Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: James Russell ?  (Read 15963 times)

pixjohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 716
James Russell ?
« on: May 23, 2007, 02:34:01 am »

Is it me? James Russell name is listed as unregistered?

James? did you unregister or get booted?
Logged

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13769
James Russell ?
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2007, 04:03:48 am »

Quote
Is it me? James Russell name is listed as unregistered?

James? did you unregister or get booted?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Read [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=16989&pid=118920&st=0&#entry118920]this[/url] thread.
Logged
Francois

pixjohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 716
James Russell ?
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2007, 04:55:53 am »

Wow I had no idea people talked outside medium format digital  and now I see troyhouse is also unregestered? Not another RG forum?
Logged

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
James Russell ?
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2007, 05:46:44 am »

During the past week, due to their disagreement with me over the Lolita title affair three people have asked for their names to be removed (even though all one has to do is simply not return to this forum if it upsets them). I guess it's a way of registering ones protest.

One person was warned and had a post deleted after making an incendiary posting, following being told that continuing to do so was a bad idea.

No one has been banned other than the usual spammers.

Michael
« Last Edit: May 23, 2007, 06:55:44 am by michael »
Logged

Henry Goh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 574
James Russell ?
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2007, 06:10:17 am »

Quote
During the past week, due to their disagreement with me over the Lolita title affair three people have asked for their names to be removed (even though all one has to do is simply not return to this forum if it upsets them). I guess it's a way of registering ones protest.

One person was involentarily removed after making an incendiary posting, following being told that continuing to do so was a bad idea.

No one has been banned other than the usual spammers.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119150\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have just scanned through the Lolita thread and am saddened to hear that a few of our regular Medium Format DB forum contributors have left.  I won't post an opinion about the issue but just wish the whole matter could have been better handled.  Sad, really sad.

Henry
Logged

thsinar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2066
    • http://www.sinarcameras.com
James Russell ?
« Reply #5 on: May 23, 2007, 08:56:18 am »

Life is like this, there are people who go and others coming. Same in this forum, and whatever are the reasons, whoever has it right (or wrong), however serious are the reasons, one should not overreact and take it too seriously.

This forum is meant to share and learn things, to communicate and ultimately to have fun with our passion and for some with their job, photography.

Let's keep it like this and continue contributing to our passion.

Thierry

Quote
[span style=\'font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\']Force 12 in tea recepticle[/span]  - if you get my drift!

Yes they are great contributors to the threads, but must not have realised their own value on-line OR not care about no longer participating, to just leave like that.
Let's not equate it to the Rob Galbriath forums fiasco, which was totally different and in my opinion justified (rather than over-moralising <sactimomiously>, which some people may suspect of being the case here - if they are in support of Michael (most people who contribute).

Ted
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119167\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com

Boghb

  • Guest
James Russell ?
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2007, 10:43:07 am »

I opened a thread yesterday on the topic of this site's general anti-PC positions.  I thought my post was polite though critical.

It was deleted.

I find this site worse in that respect than RG because the moderator's actions here are arbitary -- not according to any pre-set criteria.  Michael just deletes what he does not like.

This is an affront to anyone who spends the time to post something of redeeming value to other readers.
Logged

mtomalty

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 541
    • http://www.marktomalty.com
James Russell ?
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2007, 11:13:51 am »

What possible F@#$ing connection does this thread have to do with Med. Format.

It belongs in the 'About this Site' section and,if it gets deleted or locked for whatever
reason,then we each have our own decision to make. Simple.

James exercised his option without the need for fanfare.

Please keep this section for thrashing 'Blad and pumping Phase.

Mark
Logged

Joe Behar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 305
James Russell ?
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2007, 11:46:32 am »

Quote
This is an affront to anyone who spends the time to post something of redeeming value to other readers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119189\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Holy s*@t,

Are we all forgetting a couple of things here?

