Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Rob C on July 04, 2016, 06:34:16 am
-
Complaints have been aired recently about the fact that some non-professional MF photographers, or even non-MF photographers, have been posting on threads some would like to see kept for pros only.
I can fully understand the sentiment, one of the reason accounting for my own departure, years ago, from the BJP Forum as was. But there's a diffence: the BJP magazine used to sell itself as the voice of the professional, and certainly, for many years, only pros seemed to care enough about it to buy it, not least for its equipment reviews (excellent) and its sits. vac. columns that gradually became thinner and thinner. As a magazine, it was pretty dry, and focussed on the pro life. And that's why we bought it. As time progressed, there entered into play a sort of editorial change, with undue interest being focussed on 'students' and their accidental exposures made when loading film; a dilution of the professional concept, a fishing for new innocents.
Then came the Internet and the BJP website, where the forum was inevitably open to the world and its best-hidden secrets, some of whom now flooded the space with nonsense and, yes, abuse, the likes of which LuLa has never seen. Realising there was no control ever going to be implemented, simply out of the need to keep sales alive and, hopefully, grow within a wider maket as the pro one steadily shrank, I saw the pointlessness of keeping my voice there, so I voted with my mouse.
Now, LuLa has a different rôle to play than did the BJP, not least because it began life from the efforts of a photographic visionary, a man who not only wrote the words well, but also knew about walking the walk. And commerce was clearly not reason number one for existing. Thank you for your efforts and for your images, Michael. We all owe you.
Therefore, is it realistic to expect LuLa to provide key-entry sections today, so soon after the culture shock of the change from free to subscription? In the original scenario, the only question affecting the viewer was whether the twelve bucks represented or did not represent value to that person. Some issues occurred about copyright concerns, but I think they were resolved. Were Lula, today, to introduce more areas still closed to some viewers, I think it would not be seen in quite the same easy manner: you mean, one would pay, but still be barred access to the whole place? Really? Anybody about to eat that one?
In essence, if anyone thinks that a website open to all levels of photographer is not for him, then the challenge, surely, must be for him to start his own professionally exclusive website, not change somebody else's.
Rob C
-
Rob,
Conversations about precise tech subjects - eg. shimming a ground glass, or yaw on the Arca, are proceeding on this forum with a focused subcommittee of participants.
We may lose some guys who don't like this forum by keeping it open to random discussions and random participants, but I think everybody gains from this.
BTW, I got on well in person with Michael; he wasn't a "pro" photographer in any way, he explained to me, he had some sort of internet or telecom company and got it onto the stock exchange and took the money and ran. So historically this is not a forum which was founded for or by "working pros" like BJP.
Edmund
-
Rob,
Conversations about precise tech subjects - eg. shimming a ground glass, or yaw on the Arca, are proceeding on this forum with a focused subcommittee of participants.
We may lose some guys who don't like this forum by keeping it open to random discussions and random participants, but I think everybody gains from this.
BTW, I got on well in person with Michael; he wasn't a "pro" photographer in any way, he explained to me, he had some sort of internet or telecom company and got it onto the stock exchange and took the money and ran. So historically this is not a forum which was founded for or by "working pros" like BJP.
Edmund
A year or so back Michael listed every type of photography he had dabbled in. The only one he hadn't was wedding photography. Surely he got paid for some of the other types he had dabbled in which meant he was a professional? If he wasn't a professional then would you class him as an amateur? I think NOT.
-
eronald; stamper
If memory serves, Michael spent a lor of time doing photojournalism.
Keith,
Within the context of LuLa I am as status-agnostic as you are. I am writing in response to a post by somebody else stating that he was closing his account with Lula.
It doesn't matter to me if he does or does not; what matters to me is that we don't run throught the same shit that happened in BJP if we can avoid it. You were there, you know what happened, and how the replacement panned out, too.
I put it as a separate thread because in the original thread it would have vanished, and I think it's more important to be aware, than that. Maybe if Brexit had been better aired...
Rob
-
Rob,
Thanks for your post.
I have been a member of this site for many years, and have learned quite a bit from other members who were willing to share their knowledge of a particular subject. Hopefully someone has gained some information from my posts over the years.
I am 58 years old, and have been a professional photographer, for the past 12 years, and before a photographer most of my life. My business is small and localized, but I feel that many of the aspects of a small business at least in photography and printing are the same as a large shop.
What I have seen on this site in the past few years is a change, and a change towards a negative nature. So many folks on this site seem to respond to a post as if they actually made the Nikon, Canon, Phase One, (many others) camera. I understand they have a personal investment in the product due to the fact it was purchased, most of the same companies have no knowledge of these folks. Sure there are some lucky few that are "sponsored" by a company and I wish them the best. I also expect them to respond in a positive way toward any product that they are representing. It still offers no reason to post such a negative response that seemingly calls another person out, just like in the old west days (I am in the US). It's just not worth it, at least to me. What is gained by this type of post?
I find the method that many use on this site, of taking a post and breaking it down into individual sentences and quoting each sentence with a response to be rude, sorry just me. No problem with responding to a persons post with your own opinion but to take the time to break out each sentence to me is just not necessary, is hard to read, and takes up an inordinate amount of space on a page, and again is pain rude. I don't think anyone on this site, beside a very few have the real qualifications to do that. I also feel that is a direct form of intimidation as many folks more than likely do not have the html skills to do this type of response, or for that matter have the time to do, as they are more focused on attempting to run a business.
The other issue is just the nature of the internet, the impartiality that it allows. I feel that many of the posts written on this site, would not be said, if you were looking at that same person in the face. But that is the nature of the internet, and one it's greatest failings.
