Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: Kevin Raber on November 23, 2015, 05:32:46 pm
-
Today we anounce a change for Luminous-Landscape. Luminous-Landscape will become a membership website on November 30th, 2015. Please read the article and view the video on this announcement. View the article and video. (https://luminous-landscape.com/important-news-change-at-luminous-landscape/)
UPDATE: Even though it is mentioned throughout the many posts on the next 16 plus pages. . . The Forum will remain free to use with the exception of the For Sale topic. Anyone can view the topic, however if you want to post in the topic you will have to be a member.
-
Bravo guys, I will sign up as soon as I see it is available. It's a small price to pay to support the site we all know and love. Frankly as I was reading the announcement I was worried about what the price would be ... but then to see $12, including videos! Easily the best deal around [although you know, once we are paying customers we might start to demand more Schewe :)]
-
Watch out for what you wish for. As we said we have some mighty plans.
-
I welcome and support the change. As photographers, we hate when someone asks us to work for "exposure," i.e., for free. The site of this magnitude and significance in the photographic community is not cheap to run. The internet, in its infancy, spoiled us with free stuff. Time to pay for things worth paying. Let alone such an extremely reasonable amount as $1 per month.
-
Sounds like a great deal.
Les
-
Watch out for what you wish for. As we said we have some mighty plans.
I was cool with it until more Schewe......(note lack of smiley faces or any other inference to this being a joke)
-
Kiven,
Just saw your video and read the article about the site becoming a membership. I have to admit when I first starting viewing the video I thought the price would be to high. Howerver when you said only $12 a year and it included the videos I said WOW this a great deal. That's just a couple of coffees at Star Bucks. I think this will be a great new way for Luminous Landscape. I assume that once you signup you will have access to all the current videos? By the way I did not see where to signup so I assume this takes place on November 30th for joining?
Cheers,
Stu
-
Outstanding idea guys. I've been supporting your work for many years, and will happily continue to do so in the future. Lula is the best photography related website ever. Period. I enjoy each and every one of your articles and videos, specially those with Jeff, which is a character on its own ;) The new model is an incredible value.
Looking forward to it.
Many thanks.
Martin
-
The changes to the new membership site will take place on November 30th sometime during the day presuming everything we are working on stays on schedule. We are working hard on making it as easy as possible to set up your membership. Thanks for the positive support.
-
Price is fair. Hope you make it. It's going to be interesting, since many will think they can get the same stuff elsewhere.
-
Totally reasonable (actually, well beyond totally reasonable) and I applaud you guys for a creative solution to the problem.
-
I was initially disappointed at this news until I saw the price, I feared it would mirror the $150 subscription for the videos which frankly was not good value. However, $12 a year is exceptionally good value for the content offered and videos too!
Good luck with the new venture, I'll be along for the ride.
-
This is an absolute bargain, and I will definitely join!
Thank you SO MUCH for all that you do! I really appreciate you guys!
-
I too welcome and support this change. So I'll become a paying member soon.
But I am wondering, does this mean that the forums will become members only? If so, how will you entice new members into enrolling in case they cannot see the contents of the forums in advance?
-
You should offer a 'Charter Member' designation for the first year members, or a $15 membership with $3 of that going to the Endowment directly.
Don't mean to make things more complicated but I bet there's a lot of people who would be willing to pay a little more to give and get a little more. ;)
-
Hey guys, here in the USA you can't buy a bottle of 20 OZ Coke for less than $1.69, so count me in!
Thanks Micheal, Kevin and Chris!
Christopher
-
Fair enough. Sounds like a good deal.
-
I regret that shan't be signing up, but I wish you the best.
-
Well done to all of you. If you can make this work (and I suspect you can), I'll be thrilled with it. It's a great offer.
-
Fair enough.
ps: Please have member option to not "auto-renew" at end of 12 months.
If I croak, it's just one more thing my daughter has to cancel.
-
Excellent! I'm in!
-
I regret that shan't be signing up, but I wish you the best.
Oh, no, Andrew, who am I going to spar with!? :(
-
A million readers a month means you are going to make a million dollars a month. Or so you think because I, (and I am sure a lot of other people) will not support your greed. You will be very lucky to get one percent of those million to sign up.
Even the expressions and tone of your video hide an obvious "pretend not to notice" from you that you are going to be even filthier rich than you already are. Come on boys at least be honest you want to make a god damn killing !
-
Let me expand, a little, actually, since it arguably could be useful.
I don't get value from this site, I get something on a spectrum between entertainment and boredom-relief. Sometimes it's fun (entertaining). Sometimes it's irritating (also kind of entertaining). Sometimes it's just a place to go click around because I don't want to do something else (boredom-relief).
The price is perfectly reasonable, $12 is cheap. I can afford it.
But I'm not willing to pay a nickle for the privilege of wasting time I ought to be spending elsewhere, so $12 is infinitely too high -- for me. Your mileage, as they say, may vary. I see a lot of discussion in the technical forums that is probably very useful, it's just not my cup of tea. I'm probably not a very interesting member of the audience. The advertisers aren't at all interested in me, because I am literally never going to give them one cent.
Going subscription may well produce a more targeted audience to advertise against as well as, of course, funding a higher grade of content (which will in turn bring in those high-value eyeballs). I certainly don't know.
But, anyways. Good luck, and I'll be hanging about until the doors slam shut.
-
I too welcome and support this change. So I'll become a paying member soon.
But I am wondering, does this mean that the forums will become members only? If so, how will you entice new members into enrolling in case they cannot see the contents of the forums in advance?
I agree with Cem here - $12 (USD I presume?) is a no-brainer for us long-time members, but how are new people going to know it is "good enough" to pay for?
Cheers!
Kevin
-
Not for me thanks. Only the occasional article is of interest to me. I like the site very much, but it completely lacks the quality to put it on a pedestal above all the free-to-read sites. It is good, sure, but their equal, not their better.
We all know you are already making a living, so it looks like a greedy grab at our pockets. I hope it backfires TBH and I predict that it will.
As for posters saying 'the free internet is the way of the past', they are completely wrong and the opposite is the truth.
Just watch what happens to your advertising revenue once they see your viewing numbers crash.
Just watch all your discussion forums dry up and threads become incestuous with the same old 'buddies' boosting each other's egos and bullying anyone who dares to differ.
Of course, what few females and youth are presently interested in your message will evaporate, you know, less disposable income in general, but hey if you want to discourage diversity and focus on middle-to-old-age men, pros and superannuated retirees, that's your business and the loss of social diversity is your loss.
The decision appears to be locked in, too bad, but I hope you see sense after a short journey and return to open communications. Because I'll be sorry to lose you.
cheers
-
And one question, broken out separately:
What will happen to existing accounts? Will they be deleted, or simply left fallow? If fallow, will PMss be disabled in a user-friendly way? In particular, I should hate to get email saying "You have a new PM from some guy who stumbled across your post from 7 years back" and to find myself unable to reply, and really, it would be best if "some guy" couldn't PM me at all (got a user-friendly "that user is not active" message, e.g.) but COULD read the content I've left here over the years.
-
Interesting that several folks who feel that this shift is motivated by "greed" and that the content is not worth 12 bucks also seem to go on about how much they'll miss access. Seems like a mixed message...
Marco
-
Oh, no, Andrew, who am I going to spar with!? :(
You can always read my dumb blog where, in the words of Robert Heinlein, "you can spit on the mat and call the cat a bastard" for no money whatsoever!
-
Hi, I'm a casual photographer who enjoys occasionally reading your posts. When I read this announcement, the first thing I thought of was Taylor Hicks during his American Idol run, funnily enough. He was very popular then, so popular in fact he never ended up in the bottom 3 and he eventually won the competition that year. And he was so proud of his fans that he dubbed them the Soul Patrol. I think you know how that story goes. When he launched his first album, the legions of fans did not translate into album sales and it tanked.
Besides the quality of your posts, the vibrancy of your forums is also great. However, I won't subscribe to find out whether it remains so. The "firewall" will inevitably lead to a sharp drop in viewers and members, so I think the vibrancy of the forums will also take a dramatic hit. Certainly while I love photography, paying monthly for a website is not what I will do unless absolutely necessary. I'll just go to other websites for my photography info, and I think many will do the same. I'm sure you are perfectly cognizant of your own Soul Patrol out there. Nonetheless, I fully empathise with this move and I wish you all the best. I'll just not be reading, or posting here after that. As they say, I'm keeping it real.
-
Web advertising has changed in the last year or so, and it's getting very difficult for small publishers ("content providers" -- hate that term) to make money any more. I've been seeing this sort of model elsewhere, and certainly this is not unexpected here. It's not a matter of greed so much as how much it costs to run a site like this. Once the ad revenue dries up, there would be no LuLa.
The "million dollars a month" comment reminds me of every time I would tell my day rate to a client -- there would be a pause while they did the mental math. "Day rate times 365 = dang that's a lot of money" and then they would assume I was rich and didn't need their job. Like anyone is billing a full day rate every single day.
Count me in. It's a bargain, even if most of what I do here is time-wasting. :) I do get the occasional useful tidbit, which is well worth twelve bucks a year.
-
To be very honest for the last year or so this site has been dragging mostly the articles, I enjoy the forums on occasion and even people I have fought with like Andrew Rodney have been helpful, but to be honest I need more Michael and he has been less here then he once was and less of Mr Raber. Money for me is always an issue and this price is more then fair for the old LL but I want to know it will be more Michael. The internet is aging and another site I once loved sports shooter.com is not what it once was either.
-
Dear Kevin and Michael,
I have followed your site almost from the beginning, and have gotten A LOT out of it. Thank you. $12 is definitely worth it. However, I would like to suggest that, just like you commit to end advertising after the first $50,000 people sign up, that you also commit to devoting x% of all revenue above the minimum needed to maintain the website to your photography grants project. In many ways this can become an upward-spiraling crowdfunding idea for photography projects around the world. Wouldn't that be grand?
-
US$1 a month? Good oh.
-
This change is way beyond fair enough. I will sign up the the $12/year without hesitation.
-
A million readers a month means you are going to make a million dollars a month. Or so you think because I, (and I am sure a lot of other people) will not support your greed. You will be very lucky to get one percent of those million to sign up.
Even the expressions and tone of your video hide an obvious "pretend not to notice" from you that you are going to be even filthier rich than you already are. Come on boys at least be honest you want to make a god damn killing !
Really?! As if!! A million readers a month is not a million subscribers!! It's a million times someone has accessed the page - either me a million times or you and I a half million times each or a million people once (highly unlikely, don't you think!)
BTW - if Michael, Kevin and Chris are becoming filthy rich, then all the more power to them as they are offering a decent service at a respectable price. That's what business is all about (and I support the left!) Let's face it - you get what you pay for, hence the poor quality of free sites.
BTW2 - 1% of 1 million is 10,000 or $120,000. That's a good start!
It's funny this should arrive in my inbox today as I just received a renewal notice for a photo magazine. I'm ditching it as it is primarily ads or ad-driven.
Lu-La, on the other hand is worth it at twice the price. I'll gladly save $22.99 by not buying the photo rag and spend $12 for access here. The Forum, alone, is worth it.
Thanks guys. A courageous decision, but a healthy one (especially if it rids us of the trolls!!)
-
Huh??.. $12/year for the video content both old and yet to be, and forum access to what in my opinion is one of if not the best photography resources there is... How can anyone not believe this isn't a bargain??
I'm in.
Thanks!
-
The price is right, and if it keeps things going strong, I'm all for it.
I'll sign up as soon as it's available.
8)
G
-
It is long overdue. Easily worth $1 a month. Easily Please keep up the passionate, good work. Thanks.
MRR
-
Michael, Kevin...
Bravo! I'm in. Great idea. What I've learned from this site is invaluable. You guys, Andrew Rodney, Jeff Schewe, Eric Chan and literally scores of others who are genuine experts have upped my knowledge and increased my pleasure in photography.
Oh, and as far as the "greed" comments from some others is concerned, my take is this - a good idea and value deserves to be rewarded. I hope you all get filthy rich while you continue to provide the best photo web site on the Internet!
My best to you all as you move forward.
Rand
-
At first I though oh no (anyone remember the robgalbraith forums?) but LL is much more than a forum and you guys have been improving the content (quality of production and content) every month and have stayed relevant with all the changes in photography techniques and equipment. I hope not many people shy away from LL due to this and on the contrary, more continue to join in. It is a good community.
I myself wish you guys the best and will continue my support.
-
If they could get rid of the articles by that Egotist Alain Briot it might be worth it.
-
Hi guys :)
Kept lurking around the site occasionally for the last few months, due to doing other things and will probably go back to lurking until what I am doing is finished, but at $12 a year (about £8 in proper money) for access to all the previous content from the last 15 years, then count me in.
Sorry to see Andrew (amolitor) go, as I had a lot of respect for what he contributes on this forum, even when he was telling me he hated one of my images so much because he liked it, so I hope he reconsiders as the forum would be losing an excellent contributor if he goes.
I too would like to see the trolls dropping off the bottom and agree that this might be a way of discouraging them, but I also wouldn't like to see too many of Andrews calibre dropping off the top either.
Anyway, back to lurking - probably see you in spring, so have a nice Christmas everyone ;D
Dave
-
Would be cheap at twice the price.
Regards,
Dale
-
I am absolutely in.
Good luck Michael and Kevin and all involved.
May the games begin!
-Mark
-
At first I though oh no (anyone remember the robgalbraith forums?).....etc
Yes, the the shooting star that was Rob Galbraith forums were nothing less than awesome, and much lamented. I basically learned the ways of digital at Rob Galbraith when we were struggling to get our heads around the Canon 1D and 1Ds. Heady days. The generosity was just fabulous. In particular a prolific poster named Noel Carboni was a notable instructor who hauled a lot of people through the now forgotten confusion.
No less impressive is LL. $12.00 per year is a gift. Thank you.
-pw
-
As for greed, well, ain't nobody getting rich here.
The Lula staff are perfectly intelligent folks and as such probably have a pretty good idea what kind of conversion rates they can expect. They're looking at 10,000 to 20,000 subscribers. This to replace some ad revenue.
They probably clear in the low six figures on workshops annually. This might or might not be considered Lula money, but either way it's putting bread on Michael and Kevin's tables.
I dunno what they're making on ads, but I am confident that number is trending briskly the wrong way for a variety of reasons.
A concern with three full time staff that is grossing under a million bucks a year, and probably closer to half that, is maybe keeping the mortgages paid but it ain't generating no vast riches.
-
I don't get value from this site, I get something on a spectrum between entertainment and boredom-relief. Sometimes it's fun (entertaining). Sometimes it's irritating (also kind of entertaining). Sometimes it's just a place to go click around because I don't want to do something else (boredom-relief).
The price is perfectly reasonable, $12 is cheap. I can afford it.
But I'm not willing to pay a nickle for the privilege of wasting time I ought to be spending elsewhere, so $12 is infinitely too high -- for me.
Interesting. Makes me aware of my frivolity, as in most months I already pay at least $1 for entertainment. Do you apply this reasoning across the board? There is certainly plenty of free entertainment available, but it seems very - stern and unbending, let's say - to insist that it should all be free.
-
If $12 a year is difficult to plunk down then perhaps you should find another advocation than photography.
According to his blog, Andrew is a self described "Dick", so I for one won't miss his presence here.
Doug Dodle you've always been a sour grapes no matter which forum you've posted too, so if you don't sign on then 'ceist la vie'.
-
I'm in.
-
I will be signing up and happily pay the very reasonable fee. LuLa is a fantastic site for photographers.
-
Good move. I have no problem supporting the site, which I have been reading for over 10 years.
-
Bugger!
Cheers,
-
As for greed, well, ain't nobody getting rich here.
The Lula staff are perfectly intelligent folks and as such probably have a pretty good idea what kind of conversion rates they can expect. They're looking at 10,000 to 20,000 subscribers. This to replace some ad revenue.
They probably clear in the low six figures on workshops annually. This might or might not be considered Lula money, but either way it's putting bread on Michael and Kevin's tables.
I dunno what they're making on ads, but I am confident that number is trending briskly the wrong way for a variety of reasons.
A concern with three full time staff that is grossing under a million bucks a year, and probably closer to half that, is maybe keeping the mortgages paid but it ain't generating no vast riches.
And to add on top of that, it doesn't matter if they are making $10 or $10,000,000. Is it worth $12 to you? That is the only question. I love when people are bitter when others succeed.
-
According to his blog, Andrew is a self described "Dick", so I for one won't miss his presence here.
That is doubly crushing for me, because I will miss you dreadfully, whoever you are.
-
I'm certainly happy to pony up $12 to maintain access to the LuLa site and forum. Considering the generally excellent information that this site provides, to quibble over 12 bucks/year just seems, well, unseemly. My 2 ¢.
-
It seems like an absolute no-brainer to me. I'm definitely in.
Eric M.
-
A million readers a month means you are going to make a million dollars a month. Or so you think because I, (and I am sure a lot of other people) will not support your greed. You will be very lucky to get one percent of those million to sign up.
Even the expressions and tone of your video hide an obvious "pretend not to notice" from you that you are going to be even filthier rich than you already are. Come on boys at least be honest you want to make a god damn killing !
Aside from the wonky mathematics above, who would deny anyone doing a great job the opportunity to achieve meaningful wealth from it? That's why most successful photographers are reassuringly expensive. I've only made 30 LL posts in ten years (hardly a Newbie!) and visit briefly a couple of times a week when time permits but I'll be laying out the Mastercard the day the paid model commences. Frankly I'm surprised how low the LL asking price is, and continually surprised how much classy content in the internet is free (especially news).
-pw
-
The price is right but I'm affraid most forums will get dull and somehow empty and silent. I come to LL mainly to read member posts. I find today's articles not interesting enough. I remember with nostalgia the days of those MF comparisons (P45 time). Those articles were as exciting as new James Bond movies when I was 20. Perhaps with this fresh revenue the owners will find other ways to produce exciting articles as yore.
I'm in. Let's see in one year time if this model paid dividends for all of us. By the way, I like the LL advertising ads. They are unobtrusive and they are fun and informative when called. Lula can have more editorial freedom with paid membership tho.
Don't take my ads away. It's like going to Time Square! 😊 Seriously.
Eduardo
-
Interesting that several folks who feel that this shift is motivated by "greed" and that the content is not worth 12 bucks also seem to go on about how much they'll miss access. Seems like a mixed message...
Not mixed when you consider how much excellence is available for free..... it has to be better than any sweet combination of free sites that I can access. Right now it's in that mix for me. When it goes, I'll just slot another excellent free site in its place. So will a vast number of others. And the site that will replace LL in my mix will also be easily worth $12.... but it's free! It's what they call a business decision, and it's easy to see which is the better business decision. LL are not the only ones here capable of making a 'business decision'.
I think it is a bit sad that the site owners are willing to lose so many followers, basically lock the door on them, based on a business calculation.
Workshops for sale, tick. Expeditions for sale, tick. Videos for sale, tick. All good. But not enough! Now they want to sell our own conversations back to us!
;) ;D :o :-X
-
No hard feelings, but count me out. I am not interested in the videos (nothing personal, I don't watch videos in general), I rarely found the articles of use in the past two years (I would even say that some of them are little more than hidden advertisements for workshops). I am only using the forums.
I am not really to pay for a bundle of which I will only use the part where content is created by the users.
Time to move on for me. Bye.
-
AS I said sportsshooter is not what it once was and that has always been a paid site. A lot of people have left and I think this will happen ehar and willw e be wiped out form our old posts are you going to profit off of things we can no longer see if we do not pony up? Just a thought, will there be more Micahel I look at the front page and lots of Kevin not much Michael and I simply do not enjoy Kevins writing as I enjoyed Michael's I want answers before I pony up if I do that is.
-
A small price to pay for exceptional value and I will happily subscribe; but your readers come from 130 countries worldwide where 12 dollars a year may matter and credit card payments are not always available. It would be kind and sensible to keep the site free of charge in some developing countries.
-
I seem to have a different opinion than most of you. Let me first mention that a subscription of $12 a year is perfectly doable for me. However, I smell Kevin’s and Michael’s GREED here and I must say I hate greed!
As we all know there are many, many forums on the interweb and most of them are free. These forum owners are able to generate sufficient income through advertising and I would prefer Kevin and Michael also generate their income the same way. So let the forum site remain a free site, the rest may be based on a paid service.
What if all forum sites as well as Youtube take the same approach, would we still be happy and pay $12 yearly to each and every forum we visit? Mind you, Kevin and Michael are providing the forum site but that’s about it.
Not Kevin or Michael but us as contributors (not me of course…) are making it worthwhile visiting this forum site again and again. So who are the ones that generate traffic on the site? We are! Then why should we pay for our participation in making it a great site generating lots of traffic?
I honestly don’t know if I continue with this site, not that it matters to anyone of course so I won’t bother you with this. Of course I don’t expect you’ll agree with me on this.
-
Over here in the UK, at the current US Dollar exchange rate, that works out about £7.92 which is far less than a pub lunch when out and about with friends at week-ends.
I hope that your Company members / article contributors sign up as well in order to continue offering their expert advice / comments etc on the forums ( thinking of imaging software in particular )
-
It's not even worth devoting brainpower to thinking about. $12 a year? I'm in.
I find the comments shouting about greed (whether or not in block capitals, jaapd, as if that strengthens a point rather than making you appear a teenager) to be quite nauseating. If we lose "contributors" such as him and ddolde, we lose nothing.
Jeremy
-
Keep up the good work.
-
I think the price has been set very cleverly.
However, I do have ethical problems with someone hiding previous forum posts behind a paywall, as I did when Rob Galbraith sold his forum. Whatever its merit (and some has a lot), you got that content for free, and now you want to charge for access to it?
-
A buck a month is no problem for me. I am in.
Although, I am not clear if this only extends to the main site content or for the forums as well.
Even if the forums become paid access only, I don't think it will stop the current troll infestation. Many of them would gladly pay for the privilege of annoying others.
-
Count on me. I think this is a really great deal and it is an honest move. As Heinlein wrote: TANSTAAFL. "There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch!" This was and will ever be true and I prefer an honest and sensible price model to any form of pretending to be free.
By the way: running a forum costs money irrespective of the already available content and it is fair to share those costs. Furthermore I'm not convinced, that we all have shared content here for free. Maybe we didn't get money for our postings but we were paid with fun, community and the content of others. As I said - TANSTAAFL ;-)
Best regards from Germany,
Heiko
-
Hello
I am only an occasionnal reader, registered since 2004, with very few contributions to the forum (not worsthwile reading)
I discovered LuLa browsing idly the Internet, because it was free. I would never register for a fee on a new site without knowing what is its content !
My comment :
With this new policy you will maintain a fraction of your audience, but what about gaining new readers ?
I am interested to read about the answer to that subject, I don't doubt you have a clever one waiting
as my grand'son uses to say : it was better before
Cordially
UG
-
It will be very interesting to see which way this will turn out. I have to say I am somewhat skeptical. While there might be a million visits (certainly not visitors?) to the site every month, how many separate persons actually make those visits, and how many of those are members? Owners of this site know it, of course, and are basing their calculations on that. Still there must be great many members who just signed up for free for some reason and never returned, or have lost their password and just do not care to renew it. The usual 80/20 rule must be something like 98/2 here, extremely small percentage of members writing most forum posts, for example, I am among them. I find the 50000 paying members goal unrealistic, sorry to say, as the site is good (even though I am not a video watching type person what comes to finding information), but people behave in strange ways when they are asked to swipe their card.
One thing I am sorry about is the paywall closing some useful information links (I assume) I have used elsewhere, like the explanation of diffraction in the technical articles. Also in the past (now) people could leaf (click?) through the site to see what is it all about, now new subscribers are supposed to buy a pig in a poke, relying only on good image and hearsay. Or how is this part going to be handled? Free samples?
-
I have a technical/functional question: what will happen when the year subscription expires?
Does it gets renewed automatically?
I'm asking because I always use one-shot credit cards when buying online, so an automatic renewal will surely fails with such a card.
-
The Rand/Dollar exchange rate is at its very worst at the moment and, I am not rich man..
But, without the Luminous Landscape I would not be doing what I do now: living in a small village, running my own gallery and printing for some of South Africa's top photographers. (I used to sell tyres!)
Thank you for the passion, the know-how, the encouragement and the friendship!
...now where do I sign up?!!!
Best wishes, I am sure it will go well.
Regards
William
-
My view is that if the site is worth visiting on anything more than a very occasional basis, then the subscription is very reasonable. People pay that much for a daily newspaper that they may read in 30 minutes and discard.
To Amolitor particularly, who has obviously spent probably thousands of hours on the site, I say - do you really value your time so cheaply? Surely if one spends an hour a week visiting LuLa then $1 a month is negligible. Just because other sites are free means little to me. If I want a decent coffee and it costs £3 I would rather pay that than have a free coffee that is only half as good. Or indeed - I would still pay for it even if the coffee over the road was exactly the same but served in a smelly premises with miserable staff and came in a paper cup. Obviously I am not talking about a take-away coffee.
And as for greed - the value I have from Lula over the many years (10-15 - I cannot remember) is easily worth trying the new subscription model. I think it needs to be seen as a value to oneself and not try to work out how much the owners are going to make. If it's successful they will make money - if not it will collapse. Good luck to them
There is good quality free stuff on the internet - but for how much longer. I subscribe to Sean Reid's site and I visit that about three times a year. But when I need specific information the price is worth every penny.
My only caveat is as others have expressed - I did/do enjoy Michaels writing and video presence above that of Kevin. If you are reading this Kevin - please do not take it as personal because I do not know any of you personally. Michael to me IS Lula and I guess it will take a while to readjust.
Jim
-
The price is right but I'm afraid most forums will get dull and somehow empty and silent....
Eduardo
Valid point Eduardo, a lot of the LL life-force comes from the Forums which is built with free, contributor generated content, but if they are locked behind that paywall, where are new members going to come from? I've been thinking about this, and looking at my own online habits. I have a bookmarked list of photographic sites I visit, LL is just one of many, all free. The editorial content is going to need a quantum boost. Maybe a content deal with Reid Reviews will be there to surprise us. Someone in this thread observed that new LL content used to as exciting as a new James Bond movie and that is true! But my reality is that I probably haven't read right through any LL editorial for a long time.
The paywall model where viewing is free but participation costs may keep the thing alive. The forums are a touch "clubby" as it is, and the proposed model may entrench that even more deeply with a shrunken pool. I've only just watched the video, and never seen the usually confident and smooth flowing MR & KR look so darn uncomfortable.
$12 a year is nothing to me and represents agreeable value, but this step is very high risk and that shows 3D in MR and KR's body language in the video. The LL content is fine but hardly gold-standard. The crunch will come at renewal time next year. Good luck guys, I sincerely hope your planned moves and upgrades are enough to pull this off.
-pw
-
It's been interesting to read the various views.
I guess those who get a lot from the site are immediately ready to pay. That probably includes me. Why probably? Because it puts a greater onus on the publishers to perform. Even if it was $6 per annum, most will now be asking themselves, "Has it been worth it?". "Did they cater to my particular interests?'. Tricky territory.
The notice that the print will receive more attention is promising. I'll hang around for that. I'll not likely hang around for lots of trips/workshop advertising (add on another 10,000 miles of flying to just reach the start line, then return, and money and time intrude).
I tried drawing golden means and spirals on my prints, as per a recent composition article, and guess what, my works are absolute masterpieces! Yes, there was always something somewhere to pin down those lines :-) . Or maybe I don't need hang around for another compositional diatribe.
The videos with Michael and Kevin have been particularly good of late.
2016 will determine if the real sign up time, 2017, is a goer or not.
-
The price is right but I'm affraid most forums will get dull and somehow empty and silent.
Yes, this is the problem. I too come here only for the forums. The articles and videos are of no interest to me. But there are people on the forums that are knowledgeable and provocative - they make me "think different". E.g., Andrew, even if I do disagree with most everything he says. (Sorry Andrew.) And some others.
I'll sign up. But I fear that in 12 months time, I'll cancel, because everything that made the LULA forums interesting will have gone.
-
Possibly trolling behaviour will diminish? Who would want to pay 12 dollars and then get barred and who would want to pay 12 dollars just to spam and get barred? I suspect that some will resist paying and a few weeks from now sign up because the grass isn't any greener elsewhere.
But I fear that in 12 months time, I'll cancel, because everything that made the LULA forums interesting will have gone
This is a possibility. :(
-
Not too long ago I had entertained the thought of deleting LL from my favorites list as too many of the interesting discussions have turned into pissing matches and opportunities for the same people to divert the thread into their favorite off-topic shilling. I also subscribed to the video "magazine" but found them mostly boring as I do the current videos made by Michael and Kevin.
Agreed $12 is nothing, but if I must pay for the privilege of perusing a photography site there are other sites I prefer to visit.
I will certainly miss posts by James Russell and Rob Campbell to mention a few, but the times they are a changing...
-
Hmm ... now I don't know what to do. At the moment I am on the "try 1 year and see" side.
Basically I am visiting LuLa periodically, however I mostly read the forums (and contribute almost nothing). The videos are not interesting to me and the articles are in the same category lately.
Depends on how the forums will change after the membership goes live.
Oh and what happens to existing accounts ? I mean when I log in after the change, can I convert my existing account to a membership one ?
(BTW this is the 2nd photography site that I frequent that changed from free and mostly reader generated content to membership paywall ... the other one died once forum access was cut off to free members)
-
12 dollars per year seems reasonable.
