designed and oddly lacking in imagery. Things are easy to rectify though.
But LL has been an excellent resource in the past for learning about digital imagery and a more sensible real world approach to kit reviews, but as already observed above, digital photography is a maturing field. So a shift will almost certainly be needed to maintain people's interest.
I was also amused by Michael's apparent Volte Face on the Olympus Pen EP. On paper it maybe a deeply flawed camera, especially compared to it's direct rival. But in reality, a camera that is actually very desirable and very likable. But being able to admit to a change of mind is in my view is actually a good thing.
-
The one thing I've learned from running this site for the past 11 years is that old saw about "pleasing some of the people.... but not all of the people all of the time". As a consequence rather than trying to please others, I simply try and please myself.
This isn't as a result of arrogance, simply experience that has shown me that no matter what I do or write I will please some people and displease others.
I also don't think that some people have any idea how much effort is involved in producing a site that publishes between 8 and 12 new articles each month, month in and month out, year in and year out. And how much work it is for one person to shoot, edit, and sound mix the Video Journals and tutorials that we produce.
Chris and I do the best we can, which also includes maintaining the site, running the online store, dealing with orders, forum registrations, technical issues, finances and so on. Oh yes, I also teach workshops, write magazine articles, run a photography gallery, and do consulting.
This is all stated just to illustrate that if the video journals don't come as often as some would wish, or some of the submitted articles are not to ones liking, it's because this entire site has been built as a labour of love. Nothing more. Nothing less. And if and when it stops being fun, it will end.
Just had to get that off my chest after some of the wingeing that this thread has produced.
Michael
One thing Mike. The color scheme of this discussion forum is much better than the white on black theme on your site. I find it very difficult to read the text in many cases. You may want to consider a change.
Regards,
Bill VN
-
LL:
Perfect? Nah, it's big, sometimes unwieldy, and as flawed as the human nature that created and propagates it.
Informative, stimulating, helpful, and sometimes even entertaining? Absolutely.
Obviously these are more evolutionary than revolutionary times in photography, after a wild ride in recent years, and that is sometimes reflected in this site. I welcome Michael's intent to retool the site, and love the idea of any change that will foster more creative content to complement the wealth of technical expertise already found here.
Thanks, for all your past, present and future efforts, Michael, and I look forward to more glimpses of the spangly new LL in the coming months.
BTW: The "Beyond Mars'" subtitle to this thread has a slightly futuristic ring to it. Was it just fortuitous happenstance that you revealed your efforts to reinvent LL on this ironically named thread?
-
Nothing here is unintentional, even the things that happen by accident.
Michael
-
I just hope that the temptation to fix what ain't broke is resisted. I find this site perfectly functional, see no need to mess with it and, most of all, enjoy the contributions from many of the people.
Someone mentioned content being all: of course it is, and we are the content; let's not lose sight of that. We function well and those who seek to make nothing but trouble all eventually leave from boredom, the boredom of being ignored.
Rob C
-
I just hope that the temptation to fix what ain't broke is resisted. I find this site perfectly functional, see no need to mess with it and, most of all, enjoy the contributions from many of the people.
Someone mentioned content being all: of course it is, and we are the content; let's not lose sight of that. We function well and those who seek to make nothing but trouble all eventually leave from boredom, the boredom of being ignored.
Rob C
I would absolutely agree with that sentiment. If changes are made then no doubt there will be advice given as to "improve" them and it will be never ending?
-
...this is a pathetic response
...Anyone arguing otherwise is blind.
...Geeze man,. take a hint.
...Silly silly silly.
...Rich, retired, no need to work, and you take on a huge cost to satisfy your ego.
...A stupid decision.
...I am brave enough to say so. The rest are pathetic for not saying so.
...you must have rocks in your head.
...Now the flames can begin, I don't really care I will not visit here again.
Ah. A motivational speaker.
-
Au contraire, I shall await the coming of the upgraded site. I shall not dispense gratuitous pearls of wisdom here about any specific changes (doling out advice from an armchair is easy). In the last 5-7 years there have been significant advances in the technologies of content management systems - Wordpress, Drupal, et al have now become powerful & robust publishing platforms - and LL could exploit all the goodness they offer.
-
Wow. How DPReview-ish at times
Guess I will throw my 2 cents into the jar regarding site remodeling.
This site is, right now, the photography site i visit second most. Online Photographer is the one i visit the most.
I actually like this site's layout etc., but perhaps that is just the virtue of familiarity with it.
Re the Forum
I hope there is not a breakout of cameras by brands into separate sub-catagories. One of the things I enjoy about this site is the way equipment is already sub-grouped. It would turn the forum into another "boys & their toys" destination.
Reviews/Articles
I like them the way they are, for the most part. Re the camera reviews, being more impressions and "a photographer's take" on the item is nice. I actually enjoy the "reviews here and on Reid's site the most of any. I think if a person want the charts and graphs, there is the DXO site, and many others. I also like that the images in the "reviews" are actually, ok to very good photographs. I do read the camera "reviews', though they are of usually of little utility for me personally. I do not earn my living via photography and do not have loads of discretionary income. Most of the stuff reviewed is for me, "high end". But it is nice to see how the other 3% lives...
One suggestion for a change, is re the Review page (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/). While the alphabetical part is ok, the more crowded "letters" take awhile to visually search for what you want.
But in general, good job.
-
Ah. A motivational speaker.
touche
About as motivational as someone on speakers corner with a bullhorn and earplugs
Some people don't understand being right isn't enough, it's making others agree with you that's the hard part
-
I think that this thread has now run its course. Time to move on.
Michael