I saw Ken R's post yesterday, and said to myself, there goes another great poster, a photographer who has shared a lot of his personal techniques for both studio and landscape work. I hope Ken reconsiders and comes back to share with this site again.
At the same time, I don't feel this site should be only for "professionals" as that word in photography is a bit hard define again due to the nature of the internet and how it has totally changed the business model for photography, and the delivery of photographic work both printed and digital. A forum should be a friendly place, where someone can openly ask a question about a product or technique and in turn they should receive a positive answer that will help them move forward in their photographic quest.
Instead many of the posts here break down into personal attacks either because a person owns a particular camera brand or they happen to photograph in a certain style.
The internet is open for anyone to create their own web page and on that blog or site they should have the freedom to write in any fashion they choose, but on a public site such as this one, I do hope that folks can pass up some of the negative natured comments some of which recently have been disturbing to me also. If you have a problem with a poster, use a PM, take it off line or email a moderator.
LuLa is a great site and many folks here when posting should take a minute and remember Michael and his style of writing and try to keep the forum heading in a positive direction.
Paul Caldwell
-
It's a mix of different things... Some like to tease, others like to keep things on subject, some only care about imaging, others like to discuss technical aspects also/more, some have a great sense of humor and can't think at the first degree while others like to call a cat a cat, some live a stressful life others sip their morning coffee while looking at the sea, some only post a night after too many drinks, others post at work when they find a few minutes btwn meetings,...
There are differences of age, culture, financial resources, professional background, photographic talent, time spent taking pictures, relationship with equipment, some wouldn't mind photographing with a square box as long as DR is great, others like the sound of theit shutter when it clicks and that plays a huge role in their enjoyement of photography, some carve images with minute lighting set ups, others capture the world around them,...
Some don't care about brands, format,... and just look at results, others associate themselves with a certain type of equipment, some care about how good what they have is relative to their needs, others want to own the best... even when it isn't any longer.
You can look at these differences as an asset or as an issue.
I prefer to look at them as an asset from which I learn things.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
You don't need to be professional, which I consider is to make your living 100% from photography, to be a serious photographer. I take my own photography quite seriously and I have a clear artistic vision with it, but I don't intend it to finance my living. I don't want that pressure on me as that would hurt my artistic integrity, and besides I like my engineering work too and it makes good money (then I don't count my software related to photography ;) ).
But of course as a landscape photographer I don't have any deep understanding of a studio professional's workflow needs, but even within professional photography there are large differences, an architecture photographer is not having the same challenges as a wedding photographer. A hobbyist people photographer may know more about wedding photography than a professional architecture photographer.
I think the real "problem" here is still the old thing that MFD is very expensive and the actual image quality advantage isn't that meaningful to 95% of all real photography and people takes sides and there's a never-ending debate of why using MFD gear or not in this situation. Which I personally don't mind if it's discussed in a civilized manner. Making a forum like this closed for anyone that doesn't make their living using solely MFD gear this "problem" would largely disappear, but well most activity would disappear too.
-
The problems in LuLa have nothing to do with professional vs non professional.
It has simply to do with the fact that people with little or no experience in medium format photography insist on being the most vocal here, having opinions in every topic, derailing every discussion there is to suit their personal agenda. Every thread on page 3 onwards looks something like this.
- theodoros comes in and complaints that the camera does not do multishot. Throws random insults at PhaseOne in case the thread had nothing to do with them. Throws not so random insults in case it does.
- yunli song comes in and decrees that all CCD backs are junk that should be crushed and compacted.
- alter ego comes in and blesses us with his infinite knowledge without having touched anything medium format once in his life.
- Edmund comes in and makes some quip that I am sure sounded really funny in his head, complaints about the product in question even though the last time he had anything to do with medium format digital was a decade ago, switches smoothly to some nostalgic bit about how things were "back in the day" when others call him out on his BS.
Rinse, lather, repeat.
Tell me which thread in recent times has not de evolved into some combination of the above. Now look at the body of work (or lack there of) that the above 4 gentlemen have presented over the years.
Now you will see what the problem is.
-
I've learned quite a lot thanks to this forum and the people here.
I get inspired all the time from the professional and non professional images threads.
Besides, what gear you have and if you are or not a working professional doesn't make your opinion more important nor your knowledge more extensive and accurate. I already have a medium format camera (film only, but this forum is for both film and digital), and I would just need to register myself as a working professional. Will I become an expert overnight? Nope. Will I miss some of the contributors that would not fit in those criteria? Most probably yes.
-
The problems in LuLa have nothing to do with professional vs non professional.
It has simply to do with the fact that people with little or no experience in medium format photography insist on being the most vocal here, having opinions in every topic, derailing every discussion there is to suit their personal agenda. Every thread on page 3 onwards looks something like this.
- theodoros comes in and complaints that the camera does not do multishot. Throws random insults at PhaseOne in case the thread had nothing to do with them. Throws not so random insults in case it does.
- yunli song comes in and decrees that all CCD backs are junk that should be crushed and compacted.
- alter ego comes in and blesses us with his infinite knowledge without having touched anything medium format once in his life.
- Edmund comes in and makes some quip that I am sure sounded really funny in his head, complaints about the product in question even though the last time he had anything to do with medium format digital was a decade ago, switches smoothly to some nostalgic bit about how things were "back in the day" when others call him out on his BS.
Rinse, lather, repeat.
Tell me which thread in recent times has not de evolved into some combination of the above. Now look at the body of work (or lack there of) that the above 4 gentlemen have presented over the years.
Now you will see what the problem is.