My main reservation is that new contributors will be deterred from joining the forums if they have to subscribe first. Maybe Michael & Kevin have a 'try before you buy' plan. I say this because I've had a growing feeling that LuLa could do with an influx of new blood & influences, that is input from younger, edgier & dare I say it, financially poorer photographers / artists both as forum members & writers of articles.
This site forum does feel like a place for rich old guys at times. Some of these rich old guys produce great work but most of them seem to be here to discuss gear & what they're going to buy next. ( I clicked a link to one contributor's blog & there weren't even any photos on it - it was all about what gear & software he used ).
No personal disrespect to any of the aforementioned rich old guys they mostly seem like decent people who've made their money because they're intelligent & hard working. ( But that doesn't mean that they've got a damn thing to say as visual artists ).
I too preferred the feel of the site when it was Michael's ( no disrespect to Kevin who seems like a thoroughly decent guy ).
The promised emphasis on printing in forthcoming site articles sounds interesting. ( But please get some interesting & provocative contributions from 'outsiders' just to piss us off & keep us on our toes ).
Good luck & thanks for all the good work.
Graeme
-
This is ridiculous--ly cheap!
I pay more than this yearly subscription to my calendar and if doesn't give me anything like the info your site does.
Personally I would pay more than double that for a yearly subscription to your site.
Are you sure there aren't any catches especially if you are offering access to all the videos as well?
Personally I want to know where I can subscribe!!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
$12 a year is exceedingly cheap (OK it's not cheaper than free, but I'll argue a lot of free content doesn't match up to the video content on here. try finding something as comprehensive as C2P2S on youtube!)
I'll consider the forum free and the $12 a price for the videos. I'm happy with that.
-
Bravo, Bravo, Bravo.
As a former Video subscriber who was willing to fork over $100 when you ran a special, but not $150 on renewal because there was not that much new video content to make it worthwhile, I applaud your decision.
For what you put out content-wise $12 is nothing. If you have a million readers a month, you should have a million subscribers. I have loved LuLa since the first day I say it about 10 years ago. And I love you guys for making me feel as if I am among friends when I watch your videos.
As I started to watch the video I was guessing what your subscription cost would be. As I have subscribed to KelbyOne, Lynda.com, and LuLa in the past, let me say that I was floored! As was said in the movies: "You had me with 'Hello'".
I will happily be one more brick in the foundation.
Well done, Kevin and Michael!!
Bill Wood
-
Just wanted to also add, in the age of Google, people have taken "Free" as standard and have equated many "Wants" to "Needs".
If people who can pay thousands of dollars regularly for gear can't pay 12 bucks a year for access to some content, then the content is most definitely not a "Need", but a "Want".
Furthermore, there is no obligation for anyone to pay for this. If you find the content not worth the paltry price, feel free to vote with your wallet. I do that to Lloyd Chambers and his incredibly pedantic and artistically void "Tests". The Steve Huffs and Ken Rockwells of the world have enough free content for you where every latest thing is the "Best in the world" and a "Must buy" (Through the provided affiliate links, of course).
-
...
I discovered LuLa browsing idly the Internet, because it was free. I would never register for a fee on a new site without knowing what is its content !
My comment :
With this new policy you will maintain a fraction of your audience, but what about gaining new readers ?
I am interested to read about the answer to that subject, I don't doubt you have a clever one waiting
...
This is a very important question that I hope the owners of this site have carefully thought about.
Arguments can be made, between people already familiar with the content of this site, whether a subscription is worth it or not. But people not already familiar with this site -- aka potential new members-- won't be able to tell whether it is worth it to them to subscribe.
This the delicate balancing act that business people have to deal with all the time. You want to give potentially new customers just enough content to convince them to start paying but not too much content that they feel there is no marginal benefit for paying.
I agree with U_Grsl in that I would never have come to this site if it required any type of payment up front. I am reluctant to purchase a swine in a shed.
It is easy for owners of sites like this to be lured into garnering a short term increase in revenue (existing happy customers now paying) but potentially losing future customers and inhibiting membership sustainability/growth.
I hope they have thought this out fully.
-
Perhaps they feel that they have TOO many customers and subscribing is a way of trimming the number of visitors and existing members that don't add anything useful?
-
I did not pay attention to this site for just one day. Was woken up by an email making the anouncement.
Thanks a lot Michael, Kevin and Chris. I will join at the earliest opportunity.
Best regards,
Boudewijn Swanenburg
-
When we (happily ?) pay large amounts of money for the equipment to enable us to make photographs I find it totally incomprehensible that anyone should think for more than a millisecond about paying this tiny amount for quality advice and information about potentially improving our use of that equipment - even if it is only by a small fraction of the equipment cost. Even a one percent improvement in a year - due to new information or shared experience would surely justify $12 - few of us have less than $1200 invested in our equipment I suspect, or if we do we are planning to have that or more.
I am not a rich man but I would happily pay $12 a month for the information, shared experience and sheer pleasure that LL gives me at many times a month, indeed sometimes several times a week in one way or another. Some contributors have stressed the "value" of this move but when I look at most of the "competition" out there I rather wish that the price had been set a little higher if only to give LL an even stronger position for both the present and the future.
Personally I do especially value Michael's input and influence but personal situations change over time and every organization has to change and develop to maintain itself in this competitive world.
Two practical suggestions seem to me to make a lot of sense.
First could you not give a free first month or 'x' number of viewings to enable new viewers to see the product before having to enrol - there does seem a lot of sense in the views that one would be unlikely to enrol "blind" so to speak, unless strongly recommended to do so by a friend or colleague.
Second the suggestion of a "Charter Membership" period or level with a small extra fee going to the Endowment might well be worth consideration.
Best wishes for this change and for a most successful future - without LL those interested in serious photography would be much the poorer.
-
Some people seem to be missing my point. It's not that $12 is expensive. It's not.
The point is that for me personally, these sites have negative value. They're temptation to waste time I should spend elsewhere.
Frankly, a paywall is fantastic for me. The general diminution of the internet is working out very well for me as people flock to Facebook and a few other sites that I have not joined.
Some day I hope to have my life back.
This is a personal problem, not Lula's problem, not your problem. It's just me.
But, I probably represent a slice of the audience.
-
Thank you for the feedback . . . We do have a plan in place for people that are new coming to the site to see content. We do have plans to offer educational institutions something special for their students. We are also working on a way folks can try out the forum. We will announce these once we are live and have tested them to make sure they work the way we'd like. We are excited about the potential of some of the projects we have planned. December will be a very busy month for us as we have some big projects in the works regarding printing (tease). All of us are very dedicated to making Luminous-Landscape a success and a benefit for all our readers.
-
Some people seem to be missing my point. It's not that $12 is expensive. It's not.
The point is that for me personally, these sites have negative value. They're temptation to waste time I should spend elsewhere.
Guilty as charged. Your post did make it seem as if you had some kind of problem with paying for entertainment. I certainly relate to having mixed feelings about photo sites, and the internet in general, as time wasters.
-
Some people seem to be missing my point. It's not that $12 is expensive. It's not.
The point is that for me personally, these sites have negative value. They're temptation to waste time I should spend elsewhere.
The site helped you advertise a book you had written.....all for free.
-
Ha ha! Good point! I had forgotten that.
I've probably sold... $5 worth of books this way.
Which, if I value the time I helplessly waste here at a penny an hour... is still a staggering loss.
-
Ha ha! Good point! I had forgotten that.
I've probably sold... $5 worth of books this way.
Which, if I value the time I helplessly waste here at a penny an hour... is still a staggering loss.
I'd buy the said book, but for me it hase negative value. It's a temptation to waste time I should spend elsewhere.
-
Count me in!
-
My book is guaranteed to make you dumber. Nobody should buy it.
But that's probably enough about that? And maybe even enough insults for one thread?
Although one could argue that there's some people who haven't had a shot at me yet and they should get their turn.
-
Considering how much I just spent on a set of snow tires whose only usefulness is not slipping on dirty roads, how could I hesitate on spending 12 US$ on Lula? :)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
$12 is fair but...
Including forum access as a paid resource is simply a bad idea.
A forums value lies in the contributions of its members, so you'll start to feel like your both paying the fee and creating the content.
I recommend splitting the forum access from the regular site access.
-
Yes. Worth the money. But do not split site keep as it is....
-
Will our email addresses be shared with third parties, i.e. companies, under this subscription model?
-
The point is that for me personally, these sites have negative value.
Then please do not subscribe.
When I saw $12 a year, I had to do a double take thinking it was a typo. If that's all it takes to support this site, you're got me sold!
-
Any information gathered from membership sign up will not be sold to any third parties. That is not our intention. We will do emails once in a while when there is news to report and share as well as letting readers know of sponsor specials as we discussed in our video. We also will not do email blasts for third parties.
-
I am totally SHOCKED! This is unreasonable. I had no idea a pack of gum cost more than a dollar. However, LuLa at $12/yr, is an incredible bargain. Count me in. Congratulations guys.
-
Many museums, galleries, art fairs, etc., charge entrance fees to see otherwise copyrighted material, even when it was donated.
-
Many museums, galleries, art fairs, etc., charge entrance fees to see otherwise copyrighted material, even when it was donated.
the fault in your logic is so obvious - when I donate to a gallery that charges the entrance fees I know that it does... not the same with the forum
-
To pay or not to pay: that is not the question.
Yes, I will certainly pay to retain access, but in doing so, a lot will have been changed. I have been a contributor to this site for a few years now, and it, along with the early BJP website and some few special people I met there, have helped me through the threshold of digital to the stage where I need no further help in achieving anything that I want to achieve, technically, in the medium, which was where I already was with film, after building a reasonably successful career in photography, starting in 1960. My sense of gratitude to LuLa is why I shall pay, as well as my gratitude to those here who have helped me, too.
I received an e-mail from a photographer today, thanking me for my LuLa input, which helped him on his own way in the business, if in the discipline of motion; that's a very gratifying place in which I find myself this afternoon, and makes much of the hassle worthwhile.
But. And several buts come to mind.
I have already left this site on perhaps three occasions, and am currently distant. This isn't about hurt feelings, but it is about health: I have scored two heart attacks, and I'm told a third is usually curtains. Now this is all about frustration and exasperation created when confronted with the rare posters whom I consider to be congenital idiots, even if one of them can produce rather good photographs. Anger isn't hurt feelings or 'sensitivity'; it's its own very damaging emotion and I don't need the risk that increased nervous tension offers me.
As often admitted, I have never been much interested in landscape, finding it very difficult to tell the difference between high-art landscape and commercial stock landscape. Some of it that I see here (or anywhere else) falls into the stock category, and much more even fails that basic litmus test. The truth is, there are really very, very few good photographers around – here or anywhere else. If you want to find the best work, look at photographers' agents' websites and eat your collective hearts out. So, if LuLa turns more to fit the label on the tin, it loses ever more appeal for me and, perhaps, others, too. Will it turn that way? When Michael was running the show, his greatest input, in my view, was his exemplary reportage work. It fitted him like a glove – which, no doubt, was why he spent so much time working at it. Health fucks everybody up at some time – change is inevitable; it's the only sure bet there is.
Workshops? Trips? Photography is something best done alone, so you can think, react and be yourself. If you just want some fun with fellow snappers, that's okay too, but not for me - never was nor could be.
So, technical videos are of no interest to me, and neither are camera/lens reviews, which simply fly right over my head. I already own all the gear I need - and more – to do what I find that I do today. I don't even like digital gear, findng it so unlike Nikon F Series or Hasselblad 500 series miracles of instinctive usage, as to be obstacles in the way of images rather than aids to making them. But, as I said, change happens and you gotta go along with it or simply quit, which creates its own void to list amongst others.
However, on the matter of LuLa's future, perhaps this is the time to create a two-tier LuLa, where one section is clearly restricted to pros and another to amateurs, this to facilitate conversation between people with some common professional experience where the bullshit chat (and even insult) is not present, because there is shared substance in place of wannabe. You only have to look at the existing, two broadish parts of Lula to see that few pros ever migrate to the Coffee Corner/Critique part, because they simply don't need it or give a toss about what's written there. This indicates, to me at least, that there are two very different constituencies in LuLa, and this shouldn't be overlooked or underestimated. I'm not suggesting denial of reading access to non-pros, just denial of contribution in order to keep it professional.
Another of the buts is this: writing and posting images freely is all right when the site is also free; who really feels that they want to contribute in the same manner where the organ is now grinding out money? Being a supplier of free content where money is being made for somebody else, is akin to microstock, and flies in the face of self-respect. I have no problem with people making money, just with that being made on my supplied content without some return to myself. Which, of course suits the amateur perfectly, it always has, because being published is the holy grail for these people, not monetary value in return.
So yes, I'll pay, but I doubt I'll be having much to write about.
Rob C
-
$12 is fair but...
Including forum access as a paid resource is simply a bad idea.
A forums value lies in the contributions of its members, so you'll start to feel like your both paying the fee and creating the content.
I recommend splitting the forum access from the regular site access.
+1
I am afraid that the forum will loose its sparkle if it cannot be accessed by anyone anytime
I would rather like to 12$ pay to LL with a open forum than with a closed one.
I can imagine that money is needed to keep LL going and i like it better without advertisement.
-
Many museums, galleries, art fairs, etc., charge entrance fees to see otherwise copyrighted material, even when it was donated.
If one accepts the analogy, it's different when something has been donated to an organisation that made it freely available, but then decided to charge to see it.
-
The problem with paid memberships is- if the member passes away the fee will be still debited.
So, what do you think about having the choice between a recurring and non-recurring membership?
Thanks
Manfred
-
I have no problem with someone attempting to monetize a web site. Once it becomes a paid site it is evaluated at renewal time, and if found lacking, it loses a reader. Welcome to the marketplace. Bear in mind that, if your long term goal is to sell the business, you'll need to show a history of a fairly stable subscription base.
That said, I have gotten a great deal from this site over the years and had expected it to become a paid site long ago. I'll certainly sign on and will be curious to see how things play out. Hope that you will be able to keep up and process the initial flood of subscriptions; it'll be very irritating to not be able to sign up and be blocked from access. Best of luck going forward
-
If I offer to pay more than $12.00 will you close the Coffee Corner forum? 8)
-
Rob's comments bring up another issue.
When a site starts charging a fee, the site will also be held to a higher standard then when it was free.
This is especially true concerning the forums.
If the site is going to charge me a fee to participate in the forums, I would expect the site owners to do a better job in enforcing their own rules. If entry to the forums requires payment, and a member adheres to the rules, I expect that if a member were subjected to the the type of behavior common in the "free" LuLa (insults, ad hominem attacks and other childish behaviours), that the offending posters will be banned.
When LuLa was "free", considerable leeway was given to the owners concerning the enforcement of their own rules. It was free after all. But once you start charging people money, there is an expectation of more professional management of the forums.
Are the owners of this site going to commit to banning, and losing revenue from, members who violate their own rules? If the answer is no, things will continue just the way they were when LuLa was free, then why would anyone pay for admittance?
-
"Today, LuLa has become one of the world’s largest web sites devoted to the art and craft of photography, with some 1 million readers monthly from more than 130 countries worldwide."
I wonder if your move will make you filthy rich or irrelevant. Nevertheless I not begrudge you the success. I'm in.
-
I'm in. Obviously you gave a lot of thought to the pricing and 50k subscribers is a reasonable goal. This could work well to ensure that LL stays with us for a very long time.
Best wishes
-
AWESOME DEAL! Happy to Pay!
-
Otto, What you don't see is how often we do ban users either temporarily or permanently. We hope that the Forum stays civil and we'll be watching it carefully. Chris send lots of PM to certain posters letting them know they step over the line.
-
Dear LL,
I think the $12 a year subscription fee is a bargain. I have learned a lot from the LL community, and I sometimes revisit the LL several times throughout the day. My only complaint about the new guidelines is limiting jpgs to 800 pixels on the long side.
I respectfully ask LL to reconsider the 800 limit and increase the maximum to 1200.
Some photographers post pictures exceeding 800 pixels by a factor of 2X, 3X, or more. No question, IT administration is costly--maintaining servers, optimizing data flow, and managing security.
SO, I appeal to the powers that be, to reconsider upping the maximum pixel count to 1200. That is only a 50% increase. 400 pixels matter. Many photos require more than 800 to view and interpret--subjects, processing techniques, diagrams and charts, etc.
Sincerely,.
BobDavid (Robert D. Rosinsky)
-
If the site is going to charge me a fee to participate in the forums, I would expect the site owners to do a better job in enforcing their own rules. If entry to the forums requires payment, and a member adheres to the rules, I expect that if a member were subjected to the the type of behavior common in the "free" LuLa (insults, ad hominem attacks and other childish behaviours), that the offending posters will be banned.
Well, that's kind of a problem. Banning someone from something they are getting for free is fine. Depriving someone of something they are paying for - legal and moral problem, unless they have very clearly crossed a boundary that's specified in the user agreement, or done something illegal.
-
Great.....cost money to be in businesss. Will subscribe... Keep site as it is for a while......then you will find out who is really using your fabulous services and then adapt site for them
-
Otto, What you don't see is how often we do ban users either temporarily or permanently. We hope that the Forum stays civil and we'll be watching it carefully. Chris send lots of PM to certain posters letting them know they step over the line.
He does a great job! I don't see how a fee changes anything. Easily the best forum on photography anywhere on the internet. It ain't broke, don't even think about a fix due to that $1 a month entry fee.
-
I have to say, I am a little surprised that they didn't focus group this a little. They have the emails, they could easily have done a survey to set the price point and test the idea. As it is, they're operating with industry standard best-guesses as to conversion rates, and hoping for the best. I mean, I get why they're doing it, the trends are all going the wrong way, and something's got to give. Chucking this sort of radical pivot into the mix feels like a bit of a Hail Mary pass.
In fact, I am constantly surprised that folks who run web sites like this aren't running market research operations. They're got a ton of motivated, high-quality, eyeballs. All you have to do is ask questions in an organized way, and you can learn a lot of things. And then you can sell that actionable intelligence to, in this case, camera companies.
-
the fault in your logic is so obvious - when I donate to a gallery that charges the entrance fees I know that it does... not the same with the forum
This is quite an interesting area. For a number of years now most forums have operated on a relatively simple basis. You as the poster own the copyright but in signing up you grant the operator a pretty generous license to use and potentially transfer the content. The operator owns the collection or thread. Less common are forums that have been structured around collective ownership. If the forums is commercialised or sold members will benefit.
This has generally worked well because forum operator gets some legal protection if posters upload illegal or copyrighted material, and the original poster still owns the posted content.
In practice because most forums are small and non-profit things run smoothly. Disgruntled or banned members are not normally in a financial position to argue ownership in law and operators while not keen on deleting posts for fear of devaluing their forum will normally agree to anonymise or remove personally identifying material in posts.
When individuals have successfully forced forum operators to remove content they have done so by proving they are the poster/copyright owner and issuing the host with a DCMA. Hosts are normally fairly compliant, leaving the forum operator to fight it out with the original poster. They cave because they don’t want to fight the original DCMA.
Longer term I expect things will get more complicated. Some countries are starting to challenge the accepted norms about how ostensibly online businesses manage and distribute the information we post or provide to them. Right now the focus is on companies like Google and Facebook, but increasingly governments and specifically the EU are looking to make it easier for individuals to reclaim their digital footprint and challenge the original terms and conditions they signed up to.
-
... I am a little surprised that they didn't focus group this a little...
Well, think of this thread as a focus group. And what have we learned so far? That there are those who support it and will subscribe and then there are those who won't. What a surprising revelation!
-
I think I'd be feeling a little upset if I had just paid $150 for a video subscription, but since nobody is shouting, maybe they got refunds.
I've been around here since close to day 1. Early on I learnt a lot from the articles, and I've tried to contribute back over the years with various purchases. So, I'd say generally speaking $12pa should not be a barrier to entry. But I am going to add my voice to those saying that things are going to have to change on the content front. For a start, please, no more endless recycling of Alain Briot's self-serving preaching and eye-watering photography. Also, no more workshop advertorials - do the authors pay for these, by the way? Use the income to commission quality articles by good writers, with topics that appeal to the more advanced level of photographer that tend to frequent this site. Also, I'm afraid I agree that Kevin is no substitute for Michael. Sorry Kevin, really, but Michael's combination of wit, authority and knowledge is probably the main reason people came here. He's now a top asset for your income generation, use him well. Personally I think if you can raise the bar, you can also fix the problem that you've set the price way too low - saying your content is only worth $1 per montb might be sending the wrong message.
Oh, and keep the forum free - this is critical, imho. Best of luck...
-
This is quite an interesting area. For a number of years now most forums have operated on a relatively simple basis. You as the poster own the copyright but in signing up you grant the operator a pretty generous license to use and potentially transfer the content.
where did I consent for my posting (the text of my posting) to be sold to others ?
You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, inflammatory, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, sexist, racist, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.
Note that 'trolling' is considered to be a form of abuse and is harassment. Trolls will be banned from posting.
Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of posts. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the posted messages, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted messages express the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to remove objectionable content, within a reasonable time frame, if they determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, please realize that they may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.
You remain solely responsible for the content of your posted messages. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint or legal action arising from any situation caused by your use of this forum.
You have the ability, as you register, to choose your username. We advise that you use your real First & Last name as your on-screen or user name. Forum users who hide behind anonymous or false on-screen names and who make inflammatory posts or ad hominem attacks will be banned. Members using pseudonyms will receive stricter treatment than those using their own name.
With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password out to another person except an administrator, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason. We also HIGHLY recommend you use a complex and unique password for your account, to prevent account theft.
After you register and login to this forum, you will be able to fill out a detailed profile. It is your responsibility to present clean and accurate information. Any information the forum owner or staff determines to be inaccurate or vulgar in nature will be removed, with or without prior notice. Appropriate sanctions may be applicable.
Please note that with each post, your IP address is recorded. In the event that you are banned from this forum, your ISP may be contacted. This will happen in the event of a major violation of this agreement.
Also note that the software places a cookie, a text file containing bits of information (such as your username and password), in your browser's cache. This is ONLY used to keep you logged in/out. The software does not collect or send any other form of information to your computer.
Any attachments to your posts should not be larger than 800 pixels on any side.
Site Administrators are Kevin Raber, Michael Reichmann & Chris Sanderson. Should you have difficulty registering on our Forums, please contact: customerserviceATluminous-landscape.com giving us the details of your failed registration.
Unconfirmed & unactivated registrations older than 31 days will be automatically deleted. Look for the registration email in your Spam box if you cannot see it.
If your registration is rejected as 'SPAM', please don't take it personally; this forum's software is not particularly smart and such things as a duplicate username or a numbered hotmail account will trigger this response.
And if you are wondering why you are required to answer all the silly little questions, blame the spamming 'bots & bozos that bedevil us all!
BTW the answers are all either a numeral, an abbreviation or a single word, character or symbol '-' Answers are NOT case-sensitive!
-
Well, think of this thread as a focus group. And what have we learned so far? That there are those who support it and will subscribe and then there are those who won't. What a surprising revelation!
Absolutely! Further, to assume the LuLa gang didn't talk to some people might be a major assumption.
-
Focus groups do quite a bit more than confirm the obvious, if they're well done.
-
Well after wasting part of my life running through all the comments in this thread, it was about exactly what I figured it would be. Been here for 11 years and my interest and what I get out of the site follow along the lines of the ruts of my life, more interest in the peaks and less in the valleys. I will be here, see how things work out. I can almost guarantee that it will work itself out to a happy median, I really doubt the gloom and doom will hold true, and I doubt they will become overnight super earners. I am not overtly fond of subscriptions, but with the more modern aspects of life it is becoming more and more popular. It is not the amount but the fact that all these subscriptions eventually add up to a much larger chunk of money and it becomes harder to manage them but this is mostly a curse of being more curmudgeonly. :D As far as subscriptions go the cost is reasonable but it will be interesting to see what the big plans are, at least there is enthusiasm for change and I do hope that the site is not so large as to resist changes for the better. Since I have been here since 2004 and mostly lurk but try to add content when I think it will be useful, it will be interesting to see what the future holds.
Alan
-
Focus groups do quite a bit more than confirm the obvious, if they're well done.
For that you'd have to engage a professional market research company. And that costs money (a lot). Which would make the subscription higher.
-
Actually the thread is providing, almost certainly, the opposite of information.
Industry standard conversion rates are single digit percentages, and this thread gives the impression of a much much higher conversion rate. For obvious reasons.
And yes, Slobodan, I propose (and have proposed elsewhere, several times) that Michael, Kevin, and Chris take some books out of the library and recreate themselves as a professional market research company, offering services both to themselves and to the photography industry. LuLa is not the only web site in a position to do this, but nobody seems to be stepping up.
-
...And yes, Slobodan, I propose (and have proposed elsewhere, several times) that Michael, Kevin, and Chris take some books out of the library and recreate themselves as a professional market research company, offering services both to themselves and to the photography industry...
I am sure that a bunch of good photographers and videographers are dying to transform themselves into a boring professional market research company.
-
Well, virtually all of these places regularly write articles complaining about the industry and making proposals based on not very much for how the industry could do better. If we are to believe these pieces, the authors are actively interested in helping.
I can understand if they only want to do the fun parts: writing controversial articles, flying around to talk to executives, that sort of thing. I like the fun parts more myself. But if you actually want to make a difference, there is a more productive path, that, regrettably, involves labor that is less jolly.
-
Jeez, you guys sold out cheap! I woulda paid a lot more...say $2 a month!
In addition, very much looking forward to the "sweeping of the barnyard" effect this will provide.
Bye Bye, permanently disgruntled!
-
It's interesting how everyone seems to have their own list of people they despise, and are looking forward to seeing their hated enemies washed away by the righteousness of $12. This is promising to be a beautiful new chapter of togetherness.
-
I've been reading (though rarely participating in) this site and forums for a very long time. At a time when most photography sites have gotten stale or the owners/writers seem to have lost interest, I think Kevin Raber has been a breath of fresh air and enthusiasm for this site. In particular, Kevin's contribution has opened the site in subtle but important ways, as it somehow feels more inclusive now, less like a boys' club. Having said that, of course I have always liked and still much enjoy Michael's contributions, too.
And for the record, I actually like the workshop 'advertorials'. They permit me to vicariously participate in trips that I could never afford. I also like the toy shop videos, the blooper, the Fuji and Olympus camera videos, etc. I like that fewer of the articles are gear oriented tests now, and more about the actual experience of photography. I am looking forward to an emphasis on prints. My only complaint about content is that I want more of it - more from Michael and Kevin rather than guests, including more recaps (and photos from) both Kevin's and Michael's frequent trips.
I'm relieved that the price to join will only be $12 a year. Making the site member supported does have risks, as each of us will be confronted each year with the question of whether we are getting value from the site. In my own experience, whether that was newspapers, magazines, or paid review/photography sites, I've let all my memberships lapse over time. As readers/supporters, it is inevitable that our standards become higher once we start paying, regardless of the actual cost. We don't like being taken for granted and we don't like feeling like we are not the actual target audience, two situations e.g. where I might continue to come to a free site but will not continue to pay for a member site.
-
Valid point Eduardo, a lot of the LL life-force comes from the Forums which is built with free, contributor generated content, but if they are locked behind that paywall, where are new members going to come from? I've been thinking about this, and looking at my own online habits. I have a bookmarked list of photographic sites I visit, LL is just one of many, all free. The editorial content is going to need a quantum boost. Maybe a content deal with Reid Reviews will be there to surprise us. Someone in this thread observed that new LL content used to as exciting as a new James Bond movie and that is true! But my reality is that I probably haven't read right through any LL editorial for a long time.
The paywall model where viewing is free but participation costs may keep the thing alive. The forums are a touch "clubby" as it is, and the proposed model may entrench that even more deeply with a shrunken pool. I've only just watched the video, and never seen the usually confident and smooth flowing MR & KR look so darn uncomfortable.
$12 a year is nothing to me and represents agreeable value, but this step is very high risk and that shows 3D in MR and KR's body language in the video. The LL content is fine but hardly gold-standard. The crunch will come at renewal time next year. Good luck guys, I sincerely hope your planned moves and upgrades are enough to pull this off.
-pw
That pretty much says it for me.
Here and on other sites, I rarely watch videos for instruction (professionally produced film documentaries and college lecture videos being the exception). The "data transfer rate" is simply too slow, the repeat-access too cumbersome. I prefer reading text and studying accompanying illustrations, in formats where the information can be accessed quickly and randomly, and text-based searches can be accomplished. Video blogs, or "articles" that consist of two guys sitting and talking about stuff, are a frustrating time-waster for me.
I respect the site's management decision and truly wish Michael and Kevin the very best.
-
Otto, What you don't see is how often we do ban users either temporarily or permanently. We hope that the Forum stays civil and we'll be watching it carefully. Chris send lots of PM to certain posters letting them know they step over the line.
Granted.
But on the other hand, what I do see is the same people making the same personal attacks and nothing seems to happen to them. It seems to be the same group of people that bring some of these threads down to an unacceptable level.
But taking action against a now paying customer is one of the more unpleasant aspects of this site "going pro" by charging people. Turning away money for the betterment of your other paying customers is a difficult problem to have to deal with. But I feel it is an important problem and one that may have a significant influence on maintaining your now paying customer base.
Best of luck on this.
-
To cross post my thoughts from the MF/LF thread:
While I see direct value in the original content being created by the LuLa team, there are issues that need to be addressed. I found LuLa due to the forums, and the role they have in the community. Read this article as to how StackOverflow overtook ExpertExchange in the IT/Dev environment: http://www.inc.com/alex-moazed/how-this-engineer-turned-his-blog-into-a-400-million-business.html Their #1 platform take away is to 'Don't put up paywalls on content platforms with large amounts of user-generated content'.
