Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: narikin on December 05, 2013, 04:38:55 pm
-
Dear LuLa,
You have been a source of great information and useful technical advice over the years, and this is hard to say, but... recently you have become a tiresome series of advertisements for your own workshops, video promotions, and endless 'essays on creativity' or 'composition' etc.
You current 'what's new' page has:
1: Antarctic Workshop
2: Antarctic Workshop
3: Antarctic Workshop
4: Video sale Canada to Mexico
5: PODAS Workshop Experience
6: Video sale Ctein(might be interesting, but have to pay to view)
This is all dragging the site down, and I barely come here except for the forums. Please, please, try to get away from such self-promotion and pushing 'workshops' at us forever. Announce it once, then leave it. Stop the pointless 'creativity' essays that are of no use and quite frankly, miss the point.
It's exciting times, and we are all looking to find our way in this brave new world that is digital photography. When was there last an article on printers and printing? On custom profiling options? On new papers? Comparing Raw processors? On the new super lenses - Zeiss Otus vs Leica Apo Summicron; On sensor technology - Fuji's 6 matrix vs Foveon vs standard Bayer; on Art sales and editions? On XL printing; on latest dedicated Black and White sensor technology; on the new generation MF tech camera lenses - the list goes on and on.
Please get back to what you do best, and what has the broadest interest, otherwise you're just becoming another camera club newsletter. All this is said with much affection and wishes for a long future to you, so please take it as that!
-
When most people look at the What's New page they look at just the top one or two items.
The rest is history.
We need to sell our videos and workshops to remain in business. Such is the nature of what we do.
Sorry if it upsets you.
There is no change from the way things have been for about 14 years. We have always advertised our products on What's New.
Michael
-
There is no change from the way things have been for about 14 years. We have always advertised our products on What's New.
Michael
Well, I luv LL too, but the tenor seems to have changed in the last year. I'm not complaining, just commenting.
-
Part of the change is because we have become educated digitally. Early on there were many discoveries about the medium and its tools; ETTR, diffraction and its effects, bit depth, dynamic range, HDR and so on. Technical articles followed by related threads in the forums went on for months, even years. In addition many articles were devoted to the details of the tools in CS, LR, C1 and in the various plugins. We have become very familiar now with digital concepts and the techniques employed by the tools.
Never the less, I find something new here every day on my visits to the site. Keep up the good work and keep finding better ideas.
-
...recently you have become a tiresome series of advertisements for your own workshops, video promotions, and endless 'essays on creativity' or 'composition' etc.
...This is all dragging the site down, and I barely come here except for the forums. Please, please, try to get away from such self-promotion and pushing 'workshops' at us forever. Announce it once, then leave it....Please get back to what you do best, and what has the broadest interest, otherwise you're just becoming another camera club newsletter. All this is said with much affection and wishes for a long future to you, so please take it as that!
Yes, it is tough to be weaned off a free lunch but a big 'thank-you' to all those who through their readership, purchases of videos, advertising space and workshops help support us and this site.
-
I'm perfectly happy to shift through things I'm not interested in or not going to purchase in order to have the content here without a subscription fee. There are a lot of things here to attract me, but chief among them is the knowledge on the forum. Quality content, no matter how it's delivered, doesn't come without some means of paying the bills. Website owners either have merchandise of their own for sale, click through partner plans or a combination of both and more. What really burns my butt is paying for an email service and still getting advertising.
-
I don't think that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
There has been a bit of an hiatus recently with regard to digital stills photography but there have, in fact, been some interesting developments on the video side. LuLa, has actually documented these rather well with several in-depth reviews in the last few months.
Hopefully Canon in particular will break the drought with a new body or two that will break new ground and give us all something to talk about.
I agree that most of the ground has been well covered with regard to sensors and their technology, how to expose, post-processing and the available software, from a technical and conceptual perspective.
How best to employ our tools artistically and aesthetically remains a valid point of debate.
Although the question of the advertising is a separate one the value of the workshops and expeditions themselves should not be underestimated. Personally, I would fight dragons to do a trip to Antarctica with a bunch of enthusiastic fellow shutterbugs.
In summary, I would like to congratulate Michael, Chris, and the rest of the LuLa team for successfully negotiating LuLa through what are proving to be increasingly choppy waters.
Take a bow
Tony Jay
-
Long-time lurker; frequent purchaser. I agree with the original post insofar as content is concerned. I don't care about the ads, but something has changed; the site is just less interesting and the focus has changed quite a bit over the years. The jury is still out with respect to whether LULA has "successfully navigated" anything.