I can mentioned a few more of us that contribute to repetitive patterns -- and that includes both you and me, but the thread subjects are usually repetitive too. It's the nature of camera technology, it's only that many pieces on a camera. And I don't really see what relevance "body of work" has in relation to for example knowing things about electronics. We also need to consider that not all people here express themselves natively in English, meaning that some come across harsher or more provocative than they really mean to. I don't think that reacting to that is constructive.
A professional body of work in some specific genre has relevance in terms of understanding the business realities and what functions that are actually needed in that specific genre. It doesn't necessarily give you expertise in specific questions about electronics, for example details about long exposure capability. Those you mention have all individually contributed with detailed knowledge new to me, and I value that although I don't agree with all their opinions about hardware or the importance of various features.
Look at Yunli's body of work and you see that high dynamic range and long exposure is very important aspects to him, so naturally the new CMOS is a killer. Look at my work and you see it's not that important to me, instead I have a hard time considering a camera without rich movements. We have different favorites and different reasons for them.
-
Hi Rob,
Thanks for posting.
My take is that LuLa has always been a good source of information. Also, I would say that the discussions used to be both wide and quite tolerant. The moderators tend to try to keep the discussions civilised bit, but avoid interfering to much.
A coin usually has two sides. I would say that any discussion should be open to both sides. As the late Michael Reichmann said, "Times are changing". Photography has gone trough many transitions, like the P45 generation of sensors challenging 4"x5" film: https://luminous-landscape.com/4x5-film-vs-digital/
Or for that matter Michael Reichmann's accidental comparison of the P45+ and the Canon G10: https://luminous-landscape.com/kidding/
Sharing information is almost always a good thing. Sharing proper information is an even better thing. LuLa has always been good at sharing proper information. Michael Reichmann not only shared web size images but also actual pixel crops and raw images.
Now, there are always individuals who have little respect for views that depart from those of their own. There are some individuals who love to make skeptical or even sarcastic remarks.
LuLa has always ben toolerant about this, unless posters used a foul language.
If you post on any forum, it may be that you view is contested. That is the nature of this forum and it is also the nature of a free discussion.
Best regards
Erik
Complaints have been aired recently about the fact that some non-professional MF photographers, or even non-MF photographers, have been posting on threads some would like to see kept for pros only.
I can fully understand the sentiment, one of the reason accounting for my own departure, years ago, from the BJP Forum as was. But there's a diffence: the BJP magazine used to sell itself as the voice of the professional, and certainly, for many years, only pros seemed to care enough about it to buy it, not least for its equipment reviews (excellent) and its sits. vac. columns that gradually became thinner and thinner. As a magazine, it was pretty dry, and focussed on the pro life. And that's why we bought it. As time progressed, there entered into play a sort of editorial change, with undue interest being focussed on 'students' and their accidental exposures made when loading film; a dilution of the professional concept, a fishing for new innocents.
Then came the Internet and the BJP website, where the forum was inevitably open to the world and its best-hidden secrets, some of whom now flooded the space with nonsense and, yes, abuse, the likes of which LuLa has never seen. Realising there was no control ever going to be implemented, simply out of the need to keep sales alive and, hopefully, grow within a wider maket as the pro one steadily shrank, I saw the pointlessness of keeping my voice there, so I voted with my mouse.
Now, LuLa has a different rôle to play than did the BJP, not least because it began life from the efforts of a photographic visionary, a man who not only wrote the words well, but also knew about walking the walk. And commerce was clearly not reason number one for existing. Thank you for your efforts and for your images, Michael. We all owe you.
Therefore, is it realistic to expect LuLa to provide key-entry sections today, so soon after the culture shock of the change from free to subscription? In the original scenario, the only question affecting the viewer was whether the twelve bucks represented or did not represent value to that person. Some issues occurred about copyright concerns, but I think they were resolved. Were Lula, today, to introduce more areas still closed to some viewers, I think it would not be seen in quite the same easy manner: you mean, one would pay, but still be barred access to the whole place? Really? Anybody about to eat that one?
In essence, if anyone thinks that a website open to all levels of photographer is not for him, then the challenge, surely, must be for him to start his own professionally exclusive website, not change somebody else's.
Rob C
-
It's a mix of different things... Some like to tease, others like to keep things on subject, some only care about imaging, others like to discuss technical aspects also/more, some have a great sense of humor and can't think at the first degree while others like to call a cat a cat, some live a stressful life others sip their morning coffee while looking at the sea, some only post a night after too many drinks, others post at work when they find a few minutes btwn meetings,...
There are differences of age, culture, financial resources, professional background, photographic talent, time spent taking pictures, relationship with equipment, some wouldn't mind photographing with a square box as long as DR is great, others like the sound of theit shutter when it clicks and that plays a huge role in their enjoyement of photography, some carve images with minute lighting set ups, others capture the world around them,...
Some don't care about brands, format,... and just look at results, others associate themselves with a certain type of equipment, some care about how good what they have is relative to their needs, others want to own the best... even when it isn't any longer.
You can look at these differences as an asset or as an issue.
I prefer to look at them as an asset from which I learn things.
Cheers,
Bernard
+1
P.S. See, Bernard, there ARE instances where we agree 100% :)
-
FWIW
1. If you have a problem with someone, Use the Ignore feature
2. If you still have a problem, report the offender to a Moderator.
This report isn't sneaking or snitching, it simply alerts me to a potential problem which I will look at. I do not have the time or inclination to read everything, therefore the Report to Moderator may be the first I hear of a possible problem.
I do use the Ban feature and have done so recently with Theodoros & AlterEgo who can log on but can no longer post
-
Hi Chris,
Just to say, I would make the point that AlterEgo is in all probability a very knowledgeable guy.