1. Opinions are like a**holes..there's plenty of them around and they all stink.

2. This site belongs to Michael Reichmann, it is his to do with as he pleases.  He is offering people a forum to discuss, educate and exchange ideas. Under his rules. None of us have any right to say anything except thank you for the opportunity or, conversely, no thanks, I'll go elsewhere. When anyone of us sets up a website or discussion forum we will have exactly the same rights. We are guests here and some of the comments directed at our host are nothing short of rude.
Logged

Eric Zepeda

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
    • http://www.ericzepeda.com
James Russell ?
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2007, 11:47:36 am »

Quote
What possible F@#$ing connection does this thread have to do with Med. Format.

It belongs in the 'About this Site' section and,if it gets deleted or locked for whatever
reason,then we each have our own decision to make. Simple.

James exercised his option without the need for fanfare.

Please keep this section for thrashing 'Blad and pumping Phase.

Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119193\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Don't forget the Leaf lookers!
Logged
Eric Zepeda
 www.ericzepeda.com

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
James Russell ?
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2007, 12:27:12 pm »

Bob,

The post that I deleted was exceedingly rude and accusatory, and you posted it after being warned (as was everyone) that I had lost tolerance for further Lolita discussion. If you thunk that it was "polite though critical" then we have widely divergent perceptions of what "polite" means.

Frankly, you're luckly that I didn't ban you.

Don't push your luck.

Michael

Ps: For those that are interested, in the eight or so years that this forum and its predecessor has been in existence, and tens of thousands of messages and participants, other than spammers I have only deleted or banned 3 or 4 people.

I am a staunch believer in free speech. I just don't like being insulted and maligned in my own house.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2007, 12:27:45 pm by michael »
Logged

RicAgu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 267
James Russell ?
« Reply #11 on: May 23, 2007, 01:39:53 pm »

WOW!

I had ventured away for a few days and came back to this.  I don't really see the problem with the picture.  There was nothing bad about it in anyway.  From a psychological point of view the people that have a problem with it should look in the mirror and figure why THEY have a problem with it.  

The girls is not nude, not being touched and not exposing anything.  For anyone who has traveled South and Central America they will know that this is a very comon look in any doorway of shanty type towns.

From seeing the shot the first time I was a bit WOW, but not from the photographers point of view.  But from what the girl is trying to portray.  How much does she know?  What has she experienced?

As someone mentioned before. You can see the stuff Mapplethorpe did, Meisel for Madonna's Sex book etc.. etc.. and yes this is all adults being shot.  But you can look at many other people and one perfect example is Jock Sturges work.  I believe Sally Mann and Nan Goldin have also had similar type images.

I think, that many people are use to seeing Michael's work as more landscape and scenery type stuff.

I know James and he is a good guy and yes very opinionated.  I am not here to neither defend or rag on anyone.  But, I know James work and it shocks me that this picture offendes him.  He shoots models that are 15, 16, 18 in provocative clothing and gazes.  Sometime the girls could be barely 18 with a 15 year old look.  Something this industry is based on.  

Youth, beauty and sexiness.

It sucks that it has taken this road.  James, Troy and the rest of the guys will be missed.
Logged

william

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 472
James Russell ?
« Reply #12 on: May 23, 2007, 02:01:37 pm »

I don't intend to comment on the Lolita picture because everything's been said already.  Rather, my thoughts are regarding persons who may have withdrawn from this forum.  Don't get me wrong, James Russell seemed like a very knowledgeable guy and is an amazing photographer.  But people are acting like it's their own mother at stake here.  For all his knowledge and photographic skills, James is, to most of us, just some guy on the Internet.  I mean, if you know him, I can understand being miffed at his absence.  But for the rest of us -- come on!

I also think Michael has a perfectly valid point (not necessarily directed James) about not being maligned in his own house.  Disagreed with, sure, to the extent he's willing to put up with it.  But some of the comments (again, NOT necessarily James') verge on calling him a child pornographer.  We're free to think and say that, but Michael is equally free to kick us out of his private space when we do so.

