Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: Christopher Sanderson on October 11, 2012, 03:10:43 pm
-
I have had a request to set up a new area in the Lu-La Forum for Photography that is neither Landscape, Nature nor Pro.
This seems a reasonable request. My question is: what categories of Photography might have separate areas within an 'Other Photography' section?
Street/Documentary, Architecture and Copy/Recording are some that come to mind.
Is there a better umbrella name than 'Other Photography'?
-
Maybe something like Local Photography or similar, or even Urban Photography or Close to Home.....
Alan
-
Cell phone genre seems to be an interesting sub-group.
How about something down home, non-professional, non-aspirational - like " interesting snaps " or "experimental" to go with "the coffee corner".
Frank
-
How about Abstractions and Design?
-
I like "Other Photography" Or perhaps "Other Photographic Genres" because those titles are neutral.
I'd like to see a section for portraits.
-
How about one for cat photos? ;)
-
... Or perhaps "Other Photographic Genres" because those titles are neutral...
+1
-
I like "Other Photography" Or perhaps "Other Photographic Genres" because those titles are neutral.
I'd like to see a section for portraits.
Yes, I like Other Photographic Genres as a title too.
Portraiture should definitely be in the sub-sections. Thanks!
-
Black and White?
-
Other Photographic Genre is probably a good option.
I would personally be interested in portrait/studio since I am spending more and more time with my Profoto gear, but it would be OK to discuss that within Other Photographic Genre.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Cell phone genre seems to be an interesting sub-group.
Uh no...please Chris, don't stoop to that. Look at the name of the website...do nothing to adversely impact the core group. "Other" is generic enough although unlikely to be a place I would spend any time in. Which is fine, there are many sub-forums I rarely visit here.
-
How about Superfluous, Non-Landscape Photographs of Dubious . . . just kidding. ;D
-
I'm also for "Other Photographic Genres". My only fear is that yet another category leads to less traffic per topic. I have the impression that this is happening already. Anyone sees that? Maybe one could consolidate some areas like "Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear" and "Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques". Although I know what the difference between those is supposed to be, it doesn't really reflect in the topics. One could possibly also get rid of "Combocams" since the term has gotten a bit obsolete. Also there is now "Motion & Video".
Philipp
-
In order to create a name for a new category on the forum, lets consider all the categories of photography that currently exist in our imaginations.
We have Landscape, which is the main focus of this site, Portrait, Street photography, Architecture, Astronomy, Wildlife, Weddings, Religious Ceremonies, Models and Nudity, Sports, Musical Performances, Ballets and Stage Performances in general, Journalistic shots for the record, War scenes and other horrific scenes, Macro shots (let's not forget the world of insects), Abstract and fuzzy shots, and Candid shots of of people who could sue were it not for the editorial clause.
I'm sure there are more categories you can think of, and I might be able to think of a few more after a few glasses of wine. ;D
-
Well, then the logical consequence would be to boil it down to just two categories: "Landscape" and "Lesser Photography" ;D
-
Well, then the logical consequence would be to boil it down to just two categories: "Landscape" and "Lesser Photography" ;D
That would be discriminatory. ;)
-
How about Eclectic images, it works for me…
Cheers,
-
Chris, I trust the idea was put forwrd in jest? Possibly the result of sipping some of those Californian vintages?
For my sixpence, we already have a well-functioning system that allows ready access to all the genres and sub-genres anyone here has ever proposed or submitted.
Regarding Cellpix - there's already one for that, and the fact that a special, independently suspended car section was created has caused a little confusion in my mind at least: I snap away at interesting vehicles (much like a stray dog?) and what happens now is that I wonder whether to post such shots under Cellphone or Vehicles.
As with government, I think we possibly need less pigeonholes rather than more! And Schewe doesn't need more stress.
The thing works beautifully already.
Rob C
-
I wouldn't bother because any new areas would swiftly become cross contaminated with other subjects. The poster above will testify to that. ;)
-
I have had a request to set up a new area in the Lu-La Forum for Photography that is neither Landscape, Nature nor Pro.
On a website that is here primarily for the purpose of landscape photography, how does such a forum fit into this website's raison d'etre?
Perhaps your confusion/indecision about how and where to place it reflects the problem that it doesn't really belong?
-
Quote
On a website that is here primarily for the purpose of landscape photography, how does such a forum fit into this website's raison d'etre?