Best regards
Erik
FWIW
1. If you have a problem with someone, Use the Ignore feature
2. If you still have a problem, report the offender to a Moderator.
This report isn't sneaking or snitching, it simply alerts me to a potential problem which I will look at. I do not have the time or inclination to read everything, therefore the Report to Moderator may be the first I hear of a possible problem.
I do use the Ban feature and have done so recently with Theodoros & AlterEgo who can log on but can no longer post
-
Just to say, I would make the point that AlterEgo is in all probability a very knowledgeable guy.
Duly noted - thanks!
-
FWIW
1. If you have a problem with someone, Use the Ignore feature
2. If you still have a problem, report the offender to a Moderator.
This report isn't sneaking or snitching, it simply alerts me to a potential problem which I will look at. I do not have the time or inclination to read everything, therefore the Report to Moderator may be the first I hear of a possible problem.
I do use the Ban feature and have done so recently with Theodoros & AlterEgo who can log on but can no longer post
That is very sad to hear, I appreciated the contributions of Theodorus (even his frequent provocations ). I hope, bans in minor cases are temporary.
-
It's a mix of different things... Some like to tease, others like to keep things on subject, some only care about imaging, others like to discuss technical aspects also/more, some have a great sense of humor and can't think at the first degree while others like to call a cat a cat, some live a stressful life others sip their morning coffee while looking at the sea, some only post a night after too many drinks, others post at work when they find a few minutes btwn meetings,...
There are differences of age, culture, financial resources, professional background, photographic talent, time spent taking pictures, relationship with equipment, some wouldn't mind photographing with a square box as long as DR is great, others like the sound of theit shutter when it clicks and that plays a huge role in their enjoyement of photography, some carve images with minute lighting set ups, others capture the world around them,...
Some don't care about brands, format,... and just look at results, others associate themselves with a certain type of equipment, some care about how good what they have is relative to their needs, others want to own the best... even when it isn't any longer.
You can look at these differences as an asset or as an issue.
I prefer to look at them as an asset from which I learn things.
Cheers,
Bernard
Couldn't have expressed it better. I think the only limit should be personal insults which some members here obviously love … this is quite deterrent/ugly for a Newbie like me
-
This forum has never been "professionals only" what it has been is for people who use medium format. The constant re-railing of threads into rants or discussion to technical minute is frustrating but such are forums.
What really ruins it for me are personal attacks on other members. This was an area in which Theodorus really excelled and I am glad he is not here.
-
This forum has never been "professionals only" what it has been is for people who use medium format.
+1
(or at least would like to learn about MF)
OK, probably a dumb question, but I've got to ask.
Does the "Ignore Feature" exist or is that a joke?
-
+1
(or at least would like to learn about MF)
OK, probably a dumb question, but I've got to ask.
Does the "Ignore Feature" exist or is that a joke?
Click on Profile at the top of the page and you will find your Buddies/Ignore list
-
+1
P.S. See, Bernard, there ARE instances where we agree 100% :)
I have always thought there are many things we agree on. :)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Click on Profile at the top of the page and you will find your Buddies/Ignore list
-
+1
(or at least would like to learn about MF)
OK, probably a dumb question, but I've got to ask.
Does the "Ignore Feature" exist or is that a joke?
It exists and made the forum a lot more readable for me when used on Theo.
-
Happy to see the conversations becoming civilised again with fewer "my way is the only way and everybody else are indiots"...never used the ignore button and hoping not to look for it for a while although there are still a few troll-like posts coming up every now and again from folk who are eager to stirr the soup with pseudo-intelligent or pseudo-knowledgable dribble trying to poke holes in others opinions but also in vendors' business plans, products and market position, without ever backing things up with any real info or proof.
BR
Yair
-
Thank you Rob for posting. As Bernard hinted, I still feel the benefits of diversity in background and opinions outweigh the negativity and attacks. I think the feeling that it has gotten worse over time may simply be hearing the same thing repetitively gets old, and 5-10 years ago we had not yet heard it that many times. We could all use an occasional dose of “Wag More, Bark Less.”
I will turn this on its ear and show something below I was going to post several years ago. Never did because it was meant to be funny and I was afraid many would not take it that way. But given the topic, here it goes. Again it is old, so some of those referred to below have gone on to better places, either literally or figuratively. I also made a few minor updates. I only hope you all interpret this as a celebration of that diversity:
My ode to a few of the many great contributors to this forum.
I’m going to steal a few pages from the great but controversial climber Warren Harding. No, not the presidential “G” version of Warren Harding; this guy here (http://www.climbing.com/news/the-life-of-warren-quotbatsoquot-harding/), aka Batso. In the end of his book “Downward Bound,” he had the audacity to rate people he loved, revered, despised, climbed and associated with. His rating system was borrowed from Adams’ version of the Zone System, although as Galen Rowell used to point out, Warren erred by going from 1-10 instead of 0-10, and he certainly didn’t bother with roman numerals. In good tradition I will continue those mistakes here. 1 being a brilliant but dark, sinister person that few understand and most avoid at all cost. 10 being the revered folks who always do the right thing and everyone admires.
- BernardLanguillier – 8: Great photographer, trekker, and insightful poster. A potential 9 or 10, but there are just too many prayer flags and monasteries to the D3X/D800/D810 in his closet. He also spends far too much time knitting. That was knitting, right, or was it sewing?
- Wayne Fox – 9: Another great photographer. Wayne knows printing like no one else, and he has the best-looking avatar. His posts are always helpful, and he does something many of us have trouble with: In the midst of some off-in-the-weeds direction a thread goes, Wayne actually answers the OP’s question. Hmmf - what fun is that?
- Mark D Segal – 5: Mark has been extremely helpful to me personally with all my dopey scanning questions. He’s stuck there at a 5, perfect middle gray. Could be higher but he’s an economist, and economists are, well, just so economic.