Now, can we please get  back to medium format matters?  I could use a TFP model in Cleveland to help me test out my new P30+. :-)  (Seriously).
Logged

BlasR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 760
    • http://BMRWorldPhotos.com
James Russell ?
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2007, 02:44:10 pm »

Yes lets get back, to medium format,,


 how do you like your p30+?

BlasR
Logged
BlasR
  [url=http://www.BMRWORLDPHOTOS.CO

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
James Russell ?
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2007, 02:59:01 pm »

Quote
Yes lets get back, to medium format,,
 how do you like your p30+?

BlasR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119231\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Same question here. P30+ opinions ?

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

william

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 472
James Russell ?
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2007, 03:26:56 pm »

In all honesty, I haven't had a spare minute to really test it; been travelling like crazy.  Plus, my laptop hard drive crashed and died, which requires me to reinstall all my programs (like Photoshop, Lightroom, and Capture One), which I haven't had a chance to do yet.

Preliminarily, it's clear that high-ISO performance is better, the LCD screen is better, and shooting speed is somewhat better.

Quote
Same question here. P30+ opinions ?

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119233\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
James Russell ?
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2007, 03:53:30 pm »

Quote
I find this site worse in that respect than RG because the moderator's actions here are arbitary -- not according to any pre-set criteria.  Michael just deletes what he does not like.

This is an affront to anyone who spends the time to post something of redeeming value to other readers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119189\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You've got to be kidding! The RG site was a disater because RG didn't want anyone saying anything negative about people dropping dead presidents ($$) on his heavily advertised site. The forum police were Nazi-like in their zeal.

This site isn't ANYTHING like that. Short of yelling fire in a crowed theater, you can pretty much say what you like here.

As for the recent Lolita affair, it was way over the top, a major bandwidth sucker and not at all useful. Michael puts his images and opinions here therefore anyone can make judgements till the cows come home. Let us please see, discuss and JUDGE their images using the same vitriol heaped onto Michael. Enough.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2007, 03:55:52 pm by digitaldog »
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

awofinden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
James Russell ?
« Reply #17 on: May 23, 2007, 09:13:36 pm »

Quote
You've got to be kidding! The RG site was a disater because RG didn't want anyone saying anything negative about people dropping dead presidents ($$) on his heavily advertised site. The forum police were Nazi-like in their zeal.

This site isn't ANYTHING like that. Short of yelling fire in a crowed theater, you can pretty much say what you like here.

As for the recent Lolita affair, it was way over the top, a major bandwidth sucker and not at all useful. Michael puts his images and opinions here therefore anyone can make judgements till the cows come home. Let us please see, discuss and JUDGE their images using the same vitriol heaped onto Michael. Enough.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119244\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I absolutely agree, the RG site was so intolerant of views not shared by them and the moderator there was very rude to me on a number of occasions in private emails. This latest "incident" doesn't come close to the RG idiocy and I would hearby like to thank Michael for running the forum with such intelligence and tolerance.
Logged

nicolaasdb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
    • http://
James Russell ?
« Reply #18 on: May 24, 2007, 05:09:16 am »

my wife wasn't happy about the lolita affair either...but this site has a lot of valuable information and it is kind of nice to make an image controversial by the tittle alone! So let's get back to sharing info about medium format photography.

I love my AFDII...think my RZ67 is too heavy (or I am to weak and old) and the images created by my A65 are perfect....putting them into my LR makes them even better!!

AND I just tested the profoto 600B.....WOW....for such a small pack!! At full power I got a F32 at 125th at about 5 feet.....PERFECT
Logged

Boghb

  • Guest
James Russell ?
« Reply #19 on: May 24, 2007, 06:35:35 am »

Michael

This is not your house.  And if it is your position that you can arbitrarily regulate what people say based on your mood of the day, you should not pretend to run a free and open forum.

Anyway, you pulled my post not because it was rude but because it pointed out facts about your positions on a variety of subjects that was not flattering to your image.

The reason you do not ban me is because it would certainly be a greater loss to you than to me.  

And, my is not Bob; it is Babak.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up