The forums are a peer to peer platform that are lightly managed, where answers are from subject matter experts (or what ever we are calling ourselves today). Yes, there is a cost to infrastructure, but putting it behind a paywall is the wrong answer. The forums need consistent participation from unpaid people, otherwise the page views don't happen, and the overall site becomes stagnant. Yes, the same question gets asked over and over, so there is an opportunity to create content directly for that market.
While I can afford the $12, I'd rather that be an optional token that allows folks to see that I am personally invested in the LuLa community. Getting a large enough commitment to make this a viable alternative shouldn't be too hard, but I would suggest doing that first before going full paywall on folks.
-Joe
-
As a member of almost a decade, I have purchased content ...as a curiosity, learning, and mostly to contribute to Lula.
Turning the forums to only membership base is like cutting off artery channels of content. New content, new knowledge, new information.
Signing up to the forums should be as easy as any open forum to keep a rich content base. It is the heart of many sites like this.
For the most part I also agree with David Mantripp's post. Michael's inquisitive mind to exploit the tools to the photographers needs without "fan boying" any brand(for the most part :-), is what we loved to read and discover what advantages and weaknesses each tool possessed. I found his articles worth reading, and unfortunately I have not felt this spark in most other reads.
I don't understand it when people say "$12 is fair enough". Its not this dollar amount that anyone would be rejecting. For those that know, the marketed content is surely a great deal at that rate.
While the content the Forum has is created by its own visitors. Any restriction of this area, I think will degrade the content. Trolls, are a minimal issue we have had and are easy enough to ignore.
I can see the forum choke and drive more people to DPreview, and the like if it was pay.
A registration to track a user or the have a fee attached creates an unhealthy environment that restricts flourishing.
In a world of today's technological capabilities, site owners already have methods of identifying users with IP address and can reject trolls. Some people want to stay under a certain level or illusion that they are anonymous, and adding a registration with payment and address and such only creates a commercial gain, yet hurts the forum value.
I would be all for a pay $12 a year to all access, but remain a free and open Forum section.
(This would also give new visitors a chance to see the value of Lula, and eventually sign on as a paying member. )
I will be signing up myself to contribute regardless, but I think this is a wrong direction if it ends up including the Forums. And by signing up, am I contributing to its inevitable demise?
Or should I not sign up, just give a flat contribution as we all should to steer clear of a paid Forum?
Maybe more information from Lula would help explain the format and we have nothing to worry about?
And for anyone who is claiming that Lula sold out cheap and would pay more, then just put your money where your mouth is and contribute some money to keep the Forum free and open!
When Wiki asks for a donation, I give it, when Mozilla does, I give it. When sites encourage to click on banners I click. If you are the leach of such content with nothing to contribute, it is you who drives such sites to a pay base.
-
I would be all for a pay $12 a year to all access, but remain a free and open Forum section.
some forums have commerical sections like "sell/wtb" (you can't post or view if you are not paid member or pay a one time fee, etc)... or for example sections only for those who puchased tours/workshops or content to discuss those... some allows to post pictures in larger than whatever size if you are a paid member or have signatures pointing to member's own commercial websites... etc
-
Although one could argue that there's some people who haven't had a shot at me yet and they should get their turn.
Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.
:)
-
I think $12 is fair enough.
infact, probably the best deal out there for what you get; I'll be signing up.
however, the forum should remain free.
-
Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.
:)
Why do I feel like there is about to be a flying cow?
-
Thank you for the feedback . . . We do have a plan in place for people that are new coming to the site to see content. We do have plans to offer educational institutions something special for their students. We are also working on a way folks can try out the forum. We will announce these once we are live and have tested them to make sure they work the way we'd like. We are excited about the potential of some of the projects we have planned. December will be a very busy month for us as we have some big projects in the works regarding printing (tease). All of us are very dedicated to making Luminous-Landscape a success and a benefit for all our readers.
That's very encouraging, Kevin, and pre-empts one of the things I was going to suggest in response to the very valid points made. How about (I'm sure you have thought of these) read-only access to the forums, access for a free trial period of a month, full access to the forums but no (or restricted) access to other content? No doubt there are other possibilities.
Jeremy
-
... Read this article as to how StackOverflow overtook ExpertExchange in the IT/Dev environment: http://www.inc.com/alex-moazed/how-this-engineer-turned-his-blog-into-a-400-million-business.html Their #1 platform take away is to 'Don't put up paywalls on content platforms with large amounts of user-generated content'...
Such a line of reasoning suffers from what is known as a survivorship bias, and is best addressed with a standard investment prospectus disclaimer: "Past performance does not guarantee future results." In other words, the fact that someone made a $xxx million business using a certain approach in the past does not mean it would work today or in the future.
There are only two ways to cover the cost of running a website like this: advertisement or subscription. Apparently, advertisement revenue has been drying up as of lately and isn't what it used to be in the past. On the web in general, not just this site. We had a thread (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=96075.msg784772#msg784772) about that recently. Hence the subscription.
-
love you guys, count me in.
kind regards, Martin
-
Such a line of reasoning suffers from what is known as a survivorship bias, and is best addressed with a standard investment prospectus disclaimer: "Past performance does not guarantee future results." In other words, the fact that someone made a $xxx million business using a certain approach in the past does not mean it would work today or in the future.
There are only two ways to cover the cost of running a website like this: advertisement or subscription. Apparently, advertisement revenue has been drying up as of lately and isn't what it used to be in the past. On the web in general, not just this site. We had a thread (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=96075.msg784772#msg784772) about that recently. Hence the subscription.
and apparently website (with its content sans forums) is simply useless too... hence the forums ;D
-
To cross post my thoughts from the MF/LF thread:
While I see direct value in the original content being created by the LuLa team, there are issues that need to be addressed. I found LuLa due to the forums, and the role they have in the community. Read this article as to how StackOverflow overtook ExpertExchange in the IT/Dev environment: http://www.inc.com/alex-moazed/how-this-engineer-turned-his-blog-into-a-400-million-business.html Their #1 platform take away is to 'Don't put up paywalls on content platforms with large amounts of user-generated content'.
The forums are a peer to peer platform that are lightly managed, where answers are from subject matter experts (or what ever we are calling ourselves today). Yes, there is a cost to infrastructure, but putting it behind a paywall is the wrong answer. The forums need consistent participation from unpaid people, otherwise the page views don't happen, and the overall site becomes stagnant. Yes, the same question gets asked over and over, so there is an opportunity to create content directly for that market.
While I can afford the $12, I'd rather that be an optional token that allows folks to see that I am personally invested in the LuLa community. Getting a large enough commitment to make this a viable alternative shouldn't be too hard, but I would suggest doing that first before going full paywall on folks.
-Joe
I agree that the Forums should remain open and free. They are already separate from the content side.
I have no issue with the membership model on the content side.
Side note: it is appalling to see talk of greed and suggestions for the owner to mitigate income with his charity, both personal effort and personal decision.
-
I'm a little disappointed for several reasons:
1. The Quality of Content has tremendously decreased over the past three years.
2. The Relevance of Content has also decreased. It is aimed at a steadily decreasing customer market. Instead of widening the umbrella, it is becoming even more insular. We're not all old rich white guys.
3. LL should be a model of how to be a marketing success. The click-ad revenue was the 2000's model. Where are the real advertisements sold by your staff of marketing experts? With as many page-views that you have, that should be monetized better. This is an admission of failure. Your business model has failed.
4. One million visitors a month is not the true number. If the real number is probably closer to 50,000 unique visitors. When you figure the conversion rate to the paid subscription is likely going to be in the 10% range, that's only going to give $5000 per month in gross revenues. That might be more than what you are getting now, but it also filters out growth of new subscribers. All the old rich white guys already are here. You have to widen the subscriber base and that's not going to happen.
I wish you well. I doubt I'll subscribe because I feel that this website has pretty much run its course. I will miss it like I will miss the National Geographic. Time to move on.
That all said, I'm personally involved in exactly the same situation. My own website has run its course and only a particular segment of content keeps it afloat. I'm in the process of rebuilding it and am substantially change directions with it because the current business model has also failed and I gave up on new content creation to focus on things that earned more income. The new version will reflect a direct shift of direction because market forces and market opportunities have changed. But I won't be changing it to a paid subscription model. When my partner and I started our site, that was one of the plans--to create a paid subscription section of content and value-add. We tested it and determined that while it was a great idea, the market would not support it. But that was a few years ago.
Ken
-
I agree that the Forums should remain open and free. They are already separate from the content side.
content does not work... the life (= revenue stream) is here... seriously - who is going to pay for rantatorials and video tutorials/etc subscription clearly failed ? now I can get when people pay for the proper tests/reviews like Reid does - but here ?
-
1. The Quality of Content has tremendously decreased over the past three years.
or rather you can get faster/better and more technically correct reading elsewhere... where I am going to read about high ISO shooting with A7R2 ? to this site's main page ? give me a break (BREAK!) - I am going to read Kasson's blog or from rawdigger's developer or forums (including this very forum)... now there are people who like to read something like "Loving the American Southwest" type of articles - but I doubt those are more than already subscribing for videos.
-
Today we anounce a change for Luminous-Landscape. Luminous-Landscape will become a membership website on November 30th, 2015. Please read the article and view the video on this announcement. View the article and video. (https://luminous-landscape.com/important-news-change-at-luminous-landscape/)
Please be careful about how you handle this change. Seek legal counsel.
John Beardsworth and AlterEgo have touched this problem: requiring a paid subscription for forum access can be problematic for you, insofar as that you don't have the permission of the content (text, images, etc.) rights holders, who have provided their content free-of-charge with the understanding that it is publicly available under a no-subscription model.
Putting up that paywall would essentially be equivalent to taking down the forums.
The change should pose no problem if you leave the current forums available, even if they're only read-only, while reopening new, subscription-based forums.
If you want to put a paywall in front of the current forums, please provide those who have provided forum content with a way out.
Others have expanded well on other, more community related problems with a subscription model for forums. There were few more annoying sites on the Internet than ExpertsExchange when googling for a problem. It's still pretty darn annoying that they show up in search results at all.
There are some other non-forum issues.
Subscription models invariably cause more problems for me as a reader than non-subscription.
There are zero technical solutions available that let me easily see the subscription sites I visit in my aggregator of choice, it breaks RSS, it breaks Reader and similar services for better readability on e.g. mobile devices (where LuLa still isn't good, sorry!), and it means I need to log in every single time I use a different device.
As a technical computer person, I can probably come up with work-arounds for these issues, if I'm willing to spend the time and effort, and if LuLa offers a decent API for it, e.g. based on authorizable access tokens that can be used by third-party apps. (Sounds complicated, right? Yes, it is.)
As it is, this technical barrier is what would drive me as a reader away from LuLa. It's what's kept me away from several other paid subscription sites, regardless of their excellence.
Cheers,
Jan
PS: I completely understand and respect the issues of generating sufficient income to run the site on a professional basis. Succeeding with putting the cat back in the bag is, however, really difficult, and very few sites seem to survive that change. No matter what you end up with, I really wish you the best of luck.
-
4. One million visitors a month is not the true number. If the real number is probably closer to 50,000 unique visitors. When you figure the conversion rate to the paid subscription is likely going to be in the 10% range, that's only going to give $5000 per month in gross revenues.
This is quite exactly what I am expecting to happen, alas. I just did not want to be the first to say it out loud.
-
3. LL should be a model of how to be a marketing success. The click-ad revenue was the 2000's model. Where are the real advertisements sold by your staff of marketing experts? With as many page-views that you have, that should be monetized better. This is an admission of failure. Your business model has failed.
It's not as simple as that. Web advertising is taking a bath, and it's going to get worse. Probably a lot worse.
http://idlewords.com/2015/11/the_advertising_bubble.htm
4. One million visitors a month is not the true number. If the real number is probably closer to 50,000 unique visitors. When you figure the conversion rate to the paid subscription is likely going to be in the 10% range, that's only going to give $5000 per month in gross revenues. That might be more than what you are getting now, but it also filters out growth of new subscribers. All the old rich white guys already are here. You have to widen the subscriber base and that's not going to happen.
You can just look this stuff up, it turns out, you needn't make wild (and, it turns out, completely wrong) guesses.
-
I respect Michael & Kevin a great deal. I think they've created a great place. While the fee is really, really, low, I'm not doing a paid subscription. I don't think the site is offering anything over the countless sites I visit. I think there will be a lot of hard grafting to create content and up the ante to reflect a paid subscription, but I wish you good luck with it though. See you forum members, have a nice life!
-
I seem to have a different opinion than most of you. Let me first mention that a subscription of $12 a year is perfectly doable for me. However, I smell Kevin’s and Michael’s GREED here and I must say I hate greed!
Not Kevin or Michael but us as contributors (not me of course…) are making it worthwhile visiting this forum site again and again. So who are the ones that generate traffic on the site? We are! Then why should we pay for our participation in making it a great site generating lots of traffic?
I honestly don’t know if I continue with this site, not that it matters to anyone of course so I won’t bother you with this. Of course I don’t expect you’ll agree with me on this.
Apparently we are in a minority, but I agree with you. The forum content is created by us (well, you) and I don't see why I should put money in The Raberizer's pocket to read it.
-
Please be careful about how you handle this change. Seek legal counsel.
John Beardsworth and AlterEgo have touched this problem: requiring a paid subscription for forum access can be problematic for you, insofar as that you don't have the permission of the content (text, images, etc.) rights holders, who have provided their content free-of-charge with the understanding that it is publicly available under a no-subscription model.
I expect the posts of non subscribers to be deleted, or be DMCA'ed ;-)
-
... The forum content is created by us (well, you) and I don't see why I should put money in The Raberizer's pocket to read it.
Because the money goes into his left pocket and leaves from his right pocket to finance the infrastructure needed for you to post and read the content?
-
Try to keep this thread civil. There is little reason for members to be abusive.
Michael, Kevin & I are reading all the advice and suggestions here very carefully and will respond accordingly.
Chris S
-
However, I do have ethical problems with someone hiding previous forum posts behind a paywall, as I did when Rob Galbraith sold his forum. Whatever its merit (and some has a lot), you got that content for free, and now you want to charge for access to it?
This. John - I enjoy your posts and find them very informative. I don't like to think of someone selling the content you have given for free.
-
... Not Kevin or Michael but us as contributors (not me of course…) are making it worthwhile visiting this forum site...
Not Kevin or Michael!? The forum would not have existed without the content created by the site owners in the first place.
-
I find the $12 price a completely right decission. No one guarantees it will work, but a higher price would almost certainly not work. Those eBook sellers setting prices close to the paper version don't grasp the concept that you cannot charge $10 or more for a bunch of bits. Anyone interested in the high quality articles periodically published in the site should find those $12/year a ridiculous cost vs the benefits obtained.
I consider including the forum in the fee a wrong decission though. I know a forum requires quite a lot of work (I run one (http://micro4tercios.com)), and that means effort and time, but you must not forget that the forum contents are produced by us, the forum participants, not by the forum owners. I don't mean it must remain free, but to be fair to everyone a more refined formula is needed IMHO.
Regards
-
Not Kevin or Michael!? The forum would not have existed without the content created by the site owners in the first place.
sure, we shall get back and credit the people who created internet in the first place too... and their parents and grandparents and then propably the rock that cleared dinos too
-
To be blunt, there's a certain number of mild stretchers in the pitch on the front page. LuLa is in the top 10 photo web sites, but there are at least 4 more popular ones out there. They get 330,000 unique visitors a month on 1.8M pageviews. Costs of servers and bandwidth are negligible when stacked up next to the need to put bread on the table for three men.
LuLa is a very respectable popular web site in a relatively niche space. With respect, I think they're overstaffed, although I am certainly not calling for anyone's head, I'm just looking at the realities of meeting payroll for three men on the numbers the web site generates.
Ad revenues are in free fall out there in a wild, and the photographic industry is, as a whole, shrinking down from a bubble, which is surely producing a double-whammy on LuLa's ad revenue. Revenues are trending down, and payroll rose by 50% when Kevin joined. These curves are going the wrong way.
What are you gonna do? I don't know what the staff here looked at, but what *I* would have considered was:
- an email blast-based set of surveys and questions to investigate some possibilities
- A patreon or kickstarter based system
- a membership model for various subsets of content, up to and including the whole web site
- consideration of branching out into other businesses
- sell T-shirts and other merch
- sell more workshops
- sell workshop support services (so you want to run a workshop, let us help you)
- a market research operation serving the still and motion camera industry, leveraging the user base
- print sales, either lift the entire model from ToP or invent something new (art by subscription?)
They have a huge user base with a disproportionately high number of affluent dudes in it, and the only thing they can come up with is
put up a lowball $12/year paywall?
As I say, I have no idea what the thought process was, and I am loathe to say it was flawed, but I will say that the result doesn't strike me as particularly top-drawer. As always, I could easily be missing something.
-
Lots of discussion re whether or not the forum s/b behind the "paywall". It should because it takes time and effort to monitor it. I have benefited from the excellent advise SHARED here and trust that will continue. Will the paywall exclude many knowledgeable folks willing to share experience and knowledge? We shall see.
Just continuing to have access to what is already here is worth the price of admission, IMO
-
I think the new model makes a lot of sense. I know I owe a great deal to LULA without whom I would have had a much tougher time learning the more technical side of the craft. It has also helped me deepen my aesthetic skills and appreciation for the art form.
I also like the idea returning to an ad free model. I appreciate the idea of a site that can be truly free of any direct conflict of interest when it comes to equipment reviews and evaluations.
I am a very long time reader, visitor, supporter and subscriber to LULA. However, I very seldom participate in the forum so my name and voice will be new to the vast majority of you . Nevertheless, I wanted to add my two cents into the discussion.
I'm in 100%...in fact I would likely be in at 3x the price.
Warm regards,
Al
-
I am one hundred percent behind MR and KR in this move. The money we're talking about is a rounding error for most readers here and, with readers having a tiny bit of skin in the game, perhaps the forums will remain as cordial and civilized as always. Count on my subscription from the outset. To the "please pay me for having posted in the forum" group.... uh, no. If you feel your content is that valuable you might consider starting your own blog.
-
Quite frankly for those of us who have been using the forums the forums should stay free. WE have contributed to them and made the content new people sure charge them but we who created them should be able to stay free. I have not been happy with the articles and I associate this with a lot less from Michael. Sorry to say Kevin and though i respect his work Alain do not do much for me and Sean Reid writes teasers to get you pay for his site. Using the forums to get people to pay for them that have there own writings on them is just wrong. Remember the mess over the Rob Galbraith sites.
-
... Will the paywall exclude many knowledgeable folks willing to share experience and knowledge? We shall see.
Just continuing to have access to what is already here is worth the price of admission, IMO
Well, I have to respectfully bow out of the new LuLa subscriber plan at least for now. As a "Senior" member in the forums I hope I've contributed my fair share to the LuLa community. It's definitely not the money. A $12 annual fee is not really much different to $0 for many Lula visitors.
I truly understand the need to monetize Lula with a realistic approach that doesn't succumb to the ever growing presence of more and more online sites coming into existence to chase a finite amount of available add revenue via click charge payment remunerations. Rather, it's the fact that my usual "go to" forum thread, the printers, papers, and inks" forum topic, is already experiencing a significant decline in LuLa community involvement. This particular forum has been the prime value for me on LuLa. I can get gear reviews and meaningful new gear insight on many sites for free. I don't need LuLa for that. Yet LuLa's "printers, paper, and inks" forum has been a safe haven of rational discourse in a sea of confusion on the topic in almost all other forum threads I've visited. However, I sense that this forum is already waning, IMHO, over the last couple of years. I don't know nor can I fully calculate the dynamic which is taking place, but to put it behind a firewall is almost certain to reduce its value even further.
I truly wish LuLa the best in its new contract with its readers/subscribers.
best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
-
Remember the mess over the Rob Galbraith sites.
I do. But a lot of the reason it sank had to do with other factors besides asking for money. The rate of censorship on that site was over the top. The people who took over were clueless. Neither is the case here. I'm not saying it couldn’t happen. But Galbraith had as much to do with that site going down the toilet as asking for forum members to pay.
-
After reading 9 pages of comments: it looks as if most criticism is about the plan to put the forums behind the paywall too. I agree. I'm one of those who rarely watch a video or read an article. I'm here for the forums. I have written few posts, but in some of them I have invested a lot of work. I wanted to share my experience and discuss it with others. I was glad to do that because I knew this is a free site for everybody, that was part of my motivation. I wouldn't have done it for a subscription site. Now the former contributions of a lot of people will disappear behind a paywall.
A lot of people have made the proposition to restrict the paywall to the articles and leave the forums free.
Michael and Kevin - could you please comment on this: wouldn't that be a possibility? Why not?
-
...I'm one of those who rarely watch a video or read an article. I'm here for the forums...
And if that is true for most of those who oppose paying and want a free forum, then how is the site going to finance it?
-
Maybe it was mentioned before, but after 9 pages, I don't feel like reading every post.
I usually link articles and youtube videos from LuLa. Michael has been my ETTR flag since his first article, long time ago. I would suggest making a 15 or 30 day trial for articles, maybe not so for videos, so if someone links an article, anyone can see it right away, not having to pay for a full yearly subscription. If the reader likes the site, and decides to pay for a subscription, then much better.
-
This is the right move !! :D
I expect this enables you guys to improve quality even more...
All the best!! :)
-
And if that is true for most of those who oppose paying and want a free forum, then how is the site going to finance it?
I just pay to contribute, but if the forum is not open i am afraid it will dry up.
We need constantly new ideas, new forum input and new blood - no threshold should be put in place to prevent that from happening.
As i said before ; I rather pay for Lula with an open forum than without one.
-
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
-
I remember clearly, as it was yesterday, that some time ago Michael stated (was it a video or article?) that this site will NEVER be a subscription site. Oh boy, times change quickly …
As others, I think the quality of the articles has declined somewhat in the last years. For me it was a very important source, but not so much anymore, although I still like to step by…. I miss the insight articles from Michael which are much less in number recently ...
Now, I am more interested in the forums from which I learned a lot. They should be and stay free.
I also agree with others that this may not be a sustainable model, lack of fresh blood and diversity will be the consequence.
Anyway, I wish you the best
-
And if that is true for most of those who oppose paying and want a free forum, then how is the site going to finance it?
So you agree that most of those who would be paying, would be paying to talk? And you say that without such payment, it is unsustainable? You are overly defensive and argumentative about valid points being made.
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
Thank you Kevin. Mine and many other comments on this have been seen as the voice of reason. Slobodan to note.
-
I have been a long time reader on the forums here and since most questions are answered well enough I don’t contribute myself. I have spent several years in R&D in alternative print methods and in time will openly contribute to those specific fields as my way of giving back. I appreciate what LuLa has offered, so a big thank you for the creators and all of those who do contribute.
I would willing donate my time and funds to better moderation of forums. Why not open the forum moderation to volunteers? And why not allow individuals the ability to rate and flag post similar to arstechnica.com/? Free users could have restrictions, unable to post, having to view ads, etc, no access to LuLa generated content.
I would suggest going even lower to $1 a year as a base rate and allowing the individual to add what they feel as a donation. Be open and transparent about funds, what is raised and where it goes. Once a person is opening their wallet, you are giving them the chance to contribute what they deem is fair and valuable to them, it will be different for each individual.
And as far as LuLa generated content goes, perhaps openly soliciting more guest articles and reviews from volunteers vs having paid staff generating content.
Steve Meyers
-
... You are overly defensive and argumentative about valid points being made...
If presenting opposing arguments is being argumentative, so be it.
I remain sceptical that the new model will provide sufficient funds.
-
$12 is a good deal to continue accessing Lula website
On one hand, out of the thousands of archived articles, videos, and forum posts many are by now outdated and in all practicality obsolete. However, abandoning all that content would be a great loss.
In order to maintain all existing information online and keeping the site up to date, new articles, videos and forum posts are needed. All members, including the ones who are opposed to the subscription concept agree that some monetization is in order. So far, the $12 yearly subscription fee seems the BEST AND SIMPLEST option to solve the big problem. If anybody has a better idea, feel free to share it with the site owners.
-
And if that is true for most of those who oppose paying and want a free forum, then how is the site going to finance it?
Hi Slobodan,
I admit that I am not quiet sure about my position. I can understand your point - it is necessary to monetize the website - to a certain extent. In the past (for 16 years) it seems to have worked that money from advertisements and fees for certain tutorials finance the infrastructure and the maintenance. The users contributed to the attractivity by their content too which made it attractive for advertisements. That used to be a great deal - a combination of content from the founders and content from the users in the forums made up something great everybody profited from.
They say that things have changed on the internet and I don't know what that means. What has changed? It is impossible from the outside to get an idea about how much money comes in through advertisements and tutorial fees nowadadays. In their announcement video for the new membership Michael and Kevin mostly talk about the content that they produce and want to produce as a reason for the substription model. I'm not interested very much in that part. But if that content is really of high interest and some people pay for it - couldn't that bring in enough money and the forums could remain free?
Regards -
Marc
-
Please see the post above...
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
-
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
Thank you very much. I am glad to hear that (I did not see it in time beacuse you posted it while I was typing). I hope this solution can give you a good financial basis. Thank you for all your great work and for running this great site!
Marc
-
Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site.
I think you've made absolutely the right decision and both thank you and congratulate you on it. We'll never definitively know but my gut instinct tells me that you'll garner a lot more subscribers on day 1 than you would have done under the original proposal - and, yes, I will be subscribing (I would have done either way), but let that not detract from a politic decision in the best interest of all.
Good luck with the new model.
-
This is one of many photography sites I frequent, although 12 is not a lot of money, if I start paying that kind of money for every web site that I frequent between photography, technology and science it would no longer make the internet worth browsing at all.
good luck and I understand the difficulties in making money from a web presence, but as with all paywalls so far they are no longer part of the internet to me.
(what is with the 7 different questions just to post a message?)
-
Well I thank you for the change and will continue on the forums as afar as the for sale I cannot argue with that either. Thanks for listening David
-
I only recently discovered this site, but after browsing the forum alone I'll gladly pay the $12 a year.
-
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
Great decision. Well done! Re the content site, although I empathize with many of the critical posts, I will become a member. I worry though, about the monetization success. As others pointed out you may lose in the process and that is not good. Wish you luck!
-
We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
Smart, elegant and above all, fair. I hope the new era of Lula is a complete success. Thanks for listening.
Regards!
-
I think the subscription model is fine. I get a lot of pleasure and value from the web site for free. In the past I might have paid for books or magazines.
Whether it is $12, $24 or whatever, it will be good value for me.
-
I'm disappointed by this but I can't really say why. It's not the money as it's really just the price of a couple of magazines and I stopped buying those years ago so I'll have saved enough to pay my LL bills for a few centuries.
I enjoy many of the articles especially the real world kit reviews which are a nice change from the overly technical and maybe overly critical reviews on other sites which in my opinion can go on too much about things that will never ever matter to me. I also like the enthusiasm that comes through and it's so nice to read and hear opinions as so many seem to be afraid to express an opinion these days. I'd much rather hear and opinion than a bench test result.
For these reasons I do like LL and it's not a lot of money so all in all I can't explain why I'm disappointed, but I just am.
Sorry.
-
Lula being the oasis that is it, I think what you are charging is below value, that's just my 2¢. Many of us who visit the site rely on your reviews and opinions, many of us who travelled with you guys we know that you guys call it as it is. In my opinion you could have charged much more and still be great value. Thanks for all your hard work, will sign up and sign in on 11/30.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Kevin, Michael, Chris,
I think your decision to keep the forum open and "free" is a smart move. I think it will help encourage people to the subscription side for many reasons. The forums, for the most part, are user generated content and this shows terrific support for your users.
I'm sure you'll introduce/tweak the paid side over time, and with user feedback. Even though I visit LuLa less often now then perhaps 10 years ago, I still consider it a valuable resource and recommend many people visit.
But, in short, smart move. A paywall on the forums would eventually kill it. Even at $12/yr.
Stephen
-
Free Forum!!! Dang!! I was really looking forward to a nominal charge to keep the conversations civil, seems most of the detractors and arguer for the sake of arguing were opting out, it was so good to see them leave. Maybe I won't subscribe... It was a slam-dunk yesterday.
-
I'd reply but I'm too busy laughing myself sick.
-
Free Forum!!! Dang!! I was really looking forward to a nominal charge to keep the conversations civil, seems most of the detractors and arguer for the sake of arguing were opting out, it was so good to see them leave. Maybe I won't subscribe... It was a slam-dunk yesterday.
Terrorists won...again :D
-
What a pity.
I understand the need to monetize one's assets, especially at the end of one's life. There's too many other free sites available to occupy my attention to ever consider paying anything to your site.
Best of luck.
-
More than reasonable.
-
Although I would (and will) happily pony up the $12 with absolutely no qualms, I think the decision to maintain the forums as a free area is the correct one for the long term health of the site. Time will tell, but I suspect that the draw of the forums will, over time , entice more people to subscribe to the paywall than forcing forum readers to pay would coerce to join. (Does that make sense? Basically the openness of the forums will be a net positive vs the amount of people that would actually pay to stay on the forums).
All that said, the complaints of not enough value to be had for $12 strike me as quite offensive to the folks that create and maintain this space for us. OTOH, I do hope the content contributors are paid as well...
-
I have to say my jaw dropped when I saw the announcement that the site was going to substantially alter its new business model based on a handful of comments made in their forum.