- Schewe - 1: Ah, Mr. Schewe; the epitome of a 1. His wonderful contributions to the art and craft of photography make him at least as important to digital image processing as Harding was to climbing in the 60’s. Combine this with his dark, who-cares-who-I-piss-off approach to life, and I can only conclude that Jeff and Warren Harding should have been brothers. The only problem is Jeff enjoys a good bottle of wine, while Warren wanted nothing to do with the stuff unless it came in a one-gallon glass jug (boxed wine would work in a pinch). Also, I have no idea what kind of shirts Warren liked, but it probably wasn’t Hawaiian. I am worried, however. Recently there seems to be a bit of civility in Jeff’s posts. Or perhaps my sensitivity has been dulled…
- Madmanchan – 10: This guy is just plain perfect. Way-smart, gives away important stuff and tips on his website, always has something very valuable and important to say, yet never gets riled when some dud is mindlessly bashing the ACR/LR processing engine. Oh, and Eric takes really good pictures too. He is the Royal Robbins of digital image processing here at Lula.
- Michael – 9: Michael is an obvious candidate for a 10, but his well-known and frequent association with the sinister Mr. Schewe holds him back like a 600mm f/4 on a day-hike.
- Eric Myrvaagnes – 8: I think Eric’s a great photographer. But that name is a real marketing challenge. How ‘bout changing it to Cougar? Or Cougar-Myrvaagnes? Nevermind.
- Bjanes – 6: Wicked smart. But anyone who is wicked smart simply must be wicked too, even if it never shows! He is really a 10, but nobody else got a six, and sixes go with the word “wicked” quite well.
- Theodoros – : No score. Dark Energy does not fall within the zone system.
- Wolfnowl – 10: Gandolf, pure and simple. If there is a debate about the identity of some obscure plant or animal, my wallet is in Wolfnowl’s corner.
- Rob C – 4: Rob might very well score higher with others on this forum, but half the time I can’t tell what the hell he is saying. His wit and intellect brightens my day when I understand it, but most of the time he is in a far more enlightened space than me. He also often hints at a dark, disturbed past, so I couldn’t give him anything higher than a 5. Oh, and he’s using Windows Vista. Jeeze…
- BartvanderWolf – 6: See bjanes.
- Erikkaffehr – 10: Erik seems to know an awful lot about everything related to photography. From physics to composition, his posts just make sense. And, every post begins with a very diffusing, “Hi.”
- Eronald - 2: A bit like Rob in that he is often in a more enlightened space than me. The 2 is because he fits the Batso esteem quite well: Enormous contribution but constantly poking the Angry Bear. I can’t help but think someone from Phase One ran over his puppy in the not-so-distant past. The only thing keeping him from a “1” is his humor.
- Torger – 3: Would have scored higher, but Torger uses a technical camera. In fact, Torger carries the tech camera torch for us all. He is the person in the commons preaching to everyone (yet no one in particular) that dark days are ahead for the equipment he loves (and I love). When he isn’t wasting time posting he is wasting time producing valuable software, especially the Lumariver DOF App, which is the real unsung “Game Changer” in these parts. Ok I admit it. Probably too low of a score but I’m biased. Yeah, as if you didn’t already know that.
- Panopeeper – 10: We miss you.
If some are offended by all of this, then I blame it on reading too many Schewe posts. There are of course many other great contributors: Cheers to you all and thank you for your invaluable contributions to the Great Place. Oh, and I sure hope Rob has by now upgraded from Vista.
Semper Farcisimus!
-
Happy to see the conversations becoming civilised again with fewer "my way is the only way and everybody else are indiots"...never used the ignore button and hoping not to look for it for a while although there are still a few troll-like posts coming up every now and again from folk who are eager to stirr the soup with pseudo-intelligent or pseudo-knowledgable dribble trying to poke holes in others opinions but also in vendors' business plans, products and market position, without ever backing things up with any real info or proof.
BR
Yair
Neither have I, and probably won't. Why not? Because it's far easier to ignore their fresh posts instead, by not reading them, and yet almost impossible to achieve it in totality, in reality, because they sometimes annoy others enough to get themselves quoted, so you unavoidable get them a step removed. But the moment you see the name you know to stop wasting your time.
Rob
-
Nice listings, and obviously no offence taken.
But the computer tragedy lives on: Vista still hangs around on one computer, but it never handled a picture, because my PS6 wouldn't fit it. So PS6 lived on within the earlier XP machine kept just for Photoshop.
Then it got very tired and wanted to nap a lot more (did it snore!), so I bought a new, state-of-the-art Windows 8.1 which screwed me all over again, even refusing to accept the affections of my LaCie Blue Eye Pro calibration device that came bundled with the monitor. It also refused my Samsung cellphone, which was just as well, because I realised using that for pictures was a waste of time and opportunity. I rejected all the free marriage offers for W10, for who knows what it might have declared redundant? But I did make it to a later PS system.
Rob
-
Dave,
I love your list and I'm honored to have a spot on it.
As for marketing the name Myrvaagnes, I am forever grateful that my father never carried through on his one-time threat to anglicize the family name to
"QuagmireInletPromontory," which is a fairly literal translation of the three syllables. :D
Cheers,
Cougar
-
Eric,
The dog came over to see what I was laughing about. Hey, at least I now know how many syllables there are. I always thought it was either just one or ten, one for each letter!
Dave
-
How can I argue with a ranking that puts Michael and Bernard on top and Schewe at the bottom? I feel so comfortable in mediocrity! :P
Edmund
Thank you Rob for posting. As Bernard hinted, I still feel the benefits of diversity in background and opinions outweigh the negativity and attacks. I think the feeling that it has gotten worse over time may simply be hearing the same thing repetitively gets old, and 5-10 years ago we had not yet heard it that many times. We could all use an occasional dose of “Wag More, Bark Less.”