Unquote
If you look at all the categories then it has long since ceased to exist in that context? Everything from hard disk failures to the world's economic failures. :)
-
I signed up to LuLa on the basis of it being (ostensibly) a landscape photography site. Given that landscape seems to be just one of the genres catered for here (the Recent Professional Work thread is notable for the lack of landscapes), it's clearly morphed into a more generic photography forum.
Personally, I've been looking around the web for a good portraiture photography forum, so a portraiture section would find favour with me. Maybe a wildlife/nature photography section, and something specific to B&W wouldn't go amiss either.
-
On a website that is here primarily for the purpose of landscape photography, how does such a forum fit into this website's raison d'etre?
Perhaps your confusion/indecision about how and where to place it reflects the problem that it doesn't really belong?
+1
-
On a website that is here primarily for the purpose of landscape photography, how does such a forum fit into this website's raison d'etre?
Perhaps your confusion/indecision about how and where to place it reflects the problem that it doesn't really belong?
That is quite interesting. I have been a member here for years and I rarely ever think of it as website and forum about landscape photography. I know Landscape is in the title, but for me that's an historic thing and the site seems to cater for a very wide audience. In fact some of the most frequent posters seem more interested in the nuts and bolts of cameras and software than in any one particular genre of photography (or perhaps photography at all). Michael seems to be quite into people photography but that doesn't need a change of site name. Perhaps a section for 'People Photography' would be useful. I agree about possibly dropping the Combocam section - it rarely gets used - most of the information comes under the other movie section.
Jim
-
On a website that is here primarily for the purpose of landscape photography, how does such a forum fit into this website's raison d'etre?
Perhaps your confusion/indecision about how and where to place it reflects the problem that it doesn't really belong?
If we were to get philosophical about this we should perhaps start by defining Landscape. What is a Landscape? Could it be considered as any view of any scene that is taken on land?
For example, a photograph of a tree is undoubtedly a landscape because the tree is on land. A house is on land, but a photograph of a house is not necessarily considered to be a landscape.
On the other hand, if the house is surrounded by trees, it may be considered as a landscape.
-
If LL was essentially "here primarily for the purpose of landscape photography" I wouldn't be here.
Snap; me too! But that might make one or two folks perfectly happy.
In my view, the real value of this site is in the very variety of poster and pictures that it publishes. Were it to turn into a one-dimensional 'club' with all that that implies, I'd switch off right now. You can even get bored with too much sex; what chance some staple diet of nothing but more ARATs?
If you rule out the people contributing to the MF and Pro sections, you remove the very people from whom the amateur has so much he can learn. Photography doesn't mean that it has to be only one genre or another.
People can learn a lot from different photographic discipline, unless they are terminally anal. And insofar as I can discover, the cross-fertilization here is very good indeed. Anyone wishing to start zones for 'portraits', for example, has nobody prohibiting him from so doing - go ahead and create a thread. On anything that's decent.
Anyone wanting to pig out on pure landscape has several threads devoted to nothing else; why not use them, or is it all about exclusion and would that make you feel better about yourself if it is?
From a commercial point of view, I’d imagine that the wider the client base, the more interesting the site to prospective business backers…
But it ain’t mine, so we shall see what we shall see.
Rob C
-
You can even get bored with too much sex;
Rob C
Are you speaking from experience here Rob? Too much sex could get boring, but it would still beat too much pet photography!
Jim
-
It's yet to happen, but I'll keep an open mind.
Wrong technique: don't even think about it and you'll be okay, either way, bored or not.
Of course I speak from experience: when there's none (sex) about it's the only way to survive; as I indicated, it's all in the state or conditioning of the mind.
But let's not go there too deeply; let's concentrate instead on landscape as balm for the troubled psyche. Visual therapy.
;-)
Rob C
-
...landscape as balm for the troubled psyche. Visual therapy...
You just formulated one of the main reasons people love/paint/shoot landscapes!
Although, in your case, I suspect you were just being sarcastic ;)
-
You just formulated one of the main reasons people love/paint/shoot landscapes!
Although, in your case, I suspect you were just being sarcastic ;)
;-)
Rob C
-
I also think this forum has long passed landscape-specific focus. In fact, the reason I came here quite a few years ago was because of its continuing hands-on, practical review of digital cameras. I now consider the "landscape" of the title to be more of a metaphor than anything else, as when somebody might say, "Looking over the photographic landscape..."
As for Rob's specific involvement with sex and landscapes, I will remain mostly silent, saying only that golf seems to be a complete replacement for sex, and vice-versa. You only *need* one of the two. Both can work together, though that grows expensive, especially if you often upgrade either clubs or partners. I currently have a 12 handicap, but I don't keep one for golf...