On the other hand, if Michael and Chris are correct that nothing has changed (with respect to the site), then maybe some of us have changed. There is a lot of substantive content out there and I find myself increasingly looking elsewhere.
Not intended as a criticism, just one consumer's opinion. But I'll still check in daily!
Bill McClure
-
Interesting points Bill.
As clarification LuLa has never been a one-stop shop for me.
As excellent as the content, and the debate, is here other sites cater better for certain, more niche, content.
What cannot be substituted, at any price, is the massive number of experienced photographers who are prepared to lend that experience, either through the forums or via more formalised content.
Again, the fact that many of these submissions leads to robust debate rather than passive acceptance provides a fantastic educational environment.
As to perceived success in these endeavours success should, at the very least, be acknowledged in terms of sheer survival. Many similar websites have perished in recent years due to a combination of factors that together constitute a very savage Darwinian environment.
The fact that certain things have changed as a result are inevitable.
The infrastructure behind this website cannot exist as a charity - real money is required.
Despite the challenges, not least from his own health, Michael has managed to expand operations.
He has done this without becoming anybody's 'bum-boy'.
There is no doubt that Michael had a strong vision years ago when he established LuLa and despite the massive quantum shift that has occurred in the world on many levels in the last few years, IMHO anyway, that vision is as strong as ever.
The personal integrity of Michael and Chris has stood as a bulwark against many potential temptations that would have reduced LuLa to a shadow of its former self.
LuLa has done much better than mere 'survival'.
It has managed to uphold its vision and thrive in a difficult world environment.
So, lets give credit where credit is due.
Tony Jay
-
I regularly check older articles for interesting stuff to learn.
and still have not read everything, the site is not yet exhausted for me.
And actually I find the articles about creative topics increasingly interesting.
They are not all what I'd wish, but when mining the site for content, I still find myself digging out gems.
What I like most here is, that many topics discussed to death on the net -often by wannabe experts and people are more loud than competent-
are put into a right perspective and context from people whose experience and judgement I can really trust.
Cheers
~Chris
-
A site like this survives from the sales of its products. so advertising is needed, I have no problems with that. Over the years, the content has shifted a bit from photography to video, which to me is less interesting.
I like very much the essays on the creative and artistic side, from regular contributors. Even though sometimes the content in such essays sounds to me like the authors are using the opportunity to promote their own workshops and events...
On the whole, I have been following this site for more than 10 years, and it is still top quality.
-
These critical posts crop up now and again, and always surprise me: it's free, for heaven's sake, and everything in life exept mother's love has to be paid for in one manner or another - there is absolutely no obligation to buy anything, and neither is there obligation to read adverts.
Were I in the market for buying trips, I'd rather do them in the company of people whose talents I can see in front of my nose than by a set of cellphone wielders - I can do that by myself quite well.
I am not overly bothered by any 'lack' of equipment reviews either: I have what I need and/or can afford, and the rest of photography, the personal part, what I shoot, is my responsibility; there is no need for others to tell me what I could explore, and if I were that challenged in the imagination area, I'd be best giving up on any visual medium altogether. But perhaps I've preached that before.
Insofar as complaints I may have: nothing to do with the management of LuLa, and everything to do with the contributors; we get what we are, and if we don't have the wit to make the content gripping, then isn't that sort of our failure? Its surprising to me when I think of the high number of readers we get, regular as well as passing trade, that there are so few people posting images. There is so much noise made about the zillions of pix available all over the Internet, yet we still receive ours from a regular minority of viewers. This may be a good thing or it may not; whatever the truth, I have seen a lot of great imagery here and for those who venture into the MF/Pro(ish) zone, some really top-grade material is availble just for the looking. There are talented car photographers, architectural and fashion/advertising guys posting there - what's not to like? And they answer questions and give real advice.
LuLa's a kind of party in someone else's home; it gets as good as the guests make it: the hosts provide venue and a lot of home cheer. We can make it swing or just collect our coats at ten or eleven o'clock and retire home to bed.
Rob C
-
LuLa's a kind of party in someone else's home; it gets as good as the guests make it: the hosts provide venue and a lot of home cheer. We can make it swing or just collect our coats at ten or eleven o'clock and retire home to bed.
EXACTLY!!!
That's why I think it's a shame when polite criticism at the site style is being met with "well, that's the way it is, we've got bills to pay, like it or lump it". People making this critical posts do so because they WANT to make it swing. They DON'T want to collect their coats and go home. But if the host doesn't sometimes listen to his guests, chances are that the party will end sooner rather than later. And with the LuLa party, that would be such a shame!
-
EXACTLY!!!