I will turn this on its ear and show something below I was going to post several years ago. Never did because it was meant to be funny and I was afraid many would not take it that way. But given the topic, here it goes. Again it is old, so some of those referred to below have gone on to better places, either literally or figuratively. I also made a few minor updates. I only hope you all interpret this as a celebration of that diversity:
My ode to a few of the many great contributors to this forum.
I’m going to steal a few pages from the great but controversial climber Warren Harding. No, not the presidential “G” version of Warren Harding; this guy here (http://www.climbing.com/news/the-life-of-warren-quotbatsoquot-harding/), aka Batso. In the end of his book “Downward Bound,” he had the audacity to rate people he loved, revered, despised, climbed and associated with. His rating system was borrowed from Adams’ version of the Zone System, although as Galen Rowell used to point out, Warren erred by going from 1-10 instead of 0-10, and he certainly didn’t bother with roman numerals. In good tradition I will continue those mistakes here. 1 being a brilliant but dark, sinister person that few understand and most avoid at all cost. 10 being the revered folks who always do the right thing and everyone admires.
- BernardLanguillier – 8: Great photographer, trekker, and insightful poster. A potential 9 or 10, but there are just too many prayer flags and monasteries to the D3X/D800/D810 in his closet. He also spends far too much time knitting. That was knitting, right, or was it sewing?
- Wayne Fox – 9: Another great photographer. Wayne knows printing like no one else, and he has the best-looking avatar. His posts are always helpful, and he does something many of us have trouble with: In the midst of some off-in-the-weeds direction a thread goes, Wayne actually answers the OP’s question. Hmmf - what fun is that?
- Mark D Segal – 5: Mark has been extremely helpful to me personally with all my dopey scanning questions. He’s stuck there at a 5, perfect middle gray. Could be higher but he’s an economist, and economists are, well, just so economic.
- Schewe - 1: Ah, Mr. Schewe; the epitome of a 1. His wonderful contributions to the art and craft of photography make him at least as important to digital image processing as Harding was to climbing in the 60’s. Combine this with his dark, who-cares-who-I-piss-off approach to life, and I can only conclude that Jeff and Warren Harding should have been brothers. The only problem is Jeff enjoys a good bottle of wine, while Warren wanted nothing to do with the stuff unless it came in a one-gallon glass jug (boxed wine would work in a pinch). Also, I have no idea what kind of shirts Warren liked, but it probably wasn’t Hawaiian. I am worried, however. Recently there seems to be a bit of civility in Jeff’s posts. Or perhaps my sensitivity has been dulled…
- Madmanchan – 10: This guy is just plain perfect. Way-smart, gives away important stuff and tips on his website, always has something very valuable and important to say, yet never gets riled when some dud is mindlessly bashing the ACR/LR processing engine. Oh, and Eric takes really good pictures too. He is the Royal Robbins of digital image processing here at Lula.
- Michael – 9: Michael is an obvious candidate for a 10, but his well-known and frequent association with the sinister Mr. Schewe holds him back like a 600mm f/4 on a day-hike.
- Eric Myrvaagnes – 8: I think Eric’s a great photographer. But that name is a real marketing challenge. How ‘bout changing it to Cougar? Or Cougar-Myrvaagnes? Nevermind.
- Bjanes – 6: Wicked smart. But anyone who is wicked smart simply must be wicked too, even if it never shows! He is really a 10, but nobody else got a six, and sixes go with the word “wicked” quite well.
- Theodoros – : No score. Dark Energy does not fall within the zone system.
- Wolfnowl – 10: Gandolf, pure and simple. If there is a debate about the identity of some obscure plant or animal, my wallet is in Wolfnowl’s corner.
- Rob C – 4: Rob might very well score higher with others on this forum, but half the time I can’t tell what the hell he is saying. His wit and intellect brightens my day when I understand it, but most of the time he is in a far more enlightened space than me. He also often hints at a dark, disturbed past, so I couldn’t give him anything higher than a 5. Oh, and he’s using Windows Vista. Jeeze…
- BartvanderWolf – 6: See bjanes.
- Erikkaffehr – 10: Erik seems to know an awful lot about everything related to photography. From physics to composition, his posts just make sense. And, every post begins with a very diffusing, “Hi.”
- Eronald - 2: A bit like Rob in that he is often in a more enlightened space than me. The 2 is because he fits the Batso esteem quite well: Enormous contribution but constantly poking the Angry Bear. I can’t help but think someone from Phase One ran over his puppy in the not-so-distant past. The only thing keeping him from a “1” is his humor.
- Torger – 3: Would have scored higher, but Torger uses a technical camera. In fact, Torger carries the tech camera torch for us all. He is the person in the commons preaching to everyone (yet no one in particular) that dark days are ahead for the equipment he loves (and I love). When he isn’t wasting time posting he is wasting time producing valuable software, especially the Lumariver DOF App, which is the real unsung “Game Changer” in these parts. Ok I admit it. Probably too low of a score but I’m biased. Yeah, as if you didn’t already know that.
- Panopeeper – 10: We miss you.
If some are offended by all of this, then I blame it on reading too many Schewe posts. There are of course many other great contributors: Cheers to you all and thank you for your invaluable contributions to the Great Place. Oh, and I sure hope Rob has by now upgraded from Vista.
Semper Farcisimus!
-
If all I need to do to get a 10 is buy a Canon 5Ds/H6D, consider it done! ;)
Very flatteted by the inclusion in the list and by the kind words!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Complaints have been aired recently about the fact that some non-professional MF photographers, or even non-MF photographers, have been posting on threads some would like to see kept for pros only.