This is a web site with somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 regular readers.
The regular posters in the forums represent a self-selected and very very small subset of the people you actually need to persuade. Further, a very small subset of that population has thus far weighed in at all, and only a fraction of those suggested making the forums free. As many suggested, or implied, they didn't want the forums free (mainly so their enemies would presumably be excluded, which isn't the best of reasons).
It's really none of my business, but this isn't coming across like a particularly well thought out plan. I hope there are wheels within wheels here, things I'm not aware of.
-
It's really none of my business, but this isn't coming across like a particularly well thought out plan.
Honestly I think you need to lighten up. The owners of LuLa are trying something new, great. You don't want to pay, no problem. They reflected on comments for 24 hours and probably realized having free forums really was the right thing to do and better long term for the site, terrific. They can do whatever they want and all of us will choose to pay or not pay. For me it's a no-brainer to support what they do. For others maybe not, but that's fine. However the last thing I'd do is come onto their turf and suggest they haven't got a good plan. If they were so bad at managing the site I don't think LuLa would get 1M hits per month, which no doubt is an infinitely larger reach than any of us who are posting here. Regardless, do what you want but it really looks bad to take unwarranted shots at the people who spend so much time to create this community that many of us truly value, especially with all the things *actually* important that are going on in the world today. Live and let live.
-
As I said, I rather hope there are wheels within wheels here.
-
Kevin posted on the past page....
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
In case you didn't see it
-
It's really none of my business...
You certainly have a lot of comments about how a site is run that is "none of my business" and one which has "negative value" for you. It may very well be that your comments have "negative value" for the rest of us.
-
Hey, look, it's a discussion forum! Look, there's a topic, what's this? The topic is changes to the web site!
I know, let's discuss that topic in the discussion forum!
Or not, because when you say things that some people disagree with, they just tell you to shut up. Did I misread this? Is this a not-discussion forum? Is this a discussion forum, but only for people who say things John Hollenberg thinks are worthwhile? Can someone point out the the part I missed where John Hollenberg was appointed king?
Please.
-
Here's how I look at it. There are three reasons for visiting LuLa:
1. The content supplied by the site: articles, reviews, videos, etc.
2. The forum (user-contributed content and discussion)
3. Entertainment factor ("I'm bored, wonder what's going on, what people are talking about")
Each of us has a personal calculus determining how much we will pay for each category. For me, for #3 (entertainment factor) I will pay nothing, I'll just occupy myself elsewhere.
For #2 (forum), it's doubtful I would pay for the forum. I have only paid to access one forum ever, and LuLa isn't going to be the second. Unfortunately, I predict this will be a common view, and therefore this will hurt LuLa, for the value of the forum is in direct relation to the number of people visiting and contributing to it.
This leaves #1. I can see some people deciding that they get more than $12 worth of content from LuLa each year, and others deciding they don't.
Overall, my recommendation would be to charge your $12 for #1 only, and leave the forum open. And focus on generating more content to entice more people to subscribe.
-
It's not as simple as that. Web advertising is taking a bath, and it's going to get worse. Probably a lot worse.
http://idlewords.com/2015/11/the_advertising_bubble.htm
You can just look this stuff up, it turns out, you needn't make wild (and, it turns out, completely wrong) guesses.
Total gross advertising dollars rises and falls with the overall economy. How it is parsed out and the methods used change. We can see this in action with major sites like cnn and facebook where click-bait is the new normal. In traditional forms of media (print, broadcast, outdoor), the dollars continue to shift but maintain their edge as they have proven and measurable results. As I look at the banner advertisement on the top of this very page as I type this message, I see advertisements for a virtual photography workshop in Japan, Mamiya Leaf, Cambo, ARCA Swiss, Alpa and Phase One products. None of which have any bearing to me. Again, this is a sign that the target demographic of this site is so narrow that it is self filtering and self limiting.
My wild, completely wrong, guesses are probably not so wild and completely wrong. It was not clearly stated whether or not LL gets one million visitors a month or one million UNIQUE visitors a month. For a site like this, that can be as high as a 20:1 difference. No wild guesses, this is the fact. This means that the typical person visiting LL will visit as many as 20 times a month. This includes the forums. The stats are easy to pull. My own site averages 2.5 visits a month per visitor with 4.7 page views per visit. 20 times a month might be a little high, but for a site with an active forum, that is not unusual. The non-forum part of LL with actual publisher provided content is likely closer to my 2.5 visits per month average.
Regardless, this is where I have a problem with the numbers. If this site really is getting one million UNIQUE visitors a month, with an average of four page-views per visitor, this is SERIOUSLY sellable. An active advertising placement team would be able to monetize this in a heartbeat. ONE MILLION SETS OF EYEBALLS EVERY MONTH!!! Facebook, which is worth billions upon billions of dollars only gets 800 times that many sets of eyeballs. LL is giving away tens of thousands of dollars a month in FREE advertising to these companies providing success-based advertising commission income. I know how much click-revenue there is because I use it on my site too and it is just enough to cover my web-hosting fees and an occasional Starbucks Latte. At the peak, my website was producing over 40,000 UNIQUE visitors a month, and I realized that I was literally giving away tremendous amounts of advertising to companies in exchange for an occasional pittance. In the broadcast world, these are known as PI (per inquiry) advertisements and the only time they are run is in the middle of the night where no other advertiser will bother wasting their money. The PI advertisements are used to fill commercial breaks during network feeds. On cable television, these are usually the commercials for 20 CD sets of songs from some dead person for 12 monthly payments of $10 each. You'll never encounter these advertisements during the morning drive time on radio or the evening news hour on television.
I am NOT saying that this site isn't getting one million unique visitors a month or even one million visits a month. I don't have access to the web stats for this site. But either way, this is an example where our experts on photography and camera-exotica have made a substantial business error in not having an effective sales/marketing team to monetize the site. Changing to a subscription model MIGHT work out in the long run, but I don't think the statistics are on LL's side in this regard.
Ken
-
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
I am not sure I understand. The subscription for the videos used to be 150$/year. Now, the price is lowered to 12$/year? Is that it?
-
I live in a small Canadian prairie town. For night time fun and excitement, you can go outside and listen to the coyotes howl. Sometimes it is a little cold out there, sometimes it is a death wish as the 37 different species of mosquitos descend on you. I can have a nice beer and read a magazine, which cost $8 or I can read LuLa for $1/month. Now I can go through years of videos. This may take awhile. As you can see, I'm good with the price and the revised plan.
-
People need to lighten up:)
It's really simple:
1. You either find the content is worth it, and you pay the small price of 1USD/month;
2. Or you don't find the content useful and don't pay.
You can actually base your decision by sampling about 15 years worth of content. You either like it, or you don't. This site is more mature than the usual ones where you are flooded with the "what lens should I buy to visit whatever city"...
-
People need to lighten up:)
It's really simple:
1. You either find the content is worth it, and you pay the small price of 1USD/month;
2. Or you don't find the content useful and don't pay.
If the forum remains free it's simpler. While it was proposed that Lula would sell other people's work it was less so.
Of course one may also argue that the forum ( user IP) is being used to attract people to give money to Lula. In a world of Linux and Wikipedia it is strange to start charging.
-
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
I think that's absolutely the right decision for the long term future of the site - thanks and congratulations to all of you for making it.
-
$12/yr? I'm signing up, along with my dog and maybe my cat too.
Dave
-
$12/yr? I'm signing up, along with my dog and maybe my cat too.
I guess it's one of those cats with a catcam on its neck :D :D
-
Great price guys, I, like most seem to think that it's a good price, and will be signing up. However, I really do hope lots of other people who aren't here commenting already, feel the same way, and sign up as well, so the video content can pick up a little.
My last outright purchase, the Video primer, I felt was terribly lacking, and was orphaned. This past year of video content was absolutely minimal, the only thing I found interest in and can even remember, was the Photograph America video, but absolutely not worth $150, as it was advertising. The price I paid for the Photograph America memory stick and subscription as a result of that advertising I feel has great value, but not the $150 subscription that alerted me to it's existence... It's a good thing I didn't renew my Purple subscription when they came knocking a few weeks ago! Three years of membership at another $150 for a $36 value is not a good deal LOL.
I have no problem at all paying $12 for the site content as is, even if the video segments don't pick up the pace.
-
I've been reading this site for 10+ years and got videos back when they were mailed to you on a disc. In recent years I haven't really posted in the forums or bought any video.
For $12/year I will certainly subscribe. I would definitely like videos that focus on post-processing techniques in lightroom or photoshop, or even other more obscure programs.
-
Michael, Kevin, Chris,
I do think it would be a good idea to include an option for us to contribute more than $12.00 during the yearly sign up.
Many of us feel we could/would/should contribute more above and beyond what you are asking.
For many, this would be a way to give back. For others, it would be a way to get behind your new direction.
I do think the decision to exempt the forum is wise. In a way, the forum is the ambassador to your main website. People find it from Google searches for solutions to problems they encounter with gear or process or techniques, etc.
At any rate, best wishes with the changes - I for one am very excited about your forward movement.
-Mark
-
Thank you for you comments. Michael, Chris and I have been following the topic all day. We have heard you and we will keep the forum as a FREE portion of the Luminous-Landscape site. The rest of the site will be part of the membership site. The exception is the For Sale topic. If you wish to post there you will need to be a member. Thanks for the feedback.
Thanks for listening, Kevin, Chris, and Michael. You always have been good at that.
-
Open forum and content for 12$ a year - a very nice outcome :) !
I will be happy to sign up to support LuLa.
This site that has been for me an important well of solid information over the years with all the articles, videos and the forum.
congratulations!
Pieter Kers
-
I suggest that only paid members can have signatures listing their websites/blogs/etc... as this is a form of ad, can't be for free... or to make things simple - signature option is enabled for paid members, that's it
-
Happy to contribute here seeing as so far I have taken but not given back. For myself, I would be keen to see more emphasis on the photography itself, i.e. images, perhaps in the form of additional forums for, example, black and white, abstract, cityscapes, etc. where the emphasis is on posting images and much less so on "gear talk". I guess this is a seesaw, though. Gear talk probably brings extra eyeballs but it also brings trolls, fly-by-nights and all the rest. I may be going against the grain here but imho without quality images and attention to the image itself as the core of the whole thing a site doesn't offer much that 1000 more gear-oriented sites don't offer.
-
site doesn't offer much that 1000 more gear-oriented sites don't offer.
well, that simply shows how ignorant you are... there are only few forums where quality technical info is available... I mean the likes of argyllcms or colorsync mailing lists or http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1061 if you catch the drift (which I doubt) ... on the contrary the quality images are numerous and available to enjoy in a much higher resolution everywhere in abundance from flikr to 500x to you name it.
-
well, that simply shows how ignorant you are... there are only few forums where quality technical info is available... I mean the likes of argyllcms or colorsync mailing lists or http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1061 if you catch the drift (which I doubt) ... on the contrary the quality images are numerous and available to enjoy in a much higher resolution everywhere in abundance from flikr to 500x to you name it.
And if you don't mind my saying so your rather aggressive and rude reply suggests that forum curation is important and that too intense a focus on gear brings bad things out of the woods. Yours is exactly the kind of ad hominem criticism of another forum member that most folks, I suspect, don't really want to take out a subscription in order to read, myself among them. And, no, I'm not subscribing to argyllcms. Been there, done that. I used it for years while running Debian but left that little world behind a while ago in favour of tools on other platforms, thanks all the same.
-
I support the idea of having the ability to add more than $12. I also support the idea of only allowing paid members having signatures listing their websites/blogs/etc.
-
I support the idea of having the ability to add more than $12.
I think that's an excellent idea. It keeps the subscribtion affordable while allowing donations on a free will basis.
-
Yours is exactly the kind of ad hominem criticism of another forum member that most folks, I suspect, don't really want to take out a subscription in order to read, myself among them.
I'd suggest using the "report to moderator" link. I just did. These forums do not need that kind of contributor.
-
I support the idea of having the ability to add more than $12. I also support the idea of only allowing paid members having signatures listing their websites/blogs/etc.
Both very good ideas. I would be happy to pitch in more than $12 to support a site that has been very helpful to me over the last 10 years.
-
Both very good ideas. I would be happy to pitch in more than $12 to support a site that has been very helpful to me over the last 10 years.
Agreed - good thoughts on how to give subscribers a little something "extra" in the forums.
-
Hey, look, it's a discussion forum! Look, there's a topic, what's this? The topic is changes to the web site!
I know, let's discuss that topic in the discussion forum!
Or not, because when you say things that some people disagree with, they just tell you to shut up. Did I misread this? Is this a not-discussion forum? Is this a discussion forum, but only for people who say things John Hollenberg thinks are worthwhile? Can someone point out the the part I missed where John Hollenberg was appointed king?
Please.
You weren't discussing anything.....where is the content below? I don't see it.
I have to say my jaw dropped when I saw the announcement that the site was going to substantially alter its new business model based on a handful of comments made in their forum.
This is a web site with somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 regular readers.
The regular posters in the forums represent a self-selected and very very small subset of the people you actually need to persuade. Further, a very small subset of that population has thus far weighed in at all, and only a fraction of those suggested making the forums free. As many suggested, or implied, they didn't want the forums free (mainly so their enemies would presumably be excluded, which isn't the best of reasons).
It's really none of my business, but this isn't coming across like a particularly well thought out plan. I hope there are wheels within wheels here, things I'm not aware of.
This post is less thought out. Its not that no one wants a discussion, these types of comments are sideline noise. they add nothing to the discussion. And the claims you make about the regular posters and the percent that represents things are simply wrong. So the only thing that is of SELF value you could have been thinking to yourself is your last bit about wheels within and things your not aware of.
The people who posted with suggestions are not aimlessly posting feedback like yours above.
Genuine and thought out ideas to keep the site for a long term plan is the key. If the printing side makes some revenue, fantastic. I think it would be great that Lula adds a printing platform. Maybe with 2 targets, Archival fine art, and the competing stuff that they can offer here for a easy transition. Something like Whitewall and Costco combined. (not all members understand or value prints like someone who's gonna order it one done on Hahnemuhle textured fine art or something.
But the best plans FOR the users are always in consideration of the users views... in any company that is not looking to suck everything out of its users and shortly make a run for it.
Its actually the best thing any site can do, and that's listen to its users. It makes sense. If they had a full proof plan it would be more of a shopping site. Not a community driven site.
There are long term members here with years of a relation with the site. We are looking out for its best interest, not our one days worth of coffee money.
If you have a suggestion, MAKE IT. otherwise noise just wastes and takes up digital space. ...much like this post I felt I had to make, but in hopes for a more sustainable digital space:-)
Anyway...lets move on.
Flip the switch already...I'm interested in seeing the site....Maybe we can get a new non green/yellow color scheme with it? :-) OK, yes, maybe not a good marketing idea to change that....but it could be used as a subset within a new scheme.
-
Have Kevin or Michael confirmed that things that we now pay for, like the $150 videos, are going to be free once you pay the $12 subscription?
Because, I have seen a few posts in this thread that assume so, and I'm not so sure that they are right!
-
Yes everything including videos is included with membership. The only part we haven't confirmed on is Art Wolfe's videos and we should have that in place by Monday.
-
I'd suggest using the "report to moderator" link. I just did. These forums do not need that kind of contributor.
The use of the word "ignorant" was your reason to bother moderators!? Perhaps these forums also do not need the delicate flower kind of contributor that runs for moderator's skirt every time they hear something offending their sensitivity. Nor the kind of contributor that would like to see only the kind of contributor that thinks and behaves like them.
These forums were doing just fine the last ten years, with most contributors being adults and capable of handling occasional though talk without whining. The freedom of expression principle was not invented to protect one's delicate feelings, but to facilitate something much more valuable: a free flow of ideas. Not all those ideas come packed with a neat little pink ribbon.
-
The use of the word "ignorant" was your reason to bother moderators!? Perhaps these forums also do not need the delicate flower kind of contributor that runs for moderator's skirt every time they hear something offending their sensitivity. Nor the kind of contributor that would like to see only the kind of contributor that thinks and behaves like them.
These forums were doing just fine the last ten years, with most contributors being adults and capable of handling occasional though talk without whining. The freedom of expression principle was not invented to protect one's delicate feelings, but to facilitate something much more valuable: a free flow of ideas. Not all those ideas come packed with a neat little pink ribbon.
Perhaps some folks could try a bit more politeness and a little less rudeness of the ad hominem kind? There is no justification for it, none at all, simple as that. "I can say whatever I like but any reaction to it is invading my freedom of expression" is a very old and tired racket. Ideas don't flow freely where sarcasm and aggression hang out.
-
Enough already. Please stick to the topic.
-
Btw...
Is it a site redesign as well, or the same sight with the new functioning structure?
-
Same site. The design is less that a year old. Once you are signed in as a member things will look the same except for a couple of options on the menu, like signing out, and such.
-
as many members pointed out, I would welcome and use the option of paying more than just $12/year.
I've used this website for a while.
-
Harsh, there will be an option at check out if you so desire. It will be apreciated for sure.
-
I support the idea of having the ability to add more than $12. I also support the idea of only allowing paid members having signatures listing their websites/blogs/etc.
I too support both of these ideas.
For paying a bit extra it might be nice to have some options as to where the extra will be applied. The two I think of off hand are (1) the Endowment, or (2) Wherever most needed.
-Eric
-
Any LuLa article accessed via an external search engine will be freely accessible. Membership is to required to read that specific article.
Michael
-
Enough already. Please stick to the topic.
Oh, alright then. But Lord knows, I was tempted.....
-
I apologise for rejoining this discussion having already made my continuing support for what Michael, Chris and Kevin have been - and I trust will continue to do - very clear.
However I would add that for me without any doubt Lula provides the most mature and civilised photography resource on the web - both in terms of the information, opinion and entertainment in the original material - and, generally, in the debates and experience in the forums.
Some of the discussion about this impending change has been very worthwhile and a number of proposals have been responded to positively and promptly. However quite a lot of the comments would change the essential nature of the site, and certainly for me diminish the value and quality of the site - the very reasons I come to this site rather than the huge number of meretricious alternatives. The comments about selling the site or exploiting its full potential or employing a PR and Advertising Department totally misunderstand the essential nature of this site.
Such changes would fundamentally - and, I believe, destroy the reasons why it is valued by so many of us.
Please Michael, Chris and Kevin above all do not lower the standards, or fundamentally change the character, of Lula which have been developed over the years. "Unique" is nowadays a hugely overused word but Lula comes pretty close to warranting its use .... and I for one will be ready to pay a lot more than $1 per month to enable you not to lose that standing. I very much hope that there are many who will take the same view.
-
Krug,
Kevin, Chris and I love the web site. It's not now nor has it ever been a job for us, it's a passion.
We intend on making it better as time passes and lose none of what had made it unique these past 16 years.
Regards,
Michael
-
Just adding my thanks to Michael, Kevin and Chris for all they do to keep L-L a valuable and resource, both the forum and the main site. Their decision to keep the forum 'free' is a nice gesture, as maintaining the forum is certainly not free: someone spends time and money to maintain it. Contributors (and I occasionally contribute something) are just as contributors to journals who must pay a subscription to the journal before being allowed to contribute; at L-L we get it all for free, it is time for us to pay or share of the cost of this amazing resource.
Jean-Michel
-
2 questions come up:
1- how can someone access the articles from a news feed aggregator such as Digg?
2- I refer many of my friends to the site when they ask me questions that I know articles in the site address. That said, how will someone who is not a paying subscriber is to sample the site and browse in order to decide whether they want to become a member themselves. There has to be a way to allow people a peek.
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
OK, I was a bit stunned when I first read the news. Then I thought. Am I willing to pay $12 for reviews of expensive gear I will NEVER be able to posess.... probably not. However, am I willing to pay for the video content and great 'skill' type articles....maybe.
The value of this site is in the exchange of knowledge, opinions on the end product of our profession/hobby and in great discussions, not in (sorry for the terms) gear fetish and show offs.
I guess I will give it a try....for a year ...and then decide later. So my expectation is that the first year will be great for LULA, but the true challenge will be in a years time, when people have to renew. Will LULA be able to attract a large reliable customer base? (larger than the usual incrowd?) I hope so, but it will be a big challenge.
-
Sounds fine to me. Hopefully, there will be a PayPal option.
-
Personally, I would prefer if authorization and authentication of people to read articles was able to be separate to that of posting in forums.
The reason is more to do with back end book keeping - by joining the two there is a connection created between a name, address and credit card number with a username used to post here on LuLa forums.
So when (not if) someone hacks LuLa user anonymity is lost.
I understand that this might be painful for LuLa to implement but really, keeping the forums free and the articles paywalled is dividing the site in two so maybe that reality should be realised sooner rather than later.
I suppose what I see is a change in direction for LuLa to something more like what Sean Reid has done with "Reid's Reviews" however rather than build a separate site and try to get people go there instead, the goal is to try and capitalise on the existing user base to the fullest extent possible.
I don't think this is an issue...
Its not that hard to create a second screen name to contribute and pay for the site and read articles and continue to keep a different screen name for the forums....If you want to. Just do it from another computer/IP. Go to someone elses work computer and sign up :-) But browsers and software have gotten very sophisticated, specially on mobile apps. Some cookies are tored in the same location and different sites gain access to that content. Its really a major breach in privacy, but I guess privacy has gone out the window in most instances, yet hardly anyone is doing anything about it. You either use the browser or app with knowing what you do in other sites and the content is shared, or you don't use the app.
-
Membership for articles is probably fine: Lloyd Chambers, Reid Reviews etc. already do that and it seems to work for them. Putting the forum behind a paywall where the content is user generated is a real mistake in killing a community not to mention a rather dubious practice.
A few questions:
Will the length, frequency and content of the articles change now people will be paying for them?
We've had many 'non-articles' published here in recent years which amount to barely more than self promotion by some contributors or promoting exorbitantly priced workshops - will this change? We've had many people complain to be silenced with the fact this site is free...
Will all the ads disappear?
Will we have less 'lazy content' like just posting chit-chat videos?
I think I'm in the camp of yes $12 a year is small but I visit during my lunch break and there are many places elsewhere that are free.
-
I wonder could we get off the niggling crap and just just pay a miserable few dollars or get off the site altogether and get out of the way. There's nothing more depressing than photographers arguing about money - it's worse then their art!
Pay up or ship out. Personally, I'm paying up.
-
£1 a month (less actually) is clearly excellent value and cheaper than most paysites. Who could quibble with that?
Except...5 or 10 years ago Lula was an interesting site, these days I don't find it so. I browse the articles but rarely do I find anything interesting enough to bother reading, even for free. I don't know why that is - has Lula changed (there is less Michael), have I changed or is there just so much free competition? I subscribed to Reid for a year - couldn't argue with the quality but it wasn't actually useful so I stopped. I subscribed to onlandscape.com - superb magazine that concentrates on photographs, not cameras but that got boring, too. I occasionally buy issues of lenswork (an amazing mag) but... There's just so much quality free stuff out there and my diet of read spans a wide range of sites. What does Lula really offer that isn't available from a mix of Dpreview, Thom Hogan, The Online Photographer, GetDpi.com, Brucepercy.com, Admiringlight.com, GuyTal, Oopoomoo, The Nimble Photographer, The Lightweight Photographer etc etc.
-
What does Lula really offer that isn't available from a mix of ........
It is all on one site and therefore, for me, easier to follow on a daily basis :)
-
(snip)
Except...5 or 10 years ago Lula was an interesting site, these days I don't find it so. I browse the articles but rarely do I find anything interesting enough to bother reading, even for free.
(snip)
I feel the same way. There hasn't been an article that I've found interesting in several years. I come just to entertain myself with the forum discussions. The price is certainly alright - if one is a fan of LL and gets something out of it, it's a no-brainer. But I only come, on occasion, to read the forums. And then I have to ask myself the questions:
1) Are the forums going to grow when they are locked down to the pay wall? I don't think they will, which means that it will continue to be what they are now: kind of a rich boys club arguing back and forth.
2) Do I really need more sony and canon fanboyism? I honestly get more (and better) information from other forums, including the much-despised dpreview, even if I have to wade through some serious metric f-tons of BS, than I ever get from here lately. I will, however, miss the writings of James Russell AKA "Bcooter" in the motion/video arena, who is one of the better posters I've read in the 12 years I've lurked here, and I guess if I ever got into motion/video (I have no skin in that game now) and he's around, I'll pony up the fee.
Ultimately I don't support pay-wall forums. I might support pay-wall sites if the article or review content is good enough, but after doing so with Chambers and getting tired of both his attitude and less-than-complete testing, and Reid, whom I will never support after his run in years ago with another "famous" site, and who reviews equipment I have no interest in, the odds of that happening again is slim. I might drop Ming Thien some coin if he pay-walled his site, but that's about it.
So I'm gone. I'll reply to one post I've been meaning to answer for a few weeks and then time to pull the plug here. LL was a nice site years ago, but both the articles and the forums are just a blip on the overall radar these days.
-
Ultimately I don't support pay-wall forums.
If you paid attention to this thread, you would know that the forums will remain free.
-
Totally understand this move and am wholly supportive. Will sign up as soon as the option is available. This website has been an invaluable resource for knowledge as well as inspiration. Keep up the terrific work.
-
I joined Lula a couple of years ago and found it very informative. However in the last year or so the forum has become a nasty place. There are a lot of high and mighty keyboard warriors who seem to have no purpose other to break down other peoples comments sentence by sentence and ridicule them. If people don't agree with someone else comment, then abuse is a gutless response.
I have no problem with the price but hope that there will be more moderation and a better atmosphere going forward.
-
I joined Lula a couple of years ago and found it very informative. However in the last year or so the forum has become a nasty place. There are a lot of high and mighty keyboard warriors who seem to have no purpose other to break down other peoples comments sentence by sentence and ridicule them. If people don't agree with someone else comment, then abuse is a gutless response.
I have no problem with the price but hope that there will be more moderation and a better atmosphere going forward.
I know what you mean.
Some otherwise sensible forum members ( and it's always guys ) seem all too ready to get involved interminable pedantic arguments & pissing contests.
Wish they'd grow up.
-
[...] Dpreview, Thom Hogan, The Online Photographer, GetDpi.com, Brucepercy.com, Admiringlight.com, GuyTal, Oopoomoo, The Nimble Photographer, The Lightweight Photographer etc etc.
Thanks for that list! I wonder what other sites people use on a regular basis?
-
I came to LL because of a long running discussion of deconvolution which has died out over the last couple of years as if the technique is no longer evolving or of interest which is too bad. I will wait a bit and see where the site goes after the change or if it goes the way of Galbraith.
-
I will wait a bit and see where the site goes after the change or if it goes the way of Galbraith.
"Don't wait a bit" to sign up or you won't be able to "see where the site goes after the change" !
I personally support the change and have every confidence this will continue to be one of the best photography sites around. The inclusion of the videos is a big plus.
-
And of that I'm afraid too. Now, that posting members will be supporting economically this site, they will be kings. It may well become the photo haven of texting abusers. Or probably not at all. Let's hope for the better.
On the other hand, I was thinking that I like to visit and post on some other 20 places. What if they all do the same? I am not ready to spend 240 bucks a year on forum posting! No way men, no way!
Eduardo
I joined Lula a couple of years ago and found it very informative. However in the last year or so the forum has become a nasty place. There are a lot of high and mighty keyboard warriors who seem to have no purpose other to break down other peoples comments sentence by sentence and ridicule them. If people don't agree with someone else comment, then abuse is a gutless response.
I have no problem with the price but hope that there will be more moderation and a better atmosphere going forward.
-
And of that I'm afraid too. Now, that posting members will be supporting economically this site, they will be kings.
Based on 11 years here, I seriously doubt Chris will handle his moderation duties any differently nor should he. Part of Galbraith's demise was his heavy handed moderation. IF anyone really believes $12 is going to change how Chris deals with locking down posts probably doesn't know Chris very well.
-
... Now, that posting members will be supporting economically this site,... On the other hand, I was thinking that I like to visit and post on some other 20 places. What if they all do the same? I am not ready to spend 240 bucks a year on forum posting! No way men, no way!
Eduardo
Dear Eduardo,
Posting on forums ideally comprises two distinct actions: reading and writing. Had you read other posts in this thread, you would have noticed an announcement repeated several times, namely that forums will remain free.
Slobodan
(Your friendly texting abuser)
-
Dear Eduardo,
Posting on forums ideally comprises two distinct actions: reading and writing. Had you read other posts in this thread, you would have noticed an announcement repeated several times, namely that forums will remain free.
Not wanting to put words in Eduardo's mouth, perhaps he is implying that those that do pay might get extra slack from Chris moderating their posts. I really doubt that.
-
Not wanting to put words in Eduardo's mouth, perhaps he is implying that those that do pay might get extra slack from Chris moderating their posts. I really doubt that.
That is why I included his last sentence, of him not wanting to spend 20 x $12 on forum postings.
-
I'm very much looking forward to seeing more content in the realm of printing.
In 2009, when Michael posted about the HP Z3100, ( The Z3100 article (http://https://luminous-landscape.com/hp-z3100-printer-review/) ) it is what tipped me over to pulling the trigger on my purchase of it. Since then, I now have 3 Z-Series printers and have learned the workings of them inside out.
Unfortunately, I believe HP will abandon this series eventually, but I will keep going because of my familiarity and appreciation of these printers, and my ability to repair them ( Repairing HP Z-Series Printers (http://http://marklindquistphotography.com/HPZ3200_Repair_Notes_Mark_Lindquist_Photography.htm) ).