That's why I think it's a shame when polite criticism at the site style is being met with "well, that's the way it is, we've got bills to pay, like it or lump it". People making this critical posts do so because they WANT to make it swing. They DON'T want to collect their coats and go home. But if the host doesn't sometimes listen to his guests, chances are that the party will end sooner rather than later. And with the LuLa party, that would be such a shame!
I think it would help a lot, if people would think more about what they contribute to the site than what they get from it, especially since its free.
This does not necessarily have to be an article or something, but behavior on the forums as well.
Its like "Mommy what do we get to eat today?" against "Mommy can I help you with something?".
I think friendly critique is totally okay, and the critique presented here is not over the line I think, but sometimes my impression is we are soooo spoiled here that regression becomes an issue at times. ;)
-
I have no problems with your ads, the links to B&H, etc - understood you have costs and server fees to pay. I can often click the links, as I choose.
Do workshops make money for the actual site, or the leaders simply get a free trip etc?
Yes indeed it is as good as the contributors make it, us users in the forum (I have been active in there with my 30+ years of knowledge), and you as owners who write, commission and encourage content.
I would love to read about focus stacking, now that digital lenses are optimized at much shallower apertures. About using panoramic stitching software and nodal point work. Always interested in digital MF systems, about printing images, etc. I'd love an interview with Sigma about the amazing Foveon sensors, and where they will take that, with the Sony engineers of the 7R. Or a hard questioning interview with Canon and why they have just about given up on still photography.
Furthermore, you have an embarrassment of riches in knowledgeable expert contributors in the forums - there's virtually nowhere else like this - so why not get some to expand on their skills in reviews, articles or features?
-
As publisher of this site I hear what you are saying. We have been quite busy on a number of projects.
The LuLa team passion is very strong when it comes to photography and staying current. We have been very fortunate lately to have a number of super contributors who are members of the forum as well as some well known photographers writing some very interesting articles for us. We recently published Sculpting With Light (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/techniques/sculpting_with_light.shtml) as well as Introduction To Astro Photography (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/night_sky___astrophotography.shtml). We have articles planned in the not so distant future on the current state of HDR and as you ask focus stacking and pano techniques. Michael has written some great articles lately and Mark Dubovoy's last article was a real discussion opener. We also have some very interesting videos planned and in current production for our video subscribers. And, we will also be launching over the next few weeks a whole new line up of workshops for 2014 and 2015. There are some great articles in our queue right now and a number more being created. Also, any member of this forum is welcome to submit and article for publication. Information on writing for us can be found Here . . . (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/about/write_for_luminous_landscape.shtml)
All I can say is stay tuned. I am now 120% focused on Luminous-Landscape. Being friends with Michael for many years I know we both share the same passion for this site as well as photography and are dedicated to all the readers that visit us each month. And, Chris has been working on a lot of video projects. Our new subscription video service is quite a deal and you'll be seeing more releases over the coming weeks and months, not to mention a good number currently in the planning stages.
This is a business though and we need to keep this business viable and profitable. As a three man team we work hard to make sure there is good and different material that you can't find elsewhere. If you want technical reviews there are plenty of places to go for that. If you want hands on reviews, that we have been doing for a long time and will continue to do. Michael has posted some great reviews on the new Olympus, Sony, Panasonic and BlackMagic cameras. There are others currently in progress.
We always welcome ideas and feedback. As we move forward some folks may be saying LuLa is changing. Well, change is inevitable no matter what. I hope you see what we do here as a positive evolution.
Kevin Raber
-
Yes, the Lula team are great salesman, on this site and in past business ventures. Otherwise they wouldn't be able to play with their toys. I've been coming to this site since 2000 and have learned quite a bit. I'm enjoying the fact that there has been a pause in technology of DSLRs. We are now forced to talk about more important topics that makes photography meaningful. My favorite article about products was on Hasselblad's recycled technology for the rich. I'd love to have a camera with sequins or rhinestones. Lula provides an interesting livingroom for discussion with people I otherwise would not have contact with. Still it does get a bit out of control when people miss the big picture and start teasing everything apart through pointless bickering, but that is the nature of the beast. I was a little disappointed that one had to pay $10 just to hear an interview with Ctien but it was good. On the other hand I think Lloyd Chambers site is crazy. Really pay just to read his reviews? Still plenty are willing to pay. I figure Michael will invite me to be his cabin boy on next years Antarctica trip. I'll crash out up on the deck in a fluffy sleeping bag.