James Russell (http://russellrutherford.com), known here under the handle "bcooter", announced today that he will clear all his posts and leave.
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=111226.msg922403#msg922403 (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=111226.msg922403#msg922403)
-
If all I need to do to get a 10 is buy a Canon 5Ds/H6D, consider it done! ;)
Very flatteted by the inclusion in the list and by the kind words!
Cheers,
Bernard
We "8s" need to stick together, Bernard.
;)
Eric
-
James Russell (http://russellrutherford.com), known here under the handle "bcooter", announced today that he will clear all his posts and leave.
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=111226.msg922403#msg922403 (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=111226.msg922403#msg922403)
In another thread, started by James, he and Ronald seem to have made their peace. I hope so.
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=75783.2260 (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=75783.2260)
-
It is not about being a professional or not. Actually owning and using medium format digital gear helps but this forum also serves prospective buyers.
The big problem I have is that a very vocal minority dedicates themselves to sow discord in this and other forums. Basically trolling. It is quite sad. Even though their info is quite a few times right they are wrong with their (lack of) communication skills and come across like naggy chronically unhappy and unsatisfied folk. Over and over again post after post the same arguments are repeated. They are also kings of the straw man. Plus they almost always focus on what the product does not have rather than what it offers.
They might as well just get a A7RII and be happy, if that is possible.
Good day.
-
Great job, Edmund! You have driven away yet another talented photographer from this forum!
I can't wait till this forum is nothing but an echo chamber of you, Theo, Voidshatter, Manoli etc. throwing catchphrases like"Expensive! Multishot! Dynamic Range!" Etc. around with no one else left to care.
Golf clap.
/sarcasm
-
Hi,
Edmund has actually owned a P45 and also had a P45+ as replacement. Did not work for him.
I also own a P45+ and I am less enthusiastic about it than most owners. I am more interested in image making capability than bragging rights, but I am still using the P45+.
I don't think this subforum is reserved for professionals, whatever professional may mean. Could be it is intended for mutual admiration, but I don't think that is really the case.
This forum is visited by many advanced photographers. It is not a great idea to discuss camera movements on the other subforums.
Chris Barret was a frequent and good poster here, but left the MF subforum when he saddled over to lesser format, see this thread: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=101458.0
Chris really took the consequences of leaving MF and also left this subforum. I don't think that was a great benefit. I would rather have him staying and sharing his experience.
Best regards
Erik
It is not about being a professional or not. Actually owning and using medium format digital gear helps but this forum also serves prospective buyers.
The big problem I have is that a very vocal minority dedicates themselves to sow discord in this and other forums. Basically trolling. It is quite sad. Even though their info is quite a few times right they are wrong with their (lack of) communication skills and come across like naggy chronically unhappy and unsatisfied folk. Over and over again post after post the same arguments are repeated. They are also kings of the straw man. Plus they almost always focus on what the product does not have rather than what it offers.
They might as well just get a A7RII and be happy, if that is possible.
Good day.
-
A negative minority should be "silenced" by the Administrators.
What else is there role?
I read more and more great contributors to throw in the towel on MF. An Ignore button is not a solution.
Administrator should warn negativists that this is not acceptable (and remove their post), to the satisfaction of the large majority.
-
If I banned all the negative authors, the carpers and complainers, we would end up with a nice clean santized mono culture. Many might be happier with that.
Sorry folks, ain't going to happen on my watch. I ban only occasionally when the screeching irritates or when the civil compact is lost. This Forum is, for better or worse, made up of members from the public. It is not a private club but is free and open to all. You are free to come or go. You may choose to contribute or not - it is naturally entirely up to you. You make it or break it.
-
Another thing to consider: not every section of LuLa is designated as open to 'critique', and if that's your bag, you can do it under the User's Critiques section. And even there I felt it necessary to introduce a thread called Without Prejudice simply as a 'safe house' to enable people to show their pictures without the unwanted chorus of second-guessers that inevitably chimes in with its post-event wisdom. Some, for their own reasons, may actually want such comments, but many do not.
Any thread which shows pro-work should not, in my mind, ever be subjected to 'critiques' for several reasons, not the least being that the man who has enough ability to be a pro, and do good work, hardly requires 'technique' help from people who are not his equals. If nothing more, it's just bloody rude and offensive.
If one likes the work, then it's nice to say so; if not, then why say anything?
Rob C
-
The problem comes not from critique itself, but critique from people who have nothing to show as a body of work or at least, some proof that they possess an iota of artistic ability.
-
The thing is it's not about me. I photograph models and actors for commerce and when they receive negative comments, it's not just hurtful to their feelings, it also can affected their brand and commerce.
Same with clients and that nobody wants to see.
I loved sharing here and truly enjoy 99.999% of the people that participate, whether I agree with them or not. As you say it's our decision to stay or leave and on that I'm kind of on the fence.
I just think the risk is high and I just couldn't stand it if the people I collaborate with in my profession had any negative blowback directed towards them, just because I shared an image.
Now what you are posting is important and I suppose that many members here ignore the damage they can do to one career with a negative comment. May I suggest you add something like this to your messages: "You may comment on my pictures, but please do not comment on models or products pictured, as it may be detrimental to their image"? You may draft it as a signature, for example.
I suppose that is why you were upset by the comment that the young model looked like "someone from Mars". Probably eronald, who worked in colour science, referred to the green tint of her skin (Mars is supposed to have little green men, remember?), which you obviously manipulated on purpose. But many readers apparently understood that it was about her slightly frightened, detached look, as it indeed conveyed the emotion that she was alien to this world. The later would be a direct criticism of her looks, while the former is a simple comment that eronald prefers skin colours to look natural.