Undoubtedly, there will be little discussion about these printers going forward, particularly since Canon and Epson seem to be currently favored and HP is apparently dropping the ball. Yet all the information that comes about regarding printing is extremely valuable to me. It all translates, from printer to printer, regarding process.
The upcoming announced emphasis on printing is exciting to me, and a welcome direction that I support.
During the events surrounding an exhibition I was in at the Smithsonian American Art Museum a few years back, the museum had a special workshop for the exhibition participants on the topic of archiving and "archival-ness" which I found to be most illuminating. It is my hope that going forward on LuLa, many of the peripheral as well as central concerns of photo-print-making will be addressed.
I'm hopeful that we will all benefit from a new era at Luminous Lanscape, one that may translate into "The Luminous Print".
Considering that the vast majority of LuLa participants don't respond on the forums mainly because they are pleased, or fine with it and the proposed changes, it appears to me that there is excitement and anticipation in the air. I hope any and all who have expressed concern regarding this paradigm shift will eventually, at least, return, as they have both much to learn and much to contribute.
As the face of photography shape-shifts continually, I'm looking forward to seeing the articles, the videos, the instruction, the discussion. And for that, I am pleased to pay more than my fair share.
-Mark
-
...Now, that posting members will be supporting economically this site, they will be kings....
Eduardo
Moderation will remain the same. No Kings - except for Michael Kevin & I (I mean Us)
However, perhaps it might be a good idea to read the thread above your post. The forum will remain open to all without charge.
-
I joined Lula a couple of years ago and found it very informative. However in the last year or so the forum has become a nasty place. There are a lot of high and mighty keyboard warriors who seem to have no purpose other to break down other peoples comments sentence by sentence and ridicule them. If people don't agree with someone else comment, then abuse is a gutless response.
I have no problem with the price but hope that there will be more moderation and a better atmosphere going forward.
Tend to agree. Interesting threads can get taken over by a few. The atmosphere is more elitist, less friendly.
If the forums remain free, I will drop by occasionally, but in my view, there are now better moderated forums around. As to subscription, I will wait and see.
-
Chris, Slo, Andy: I've read most posts from the begining to the end. Somehow i missed to understand (perhaps lost in translation) that posting in the forums will remain free.
However, I'm glad you will keep moderation at least as tight as it is now. One bad apple too many can be enough to spoil the fun for the rest of us.
Good luck to you.
Eduardo
Moderation will remain the same. No Kings - except for Michael Kevin & I (I mean Us)
However, perhaps it might be a good idea to read the thread above your post. The forum will remain open to all without charge.
-
Chris, Slo, Andy: I've read most posts from the begining to the end. Somehow i missed to understand (perhaps lost in translation) that posting in the forums will remain free.
Kevin has posted that information clearly several times in different threads. Hard to miss.
-
i don't believe this will end well. Not only will the conversion rate to subscription be lower than desired, but once you lose the casual visitor, you will have also lost the ability to gain the first time visitor. Without gaining first time visitors, you will not be able to gain additional subscriptions. The spiral of death will kick in. You can stave off the death spiral through additional marketing efforts, like promotions and advertising on other websites, but you will have lost the free word-of-mouth marketing you've had all along.
Maybe this is the plan. To have an exit strategy. If so, stay the course and go with the subscription model. But if you have any hopes of having this survive to see 2017, don't do it. When you decide to reverse course, it will have been too late and the site will never regain the status it has now.
I suppose that if this really is an exit strategy for Luminous-Landscape, it is probably the most peaceful way for it to go. Better than just giving a notice that you've closed up shop and the site goes 404.
Please, Tell me I'm wrong.
Ken
-
i don't believe this will end well. Not only will the conversion rate to subscription be lower than desired, but once you lose the casual visitor, you will have also lost the ability to gain the first time visitor. Without gaining first time visitors, you will not be able to gain additional subscriptions. The spiral of death will kick in.
That was what I feared until the plan was revised: now, these forums will stay free, except that only paid members will be able to advertise by posting in the For Sale forum. My guess and hope is that the forums are what attract many people to this site, and so will serve to advertise the other, paid, content.
My feeling, perhpas more moral than practical, is that the quality of a product is improved when its users pay a bit for it, by reducing the pressure to insinuate advertising everywhere, so I hope for the best.
-
Please, Tell me I'm wrong.
Yeah, pretty much. Look, the Internet has changed..."free content" is usually worth what you pay for...I've seen a lot of free content and it pretty much sucks. There are a few (precious few) free content that is worthy like Julianne Kost at Adobe.com or Andrew Rodeny's free content. But if you want good content, it can't be free.
So, the question you gotta ask yourself, are you willing to be a paying customer where you can influence the direction as a paying customer? Or are ya gonna sit on the sideline and kvetch (Piss&Moan).
You decide...I've followed this thread with some interest. The vast majority seem to be in favor of the change. A few seem to take some sort of offense...it reminds me a bit about the change in perpetual vs subscription licenses for Photoshop.
What, you pay a monthly bill for cable, internet, Uber, etc...but you don't want to pay for a subscription to information? You drop $'s for equipment but don't want to pay for education to use it?
You control your wallets...vote with them. You want better content? Pay for it...or not.
-
i don't believe this will end well. Not only will the conversion rate to subscription be lower than desired, but once you lose the casual visitor, you will have also lost the ability to gain the first time visitor. Without gaining first time visitors, you will not be able to gain additional subscriptions. The spiral of death will kick in. You can stave off the death spiral through additional marketing efforts, like promotions and advertising on other websites, but you will have lost the free word-of-mouth marketing you've had all along.
This is also something the owners should bear in mind. They better than anyone can have info about first time vs recurrent visitors, links from other sources to their articles/forums, interrelation between the forums and other contents,...
Formulas to let non subscribers know about the last published paying contents must be found: advertising, an "official" discussion thread in the forum,...
I also find a good idea that the new contents are partially published (some online newspapers do that) with a "Want to read more?" subscription link. An additional idea to that is to make content publicly available only after some time from publication (one year?).
Regards
-
I will give it a go. Its worth it just to see how it pans out. Not really money $12.
Forums are not my favourite place here. I pop in to monitor whatever is currently generating hysteria the move on to make my own mind up about the issues raised.
-
Yeah, pretty much. Look, the Internet has changed..."free content" is usually worth what you pay for...I've seen a lot of free content and it pretty much sucks. There are a few (precious few) free content that is worthy like Julianne Kost at Adobe.com or Andrew Rodeny's free content. But if you want good content, it can't be free.
Have you told the users of Wikipedia and Linux about this ?
There is an argument that in an age where the biggest "value" in a product is information, and that information can be copied for free, the old economic certainties are now up for debate. But that is for another forum.
-
The idea that you get what you pay for in web content is an interesting argument but I simply don't find it to be true. All of my internet content is free and good.
I like Lula and have been a visitor from the beginning but frankly it is no better than the other free sites I visit - it is by no means my favourite these days (I'd rather read Guy Tal or Bruce Percy over Alain Briot, for example, and I get their content from their own sites).
I think the nature of the web doesn't favour the magazine subscription approach. With magazines you buy the whole magazine and become a customer of that particular title; with the web you browse interesting pieces of content from a wide variety of sources. Also, magazines are periodicals - you wait for an edition to be published and you get a shot of content in one go, then nothing til the next edition. With the web, I expect to see something new 10 times a day. Can any one online site feed that? I don't think so. The web is a pick'n'mix environment. I get an continous stream of quality content by casting my net widely amongst the available sources.
It's a similar problem for print magazines. My two favourite magazines are Black and White Photography and Outdoor Photography (the UK versions). I like them because they focus on pictures, rather than gear. However, at £5 an edition for a flimsy handful of pages, why would I buy them over visiting say 1x.com, where I can view an unlimited number of even better pictures? To be compelling at the price, a print magazine has to offer both quality and quantity, to concentrate the goodness in a way that the web doesn't offer. And none of them can do that sufficiently to earn my £5.
Is Lula going to improve so dramatically both in quality and quantity as a result of the paywall that it will become the only source of photographic content I want? Would we want the whole web to go this way? Who would pay for a hundred subscriptions?
I have subscribed to onlinelandscape.com, Reidreviews, landscape photography magazine in the past but I have never felt the need to renew, they are not that extra special. I currently subscribe to physics.org but I won't renew. The only online content I have found so far that is so compellingly good and valuable to keep me as a customer is lynda.com - not for their photography training but for their web courses.
I have a suspicion that Lula suffers from the high costs of providing video content. I don't think much of a great deal of expensive to produce video content because mostly video is a poor medium. I do video production at work as part of my job and it takes a lot of effort to produce what can usually better be said in text. A video interview is a tortuous long winded slow way of conveying information. Mostly our audience doesn't have the time to sit through it. Video is at its best when you are showing your audience something it is difficult to describe with text. Text is quicker for simply telling them stuff).
Don't overlook the power of RSS feeds either. I subscribe to a bunch of favourite websites through RSS and through feeds I get my own customised online magazine delivered automatically to my feed reader. Change my tastes? Just adjust the feed aggregator and I have a new magazine.
I wish Lula good fortune with the new approach - despite my misgivings - and even if I wish you had not decided on this route.
Yeah, pretty much. Look, the Internet has changed..."free content" is usually worth what you pay for...I've seen a lot of free content and it pretty much sucks. There are a few (precious few) free content that is worthy like Julianne Kost at Adobe.com or Andrew Rodeny's free content. But if you want good content, it can't be free.
So, the question you gotta ask yourself, are you willing to be a paying customer where you can influence the direction as a paying customer? Or are ya gonna sit on the sideline and kvetch (Piss&Moan).
You decide...I've followed this thread with some interest. The vast majority seem to be in favor of the change. A few seem to take some sort of offense...it reminds me a bit about the change in perpetual vs subscription licenses for Photoshop.
What, you pay a monthly bill for cable, internet, Uber, etc...but you don't want to pay for a subscription to information? You drop $'s for equipment but don't want to pay for education to use it?
You control your wallets...vote with them. You want better content? Pay for it...or not.
-
Have you told the users of Wikipedia ... about this ?
Just to clarify here - is this the same Wikipedia that's just sent me (as someone who donated money to them in the past) another request for funding, on the basis that if they don't continually obtain this income stream, they will have to shut down ?
-
I joined Lula a couple of years ago and found it very informative. However in the last year or so the forum has become a nasty place. There are a lot of high and mighty keyboard warriors who seem to have no purpose other to break down other peoples comments sentence by sentence and ridicule them. If people don't agree with someone else comment, then abuse is a gutless response.
I have no problem with the price but hope that there will be more moderation and a better atmosphere going forward.
I have been coming to this site since 1999. It has been very helpful to me. I do participate from time to time in the forum. But the forum is too often filled with not at all useful put downs and other forms of unnecessary nastiness in my experience. And further even in this discussion there are those that "justify" that behavior. Information gets exchanged best in "safe from insults and put down" environments - as does learning. Unfortunately from reading these posts here I do not believe Chris or Michael or Kevin see this as an issue needing addressing. For the record I do strongly feel it needs changing or I think of it as upgrading. I prefer environments where groups have learned to communicate well meaning judgmentally neutral perhaps. For a long time the yahoo group on Epson printers was very civil and a person being incorrect about something did not result in insulting corrections - instead information was presented and we all learned! I am planning on trying out the year and see how it feels.
Being part of a group with common values and civil respectful behavior is a blessing when one finds such a group. And can be an awesome resource.
Cheers
Gary
-
... There are a lot of high and mighty keyboard warriors who seem to have no purpose other to break down other peoples comments sentence by sentence and ridicule them...
Bob,
The keyboard warrior "with no other purpose" you have in mind is, at the same time, a renown expert in his field, who frequently offers his highly esteemed expertise for free in these forums.
Another member of this forum is equally renown, a multiple book author, and highly esteemed expert in his field, yet is also quite well known for his abrasive debate style in forums (when and if provoked).
People come in packages, good with bad.
The question is, do we want to throw the baby out with the bathwater? Shall we ban the two prominent experts because they can behave, on occasion, nasty? Or shall we try to send them to a verbal-abuse rehab? Or simply man up and ignore it or respond in kind? One thing I can tell you ain't work: forcing them to change.
-
Look, the Internet has changed..."free content" is usually worth what you pay for...I've seen a lot of free content and it pretty much sucks.
Have you told the users of Wikipedia and Linux about this ?
Wikipedia and Linux* are produced by volunteer contributors. They are analogous to the Lu-La forum, which under the current plan will remain free. It seems quite reasonable to me to charge a modest subscription fee for access to the site's other content, which consists of commissioned essays and videos or contributions by the site's maintainers. Those who value that portion of the content sufficiently will subscribe. Those who don't will still have full read-write access to the forum (with some minor restrictions).
____
* I'm not sure the Linux analogy is apposite in any event. The GNU license which governs the release of the Linux kernel and some other parts of all Linux distributions explicitly allows distributors to charge for support as long as they continue to make the source code generally available. And the providers of some of the best-known Linux distributions do indeed charge an annual license — i.e., subscription — fee.
-
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.”
― Thomas Jefferson
-
Just an update....THE FORUM WILL REMAIN FREE!!
(maybe revising the first post regarding the New Change can help those that don't read into the thread?)
-
The question is, do we want to throw the baby out with the bathwater? Shall we ban the two prominent experts because they can behave, on occasion, nasty? Or shall we try to send them to a verbal-abuse rehab? Or simply man up and ignore it or respond in kind? One thing I can tell you ain't work: forcing them to change.
Hah! Very funny - "verbal-abuse rehab"- there was a day when they called that "charm school". Having been fortunate enough to have had many really gifted teachers, I have found that they have two things in common - short tempers and high opinions of themselves. The way it works is pretty much, if you want to play you got to pay. What can you say, "get thicker skin"? Maybe so.
Edit: Removed anecdote re: 60's teaching methods because it apparently offended some. The 1960's was a strange time for teaching, with encounter groups and a kind of directness mostly not present today (with the exception of really GREAT teachers, LOL). If you weren't there in the 60's you can't really know about the times. If you were there, chances are you won't remember most of it... (as has been said....)
-
I believe most of the detractors are missing the point that one of the things that makes this a very sweet deal are the instructional videos, which where all paid content already, and very expensive in comparison. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, I've paid more for videos than all the years I've been visiting LuLa multiplied by 12.
-
Having been fortunate enough to have had many really gifted teachers, I have found that they have two things in common - short tempers and high opinions of themselves.
Not my experience. Couldn't disagree more. The really gifted teachers I have had have been brilliant, patient, and good communicators.
-
A video interview is a tortuous long winded slow way of conveying information. Mostly our audience doesn't have the time to sit through it. Video is at its best when you are showing your audience something it is difficult to describe with text. Text is quicker for simply telling them stuff.
I often get that impression myself when watching a video tutorial. I can't help thinking, "Get a move on. I haven't got all day. Be more clear and precise. Talk more quickly, and less 'errhhing, uhmming and aahing', please!
With text, one can more easily skip over any parts that one finds unnecessarily basic and spend more time reading and re-reading the difficult bits.
-
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.”
― Thomas Jefferson
Pretty sad, but I understand lot better now.
The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.
Thomas Jefferson - (30,000 Americans die each year shot by other Americans, often in the same family.)
law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson
For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.
Thomas Jefferson
Maybe a lot of the things he said are not relevant today and hopefully not here.
-
Not my experience. Couldn't disagree more. The really gifted teachers I have had have been brilliant, patient, and good communicators.
I totally agree John and my experience has been the same. Abuse and bullying would seem to be a barrier to communication rather than promote it.
-
Abuse and bullying would seem to be a barrier to communication rather than promote it.
Care to point out where I was abusive vs. verbally aggressive? I know where the lines are and I tend to come right up to them and don't cross them Others may and I may get grouped with them but I am not with them...when somebody says something, uh, ignorant, is it not proper ti point that out? Or is that bullying?
-
I have no idea what you are talking about I was simply saying I agree with John Holenburg regarding a comment he made I thought about a pottery teacher whacking his pupil. I am clearly quite mistaken and for that I apologise.
I seem to have caused some offence so I unreservedly apologise. It is my own ineptitude within forums and my poor use of English that seems to get me into these situations. No offence was intended and I regret being so clumsy as to have given any.
Mike
-
I have no idea what you are talking about I was simply saying I agree with John Holenburg regarding a comment he made I thought about a pottery teacher whacking his pupil. I am clearly quite mistaken and for that I apologise.
Accepted and in not directed at me, I also apologize for overreacting...
-
Given that I quoted someone else I am struggling to see how it could be directed at you, except very indirectly and there was no criticism of anyone just on teaching methods. However, I do accept that I was probably inept at best or stupid at worst and will be less swift to join any discussion without a lot more thought and care.
-
Having been fortunate enough to have had many really gifted teachers, I have found that they have two things in common - short tempers and high opinions of themselves.
Not my experience. Couldn't disagree more. The really gifted teachers I have had have been brilliant, patient, and good communicators.
Perhaps we can conclude that skill at teaching is at best loosely related either to length of temper or extent of egotism. I've certainly had good teachers whose personalities cover pretty much all of the spectrum.
Or maybe people learn best in differing environments and with differing teaching methods.
Jeremy
-
Perhaps we can conclude that skill at teaching is at best loosely related either to length of temper or extent of egotism. I've certainly had good teachers whose personalities cover pretty much all of the spectrum.
Or maybe people learn best in differing environments and with differing teaching methods.
Jeremy
Excellent observations, sir. I believe that some teachers are extremely passionate about what they believe, hence the "my way or the highway" approach. Additionally, there are only two modes of teaching: Instruction and Correction. To instruct AND correct requires passion that often instructors today are hesitant to evidence given the climate of political correctness and litigious society we live in. In every area of endeavor, teaching methods vary, and within those modes of imparting wisdom and knowledge are various degrees of techniques. The old saying goes: "When the teacher is ready, the student appears", or is it: "When the student is ready, the teacher appears". Perhaps both. Students that do not ask hard questions or provoke hard responses from instructors do not necessarily get the full experience. Perhaps during the period prior to 45 years of my career with the teachers I have had, and the mentors I have had along the way, I have asked hard questions and sometimes elicited hard responses. In so doing, I have had an unusual and in my opinion interesting learning experience with my teachers, many of whom I believe to have been exceptional.
Your comment about different people learning in different environments is wise - I think you're right. We all learn in our own ways.
-
Others may and I may get grouped with them but I am not with them...when somebody says something, uh, ignorant, is it not proper ti point that out? Or is that bullying?
To the ignorant, it's their idea of bullying.
To be conscious that you are ignorant is a great step to knowledge.
-Benjamin Disraeli
-
I totally agree John and my experience has been the same. Abuse and bullying would seem to be a barrier to communication rather than promote it.
I agree with John, Bob, drmike. Abuse and bullying were very common in both households and public life up through at least the 70s, then things began a slow shift. Bullying in all it's forms is now more openly discussed and being considered what it is - an abhorrent behavior that shuts down constructive communication / civil discourse. The other thing I wish to say is that NO ONE here actually knows just how many awesome participants don't post because of this behavior we are discussing in here. It is predictable of course that someone will explain their absence by the fact that those persons are "insert derogatory adjective". My only intent in bothering to post again here on this is that a truly open civil forum is a wonderful thing - I have experienced and still do experience them - and this site COULD be one of them, many ingredients are present. Unfortunately many ingredients are present to kill it. Actually I am thinking going to subscription could end up making the whole thing worse. Only time will answer this.
I am done with this. :(
-
... NO ONE here actually knows just how many awesome participants don't post because of this behavior ... My only intent in bothering to post again here...
I am done with this. :(
Oh, no!? Just as I was dying to see how awesome a participant you are. Please come back!
-
Happy to subscribe and pay the fee for LuLa, a site I like.
-
Back then, the word "offensive" was understood mostly as a noun, not an adjective:
-
Oh, no!? Just as I was dying to see how awesome a participant you are. Please come back!
See Slobodan I just don't understand how you feel this adds anything good to the site. The guy has just said he thinks that some attitudes displayed here discourage participation by some members who being less confident feel intimidated and fearful about contributing. You are clearly both intelligent and sensitive and yet you seem to revel in reacting in this way.
You are a positive and generous contributor to the site giving time and thought to helpful, interesting posts but just that one post might put off many others who are less confident and are fearful of being reviled. I certainly can't see Gary wanting to post again, why would he? Like him, I wonder how many others don't post for similar reasons although clearly not on your account more a small but prevalent attitude.
-
Mike, I do not remember anyone posting something genuine for the first time and being immediately attacked or ridiculed. When something like that happens, it is usually after things escalate over time. Most new posters are generally welcome here. If someone came here and said something smart and worthwhile that resulted in an attack, there are many here, myself included, that would jump to their defense (as you just did). I sincerely invite Gary to say something, instead of just complaining how the water is not warm enough.
My point being, this isn't an ideal world in which one can wait till this forum (and the world) becomes perfectly nice and polite to participate. Because that is never going to happen - we are all human, after all. So, if you have something to say, go ahead and say it. Test your stance. While some of the responses might be less than palatable, they still might contain a kernel (or more) of truth. That's the proper learning environment, when your stance is vigorously challenged, not when you are coddled. Kids, who are accustomed of getting a blue ribbon for being 37th in a race, then step into the real, grown-up world, where nobody gives a damn how nice you tried. The world where you don't get rewarded for efforts, but for results.
-
See Slobodan I just don't understand how you feel this adds anything good to the site. The guy has just said he thinks that some attitudes displayed here discourage participation by some members who being less confident feel intimidated and fearful about contributing. You are clearly both intelligent and sensitive and yet you seem to revel in reacting in this way.
You are a positive and generous contributor to the site giving time and thought to helpful, interesting posts but just that one post might put off many others who are less confident and are fearful of being reviled. I certainly can't see Gary wanting to post again, why would he? Like him, I wonder how many others don't post for similar reasons although clearly not on your account more a small but prevalent attitude.
Nice point drmike.
I will add that another reason any person- including me - might chose to not post (or post further) might have nothing what so ever to do with "confidence" - in fact might have entirely to do with preferring to participate with groups that are interested in creating an inclusive environment so as to benefit from all possible sources of insight or knowledge. It can be as simple as that. I just like persons with that vision and the corresponding attitude/behavior. Having to pass "hazing" for entry to participate may in fact have a place somewhere in life, but since I am in control of where and how I use my time and contributions and I prefer being in environments where there is an absence of the behavior we are discussing and the presence of the behavior I just described (inclusive), I and most likely many others, who may in fact not be "damaged or weak", just choose to let you folks engage in your thing without me/us. In this case the whole forum loses contributors. Inclusive behavior or excluding behavior, not that difficult to recognize.
Regards
Slobodan - I do not feel that you (and others) actually understand or want to acknowledge what might possibly be useful in what those of us that have shared the perspective that some behaviors we have described are detrimental. That is what I am experiencing reading your post. I made an effort, kinda need to move on, kinda want to move on. Not sure that saying anymore is going to add much from here.
OK, one thing: dear forum - do you think sharing you are interested in something changing automatically = complaining? It slipped my mind that some people think that way, hence interested in a little impromptu polling. For fun, ok? Is suggesting something change = complaining.
-
For the record, Gary and I already interacted in two threads about a year ago and it all ended in a terribly... polite and thoughtful exchange of opinions.
-
Time for SB to stop posting and quietly reflect on the good advice he has received above. Fat chance eh?
Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk
-
Time for SB to stop posting...
Now you hurt my feelings. Off I go to find a safe zone :'(
-
My point being, this isn't an ideal world in which one can wait till this forum (and the world) becomes perfectly nice and polite to participate. Because that is never going to happen ...
Slobodan -
Let's get one thing clear – behavioural issues, if you have them, are yours and yours alone – nothing to do with this 'forum' and even less to do with the world.
-
But if you want good content, it can't be free.
Back on topic -
Very well said, Jeff. Now tell me just how many of the articles published on LuLa over the past two years have been other than pro-bono. With Michael receding into the background and LuLa's 'authority' crumbling faster than a soufflé in a freezer – no amount of cash, by itself, will halt the slide unless that cash is put towards the reconstructive surgery LuLa needs.
Dumbing down ain't going to bring the masses back – all that's 'really' left of LuLa is the forum and even there, care to work out how many of your previous contributors and pros no longer post or contribute here but are often to be both seen and heard on other fora ?
You want better content? Pay for it...or not.
My point, entirely.
-
I have followed LULA for years, teach photography at our local college, and have really enjoyed the site generally. It is, of course, very well worth the modest annual fee being implemented.
It saddens me to see that a subset feel that this represents "greed", this site represents substantial effort that deserves to be rewarded.
I fervently wish LULA roaring success with this new model, you guys well deserve that!
Jack Winberg
-
I wonder though (not that I am reading or interested in anything except the forum itself) - what will be relationship between paid LuLa website (sans forum) and people who are posting articles - are those authors will be paid or provide the content for free in exchange for the honor or something else ?
-
how many awesome participants don't post
and do they have anything informative to post other than their awesomeness ( like in http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?board=26.0 - where it is mostly like : you pat me, I pat you back ;D ... and degree of awesomeness reaches almost D50, if not D65 )
-
...have really enjoyed the site generally. It is, of course, very well worth the modest annual fee being implemented.
It saddens me to see that a subset feel that this represents "greed", this site represents substantial effort that deserves to be rewarded.
I fervently wish LULA roaring success with this new model, you guys well deserve that!
Jack Winberg
+1
Well stated, Jack.
I'll be signing up too!
-
Very well said, Jeff. Now tell me just how many of the articles published on LuLa over the past two years have been other than pro-bono. With Michael receding into the background and LuLa's 'authority' crumbling faster than a soufflé in a freezer – no amount of cash, by itself, will halt the slide unless that cash is put towards the reconstructive surgery LuLa needs.
Well, I can't speak to the issue of self promotion/pro-bono because as you may have noticed, the only articles I've done here is zero. I have a golden rule, I don't do anything for free. So, I've never done an article for LuLa because the fee has been zero. That might change in the future...I do post for free on the forums but that's based on exchanging information more than doing an article-I want to learn as much as I teach. The articles I've done elsewhere have been paid for. I don't, as a rule, write for free.
Kev and I will be talking about this shortly...I'm due to go to Indy and shoot some print videos in Dec. I'm a big believer in pay content being paid for. It's the biz in me...
-
Care to point out where I was abusive vs. verbally aggressive?
Care to tell us the difference?
-
Care to tell us the difference?
it is in the eye of the beholder & Co.
-
Care to tell us the difference?
What do you think? Not terribly useful posting an ambitious post about something that's not very ambitious. So, have I pissed you off in the past? Probably...if not then, maybe now? Care to explain just a bit more specific?
-
I have found the tone in the forums unpleasant. No it's not scary. I'm Unafraid of someone sitting on another continent cap locking me into submission, but it is tedious. No it's not a learning process or a method of teaching. It's a disagreement over stuff like Adobe subscription or some such. It's a dick swinging competition.
Sure there are people that are abrasive at times, but who have a tremendous amount of info and who seem to get annoyed with idiots. I don't have an issue with these people. I guess a good example of this is Mr Schewe. It's a pity he doesn't post more often and I hope when this site goes behind a paywall that he will be able to start writing articles.
For me it's simple. If you are a really talented photographer I will pay attention and listen to what you have to say. If you have useful information and new ways of doing things I will pay attention. If you have a problem I can help with I will try to help. If you think others are idiots because they don't agree with your point of view on something like what is the best sensor or who makes the best software or how dumb is subscription software then you are like a hooting car. Slightly irritating but of no real concern to me other than to avoid your immediate vicinity.
-
What do you think? Not terribly useful posting an ambitious post about something that's not very ambitious. So, have I pissed you off in the past? Probably...if not then, maybe now? Care to explain just a bit more specific?
I think, as AlterEgo has said it is somewhat in the eye of the beholder. I think the tone of your postings is aggressive, abusive and bullying. However, the impression I get from seeing you on videos is that you are actually quite a nice guy, a bit of a cuddly uncle figure. So I put the image you project in writing down to poor written communication problems rather than a personality issue.
-
What do you think?
What do I think ?
I think a lot of it is a culture issue.
There's a 'big' thing on the US continent about appearing a 'tough' guy, possibly perpetuated from the image of the Wild West. In Europe, someone who, off the bat, comes over as overtly aggressive is generally considered 'stoopid' - in the first instance. It rarely changes after that.
If you think civility casts aspersions on your masculinity - you need to think again.
Edit:
This post not directed at Jeff. The 'you' is a generic one.
-
Kev and I will be talking about this shortly...I'm due to go to Indy and shoot some print videos in Dec. I'm a big believer in pay content being paid for. It's the biz in me...
Kev sent me an email and I'll PM you the reply.
-
I have found the tone in the forums unpleasant. No it's not scary. I'm Unafraid of someone sitting on another continent cap locking me into submission, but it is tedious. No it's not a learning process or a method of teaching. It's a disagreement over stuff like Adobe subscription or some such. It's a dick swinging competition.
Sure there are people that are abrasive at times, but who have a tremendous amount of info and who seem to get annoyed with idiots. I don't have an issue with these people. I guess a good example of this is Mr Schewe. It's a pity he doesn't post more often and I hope when this site goes behind a paywall that he will be able to start writing articles.
For me it's simple. If you are a really talented photographer I will pay attention and listen to what you have to say. If you have useful information and new ways of doing things I will pay attention. If you have a problem I can help with I will try to help. If you think others are idiots because they don't agree with your point of view on something like what is the best sensor or who makes the best software or how dumb is subscription software then you are like a hooting car. Slightly irritating but of no real concern to me other than to avoid your immediate vicinity.