-
I also think this forum has long passed landscape-specific focus. In fact, the reason I came here quite a few years ago was because of its continuing hands-on, practical review of digital cameras. I now consider the "landscape" of the title to be more of a metaphor than anything else, as when somebody might say, "Looking over the photographic landscape..."
As for Rob's specific involvement with sex and landscapes, I will remain mostly silent, saying only that golf seems to be a complete replacement for sex, and vice-versa. You only *need* one of the two. Both can work together, though that grows expensive, especially if you often upgrade either clubs or partners. I currently have a 12 handicap, but I don't keep one for golf...
A wise course to play, John; consider the Tiger, Tiger, burning bright in that forest in the night!
;-)
Rob C
-
I think "other photography" is sufficient to offer a home for everything else.
I don't want to see Lula diluted with other genres like sport, portrait, animal, event, wedding or such like. There are plenty of other fora for their specialisms.
However there remain some aspects of landscape photography that don't easily fit into any existing section. As an example: I'm interested if anyone else had tried the new Impossible Project colour protection film for the SX70, but there's nowhere to ask.
(For anyone that thinks Polaroid type products aren't suitable for landscape work, I suggest they have a look at Singular Images by Ansel Adams, then come back and discuss if it's relevant or not) ;-)
-
As a relative newbe & infrequent poster here I find the site functioning pretty well. I started visiting the site for to read some of the articles & naturally found the forums. They are useful. Especially in the areas of processing & printing.
In the other forums I participate in, mostly antique machinery of some sort or fly fishing, there is some kind of Off Topic or general discussion area. Where you will often find the best or more interesting conversations of the entire forum. Similar to the coffee Corner here. There is some good bits there.
I think a other photography styles section could be interesting. At least give it a try I say.
-
I think "other photography" is sufficient to offer a home for everything else.
I don't want to see Lula diluted with other genres like sport, portrait, animal, event, wedding or such like. There are plenty of other fora for their specialisms.
However there remain some aspects of landscape photography that don't easily fit into any existing section. As an example: I'm interested if anyone else had tried the new Impossible Project colour protection film for the SX70, but there's nowhere to ask.
(For anyone that thinks Polaroid type products aren't suitable for landscape work, I suggest they have a look at Singular Images by Ansel Adams, then come back and discuss if it's relevant or not) ;-)
So start a thread.
Rob C
-
As for Rob's specific involvement with sex and landscapes, I will remain mostly silent, saying only that golf seems to be a complete replacement for sex, and vice-versa. You only *need* one of the two. Both can work together, though that grows expensive, especially if you often upgrade either clubs or partners. I currently have a 12 handicap, but I don't keep one for golf...
I'm no expert, but I can't help thinking that if the two can be substituted there is something wong, or at least highly unconventional, about your technique in one or both pursuits!
8)
-
I'm no expert, but I can't help thinking that if the two can be substituted there is something wong, or at least highly unconventional, about your technique in one or both pursuits!
8)
Well, they seem to share quite a bit of common jargon...
Rob C
-
Another vote for "Other Photographic Genres."
-
I don't much like "Other Photographic Genres." That widens the category to cover too much. I suggest two things:
1) making a few stickies for long threads (like subcategories) on cars or trees or barns or nudes or whatever
2) making a new forum category about street photography
If I had to say what specific type of photography has been most popular at LuLa, it would be landscape. Second most popular would be street photography. We should focus on a genre of photography that clearly has a substantial talent and mindshare (including Michael's) here at LuLa. I think that is street photography. If I had a nickel for every time that Bresson was reverently mentioned I would be rich. On the other hand quoting Ansel Adams is almost dismissed as cliche.
-
I think "other photographic genres" will work well so long as you leave it up to the members to start specified topic posts. Too many sub-forums drives down traffic and makes things needlessly complicated. On the Landscape side, this has already happened with the cars/clouds threads. Let us start threads of similar nature in the new forum Subtopic in the same manner and it will work well IMO.
-
If anything, the board needs consolidation, pruning, not expansion. That does not mean there wouldn't be a place for "other photographic genres" in a consolidated forum, however.
-
If anything, the board needs consolidation, pruning, not expansion....
I tend to agree - however there is no elegant way of consolidating fora. (eg Combocams with Motion & Video)
Short of moving every single darn topic within a forum, deletion appears to be the only way - I am not doing either at this point - which is why you have not seen any change.
I'll chat with Mark Guertin & Michael about it.