-
Between 2003 and 2008 (approximately) the rate of change and innovation was staggering. An entire industry was transforming from film to digital. There was a lot of new technology to understand and there was a rapid explosion in digital capture and processing techniques using these new cameras and software. Quality and usability improvements were substantial and easily noticed.
The rate of change has leveled off. The Digital Imaging Bubble has ended. Innovations are far more incremental than revolutionary. The excitement has settled down and left behind those of us who are truly passionate about making images to trudge on as we did before the bubble. It is the natural progression of things. There is interesting stuff to read and talk about, but we don't have the great epiphanies like we did before when we explored the depths of ETTR, panoramic stitching, HDR, focus stacking, exposure blending, advanced raw processing, and etc.... This cooling-off is perhaps a good thing. We can settle back and focus on our craft instead of our tools. So it is no surprise to me that the photography articles here and elsewhere are a bit less revolutionary.
As for monetization of LuLa...MEH, It's Michael's brand to do with as he pleases. He is gracious to put up with the hassles that come with hosting these forums. He acknowledges how he benefits from the LuLa community. The relationship is symbiotic.
What is the next big thing that will shake-up digital imaging? I don't know. Maybe this is it. Maybe we have tapped out the technology? Maybe not, but when you figure it out, make sure and tell the rest of us so we can beat it do death for a few months.
-
I tend to agree with the OP somewhat, however I'm also quite prepared to ignore the minor discomfort that the change of emphasis - which I perceive too - entails. And I don't particularly like the way I have to navigate the browser window away from the ads to examine the current article content: but many excellent pieces are still free and it's hardly distressing.
I don't know how many users of the site feel an identification with contributors who note that this is their "nineteenth trip to Antarctica" - or something similar - but I'd guess that relatively few of us have the prospect of ever making such a trip: we have to eke out our photographic opportunities from more modest locations. But there's plenty of free content and a distinguished set of contributors to the site. Could be a lot worse... Just don't go all Adobe on us.
Roy
-
Frankly, though I enjoy reading the articles and purchase the occasional tutorial, the real reason I visit this site daily is the forums. Personally, I think the site has developed a more "monetized" feel to it, and I prefer the feel of the funkier older days. That said, a lot of work obviously goes into the site, not to mention establishing it to what it is today, and I can't see any legitimate basis to begrude Michael et al any income they can generate from it. It's easy enough to bookmark straight to the forums if you don't like the rest of the site.
-
I am now 120% focused on Luminous-Landscape.
Kevin Raber
Holy mother of Ansel, even arithmatic is being Rabered!
My 0.02 USD: the site HAS changed (the changes are obvious), and will continue to change. I ate heartily from the "free lunch", and remain indebted to Michael (and others) for generously sharing their knowledge. He did, and continues to do, a great service to Photography. I also purchased numerous videos (most recently the interview with Ctein). I also (full disclosure) block as many ads (from all WWW sites) as I can (using, among others, AdBlock — recommended). Sites I frequent that allow subscriptions, I subscribe to (e.g.: Reid Reviews — also recommended). I do not expect to subscribe to LuLa. Video remains, for me, a slow, clumsy, and usually un-ordered means of knowledge transmission. The recent editorial content — verbal and visual — has not interested _me_. I use Aperture (I'm a Certified Pro), and do not use LightRoom.
Am I sorry to see LuLa change? Yes.
Do I matter to LuLa? No.
Should a publisher ever publish the statement I quoted? You decide.
-
Lula is and continues to be, the #1 hangout for anyone who is serious and passionate about their photography and is run by people who are serious and passionate about their photography, long may it continue...
Dave
-
Lula is for me one of the few sites i find interesting enough to visit daily;
The content of the forum and the articles are feeded by people who usually know what they are talking about.
I have learned a great deal through Lula.
In the age of internet there is loads of information- the problem now is to filter the valid information.
Lula is such a filter and doing a good job, now and before.
Thanks to Michael and his team and all the people the site has attracted to its forum.
So thank you all! :)
-
totally agree with two posts immediately above
-
... I am now 120% focused on Luminous-Landscape...
And it shows ;)
-
Lula is and continues to be, the #1 hangout for anyone who is serious and passionate about their photography and is run by people who are serious and passionate about their photography, long may it continue...
Dave
Agreed, it is pitched at an audience that is pretty clued up technically and that is appreciated. More recently I feel it has lost it's way, the strength has been technical discussion and I'm not sure articles on creativity etc. have been very good, there are certainly a couple of contributors I could do without reading anything from.
-
Agreed, it is pitched at an audience that is pretty clued up technically and that is appreciated. More recently I feel it has lost it's way, the strength has been technical discussion and I'm not sure articles on creativity etc. have been very good, there are certainly a couple of contributors I could do without reading anything from.