Well said Martin
-
So, the question you gotta ask yourself, are you willing to be a paying customer where you can influence the direction as a paying customer?
I am not sure I understand what you wrote. Could you please explain how paying a subscription to LuLa would enable me to influence the direction of the website?
It was my understanding that the owners of this website would continue running it the way they choose to.
-
I am not sure I understand what you wrote. Could you please explain how paying a subscription to LuLa would enable me to influence the direction of the website?
It was my understanding that the owners of this website would continue running it the way they choose to.
More money in the owner's pockets means that they can commission better articles?
-
...
I have a golden rule, I don't do anything for free. So, I've never done an article for LuLa because the fee has been zero. That might change in the future.
...
Ok, you're a good capitalist :) I'm the opposite - a very bad capitalist :) Sometimes I wish I could be more like you because it would be better for various parts of my life ;)
Yeah, pretty much. Look, the Internet has changed..."free content" is usually worth what you pay for...I've seen a lot of free content and it pretty much sucks. There are a few (precious few) free content that is worthy like Julianne Kost at Adobe.com or Andrew Rodeny's free content. But if you want good content, it can't be free.
I wonder just how much of your computing world relies in different ways on free software that you never paid for, will never pay for and don't even understand is there because "it just works." What you do pay for is what you do see. And indeed, "free content" is what started the Internet, made it worthwhile and drew people to it. Don't underestimate the value of "free" or its importance even if you can't understand it or don't want to be a part of it.
So, the question you gotta ask yourself, are you willing to be a paying customer where you can influence the direction as a paying customer? Or are ya gonna sit on the sideline and kvetch (Piss&Moan).
Influence direction as a customer? You mean for $1/month we get voting rights on what content does and doesn't appear? I don't think *that* was written ... but if you mean to say "vote with your wallet", then that I can understand.
What, you pay a monthly bill for cable, internet, Uber, etc...but you don't want to pay for a subscription to information? You drop $'s for equipment but don't want to pay for education to use it?
When I pay for education, I expect an in person class because that's where I get value. To me there is little to no value in youtube videos, etc, because there is no scope for interacting with the teacher (questions, etc.) In this maybe I'm a 1%'er and don't represent the Internet at large - I can accept that.
-
There's one aspect of this that kind of makes me sad (as a human being) and that's the paywall that goes up to all of the historical content.
It's like taking a library in the neighborhood that was free to enter and now charging people a monthly fee to go inside. I think that's a sad outcome because it puts a barrier between people and knowledge that has been previously published openly.
Outside of commercial enterprises such as newspapers, the general trend has been in the reverse direction, e.g.
Scientific papers take a step outside Nature's paywall (http://www.cnet.com/au/news/research-at-nature-takes-a-step-outside-paywalls-limits/)
But just as someone must pay the rates, staff wages and utility bills, so too must someone pay to keep data stored on computers, for the computers to run, the network cables and bits to flow over those cables for a website to operate. It's unfortunate that this website has become an expense that requires a membership fee now to read but what are the alternatives? :(
-
Well said Martin
I agree completely. Almost everything I have learned about digital photography has been from Michael and Jeff, plus a few other knowledgeable and generous people on the LuLa Forum.
To my mind, Jeff can sometimes be what might be called "brusque" but never "abusive."
And the term "greed" that has been thrown around quite a bit in this thread only fits those who continue to complain about being asked to pay less than 4 cents a day to support this excellent system of website and forum. And even the fact that the forum won't even cost the less-than-4-cents (except if you want to post in the For Sale section) still doesn't satisfy the greedy beggars.
I'll be happy to see those complainers go away.
And, by the way, I have a question for those who claim there are lots of excellent, free, photography forums that are more genteel than LuLa and at least as informative: Can you please name for me your top three "better" forums?
Eric M.
-
Actually, we do get voting rights. We are able to influence the direction. Either you pay or you don't. Very simple.
I highly doubt that we'll see any improvement in content. It is what it is. I just took a gander at the content from this past year and there is about one significant article a month on average. Just the coverage of the Leica SL is an indication of just how irrelevant this site has become. The only information on this camera worth looking at is through a link to another PAY site. The "portfolio reviews" are nice (The Feminine Landscape), but not unique, nor is it what I would call a curated feature.
The reality is this website is no longer aimed at anybody other than a small subset of rich people who spend money on cameras instead of (or in addition to) Italian sports cars. The "Is Good, Good Enough" paint-drying video is a perfect example. You have two guys rambling on about whether or not $10,000 in equipment is good enough for bragging rights.
I really do like you two guys, but seriously, pick up the pace a little and have an outline before you hit the record button.
Anyway, I wish you well. I may tap into the site occasionally to see when you change your mind and knock down the pay wall, but I am convinced that this move is only going to make you guys more insular.
And exclusive.
Maybe that's the point. You really don't want us hoi polloi with kits that don't meet your approval around.
Fair enough.
Ken
-
... I am convinced that this move is only going to make you guys more insular.
And exclusive.
Maybe that's the point. You really don't want us hoi polloi with kits that don't meet your approval around.
Fair enough.
Ken
Nope - that's your point but certainly is not ours!
'hoi polloi' are as welcome as any ;D
-
I have read most of the thread and my thoughts are:-
I was not happy with the move the Purple streaming for the videos where in the past I had bought downloadables, so under the new pay model will all old videos and future ones be stream & downloadable?
Since that side was in effect closed to me I have mainly followed the forum and learned and hopefully contributed with my postings ;)
Of the few articles that have caught my attention on the main site I have found them a mixed bag as the equipment reviews were of limited influence because of either the make/grade/type or cost! In common with many my budget is modest and requires much thought before I buy new glass or indeed any new kit.
Having said that for $12 I would be content to give it a go..............and see what benefits there are and how the site progresses and adds to my photographic experience of the world?
Edit ~ I wonder if part of the increased pro contributor input would be articles (travelogues?) for Europe as being in the UK longhaul is an every few years luxury.
-
And, by the way, I have a question for those who claim there are lots of excellent, free, photography forums that are more genteel than LuLa and at least as informative: Can you please name for me your top three "better" forums?
Eric M.
Nikonians and Nikon Rumors are two websites where the forums are at a higher level of maturity and helpfulness.
-
I was not happy with the move the Purple streaming for the videos where in the past I had bought downloadables, so under the new pay model will all old videos and future ones be stream & downloadable?
We were also unhappy with Purple whom we dropped over a year ago. Since that time, videos have been available both as streaming and download and will continue to be so under the membership setup.
Chris
-
To my mind, Jeff can sometimes be what might be called "brusque" but never "abusive."
To be fair, Jeff has had more than a smattering of morons to deal with over the years. I'll defend anyone's right to be more than 'just a bit short' with someone who persists in abject foolishness.
This sub-topic was more to do with those who employ aggression as a means of self-expression from the outset - at least that was my understanding.
I think Martin Kristiansen put it well in post #326.
-
...You really don't want us hoi polloi with kits that don't meet your approval around...
I still shoot with a Canon 60D and have only recently acquired a full-frame camera (6D). My bestseller image was done with a P&S (Canon G10). Hoi polloi enough?
-
We will be launching the membership site on November 30th, 2015 sometime during the day.
Just a request that you folks let us know when this happens please. It appears going to the main page, not yet. I do intend to contribute at the earliest opportunity.
-
If all goes as planned the membership site will launch around 5:30 - 7 PM Eastern time US.
-
How will you be able to avoid double registration for 'old' forum members? What if the name is the same but the e- mail address changed, new password is used and so on...
-
Quot capita tot sententiae, and I leaf through the blog of Ming Thein too, if anybody interested.
-
Couldn't the green help button be better placed in the black border that stays on top anyway? Up with the "Luminous Landscape Home" and Videos link?
-
We'll look into moving the help button. It's a new feature and there to help those that are having issues on signing up for the membership.
-
I mis-typed my zip, so my credit card wasn't accepted, and there seems to be no way to backup to the initial sign-up page.
-
You should still have access to the site and in 24 hours you'd have to try again. Some transaction take a little while to process. we see you logged in to the payment page several times. Go to your account to right corner > account details and modify your zip and re-save. Let's give it some time to see if your payment is processed. Also, use the green help button on bottom right to go right to the developers so they can help if this doesn't solve it.
-
I have found LuLa to be of really good value in advancing my photographic skills and knowledge. LuLa was especially valuable to me with respect to Lightroom, printers, monitors, color management and reading the constructive criticisms and comments on submitted landscape captures.
Count me in! Thank you Michael, Kevin and Chris.
-
So I put the image you project in writing down to poor written communication problems rather than a personality issue.
Well I'm a paid, professional author so it's not a "poor written communication problem"...I write what I mean to say. Whether or not you gleem the meaning of what I write, I'll leave you to decide. :~)
-
Care to tell us the difference?
If you don't know the difference, it's doubtful you would recognize the difference if I pointed it out to you. I mean, really, how obtuse can you get? I understand you don't like me. That's ok, I don't like you. Is that verbally agressive enough for you?
-
Well I'm a paid, professional author so it's not a "poor written communication problem"...I write what I mean to say. Whether or not you gleem the meaning of what I write, I'll leave you to decide. :~)
Jeff - me thinks the word you're after is 'glean' ... :)
-
Is it just me, or is PayPal not available for everyone? On the announcement page it says paying by PayPal will be possible: https://luminous-landscape.com/important-news-change-at-luminous-landscape/
-
For me the transition was problem free. I just logged on using the same username and password I use for the forum. I also don't have to log on again each time I visit.
-
Simple enough process. I was surprised the site access username is distinct from the forum username. No Paypal option, but it took Mr. Amex.
-
Jeff - me thinks the word you're after is 'glean' ... :)
Yep...typo on my part. My bad...
-
"you don't like me. That's ok, I don't like you".
Very childish behaviour. Are you done Jeff? Can you please grow up first and then contribute to this site?
-
Very childish behaviour. Are you done Jeff? Can you please grow up first and then contribute to this site?
Nope, sorry, ain't gonna happen. And I do contribute to the site whether you like it or not.
-
PayPal option will be available today. There was link issue that needs to worked out with them. Typical PayPal. Check back later if you want to use that option.
-
If you don't know the difference, it's doubtful you would recognize the difference if I pointed it out to you. I mean, really, how obtuse can you get? I understand you don't like me. That's ok, I don't like you. Is that verbally agressive enough for you?
Yes, that qualifies as abuse.
But I didn't say I don't like you - I don't know enough, or care enough, to form an opinion on that issue. What I did say is that it's my impression that you communicate badly in writing - that's not the same thing.
-
Yep...typo on my part. My bad...
"Typo" ... right .....
-
Yes, that qualifies as abuse.
But I didn't say I don't like you - I don't know enough, or care enough, to form an opinion on that issue. What I did say is that it's my impression that you communicate badly in writing - that's not the same thing.
No, that doesn't qualify as abuse: abuse is something far more aggressive and riddled with all manner of innuendo and threat.
I have, in the past, referred to Señor Schewe as resident Rottweiler and he never seemed to find that offensive in any way; in fact I believe he was perfectly happy with the soubriquet because retaliatory action (which never came) would have been very easy for him.
The thing is, the man has a great history of real photographic achievement behind him, which is a helluva lot more than many here can boast. Little wonder, then, that his patience can sometimes run short.
Come to think of it, I admire his attitude towards the use of unpaid content, a principle hard to maintain when one has already had a close-term relationship with the website ownership, even if of the past. It's not easy refusing friends. I guess, though, that real friends wouldn't ask.
Rob C
-
A change I don't recall seeing mentioned was that logins to the forum now require an email address instead of forum login name.
Is the payment system incompatible with just allowing forum names for login?
-
A change I don't recall seeing mentioned was that logins to the forum now require an email address instead of forum login name.
Is the payment system incompatible with just allowing forum names for login?
We had to use one key fixed item around which membership and forum data records could be based. Email is the best choice. So yes, once you are a Member, login uses the email as the 'username' id. BTW, if you change your email address, the original still stays as your username. It is not editable
Check the FAQ here (https://luminouslandscape.zendesk.com/hc/en-us)
Chris
-
For members wanting to keep a different user account than the exisiting one for Forum, we just need to sign up as a new member with a different email address?
Great to know Paypal will be added shortly, as that is my means of online payments.
Also, it's not necessary to request users physical addresses when paying via PayPal.
Perhaps those fields should be optional if paying by PP, and forced if paying by CC?
Also noticed I can't change the amount. Perhaps we can make the minimum $12, and any additional funds as donation? Or perhaps depending on amounts set, one can be a lifetime member or various lengths of membership based on amount?
-
I'm in as a subscriber, but struggled a bit getting there as I couldn't register from my iPad. For some reason the username field wouldn't let me enter any characters, so I had to use my MacBook instead.
I would have much preferred to have been able to pay using Paypal (but I understand that's coming soon).
Also I thought that the username and password I chose to subscribe with would have allowed me to log in to this forum as well. But no, I have had to choose a different login for the forum as I got the message that my username was already taken.
But never mind, I'm in now and looking forward to working my way through the videos!
-
I have, in the past, referred to Señor Schewe as resident Rottweiler and he never seemed to find that offensive in any way; in fact I believe he was perfectly happy with the soubriquet because retaliatory action (which never came) would have been very easy for him
"Rottweiler"? Hardly. The impression I get is of a grumpy ageing Labrador that barks a lot but in the end just wants its head scratched.
-
Just a quick heads up in the first gremlin I've spotted. Nothing major. There are two transactions on my Amex, from the same source. One for USD 12 and another for USD 1.
Edit: Oops - the source is Stripe, who I assume are your payment handler.
-
... Email is the best choice. So yes, once you are a Member, login uses the email as the 'username' id. BTW, if you change your email address, the original still stays as your username. It is not editable
Check the FAQ here (https://luminouslandscape.zendesk.com/hc/en-us)
Chris
People do change email addresses... the username id should either become the new address or be editable.
Yesterday the login email address was shown on top of the page. Today was replaced by first name - that is better.
-
$12 a year and includes the videos? Great deal :)
-
Just a quick heads up in the first gremlin I've spotted. Nothing major. There are two transactions on my Amex, from the same source. One for USD 12 and another for USD 1.
Edit: Oops - the source is Stripe, who I assume are your payment handler.
The 1$ is usually an "authorization" test. i should go away once the final charge goes through.
-
Some glitches I've run into with the new setup:
1) LuLa wouldn't let me log in or sign up as Telecaster using my "old" password. So I did a password reset…but it turns out the issue wasn't the password but rather Telecaster. I've run into this kind of thing before: after an update a site will no longer accept your username yet has no provision for letting you change it. You're hosed.
2) Realizing I was stuck in no-man's land I decided to create a new account using a different e-mail address. Assuming (incorrectly as it turned out) that Telecaster had been wiped I chose it as my username for the new account. I can log in to LuLa this way…but when I try to access the Forum I become persona non grata and can't post or reply to forum messages.
3) So how am I able to create this post? I can force a forum login by finding one of my old posts and clicking (tapping actually…I'm using my iPad) on my name. This requires me to use my "old" password.
4) So…there's a disconnect between the LuLa Site account and the Forum account. Likely two different databases not properly talking to each other. I'd guess my Forum account still contains my original e-mail address while the new Site account has the new one, and that this is creating a conflict. But this doesn't explain how/why Telecaster was invalidated in the first place…
To fix this the Forum-level Telecaster database fields likely need to be properly synced with the Site-level Telecaster fields. The new account e-mail address should supercede the old address.
-Dave-
-
@ Telecaster
Try logging in with your email as your username
-
@ Telecaster
Try logging in with your email as your username
Yes, looks fine now. (I got an e-mail from your support folks.) Thanks.
-Dave-
-
For members wanting to keep a different user account than the exisiting one for Forum, we just need to sign up as a new member with a different email address?
Great to know Paypal will be added shortly, as that is my means of online payments.
Also, it's not necessary to request users physical addresses when paying via PayPal.
Perhaps those fields should be optional if paying by PP, and forced if paying by CC?
Also noticed I can't change the amount. Perhaps we can make the minimum $12, and any additional funds as donation? Or perhaps depending on amounts set, one can be a lifetime member or various lengths of membership based on amount?
-
Phil, We are working on all your points that you mention. When you sleet PayPal you'll go into their pay system and the information they need based on how you have your pAyPal will be requested. The credit card processor we use asks for the address as a means of further verification if needed. Not much different than most online transactions. We are asking if it can be optional. We don't see the address as it is part of the payment process. The only thing that we have in our database is Name, User name, email, and start dates.
I want to reiterate that we do not sell or share our information with anyone. We may do the occasional email and if we do you can always opt out if you don't want to get the emails. Our IT team is working real hard to make it easier to sign on based on what we have learned today.
We have seen a great response today and appreciate everyones support.
Thank You!
-
Are you making a guarantee that personal information will never be shared, traded, or sold, or the statement that at the present time it is not being shared or sold?
-
I just sent off my 12$. Looking forward to all the videos and new articles which will be running on Luminous.
Thanks Michael, Kevin and Chris for an invaluable resource.
-
Yes, looks fine now. (I got an e-mail from your support folks.) Thanks.
-Dave-
Good deal. Just in time. I was gonna suggest that you'd have to re-up with the username "Jazzmaster" :)
-
The credit card processor we use asks for the address as a means of further verification if needed.
That's kind of a given, so when I saw no PayPal option and realized I'd have to pay with CC, my first impulse was to go back and fill in street address that I left empty -- but there was no Back button! Can't say I panicked :-), but, look, you have to have Back button there.
Another piece of feedback: you have one of the nastiest CAPTCHAs out there. Not only it is unintelligible, but each time I request another image, I get back to the page top.
Other than that, well, it went quite smoothly, I'm in.
I wish you guys every success. I for one totally understand the move; just recently donated $50 (hint to Kevin et. al.: you should have charged more!) to a brilliant youtuber, despite having quite an audience, gave up all hope to earn ad money and had to run donation campaign... So yeah, everyone who wasn't living in a cave for a few recent years knows ad money dry up.
In fact, I fully expect more and more of this type of changes. And it will be really interesting to see how some sites living off pure controversy and shots from the hip will accommodate... LL is, to me, a very nice mix of knowledge and entertainment that... Heck, I can't even say it was great deal or something; I felt like I *owed* this site. I discovered LL pretty soon after it was created, and by the time of Canon 10D articles became a regular reader.
Besides, at least once I listened to Michael, even though he was in disagreement with popular opinion, and bought 70-300 DO (that was being heavily trashed for "dreamy look" and other crimes against humanity). Which I was then able to take with my on great many trips, whereas a bigger lens would stay at home... So, Michael, if you are reading this, thanks again.
There's a whole lot more to say, like give this site very clear development directions, patiently explain whose articles should not be published, give list of forum members that have to be handed life bans etc. etc., but I guess what I already wrote is enough for the very first post. ;-)
-
I paid my $12 but do I still have to look at all these annoying moving ads as well? If we pay shouldn't it be ad free?
-
I paid my $12 but do I still have to look at all these annoying moving ads as well? If we pay shouldn't it be ad free?
No. Ads are fine, if related to photography.
-
Are you making a guarantee that personal information will never be shared, traded, or sold, or the statement that at the present time it is not being shared or sold?
Why waste time when you said you weren't up for it? :-)
Hope you changed your mind.
So up to the point you input your username, email password, it then links out to Constant Contact.
Here is their policy on privacy...
http://www.constantcontact.com/legal/privacy-statement
-
So how am I able to create this post? I can force a forum login by finding one of my old posts and clicking (tapping actually…I'm using my iPad) on my name. This requires me to use my "old" password.
Thanks, that is how I finally got in to the forum. I am going to wait until the dust settles a bit. Seems that the new system is not well thought out (at least from my perspective). A short article about how to make the transition would be a good idea.
-
After finally registering for the pay side of LuLa (thanks to the IT fellow resetting something for me on his end), I too found myself unable to log into the forum. It wasn't as simple as the site not accepting my login and password, but merely pressing the "login" button resulted in an error message. Emptying my browser's cache, logging out of the pay site, etc. did nothing to resolve the problem. Thanks to Telecaster for the workaround, I'm now back on the forum using my old login credentials. Curiously, none of these shenanigans affected my ability to log in to the forum via Tapatalk...
John
-
Thanks, that is how I finally got in to the forum. I am going to wait until the dust settles a bit. Seems that the new system is not well thought out (at least from my perspective). A short article about how to make the transition would be a good idea.
So many questions easily answered by clicking and reading the help desk link at the bottom of the home page:
https://luminouslandscape.zendesk.com/hc/en-us
-
So many questions easily answered by clicking and reading the help desk link at the bottom of the home page:
https://luminouslandscape.zendesk.com/hc/en-us
Now that I know about the link, I will read it. As I said, not obvious.
Edit: OK, I read the link, followed the directions, can't log in, can't reset my password. Complete fail. Still broken.
-
Now that I know about the link, I will read it. As I said, not obvious.
Edit: OK, I read the link, followed the directions, can't log in, can't reset my password. Complete fail. Still broken.
I've been locked out as bcooter. Is this a glitch in the system, an editorial decision or a commercial plan to put the site behind a paywall, by making it difficult to log in?
For some reason my old account comes in without me doing a thing.
With all the recent talk, not a good grand opening guys.
IMO
BC
-
I've been locked out as bcooter. Is this a glitch in the system, an editorial decision or a commercial plan to put the site behind a paywall, by making it difficult to log in?
Cooter,
Have you tried logging in with your old email address , NOT your 'bcooter' username BUT use your old/original password ?
If you succeed in logging in , then your username will show (as before) and your email address stays hidden.
Sorry, it's too early but I hope it makes sense.
M
-
Cooter,
Have you tried logging in with your old email address , NOT your 'bcooter' username BUT use your old/original password ?
If you succeed in logging in , then your username will show (as before) and your email address stays hidden.
Sorry, it's too early but I hope it makes sense.
M
Thanks,
Yep, tried it at first three times, them all of a sudden it reverted back to an old account.
Not saying anyone is doing anything uncool, but with what's gone on, at this point I just want access to remove content and either start fresh or head for the hills.
Thx.
BC
-
I've been locked out as bcooter. Is this a glitch in the system, an editorial decision or a commercial plan to put the site behind a paywall, by making it difficult to log in?
For some reason my old account comes in without me doing a thing.
With all the recent talk, not a good grand opening guys.
Same here...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Are you making a guarantee that personal information will never be shared, traded, or sold, or the statement that at the present time it is not being shared or sold?
Or hacked ...
-
OK, I just got temporarily locked out too.
There are 2/3 ways to login. Top menu bar, RHS 'Guest' small print, and clicking on any user ( as you would to view a profile or posts).
One didn't work , the other did,
Don't remember which one was which - but try them until 'hopefully' one does.
In the meantime, deep breath and stick some rose tinted spectacles on until the cavalry arrive ...
We had to use one key fixed item around which membership and forum data records could be based. Email is the best choice. So yes, once you are a Member, login uses the email as the 'username' id. BTW, if you change your email address, the original still stays as your username. It is not editable
Check the FAQ here (https://luminouslandscape.zendesk.com/hc/en-us)
Chris
-
OK, I just got temporarily locked out too.
There are 2/3 ways to login. Top menu bar, RHS 'Guest' small print, and clicking on any user ( as you would to view a profile or posts).
One didn't work , the other did,
Don't remember which one was which - but try them until 'hopefully' one does.
In the meantime, deep breath and stick some rose tinted spectacles on until the cavalry arrive ...
I've done everything in the FAQ. It seems when I try to log in as bcooter it wants a pay and like I say . . . that will never happen for forums use.
There is a link on how to cancel an account, but I want to know how to remove my content.
But thanks Manoli for your help.
BC
P.S. I went through this before with the RG forums. They didn't want money, they just didn't like what people wrote. Then again they wouldn't release the content because they sold it.
After the new owners arrived, they asked me to come back offered incentives (you can figure out what incentives mean) and all I asked for was for them to remove my content, which they finally did.
I feel the same now.
Look, I know this may be a glitch, but since the original plan was to charge for our content and the access to post or clear our previous posts, it makes me very uncomfortable.
I'd feel a lot better if I heard from Michael as he has always been straight up with me, even if we disagreed.
Michael I respect cause he has no problem getting in your face and telling you the truth, even if you don't like it.
Chris I have man love for cause he always shares thousand, hell 25,000 hours of knowledge to anyone that asks.
If these two guys tell me it's ok, then I'll believe it as long as there is a resolve.
In other words to me Canada is fine, Indiana has always made me nervous, it more ways than one.
Canada has always been a pay for exact play system. Indiana is like Phase One, "let's talk about upgrades".
But it's interesting. A few hours ago the header on this forum was "Discussion Forms". Now it's blank and the only link is LL Home.
So who's playing who?
IMO
BC
-
Cooter,
In all honesty I suspect that these are just unfortunate tech issues. In your case if you had the same email both on your latest account and the earlier one , then the software has probably defaulted to the earlier one and that's why you're locked out from your bcooter account.
Chris did make the point earlier that, come what may, the email address that one originally used at registration is now your user ID ( not displayed but logged in the database) and it's not changeable. Translated it means – it is, but someone has to do the tech equivalent of reconstructive plastic surgery and botox the database.
In the meantime, Chris is probably asleep or recovering from multiple stress induced convulsions, Kevin's planning a weekend break in Syria, and Michael is swanning it in an Ethiopian desert. Smart fox that Mike is though, he's got a sat phone with him – exactly for emergencies – probably not what he had in mind but could there be a better time for him to use it ? No. Time to ring home, Michael.
That's as far as you're concerned.
Bernard's case is slightly more complex. Bernard has upset the Gods and he needs to recant, incant and swear undying love and allegiance to Kwanon at the temple of Kyoto. Then, and only then - perhaps …
And no, $12 bucks won't cut it.
--
- Guys, a bit of chill and hopefully all will soon be cool.
-
Manoli,
I don't disagree with you one bit. I think it's 90% tech glitches except for two things.
1. No LL forums on the header. Let's be real. If you want people to access the site, that's the easiest click, instead we have two links to the paid site.
2. I . . . like I'm sure many others was sent an e-mail before this all happened saying just sign in and the 12 bucks is free since I am a valued contributor.
The second one sent me for a loop. My words, photos, opinions on the site carry no more weight than a first time user asking what camera they should buy.
Once I see something like here's 12 bucks just keep on keeping on, I wasn't insulted because of the cost, (actually I was) I was more insulted because it seemed it wasn't offered to everyone that contributed.
I also felt that this was just the start of a very bad deal, so i began stripping my content. If what i write important to others? Probably not. To me . . . yes because it's mine and I wanted it gone.
So bottom line. I'm not 100% done, I just want a fresh start, then an honest, no more canned responses from Indiana like "due to changing market conditions".
That line is what the banks, our cell carriers tell us when they put on the gloves and say bend over.
So Kevin, if your awake, answer one question. Why do you think what I or the others produce is more important than the people that ask equally compelling questions, especially for 12 bucks?
As I keep saying. This forum is an elective and when it becomes work, it's just not worth it.
IMO
BC
Cooter,
In all honesty I suspect that these are just unfortunate tech issues. In your case if you had the same email both on your latest account and the earlier one , then the software has probably defaulted to the earlier one and that's why you're locked out from your bcooter account.
Chris did make the point earlier that, come what may, the email address that one originally used at registration is now your user ID ( not displayed but logged in the database) and it's not changeable. Translated it means – it is, but someone has to do the tech equivalent of reconstructive plastic surgery and botox the database.
In the meantime, Chris is probably asleep or recovering from multiple stress induced convulsions, Kevin's planning a weekend break in Syria, and Michael is swanning it in an Ethiopian desert. Smart fox that Mike is though, he's got a sat phone with him – exactly for emergencies – probably not what he had in mind but could there be a better time for him to use it ? No. Time to ring home, Michael.
That's as far as you're concerned.
Bernard's case is slightly more complex. Bernard has upset the Gods and he needs to recant, incant and swear undying love and allegiance to Kwanon at the temple of Kyoto. Then, and only then - perhaps …
And no, $12 bucks won't cut it.
--
- Guys, a bit of chill and hopefully all will soon be cool.
-
Everything worked fine!
Downloading videos as we speak.
Thanks guys! I have already got my annual subscription's money's worth!
Happy Days!
-
The second one sent me for a loop. My words, photos, opinions on the site carry no more weight than a first time user asking what camera they should buy.
James,
My comments were only tech related.
You know my thoughts on the rest, so I won't repeat them here other than to say that valued professional 'front-line' real world feed back and experiences are obviously worth immeasurably more than endless pontifications . But the last time I hinted as such, I was told by another, recently (LuLa) departed, that I was nothing short of a supremacist - (even though I'm hoi polloi)! Go figure.
Best,
M
-
2. I . . . like I'm sure many others was sent an e-mail before this all happened saying just sign in and the 12 bucks is free since I am a valued contributor.
The second one sent me for a loop. My words, photos, opinions on the site carry no more weight than a first time user asking what camera they should buy.
Once I see something like here's 12 bucks just keep on keeping on, I wasn't insulted because of the cost, (actually I was) I was more insulted because it seemed it wasn't offered to everyone that contributed.
I also felt that this was just the start of a very bad deal, so i began stripping my content. If what i write important to others? Probably not. To me . . . yes because it's mine and I wanted it gone.
So bottom line. I'm not 100% done, I just want a fresh start, then an honest, no more canned responses from Indiana like "due to changing market conditions".
That line is what the banks, our cell carriers tell us when they put on the gloves and say bend over.