As a side note: this kind of colour manipulations are quite fashionable at present in the advertisement business, but maybe eronald did not realise that.
-
If I banned all the negative authors, the carpers and complainers, we would end up with a nice clean santized mono culture. Many might be happier with that.
Sorry folks, ain't going to happen on my watch. I ban only occasionally when the screeching irritates or when the civil compact is lost. This Forum is, for better or worse, made up of members from the public. It is not a private club but is free and open to all. You are free to come or go. You may choose to contribute or not - it is naturally entirely up to you. You make it or break it.
Not all negative authors just 2 or 3 would have done the trick. I agree that being open to the public is key for this and other forums and moderating is not that simple.
I choose to leave after 11 years, please delete my account and all my posts. Thank you.
-
Hi BC,
Thanks for explaining, I was not aware of that part.
I always enjoyed your writing, sometimes I would not agree, but that is a different thing. You used to be one of the great contributors to these forums, so you would be missed.
I see your point and have a lot of sympathy for it.
Best regards
Erik
Chris,
We all appreciate you and your efforts. It's a very under appreciated job you do.
Since this last situation, I've been contacted by a lot of people, some asking me to stay involved, some understanding why I wouldn't.
The thing is it's not about me. I photograph models and actors for commerce and when they receive negative comments, it's not just hurtful to their feelings, it also can affected their brand and commerce.
Same with clients and that nobody wants to see.
I loved sharing here and truly enjoy 99.999% of the people that participate, whether I agree with them or not. As you say it's our decision to stay or leave and on that I'm kind of on the fence.
I just think the risk is high and I just couldn't stand it if the people I collaborate with in my profession had any negative blowback directed towards them, just because I shared an image.
Thanks for all you do.
BC
-
Not all negative authors just 2 or 3 would have done the trick. I agree that being open to the public is key for this and other forums and moderating is not that simple.
I choose to leave after 11 years, please delete my account and all my posts. Thank you.
Now that's lazy!
;-)
Rob
-
I don't see the complaints as having anything to do with professional status or otherwise. Frankly I don't give a rat's arse how a contributor earns his keep, I will only gauge opinion based on experience and ability.
+1
Track record (of usefulness, to the individual if one is selfish, or to others) it is....
Personal issues/traits (either of a poster or reader) are irrelevant then.
Cheers,
Bart
-
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074756321500268X
At least science tells us it is valuable to participate in online forum, if not in this forum. ;)
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8777/28294004555_7d17c119d9_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
If one likes the work, then it's nice to say so; if not, then why say anything?
Rob C
Thanks for putting it like that, Rob.
That is exactly the way I see it. Outside of the Critique section, if I like something a lot, I will say so, and if I don't like it, I will keep quiet.
Eric M.
-
I'd say that if all we saw was positive comments then it just becomes mutual back slapping and worthless congratulation. In my opinion one well expressed negative reaction can provide the impetus for change, growth and improvement.
But why should I give a shit? I rarely comment on images now and almost never bother to offer anything that can be construed as negative unless it's plain the author welcomes such.
If I was a pro I doubt I would publish anything here if I thought negative comments could harm my relationship with a client. I would only do so in a closed forum not available to the public/clients.
Mike
-
But why should I give a shit? I rarely comment on images now and almost never bother to offer anything that can be construed as negative unless it's plain the author welcomes such.
My opinion exactly.
-
Something else. It seems that some members resent when members who do not use a MF camera post on this sub-forum. This is a picture of my H4D-50. I have seen other people using this method as a proof of owning a camera in other forums.
-
Something else. It seems that some members resent when members who do not use a MF camera post on this sub-forum. This is a picture of my H4D-50. I have seen other people using this method as a proof of owning a camera in other forums.
You mean you didn't borrow or steal one? ;) It doesn't prove anything. :)
-
You mean you didn't borrow or steal one? ;) It doesn't prove anything. :)
Wow, this is getting kind of ridiculous now. I never understood why somebody would have to own a medium format to post in this section. I very much prefer a good comment of a non owner to a stupid one from a MF user. As cooter mentioned in one of his unfortunately soon to go postings (still hope he´s just having a bad day, and I´m with Bart on this topic), this section was the place where most professionals are / were reading and contributing and it used to be the place where I could be reached. Now I have to check the lighting section as well… and I already feel I spend way too much time here.
-
Wow, this is getting kind of ridiculous now. I never understood why somebody would have to own a medium format to post in this section. I very much prefer a good comment of a non owner to a stupid one from a MF user. As cooter mentioned in one of his unfortunately soon to go postings (still hope he´s just having a bad day, and I´m with Bart on this topic), this section was the place where most professionals are / were reading and contributing and it used to be the place where I could be reached. Now I have to check the lighting section as well… and I already feel I spend way too much time here.
I never said or implied I was a professional.
The problem comes not from critique itself, but critique from people who have nothing to show as a body of work or at least, some proof that they possess an iota of artistic ability.
Neither did I say or imply that I possessed an iota of artistic ability.
...but fortunately for the forum, I don't post much. Maybe I should stop completely.
-
I never said or implied I was a professional.
Neither did I say or imply that I possessed an iota of artistic ability.
...but fortunately for the forum, I don't post much. Maybe I should stop completely.
Landscapephoto, I´m sorry you completely got me wrong. I could´t care less if you own MF gear or not, your opinion is very welcome to me. Looks like this is the week of the thin-skinned...
-
I believe that most points-of-view have now been expressed. Time to take a deep breath and move on. I have locked the topic. Send me a PM or Report to Moderator should you feel you need this topic re-opened.