So Kevin, if your awake, answer one question. Why do you think what I or the others produce is more important than the people that ask equally compelling questions, especially for 12 bucks?
As I keep saying. This forum is an elective and when it becomes work, it's just not worth it.
IMO
BC
Ooooh :-( That's a shame - I really value your contributions and I really understand your viewpoint 100%. Playing favourites - paying 12 bucks to people to provide forum content ("astroturfing", in effect) - leaves a bad taste.
-
James,
My comments were only tech related.
You know my thoughts on the rest, so I won't repeat them here other than to say that valued professional 'front-line' real world feed back and experiences are obviously worth immeasurably more than endless pontifications . But the last time I hinted as such, I was told by another, recently (LuLa) departed, that I was nothing short of a supremacist - (even though I'm hoi polloi)! Go figure.
Best,
M
More valuable to whom? The thoughts of a professional 'front-line' real world photographer may be less useful to a beginner than the words of a simpler soul who answers a question. (Pontifications, of course, may be discounted whatever the source.)
-
Seems there may have been glitches overnight and our guys will sort these things out ASAP.
This notice is on the sign in screen for logging on:
*Existing forum users logging in for the first time should use their username to login. as well as password.
If you have had trouble then the help button at the bottom of the page will go directly to the IT guys who will fix what ever is happening. Not sure why you are encountering any problems.
We'll get you up and running.
-
I . . . like I'm sure many others was sent an e-mail before this all happened saying just sign in and the 12 bucks is free since I am a valued contributor.
The second one sent me for a loop. My words, photos, opinions on the site carry no more weight than a first time user asking what camera they should buy.
James,
To be fair, the initial plan to charge for forum access was withdrawn and the site owners are entitled to offer "discounts" to whomever they choose, presumably because doing so brings value to their business, which I don't begrudge them. With that said, yes this does leave a bad taste. If someone were doing this in my professional sphere (photography is my avocation, I don't depend on it to put food on the table - quite the opposite, actually), I would probably be more worked up so I understand much better where you are coming from.
I do hope this messiness works itself out. I have benefited a lot from the forum discussions (with all of their warts), have contributed when I thought I could add something valuable to the conversation (but clearly my comments were not worth paying for), and have also enjoyed reading some of the articles on the main site. Now that I'm a paying customer, I suppose I'll watch some of the videos as time allows, at least for the next year. Time will tell...
John
-
Went to the home page, tried to log in with my "user name", got an error, tried again with my email instead... done. Only a few seconds. Went back to this forum, no problem, no need to log in again or anything. Smooth.
-
For those who see ulterior motive behind our every move & problem during this transition, here is a timeline and objective list.
Have a read and then decide if there really is a bogeyman or not ::)
May 2015: Michael, Kevin & Chris discuss what can be done to return LuLa to a financially self-sustaining entity rather than a costly hobby. Michael suggests a buck-a-month club. We all agree.
June-November: Planning and implementation for that membership transition done on an offline server.
November 23: Public Announcement that we will become a membership site. E mails sent to video subscribers, video purchasers and 'senior' forum contributors that their membership will be free for a year or more.
November 24-5: Much reaction both positive & negative. Many protests from several forum users angry that they will be charged $12 for 'their own posts'. Kevin, Michael & Chris discuss and decide that, on balance, the Forum remaining free to users is an acceptable cost of doing business. But For Sale posters need to pay for the privilege of posting items for Sale.
November 30: Server switch is made and generally the process works well and the membership uptake is reassuringly robust - but there are glitches: PayPal doesn't work, Credit card 'hook' doesn't work for the first few hundred subscribers. Developers work until the wee hours sorting things out (and continue...).
December 1-2: Existing senior Forum members with accounts that have been given a year's membership suffer login problems and the confusion of duplicate accounts. Developers are sorting this out on a case-by-case basis.
Message for those mad at us: Our apologies and please know that we feel bad that it hasn't worked flawlessly and that the developers are doing their damnedest to sort it out
Chris
P.S. Michael says Hi from Ethiopia where he is taking enviably compelling photographs
-
I think LuLa's team is handling initial glitches with better and faster responsiveness than Obama's administration did when launching their healthcare website ;)
-
I'm one of those existing senior Forum members with accounts that has been given a year's membership.
Logged in with my email, done.
Thanks.
Ditto.
Rob
-
I think LuLa's team is handling initial glitches with better and faster responsiveness than Obama's administration did when launching their healthcare website ;)
I must agree.
I think it may even be faster than Adobe's fixing of glitches in LR and PS. ;)
And to James/Bcooter: As an amateur I have seldom commented in the sections for pros, because I didn't think I had anything useful to tell the pros. But I must say that I have found your contributions over the years to be very valuable to me, and I have greatly appreciated the willingness of the pros on LuLa to share information about how they make their shots. You folks set a high standard for the rest of us, and not the least for the fact that you all seem to enjoy what you are doing, just as we "amateurs" are supposed to.
I do hope the LL geek squad will be able to straighten out all of the sign-in glitches within the next very few days. But if they are not, I am willing to shell out $12 to cover your, Bcooter's, membership if you are willing to keep your posts here.
-Eric M.
P.S. Yes, I got the one year freebie email, too, and I'm still willing to shell out my $12 for Bcooter.
-
My experience so far is that I am still awaiting support to get in touch with specific recommendations and that has been a couple of days since they replied thanking me for the report. :-\
PS one thing I have noticed is that the login page looks identical for both forum login and the home page login..........I would have thought they should be different to distinguish them???
-
My experience so far is that I am still awaiting support to get in touch with specific recommendations and that has been a couple of days since they replied thanking me for the report. :-\
PS one thing I have noticed is that the login page looks identical for both forum login and the home page login..........I would have thought they should be different to distinguish them???
Try emailing again. I do not see any from you addressed to Customer Service.
There is really only one login now since forum/membership/video are now blended - for most (other than duplicate accounts)
-
Good deal. Just in time. I was gonna suggest that you'd have to re-up with the username "Jazzmaster" :)
;D I considered it! Got ahold of an absolute killer JM earlier this year.
-Dave-
-
Not yet clear to me what my status is but today I added a reply in the printers forum after logging in with my email + password where normally I could enter with my user's name + password. As soon as PayPal works I will contribute though my main interest has always been some forums where the content is created by forum members.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Could you maybe split off the forum into a "A" Forum and a "B" Forum, with all the highly valued important professional contributors safely guarded within a sound-proofed velvet-roped perimeter, and the rest of us dregs, incompetents and general losers to innocently get on with it and enjoy not being shouted at ?
8)
-
Try emailing again. I do not see any from you addressed to Customer Service.
There is really only one login now since forum/membership/video are now blended - for most (other than duplicate accounts)
Hi Chris
I did reply (before posting) to the support reply to me asking for an update. I am not sure whether all support requests are serially numbered buy mine is #17 ................I wonder what number they are up to now???
In the absence of their specific guidance is my best course of action just to do a reset password? I have been concerned about doing so in case it fails and then I am frozen out on all devices!
-
Besides, at least once I listened to Michael, even though he was in disagreement with popular opinion, and bought 70-300 DO (that was being heavily trashed for "dreamy look" and other crimes against humanity). Which I was then able to take with my on great many trips, whereas a bigger lens would stay at home... So, Michael, if you are reading this, thanks again.
Hehe. When I sold most of my Canon stuff in mid-2006 the DO was one of two EF lenses I kept. Now that the Metabones Canon-to-Sony adapters are maturing I'll likely get one and put the DO back in play. The reason I kept it: after getting a 5D in 2005 I found the DO to be soft along the left edge & so sent it to Canon for repair/recalibration. They did a terrific job, which persuaded me to hang onto the lens.
-Dave-
-
December 1-2: Existing senior Forum members with accounts that have been given a year's membership suffer login problems and the confusion of duplicate accounts. Developers are sorting this out on a case-by-case basis.
Chris
P.S. Michael says Hi from Ethiopia where he is taking enviably compelling photographs
I gather by this statement that some senior members were "gifted" a year's membership, correct? I think this is the first that I've seen this statement (correct me if I'm wrong). What was the criteria here? Number of posts? If so, that's problematic as there are some who have posted a lot of dross.
Alan
-
I guess that is for us to know and others to speculate about. :)
-
I guess that is for us to know and others to speculate about. :)
I surmise there was also a cut off date for those like myself who bought videos when it was downloads only but stopped once Purple came in.
As noted above by Bcooter, $12 will not be an impact on the pocket especially for the improved offerings :)
-
As a now-retired jack of many trades, one of which involved database design & interface programming, my main observation re. the LuLa signup procedure is: beware of stonewalling your users. Instead offer them ways to proceed.
In this case the new database (or new tables in an existing database) should be keyed to the username field in the forum database as well as the e-mail address. So when I tried signing up for the new membership as Telecaster, rather than telling me "Sorry, dude, you've made a mistake" I should've seen something like: "Please sign up using your e-mail address as your username. You will still be recognized as Telecaster in the forum."
-Dave-
-
I surmise there was also a cut off date for those like myself who bought videos when it was downloads only but stopped once Purple came in...
Yes - purchases one year from the start of membership.
-
As a now-retired jack of many trades, one of which involved database design & interface programming, my main observation re. the LuLa signup procedure is: beware of stonewalling your users. Instead offer them ways to proceed.
In this case the new database (or new tables in an existing database) should be keyed to the username field in the forum database as well as the e-mail address. So when I tried signing up for the new membership as Telecaster, rather than telling me "Sorry, dude, you've made a mistake" I should've seen something like: "Please sign up using your e-mail address as your username. You will still be recognized as Telecaster in the forum."
-Dave-
I believe that would have been complicated by differing types of users; too many IF - THENs
-
Number of posts?
that I doubt : for example I can see that I have "Posts: 1493" + this one... less than you.
-
I guess that is for us to know and others to speculate about. :)
This is not an acceptable answer. I've purchased three of the video tutorials over the course of the last several years and the fact that some have been "gifted" memberships because of some unknown criteria is just ludicrous. I did pay for a year's membership yesterday but I might not have had I known there was some favoritism with "freebies." This site is either egalitarian, e.g., everyone pays or it is "let's play favorites."
Alan
-
I gather by this statement that some senior members were "gifted" a year's membership, correct? I think this is the first that I've seen this statement (correct me if I'm wrong). What was the criteria here? Number of posts? If so, that's problematic as there are some who have posted a lot of dross.
Problematic ? Why?
I've lost count of the number of times I've been to a restaurant, and when the check (aka bill) comes, been told 'the coffees are on us' – or similar.
It's not a free-for-all, just a token of appreciation.
Does it influence my choice of restaurant ? No.
Is it a charitable gesture on the part of the owner ? Yes.
And, no, it's none of my friggin' business how the owners choose to express a goodwill gesture.
So instead of cheapskating, I'd rather contribute come-what-may – if for no other reason that I've been freeloading for long enough.
YMMV.
-
that I doubt : for example I can see that I have "Posts: 1493" + this one... less than you.
Were you gifted a year's free membership?
-
there was some favoritism with "freebies."
I was also banned a lot... so everything is relative.
-
I gather by this statement that some senior members were "gifted" a year's membership, correct? I think this is the first that I've seen this statement (correct me if I'm wrong). What was the criteria here? Number of posts? If so, that's problematic as there are some who have posted a lot of dross.
Damn right!
So much so, that I suggest we start an Occupy LuLa movement, organize street protests and do not stop until the disgraced management resigns. After all, they've proven, time and again, they have no clue how to run a successful photo site.
We then proceed to run the site ourselves, managed by a committee (Goldhammer committee? Ironhammer committee? Hammer & Sickle committee?) to ensure PC values are adhered to and an inclusive and safe environment created for all.
Speaking of which, high time for the landscape privilege to end. There are many other minority genres who feel threaten, isolated, abused and neglected, thanks to the landscape brutality.
-
resigns...
nothing less than seppuku...
-
Damn right!
So much so, that I suggest we start an Occupy LuLa movement, organize street protests and do not stop until the disgraced management resigns. After all, they've proven, time and again, they have no clue how to run a successful photo site.
We then proceed to run the site ourselves, managed by a committee (Goldhammer committee? Ironhammer committee? Hammer & Sickle committee?) to ensure PC values are adhered to and an inclusive and safe environment created for all.
Speaking of which, high time for the landscape privilege to end. There are many other minority genres who feel threaten, isolated, abused and neglected, thanks to the landscape brutality.
Real cute! I'm sure you are one of the favored few that received a freebie based on you Republican ideals and quick quips.
-
Just to let those know that were waiting . . . PayPal is now active and working for those that want to use PayPal for their membership.
-
This is not an acceptable answer... This site is either egalitarian, e.g., everyone pays or it is "let's play favorites."
It is acceptable to me, since I am not harmed in any way by some getting a large gift ($12 worth of access!!!) from the owners of Luminous Landscape.
Full Disclosure: Neither Kevin nor Michael nor any employee, contractor or subcontractor of Luminous Landscape have offered me anything of monetary value in exchange for this comment or any previous activity on Luminous Landscape including but not restricted to forums or main web site. Also, I reliably vote democrat.
-
Also, I reliably vote democrat.
I even voted communist ;D
-
@Alan - I will tell you this: Yes, there was favouritism...
When we originally thought to include the forum inside the membership system, we wanted to at least say a small thank-you to those who had made substantial and meaningful contributions to this Forum over the years, and make the offer of a year's membership.
When we later changed our minds and decided to keep the forum open, the emails to those contributors had already been sent. Their 'free' membership stands. Would they have been sent that email after we changed our minds? I am not sure.
So, Damned if we did. Damned if we didn't. 8)
-
I am not sure whether all support requests are serially numbered buy mine is #17 ................I wonder what number they are up to now???
Mine was #145, successfully resolved about an hour ago.
-
@Alan - I will tell you this: Yes, there was favouritism...
When we originally thought to include the forum inside the membership system, we wanted to at least say a small thank-you to those who had made substantial and meaningful contributions to this Forum over the years, and make the offer of a year's membership.
OK, thanks for the candid answer.
-
@Alan - I will tell you this: Yes, there was favouritism...
When we originally thought to include the forum inside the membership system, we wanted to at least say a small thank-you to those who had made substantial and meaningful contributions to this Forum over the years, and make the offer of a year's membership.
When we later changed our minds and decided to keep the forum open, the emails to those contributors had already been sent. Their 'free' membership stands. Would they have been sent that email after we changed our minds? I am not sure.
So, Damned if we did. Damned if we didn't. 8)
I'm glad to discover in this way that I did not provide substantial or meaningful contributions to the forum over the years ;)
-
Real cute! I'm sure you are one of the favored few that received a freebie based on you(r) Republican ideals and quick quips.
Even if true, I doubt that would work in my favor, as it looks like all three are leaning left.
-
So, Damned if we did. Damned if we didn't. 8)
QED :o
-
I'm glad to discover in this way that I did not provide substantial or meaningful contributions to the forum over the years ;)
You are not alone, there are probably a lot of us who don't fall into the "meaningful contribution" category!
-
Mine was #145, successfully resolved about an hour ago.
Looks like mine @ #17 has slipped through the gratings :(
Being GMT I lose track of the time difference but I did email the support desk again a few hours ago and still no update or acknowledgement of activity.............is anyone else waiting for "a result" or update or is it just me ::)
Or am I being too impatient, either way not the sort of lack of response or clear guidance I was anticipating. But then perhaps I am surely one who has made little meaningful contribution as others have also declared ;) ;D Not shades of 1984..........now thoughts of that take me back as was on my school reading list with the other book a remember most being "To kill a mockingbird" ~ sadly showing my age now :-[
-
I got stuck in an odd loop where I couldn't sign on at all today, but some quick help from you guys got me online fairly quickly. I appreciate it.
I do hope all the information involved in the new signup is heavily protected -- you now have my email, address, credit card number with security code -- all required fields -- and everything anybody would need to know to rip me off. This is the smallest site (by far) that I've ever given all of that to, and I have to confess that it worries me a bit.
-
;D I considered it! Got ahold of an absolute killer JM earlier this year.
-Dave-
Cool. And I just today pulled the trigger on a Gretsch Brian Setzer Nashville.
-
I got stuck in an odd loop where I couldn't sign on at all today, but some quick help from you guys got me online fairly quickly. I appreciate it.
I do hope all the information involved in the new signup is heavily protected -- you now have my email, address, credit card number with security code -- all required fields -- and everything anybody would need to know to rip me off. This is the smallest site (by far) that I've ever given all of that to, and I have to confess that it worries me a bit.
That is where PayPal comes into play as an extra layer, at least to protect your money aspect.
-
I got stuck in an odd loop where I couldn't sign on at all today, but some quick help from you guys got me online fairly quickly. I appreciate it.
I do hope all the information involved in the new signup is heavily protected -- you now have my email, address, credit card number with security code -- all required fields -- and everything anybody would need to know to rip me off. This is the smallest site (by far) that I've ever given all of that to, and I have to confess that it worries me a bit.
Just to re-state and emphasize: We do not store credit card information - All of that is done by Stripe - a heavily secured third-party Credit Card service
-
Looks like mine @ #17 has slipped through the gratings :(
Being GMT I lose track of the time difference but I did email the support desk again a few hours ago and still no update or acknowledgement of activity.............is anyone else waiting for "a result" or update or is it just me ::)
Or am I being too impatient, either way not the sort of lack of response or clear guidance I was anticipating. But then perhaps I am surely one who has made little meaningful contribution as others have also declared ;) ;D Not shades of 1984..........now thoughts of that take me back as was on my school reading list with the other book a remember most being "To kill a mockingbird" ~ sadly showing my age now :-[
I have nudged the developers...
-
Ah ha! just had an email from support with an email reset......................but how come if they have reset the password that I am still 'here'???
Edit ~ will try that on the smartphone but the trash needs to go out first!
-
Ah ha! just had an email from support with an email reset......................
See! that only took 25 seconds!!
-
See! that only took 25 seconds!!
OK it took 2 attempts but the smartphone is now logged in :)
However, as support are so responsive to you and not me can you ask them as follows:-
1) If I log out on the tablet or PC will my old password work or do I have to use the new one he gave me. NB in the past when I reset the password myself on the PC I have found myself logged out on all devices!
2) Whenever I get a system reset I get asked to create a new password private to me but as once logged in that function unlike on other sites there is no user access to change the password.................so other than going through a user requested reset how do I change the password to one of my choice.
Oh, he did not pass any comment about my report of the 'missing' help button in landscape on a smartphone or Tablet? any idea when that will be fixed
Many thanks for the helpful input and hopefully support will provide the answers to the above nice & promptly :)
-
I'm glad to discover in this way that I did not provide substantial or meaningful contributions to the forum over the years ;)
Don't feel bad. I didn't make the cut, either. But it does beg the question...What percentage of LuLa readers actually go to the forums and further contribute frequently enough to go from newbie to junior or senior member status? It might have been a more enlightened approach to give each and every past contributor to the forums a 1 year free subscription. While that approach might have delayed some initial revenues by one year, it may well have brought a very favorable return on investment next year.... just sayin.
cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
-
It is unfortunate, to say the least, that some who got a private email decided to berate it publicly. A breach of etiquette, I would say.
-
It is unfortunate, to say the least, that some who got a private email decided to berate it publicly. A breach of etiquette, I would say.
In rereading an earlier post by Chris Sanderson if I understand it correctly, apparently one of the criteria for getting the private email offering for the courtesy one year free subscription was Senior Membership status in the forums. As a Senior member in the forums I got no such private email, and my email address on record with LULA is correct, so perhaps there were other criteria as well that had to be met, or perhaps it is yet another glitch in the new website roll out.
Honestly, it's just a $12 difference for the haves and have not recipients of that offer, so it's not a big deal to me, but certainly a more carefully executed roll out plan could have spared lots of hard feelings.
cheers,
Mark
-
Cool. And I just today pulled the trigger on a Gretsch Brian Setzer Nashville.
:) That sounds like fun. The single-cut Nashville/6120 is my favorite style Gretsch. I love the old DeArmond pickups (Seymour Duncan makes a spot-on repro) but Filter'Trons are mighty fine too. Got a set of the TV Jones "Classic" version waiting for the right guitar.
-Dave-
-
:) That sounds like fun. The single-cut Nashville/6120 is my favorite style Gretsch. I love the old DeArmond pickups (Seymour Duncan makes a spot-on repro) but Filter'Trons are mighty fine too. Got a set of the TV Jones "Classic" version waiting for the right guitar.
-Dave-
A guitarist I was in a band with in the 1980's had one of these:
https://www.gbase.com/gear/gretsch-single-anniversary-1960-two-tone-gree
It was a lovely thing.
Weirdly, I wasn't offered free LuLa membership - what's that all about?
-
I opted to stop automatic renewal and got an email stating my subscription has been canceled... I do not think that in actuality the subscription is cancelled, but that is an odd way to do this.
Many CC merchant systems offer an option (checkbox) to not save CC info post purchase. That would have been preferred and we should expect that the CC processing company does indeed delete CC info. This is important.
As a result of this (Stop Auto Pay) my Payments page states that my paid annual membership was FREE!?!
-
For those who see ulterior motive behind our every move & problem during this transition, here is a timeline and objective list.
Well, I'm certainly no conspiracy theorist, but are you explicitly claiming that you and Kevin and Michael didn't actually concoct this whole subscription scheme just to deflect our attention from beating up on Adobe for its "Creative Cloud?"
P.S. Michael says Hi from Ethiopia where he is taking enviably compelling photographs
Yup, very suspicious. Sounds to me like he is really on the lam.
-
Real cute! I'm sure you are one of the favored few that received a freebie based on you Republican ideals and quick quips.
Well, I got a freebie, too, much to my surprise. And I wouldn't vote for a Republican for anything (except, maybe, Slobodan for Dog Catcher). :o
-
Well, I got a freebie, too, much to my surprise. And I wouldn't vote for a Republican for anything (except, maybe, Slobodan for Dog Catcher). :o
Hum...I didn't get a freebie email...maybe I HAVEN'T been a good contributor over the years...so I dropped $12 to be a subscriber. I post this only to dispel any conspiracy regarding the "friends" discount :~)
-
I didn't get a freebie email
just check the spam folder...
-
just check the spam folder...
I did...nothing :~(
-
Just to let those know that were waiting . . . PayPal is now active and working for those that want to use PayPal for their membership.
Great .. halfway there, Kevin.
Now all we need is a 'Contributions' button linked to PayPal.
-
Yes, I got a 'free' extension to my visiting here; so what? I've already stated that I'd pay up twelve bucks if only in gratitude to the good that LuLa has done me in furthering my education in matters digital, a service that they rendered me after earlier such kindnesses from members of the original BJP forum did much the same. I eventually quit that earlier scene due the few assholes there who ruined it for the rest of us, who qu¡etly withdrew from what had become an open sewer, and started up our own photographic site, by invitation only. That's one thing that happens when a good place becomes soiled beyond redemption. Problem is, some asholes also migrate.
If I had any objections to LuLa and payment, these have now been overcome due to the fact that content freely supplied is no longer subject to being monetized, the same objection that would prevent me from handing over work to any paper magazine that had no intention of paying me. That sort of submission is normal for a wannabe, and I trod that same route once myself, but comes a time it becomes silly for the individual to persist: it simply cheapens the public (therefore business) perception of the contributor. Same with books: if the stuff's not good enough for a publisher to take a chance, then the same applies to myself, and I'd be an idiot to blow my scarce pennies on publishing vanity; better, and far more gratifying, to have bought a wee Merc, even if only to tool around a deserted summer resort, swanning off to the stray dogs!
As to the relative value of different contributors: of course they vary, and it's not numbers dependent! IMO, one post from Cooter is worth all of those from some other writers. That's IMO. It does not signify that the ownership of LuLa follows my personal beliefs or evaluations in the slightest. In fact, my own 'gift' wasn't even addressed to me by name, so for all I know, perhaps it's computer-generated, and that accounts for the seemingly random manner in which such things happened, and when you deal with the numbers of people who visit this site, seems highly likely to be the only method that's practicable; do you imagine a personal analysis of each and every contributor? Whatever the reason, I really don't feel the owners need explain - it's their site, after all - and the value concerned is about one menu del dia for me, or possibly the cost of a coffee for those living in some cities. Big fucking deal. Of course, there will now ever be the PC brigade that sees imaginary equality as reality, and may God help them all and forgive them, for they are blided by their own faux altruism.
Rob C
-
Well, finally got the login sorted!
Made my subscription payment via PayPal and noted it was for a repeating payment................OK no problem thinks I as I had read hereabouts that I could change/cancel that aspect in the LuLa portal but where is it???
For the record my payment page still says processing and oddly I see this
Enabled
$12 / year
Next Billing: December 3, 2015
I have sent a "help request" to get the feedback but if a recurring payment I would have expected the next billing to have said Dec 3, 2016.
Still a few wrinkles to iron out???
No doubt there is time to sort it out in due course so just looking forward to enjoying the video access the subscription allows :)
-
I really don't feel the owners need explain - it's their site, after all - and the value concerned is about one menu del dia for me, or possibly the cost of a coffee for those living in some cities. Big fucking deal. Of course, there will now ever be the PC brigade that sees imaginary equality as reality, and may God help them all and forgive them, for they are blided by their own faux altruism.
Rob C
It has nothing to do with PC but simple transparency. The entry fee is low and as noted, I paid it. My point in raising this is that some were gifted others were not. Had the site managers been up front with this from the get go, it would have been fine with me, the fact that they did not and then tried to make light of it was just wrong IMO.
-
It has nothing to do with PC but simple transparency. The entry fee is low and as noted, I paid it. My point in raising this is that some were gifted others were not. Had the site managers been up front with this from the get go, it would have been fine with me, the fact that they did not and then tried to make light of it was just wrong IMO.
The fee and membership relate solely to the 'for sale', published articles and video on the site.
Cooter's concerns are entirely distinct from the objections and offence felt by some in this thread. Chris has already explained 'why and how' the confusion arose but, irrespective, I'll defend anyone's right to proffer a charitable gesture, without a need to either explain or justify, and there is definitely no requirement that it be egalitarian. The pecuniary amount is so trifling that it really shouldn't warrant concern - it's well below the radar of any reasonable interpretation of a 'financial incentive'. And, no, I don't feel slighted or belittled.
To those who still take umbrage, all I can say is : 'I feel sorry for you'.
-
The fee and membership relate solely to the 'for sale', published articles and video on the site.
Cooter's concerns are entirely distinct from the objections and offence felt by some in this thread. Chris has already explained 'why and how' the confusion arose but, irrespective, I'll defend anyone's right to proffer a charitable gesture, without a need to either explain or justify, and there is definitely no requirement that it be egalitarian. The pecuniary amount is so trifling that it really shouldn't warrant concern - it's well below the radar of any reasonable interpretation of a 'financial incentive'. And, no, I don't feel slighted or belittled.
To those who still take umbrage, all I can say is : 'I feel sorry for you'.
You are missing my key point which is not the right of the site owners to gift anyone they please. Clearly that is their right and you are correct that the the fee is low which I acknowledged as well. It's proper to disclose these things and not just issue a flippant, "....I guess that is for us to know and others to speculate about."
I'll throw this back at you, if you think this is correct behavior then, "I feel sorry for you." We may agree that $12 is piddling but what if the membership fee was $25, $50, $100 a year? Would you feel the same way?
-
... It's proper to disclose these things...
Why? Are they running for a public office? Or financed by taxpayers? Is "transparency" a PC translation for "I have the right to stick my nose in other people's business"?
-
You are missing my key point which is not the right of the site owners to gift anyone they please. Clearly that is their right and you are correct that the the fee is low which I acknowledged as well. It's proper to disclose these things and not just issue a flippant, "....I guess that is for us to know and others to speculate about."
I'll throw this back at you, if you think this is correct behavior then, "I feel sorry for you." We may agree that $12 is piddling but what if the membership fee was $25, $50, $100 a year? Would you feel the same way?
For this question to make sense, you must ask yourself: would the freebie gesture have then made sense to the proprietor? If not, your argument is simply a reduction to the absurd. As the current re-evaluation of the infamous trial in South Africa shows, one has to consider all the nuances alongside ultimate result as well as of intent. Clever council will ever discover some arcane point that makes a difference to any argument. Is it worth the man-hours in this case? But hey, some simply enjoy the argument, which is fine, too.
Rob
-
I'll throw this back at you, if you think this is correct behavior then, "I feel sorry for you." We may agree that $12 is piddling but what if the membership fee was $25, $50, $100 a year? Would you feel the same way?
I'm not Manoli, but I certainly would feel the same way. Michael and friends own the site. What they do with it is entirely their business (unless they use it to promote heinous acts, like terrorism, for instance).
Whether I subscribe or not is entirely my business.
In my view they have bent over backward to be responsive to issues brought up concerning the monetizing of their site.
As soon as there is a "Donate" button, I will donate something more than the $12 they are asking for, for access to the main site and all the videos. The forum remains free (unless you want to sell something, and that seems to me quite reasonable, too).
I find it somewhat ironic that a vocal minority is taking advantage of it to complain repeatedly about aspects of the monetization of what was previously a free site, but with fairly expensive videos, if you wanted several of them. (If you want all the videos, it is now much less expensive.)
Eric
-
I'll throw this back at you, if you think this is correct behavior then, "I feel sorry for you." We may agree that $12 is piddling but what if the membership fee was $25, $50, $100 a year? Would you feel the same way?
Absolutely, because the choice is mine and mine alone.
What's offered to others , either as a means of financial inducement or ex-gratia payment is simply not my concern. Equally, whether I choose to accept or decline a gratuitous gesture is mine alone.
What I do see is a considered gesture, (the import of which changed abruptly) which a majority neither anticipated nor accepted. Of those who have accepted (and many would have been given no alternative simply because the act of registration confirmed their membership) a large number have, within this thread, stated that they feel more disposed to supporting a site that, up until now, has existed thanks to the generosity of its owner(s) and in recognition wish to contribute financially, either by way of a subscription fee or contribution.
Broadening this discussion to include aspersions on the intent and 'correct behaviour', IMO, doesn't become you.
-
I've already stated that I'd pay up twelve bucks if only in gratitude to the good that LuLa has done me in furthering my education in matters digital, a service that they rendered me after earlier such kindnesses from members of the original BJP forum did much the same.
Me as well. But it doesn't appear to be an option. My suggestion to Kevin is that be an option.
-
Why? Are they running for a public office? Or financed by taxpayers? Is "transparency" a PC translation for "I have the right to stick my nose in other people's business"?
Ok, her is a simplistic example that maybe even you can understand. I own a restaurant that has 10 customers a day (keeping it simple). My break even point is $1000/day and let's say I want to make a $200 profit per day. This means that I need to charge the 10 customers $120/meal to make that profit. Now two of these people are photographers and really great pals and on my day off we go out into the field and take pictures. I decide that because these two people have been good contributors to my avocation that I will gift them free meals. Now I still need to make the $200 profit so I can save up for a new camera lens. This means that the other eight customers will be charged $150 per meal. Now I don't disclose on the menu that some people will be charged more because of the freebies. If I were one of those customers paying the extra $30, I might feel aggrieved.
Obviously LuLa is operating on a different scale. My point is that Chris's comment blowing things off was offensive to me. Maybe it wasn't to you. I spent my working career in an industry that spent a lot of time and effort fighting transparency and that fight ultimately failed. Perhaps this has made me more sensitive to these issues and if so that's my right. For you and the others who don't seem to think this is wrong, that's OK; it's your opinion and you have the right to express it. Just don't come at me like an anti-PC jackal, that's not your right and it's offensive.
I'll leave it at that and just reiterate that I am disappointed that this was done behind the veil of secrecy.
-
People getting troubled over an annual fee of only $12 for LULA is beyond me.
-
All we need to care about actually is do we see value in the offering. Is what is on offer worth the price to you. If it is you buy it. If it is it isn't then don't. Why stress about what someone else is paying?
I don't charge all my clients the same price. I do special deals with certain clients for all sorts of reasons. Top pros get free equipment all the time. I don't get offended.
In this case it's $12. The rest of it is a debate about ego in my opinion.
-
Why? Are they running for a public office? Or financed by taxpayers? Is "transparency" a PC translation for "I have the right to stick my nose in other people's business"?
I rarely agree with posts from SB, but I have to say this one hits the nail on the head for me. It is their web site and they can do whatever they damn well want to without justifying to anyone the reasons. Period. I could care less that they gifted some memberships, and I actually think rewarding valued contributors in that way is an excellent idea. They absolutely do not have to be "transparent" in how they operate. Nor does a restaurant and everyone has a choice, don't like it, hit the bricks so to speak. No one is locked in to coming here. All by free choice and a desire to participate and receive and disseminate what ever knowledge you have that is relevant at the time.
Alan
-
A guitarist I was in a band with in the 1980's had one of these:
https://www.gbase.com/gear/gretsch-single-anniversary-1960-two-tone-gree
It was a lovely thing.
Yeah, essentially the same thing as the Chet Atkins single-cut hollowbody guitars (and typically available at lower prices). Gretsch used the same template for many different models. This one has the same aluminum Bigsby bridge as my Chet. The bridge doesn't get much love from Gretsch fans, as the preset intonation isn't good with lighter gauge strings, but it works fine with my prefered 12 gauge flatwounds.
-Dave-
-
P.S. Michael says Hi from Ethiopia where he is taking enviably compelling photographs
Yup, very suspicious. Sounds to me like he is really on the lam.
Nah, not yet at least.
If you suddenly see Chris and Kevin joining him in Ethiopia (which I presume has no extradition agreements with neither Canada nor USA) and LuLa suddenly goes dark, I would be very, very concerned for the $12 million dollars they just collected from us ;)
-
Well, with all that money they could get rid of the forums and do just the videos.
-
Ok, her is a simplistic example that maybe even you can understand. I own a restaurant that has 10 customers a day (keeping it simple). My break even point is $1000/day and let's say I want to make a $200 profit per day. This means that I need to charge the 10 customers $120/meal to make that profit. Now two of these people are photographers and really great pals and on my day off we go out into the field and take pictures. I decide that because these two people have been good contributors to my avocation that I will gift them free meals. Now I still need to make the $200 profit so I can save up for a new camera lens. This means that the other eight customers will be charged $150 per meal. Now I don't disclose on the menu that some people will be charged more because of the freebies. If I were one of those customers paying the extra $30, I might feel aggrieved.
For me the analogy is more like I attend a workshop and the leader buys coffee for a little group of his pals every day. Of course the money is a) small and b) his to do as he pleases. But it feels exclusionary. My problem? Yes, maybe. Unless the leader cares about the impression he wants to give, as a personal and business matter.
-
Ok, her is a simplistic example that maybe even you can understand...If I were one of those customers paying the extra $30, I might feel aggrieved.
I suspect you meant a simple example. I am afraid you came up with a simplistic one. When I eat in a restaurant I am happy if I get what I consider to be value for money and I have no expectation whatsoever that the proprietor disclose to me the financial arrangements (including freebies) that sit behind his or her pricing.
-
For me the analogy is more like I attend a workshop and the leader buys coffee for a little group of his pals every day. Of course the money is a) small and b) his to do as he pleases. But it feels exclusionary. My problem? Yes, maybe. Unless the leader cares about the impression he wants to give, as a personal and business matter.
Interesting point. I guess I have always considered LuLa to be more like a restaurant than a workshop - ie, a business, of a certain scale, with a certain duration, in which the background financial arrangements are none of my business. But for what it is worth, the leaders have not created any negative impressions a result of the way they have managed this change.
-
For me the analogy is more like I attend a workshop and the leader buys coffee for a little group of his pals every day.
you mix once and every day... also "pals" can hardly be applicable to me specifically for example... yet, I received that EMAIL... actually I did not read it past the line that some changes are coming to LuLa and deleted it the same minute... however after somebody posted here several pages ago I tried out of sheer curiousity to login with my email address and to my very genuine surprise discovered that I was indeed given the free membership or whatever is the term... I actually used an opportunity to watch a video of KR talking with LK about C1 internals and was very, very disappointed that most of the hour was wasted on wordly niceties instead of asking tough technical questions... what a waste !
-
For me the analogy is more like I attend a workshop and the leader buys coffee for a little group of his pals every day...
Given LuLa visitors' size, a more appropriate analogy would be a concert at a stadium, where a few pals would get a free pass. Big deal.
-
Ok, her is a simplistic example that maybe even you can understand. I own a restaurant that has 10 customers a day (keeping it simple). My break even point is $1000/day and let's say I want to make a $200 profit per day. This means that I need to charge the 10 customers $120/meal to make that profit. Now two of these people are photographers and really great pals and on my day off we go out into the field and take pictures. I decide that because these two people have been good contributors to my avocation that I will gift them free meals. Now I still need to make the $200 profit so I can save up for a new camera lens. This means that the other eight customers will be charged $150 per meal.
My thought would be, "Here is a guy who does right by his friends. That is the kind of guy I want to do business with." If I thought the meal was worth $150, I would still eat there. If not, I would eat somewhere else. How he sets his prices and who he charges what is not my concern, other than what he charges me for the meal. I would reserve "fairness and transparency" for the realm of elected office and the deals those in elected office make with private corporations.
-
...
I think people are willing to pay, but they do want to be treated equally.
And all are free to comment (with respect) as they see fit.
Chris
-
Slobodan has nailed it, again.
This site is a privately owned one and no one is compelled to use it. In common with another photography site which I once frequently visited (the owner is now apparently chasing ghosts and spirits :), certain readers imagine they are part of some "community" and become self-appointed guardians who ride shotgun or demand equality and rights akin to the owners. Time for them to get out more.
-
I have just spent a couple of hours watching LLVJ 20.
Michael's wander around Art Wolfe's gallery discussing his prints and the rather technical but very educational chat with Mark Dubovoy on Carbon Pigment Printing were most enjoyable to watch :)
Of course, all the other items were worth watching too.
Needles to say I will be watching more of the others, probably during the Christmas / New Year holiday period.
-
Guys,
you stand alone! The concept is simple: Cash in on your (well
deserved) popularity while NOT ripping off the individual. The
latter aspect is, unfortunately, quite unique.
May you for ever prosper!
I will certainly sign up and stay so, considering the value I get.
Keep the good stuff coming,
Matthias
-
Nah, not yet at least.
If you suddenly see Chris and Kevin joining him in Ethiopia (which I presume has no extradition agreements with neither Canada nor USA) and LuLa suddenly goes dark, I would be very, very concerned for the $12 million dollars they just collected from us ;)
Correction, Slobodan: That would only be $11,999,964. I think you forgot about the three of us who got free passes.
-
Correction, Slobodan: That would only be $11,999,964. I think you forgot about the three of us who got free passes.
I can neither confirm, nor deny ;)
-
What a tempest this has turned out to be.
1. A lot of people must have their feelings hurt easily.
2. The owners of the site are entitled to monetize their hard work how ever they see fit.
3. The owners of the site are under no obligation to be transparent in everything they do nor every decision they make.
4. The first several years of Luminous Landscape coincided with explosive technological development in digital photography. If some people perceive that the content is not commensurate with the earlier years, their beef is with digital photography, not the effort the site owners put into content. The legacy content still has value and they are entitled to benefit from it.
Now, let's redirect some of this effort to something productive that benefits the community.
-
I Completely agree, both on the absurdities of griping about a tiny number of freebies, and also this:
4. The first several years of Luminous Landscape coincided with explosive technological development in digital photography. If some people perceive that the content is not commensurate with the earlier years, their beef is with digital photography, not the effort the site owners put into content. The legacy content still has value and they are entitled to benefit from it.
I agree with some other posters that LuLa was of greater interest to me some years ago that it is now, but almost entirely because I was far more in need of guidance to choosing and using a digital camera back then: so much was unfamiliar, and technological progress that could visibly improve a significant proportion of my images (not just in lab tests and extreme edge cases) was happening fast!
-
I Completely agree, both on the absurdities of griping about a tiny number of freebies, and also this:
I agree with some other posters that LuLa was of greater interest to me some years ago that it is now, but almost entirely because I was far more in need of guidance to choosing and using a digital camera back then: so much was unfamiliar, and technological progress that could visibly improve a significant proportion of my images (not just in lab tests and extreme edge cases) was happening fast!
actually apart from the site itself (which is in the urgent need to find volunteer technical editors reviewing __technical__ articles before team of MR/KR/CS will dare to post them) in the forum we still have as much interesting (technical stuff) as before...
-
Well, if this be the season for suggesting alterations, perhaps we could do with some more contributors willing to write on subjects that be even just a teensy bit beyond the mechanics of photography? Hell, it's not that difficult a process to grasp or most of us wouldn't be doing it; there must be more to photographic life than this? (As Jerry Lee sang about love.)
Rob C
-
I agree with some other posters that LuLa was of greater interest to me some years ago that it is now, but almost entirely because I was far more in need of guidance to choosing and using a digital camera back then: so much was unfamiliar, and technological progress that could visibly improve a significant proportion of my images (not just in lab tests and extreme edge cases) was happening fast!
Yep, IMO this sums up the situation re. technique- & gear-centric photo sites in general. With maturity comes a decrease in novelty…and novelty is what tends to generate excitement and enthusiasm. I spend more time here than at other such sites (most of which I've dumped entirely) because the content is richer, but less time than I once did. So it goes. The plus side is that I spend more time online looking at photographs. :)
-Dave-
-
For a while I was amused by all of the too-ings and fro-ings about the change to a paid site but it really has gone on rather too long don't you all think ? Could we all grow up please ?
Could we not put the energy of this storm in a teacup into something worthwhile ... like talking about - even arguing about - photography ? Isn't that what this site is supposed to be about ?
Personally I do not believe that fortunes are going to be made for anyone by these changes - but even if they are I could not care less so long as they deliver a vibrant and challenging source of information, instruction, and entertainment on photographic matters. Just as I don't expect to examine the bank accounts or the inner workings of other sources of such things - I judge them on the quality that they provide and on that basis decide whether or not I wish to partake of their offerings - if it has value for me that is what counts not whether they are making a buck or two - although I like them to make a buck or three as that may well determine if they are still going to be there for me tomorrow and the day after that.
-
Thank You . . . I know we are back to business as usual and then some. Lots of projects and content coming. All of us are busy. Our web guys are handling some issues with readers and log in problems etc. If you experience any issues please use the help button at the bottom right corner. It's a direct line into the help system and their desks. They'll take car of all concerns. And, enough already about the help button comments. It is tucked away in a corner and doesn't interfere with anything but helps those that need it and use it. And, a big thanks from Michael, Chris and myself for all the support of those that have joined the membership for Luminous-Landscape.
-
Thank You . . . I know we are back to business as usual and then some. Lots of projects and content coming. All of us are busy. Our web guys are handling some issues with readers and log in problems etc. If you experience any issues please use the help button at the bottom right corner. It's a direct line into the help system and their desks. They'll take car of all concerns. And, enough already about the help button comments. It is tucked away in a corner and doesn't interfere with anything but helps those that need it and use it. And, a big thanks from Michael, Chris and myself for all the support of those that have joined the membership for Luminous-Landscape.
I hope your Help button doesn't read Ajuda! too - might cause more confusion than ever!
;-)
Rob C
-
Thank You . . . I know we are back to business as usual and then some. Lots of projects and content coming. All of us are busy. Our web guys are handling some issues with readers and log in problems etc. If you experience any issues please use the help button at the bottom right corner. It's a direct line into the help system and their desks. They'll take car of all concerns. And, enough already about the help button comments. It is tucked away in a corner and doesn't interfere with anything but helps those that need it and use it. And, a big thanks from Michael, Chris and myself for all the support of those that have joined the membership for Luminous-Landscape.
Hi Kev, looking forward to all the good stuff you guys will be doing and I'd like to acknowledge one of your help folks. He goes by "Job" but I'm not at all certain it's his name but rather a testament to his patience!! Anyway, thanks Job for getting me out of login loop hell!!
-
I'm still in that loop. My username and email are unknown in LuLa. But when coming through a link to forum, i could sign in and maybe send this post, lets try!
-
Out of respect to Michael, Kevin and the team, I have now subscribed. Its only the price of a cocktail. I can sacrifice the price of a single Gin & Tonic, for goodness sake..
This is of course on the strict understanding that if Michael or Kevin become bilionaires as a result, and buy a superyacht, they will some to me - I'm a superyacht lawyer after all! ;)
-
Our web guys are handling some issues with readers and log in problems etc.
They are doing a good job (pun intended there). The response was quick and effective when I had a problem.
-
Kevin, Michael,
as rather a late addition to this thread, I'd like to quickly note why I won't subscribe, now that the transition has been in place for some days, and clicking on LuLa items in my RSS reader leads to paywalled content more and more often. I don't participate in the forums, but I have been a LuLa reader for many years.
Two reasons.
Firstly, the fee. Right, $12 a year is, by itself, nothing that would make me even so much as hesitate to pay up. But, if every website I regularly read would start charging a dollar a month, I'd soon have a financial problem. And, sorry, as valuable as I used to find the rather unique form of experienced professionals' views on photography and technology that I saw in LuLa, I must admit since two or three years I find new content less and less thorough and interesting, so LuLa wouldn't be the first site I'd start paying for, either, if the whole internet went paid-content.
Secondly, I don't read LuLa only for myself. I talk a lot about photography, and I run a small photography-related private forum myself, and I link to stuff I find to talk about it and to give others stuff to talk about. I regularly used to link to LuLa content in that forum. For obvious reasons I cannot link, though, to paywalled content, and I couldn't and wouldn't expect others to subscribe to LuLa just because I was a subscriber.
That's why I'll now delete LuLa from my RSS feeds instead of subscribing, for the time being. I'll probably be stopping by to see how things are going once in a while, though...
And yes, I do wish you well with your site.
Cheers and all the best,
Robert
-
Robert, as we have said a dozen time we wish we could keep things FREE. It is a business decision to allow us to grow and share more. The value is a good one as you get all the video content and we have a lot of content coming. The price is more than fair. If a visitor comes to us from a link they should see the article free. Magazines cost a lot to subscribe to and most likely you pay more and get less. So far we are doing well and do realize there will be some people who will not subscribe. Hope you reconsider sometime.
-
... as rather a late addition to this thread, I'd like to quickly note why I won't subscribe ...
And to think that you went to all the effort of registering, just to make your first and last post. Such dedication.
So, for years you've read, benefitted, even linked articles to further your own pitifully obscure photo forum yet offered zilch in return. The perennial freeloader.
No doubt you'll be missed. Not.
-
If a visitor comes to us from a link they should see the article free.
They don't.
If they did it would defeat the whole point of a pay wall anyway.
It is a business decision to allow us to grow and share more.
Please use the correct words, it's 'sell' not 'share'. The pay wall is there to make money, not give content away.
-
And to think that you went to all the effort of registering, just to make your first and last post. Such dedication.
So, for years you've read, benefitted, even linked articles to further your own pitifully obscure photo forum yet offered zilch in return. The perennial freeloader.
No doubt you'll be missed. Not.
What an unpleasant tone to a first poster.
Just remember that the people that have been reading this site and promoting it widely in the past, aren't "freeloaders" they were the viewers that that allowed Lula to charge to advertise on the site. The viewers are the people that have been driving income to Lula since advertising was first used to subsidise the costs of running the site.
-
The perennial freeloader.
Of one wants to read a photography site and forum, but does not feel that he/she can give nothing meaningful (newbie, learning, shy, not fluent in the language used, whatever) in return it is freeloading. Many of us (great majority actually) do not feel qualified to make corrections to articles or post relevant questions. What would it be like, if after reading an article about, say, faking a Grand Canyon sunset, all 50000 viewers were required to "contribute" their views about the matter. There are a lot of sites which I visit and never comment. So I am a freeloader also.
-
And to think that you went to all the effort of registering, just to make your first and last post. Such dedication.
So, for years you've read, benefitted, even linked articles to further your own pitifully obscure photo forum yet offered zilch in return. The perennial freeloader.
No doubt you'll be missed. Not.
Spiteful.
-
Avoid personal attacks please. Stick to the topic or the thread will be locked.
Chris
-
I just wrote my first letter to Scarlett Johansson that I am not in love with her and won't be marrying her anytime soon.
-
I decided to amortize the new fee over the period LuLa has entertained and educated me. Pretty sure I began in 2001. So my true cost is 80 cents per year. Pretty happy with my ROI.
-
And to think that you went to all the effort of registering, just to make your first and last post. Such dedication.
So, for years you've read, benefitted, even linked articles to further your own pitifully obscure photo forum yet offered zilch in return. The perennial freeloader.
No doubt you'll be missed. Not.
Well, I for one think that Rob Schroeder did the right thing -- in that he posted his opinion here. If I were Kevin, I'd want to know it.
The thing is... I suspect that many of us subscribed out of gratitude for all those years we were enjoying quality contents of LuLa. Plus, $12 is insignificant, especially given that you don't have to choose what to pay for -- vast majority of other photography-related sites out there are free.
Now, fast forward a few years, and the situation may be quite different, with
1) many more sites behind paywalls,
2) many current subscribers feeling that they kind of paid their debts to LuLa (or the perception of debt becoming not acute enough to go through the trouble of registering new CC once current one expires),
3) Michael becoming even less involved with LuLa (or rather "less visible"; we're rapidly moving from "occasional article not from Michael" to "occasional article from Michael"... if not already there).
As an avid amateur (with some 35+ years of experience), I do not benefit from LuLa access the way pros do.
Videos? I had two copies of LR5 (bought one for me, and one for my daughter), then there came botched LR6 upgrade, with no upgrade option in Russia; I'd have to buy two new copies of LR6, and that at 20% or so markup because Adobe only sells LR for rubles in Russia at their own insane exchange rate. Result? F** them, no more Adobe software for me, ever. I bought ACDSee Ultimate, and vast majority educational LuLa's videos suddenly became irrelevant (this includes C1 too; there's no way I'll even let myself locked with an "import into catalog"...)
Articles? Still enjoying many of them. Some (e.g. recent one on street photography, or Michael's article on landscape photography with long lenses) still do count as educational, of sorts, but vast majority of those that I do like fall strictly into "entertainment" category. Not long ago, I bought "Perfect Composition" video by Tim Cooper ($50, highly recommended), and I do not even see this topic represented at LuLa. I feel like my curiosity and desire to improve is better served by B&H photo tutorials on YouTube (it was there that I stumbled upon Tim Cooper, BTW). To me, the art of photography is subdivided into "composition" and "pixel peeping" (with the latter including color management), and I'd like the former to be [better] represented at LuLa, which is currently not the case.
Forums? Well... LuLa forums are good, but IMHO not as good as some tend to think. Yes, true experts, yes, big names, but when it comes to SNR, they are not [much] better than those of DPR -- with the true artists being so hyper-sensitive that any any disagreement has high chances of turning into childish sh!t-throwing exercise. I don't think I ever saw "Ignoring posts from <list-of-names>" in member's signature on any other forum... BTW, I've been reading LuLa almost from its inception, but only "discovered" its forums only few years ago... And I didn't feel like "oh I lost all those years!"; in fact, I only registered when it became necessary for site access.
Needless to say, all that is IMHO; just trying to provide honest feedback, as someone who wants LuLa to succeed.
-
Forums? Well... LuLa forums are good, but IMHO not as good as some tend to think. Yes, true experts, yes, big names, but when it comes to SNR, they are not [much] better than those of DPR -- with the true artists being so hyper-sensitive that any any disagreement has high chances of turning into childish sh!t-throwing exercise. I don't think I ever saw "Ignoring posts from <list-of-names>" in member's signature on any other forum... BTW, I've been reading LuLa almost from its inception, but only "discovered" its forums only few years ago... And I didn't feel like "oh I lost all those years!"; in fact, I only registered when it became necessary for site access.
I would agree with your enumeration of the forums. They could be so much better. But there seems to be this small group that in intent on bringing down any discussion to the level of personal attacks and insults.
-
This forum is no more or less than what its contributors make it.
If the forum suffers from posts that are detrimental to its overall tone, use the Report to Moderator function for goodness sake. Moderation is really only swung into action by that one function. We will never be able to read every post of every thread.
-
Avoid personal attacks please. Stick to the topic or the thread will be locked.
Chris
It would be appreciated if there was some moderation of snarky, sneering and sarcastic jibes that, while not actually personal attacks, incite bad feelings and result in the type of posts that get threads closed. Attack the disease at its root. One pro-paywall poster in this thread would have made a couple of dozen comments in that category already. Not reportable, but generally corrosive. Best Regards, Arg.
-
It would be appreciated if there was some moderation of snarky, sneering and sarcastic jibes that, while not actually personal attacks, incite bad feelings and result in the type of posts that get threads closed.
Well, you have the ability to ignore (not respond) to anything posted on LuLa. Do you really expect a moderator to "protect you" from posts that might possibly offend? You have unreasonable expectations of moderation...moderation must be done by yourself. If it offends, it is up to you to decide how to react. You can't control the actions of others, only your reaction to what others may post. You are in control, do you really want to cede that to others? Obviously, I don't :~)
-
If a visitor comes to us from a link they should see the article free.
If you are serious about this, could you please fix the current situation in which it is not possible to see an article like "Do Sensors Out Resolve Lenses?" (https://luminous-landscape.com/do-sensors-out-resolve-lenses/) without subscribing to your site?
There also is an error with the attribution of this article. I don't exactly remember who contributed it to your site, but the author was definitely not Mr. Reichmann (as is currently claimed).
If you discover that actually don't want outside links to allow people to continue reading the articles for free then I hope your agreement with your past authors covers the case of having their content hidden behind a paywall. Perhaps for some authors the aspect of exposure was important and you appeared to have now changed the terms of any past deal with external authors (unless they were already told that their content may potentially disappear behind a paywall at some point).
-
You have unreasonable expectations of moderation...moderation must be done by yourself.
This would work in a private head-to-head discussion.
However, in a public forum, with a retreat caused by the other party becoming abrasive there is always the problem of apparent tacit approval to the other party's arguments or position.
You can't control the actions of others, only your reaction to what others may post.
In a good forum, you can control the actions of others in the form of notifying behaviour that is detrimental to the culture of discussion to moderators.
You are in control, do you really want to cede that to others? Obviously, I don't :~)
How is asking for additional help against forum members whose behaviour hurts the whole forum a case of "ceding" control?
Are you against police forces in real life as well? According to you it is just a matter of how to respond to criminals and you don't want to "cede" control to anyone else away from you.
-
... in a public forum, with a retreat caused by the other party becoming abrasive there is always the problem of apparent tacit approval to the other party's arguments or position. ...
Then don't retreat, respond. Flight or fight. Or faint.
...In a good forum, you can control the actions of others in the form of notifying behaviour that is detrimental to the culture of discussion to moderators
Which is already the case.
-
I see some hyper sensitive fan boys (‘boy’ as in immature, not mentally grown up) here, protecting this forum with all that they have. Some of them are bulk-writers, having written more than 5000 posts, mostly without any interesting content. Unfortunately these boys are not aware that their behavior has a negative influence on how this forum is perceived.
If you really want to defend and contribute to this forum then think for a moment about the perception that the readers have on your post. Are you with your contribution really helping Michael with this and make it a great forum?
I expect that some are even offended by this very text and that they have a need to attack. Well, that’s fine of course. Nevertheless the previous paragraph remains still valid.
-
I see some hyper sensitive fan boys (‘boy’ as in immature, not mentally grown up) here, protecting this forum with all that they have. Some of them are bulk-writers, having written more than 5000 posts, mostly without any interesting content. Unfortunately these boys are not aware that their behavior has a negative influence on how this forum is perceived.
If you really want to defend and contribute to this forum then think for a moment about the perception that the readers have on your post. Are you with your contribution really helping Michael with this and make it a great forum?
Indeed. I recall a particularly well-written and pertinent post a little while ago by someone who had obviously drunk deep from your well of inspiration:
I seem to have a different opinion than most of you. Let me first mention that a subscription of $12 a year is perfectly doable for me. However, I smell Kevin’s and Michael’s GREED here and I must say I hate greed!
Jeremy
-
Hehe. When I sold most of my Canon stuff in mid-2006 the DO was one of two EF lenses I kept. Now that the Metabones Canon-to-Sony adapters are maturing I'll likely get one and put the DO back in play. The reason I kept it: after getting a 5D in 2005 I found the DO to be soft along the left edge & so sent it to Canon for repair/recalibration. They did a terrific job, which persuaded me to hang onto the lens.
-Dave-
I retained all my Canon gear, so I bought into Sony rather than "switched"... And I got Metabones adapter, of course, Mark IV.
The 70-300 DO works OK with it. Definitely focuses much worse than on 5DII, up to the point that when I first tried a6000 with 70-300 DO, I thought it just won't work, just like 50/1.4 (for which Metabones have specific note on their site), but no, it was just massive hunting on the first subject that I tried... Then again, I did not update adapter's firmware yet; release notes for it stated they improved focusing with A7 w/PDAF line, and no word on a6000, but the latter still uses same on-sensor phase-detection, so I'm going to give it a try and see...
So this combo is definitely not for BIF and other such stuff (though with FW update even that might be possible), but works great for compressed landscapes. Speaking of which: that's one more thing that... I'd say Michael introduced me to, so yeah, thanks again ;)
-
I see some hyper sensitive fan boys (‘boy’ as in immature, not mentally grown up) here, protecting this forum with all that they have. Some of them are bulk-writers, having written more than 5000 posts, mostly without any interesting content. Unfortunately these boys are not aware that their behavior has a negative influence on how this forum is perceived.
If you really want to defend and contribute to this forum then think for a moment about the perception that the readers have on your post. Are you with your contribution really helping Michael with this and make it a great forum?
Indeed. I recall a particularly well-written and pertinent post a little while ago by someone who had obviously drunk deep from your well of inspiration:
Quote from: JaapD on November 24, 2015, 08:12:32 AM
I seem to have a different opinion than most of you. Let me first mention that a subscription of $12 a year is perfectly doable for me. However, I smell Kevin’s and Michael’s GREED here and I must say I hate greed!
Jeremy
Nice one Jeremy. Did you take the precaution of reviewing ALL of your posts for any discretions? Do you want me to do it for you? ;) ;D
-
This forum is no more or less than what its contributors make it.
If the forum suffers from posts that are detrimental to its overall tone, use the Report to Moderator function for goodness sake. Moderation is really only swung into action by that one function. We will never be able to read every post of every thread.
Trust me Chris, your sanity depends on you not doing so!
Actually, though, I think this place is very well run; as mentioned earier, it is essentially what the contibutions allow it to be. As in all societies, there are those with quick minds and others who compensate with quick fists. In general, the latter will always lose the argument/discussion? because they simply fail to understand even when they might, by fluke, have been ceded a point, if only by their adversary's utter boredom with the topic to hand.
;-)
Rob C
-
I think that this thread (at 28 pages) has run its useful course.
Many thanks to all those who have made suggestions on our new setup - always appreciated.
Chris