Mark, technical is easy: it's pretty much black and white and how-to.
Scribbling well about creativity is impossible because of our old friend: subjectivity. What pleases one segment will inflame another, or, worse, bore him to sleep. Apart from the ulcer of objectivity, writing about art requires a very clear view from the bridge, and I suspect that most of us who find ourselves paddling in that particular swamp lack a clear view of anything; were it not so, I doubt we'd find ourselves in such a mess in the first place! I suspect that the world of art is the general depository of the bewildered.
Rob C
-
Mark, technical is easy: it's pretty much black and white and how-to.
Scribbling well about creativity is impossible because of our old friend: subjectivity. What pleases one segment will inflame another, or, worse, bore him to sleep. Apart from the ulcer of objectivity, writing about art requires a very clear view from the bridge, and I suspect that most of us who find ourselves paddling in that particular swamp lack a clear view of anything; were it not so, I doubt we'd find ourselves in such a mess in the first place! I suspect that the world of art is the general depository of the bewildered.
Rob C
Rob - with all due respect to your age and experience - I find your last sentence naive.
Its much worse.
Humanity itself is the incarnation of bewilderment.
I think this thread is reflecting the upcoming X-mas regression and winter blues.
We want more presents !
Where is mommy?
I want ... I want ... I want ... MMMMOOOOOOAAAARRRRRRR ....
After new years eve it will all become better...
:D
Cheers
~Chris
-
Rob - with all due respect to your age and experience - I find your last sentence naive.
Its much worse.
Humanity itself is the incarnation of bewilderment.
I think this thread is reflecting the upcoming X-mas regression and winter blues.
We want more presents !
Where is mommy?
I want ... I want ... I want ... MMMMOOOOOOAAAARRRRRRR ....
After new years eve it will all become better...
:D
Cheers
~Chris
You don't want to quote that: if you do, you endanger us all to another bout of the Goldens!
;-)
Rob C
-
Thank you all for your observations.
What I learned many years ago is that the truism "You can't please all of the people all of the time" is in fact true. What a surprise.
So instead, what I have tried to do is write about and publish what interests me. This now applies with Kevin as well, since we see almost eye-to-eye on everything related to LuLa.
Fourteen years ago, when this was one of the only places on the net where reliable information on digital technology and image processing was available, we served one purpose. Now we are more focused on other aspects of photography and serve another. We don't try and satisfy any one type of reader. We simply try and satisfy ourselves.
As a consequence some people will be left behind. Some will find a greater attraction. That's simply the nature of a web site that has more than 1 million people visiting every month. There is no common factor to be met or attended to. So, we do what we wish, and we answer to no one except ourselves.
If your interests match ours to one extent or another, that's great. Welcome. If not, sorry to say goodby.
Any other course of action on our part would be frustrating to the max, because we would find ourselves torn in a million directions.
Michael
-
Absolutely the attitude required to live rather than merely exist or survive.
Well done.
I hope you continue on this track long into the future.
-
Absolutely the attitude required to live rather than merely exist or survive.
Well done.
I hope you continue on this track long into the future.
+100.
-
Michael, I took the original post as constructive feedback, but it appears that is neither wanted or valued.
The arrogance is astounding.
I wish you and your millions of fanboys the best.
Bye, bye
Bill McClure
-
Bye, bye
Bill McClure
See ya...don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out :~)
-
"the site is just less interesting and the focus has changed quite a bit over the years."
-
"the site is just less interesting and the focus has changed quite a bit over the years."
And, your point is?
If the site is less interesting to some but more to others what is the problem?
This stuff averages out over time...if you give it time.
-
If some don't find this site to be up to the standard they think it should be then it would be interesting to see what they consider to be "better"?
-
If the site is less interesting to some but more to others what is the problem?
This stuff averages out over time...if you give it time.
Not necessarily. Sometimes sites stay relevant and some become completely irrelevant and completely vanish.
One of the things I always liked about LuLa were the informed articles about the new technology and equipment in photography. Obviously this is a maturing market, so there will be less need for this sort of thing. But I'd imagine a lot of forum users also came here originally because of those kind of articles, so that needs to be borne in mind.
And being rude to new folks is probably not a good idea.
See ya...don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out :~)
-
And being rude to new folks is probably not a good idea.
Quote from: Schewe on Today at 02:50:21 AM
See ya...don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out :~)
Michael, I took the original post as constructive feedback, but it appears that is neither wanted or valued.
The arrogance is astounding.
I wish you and your millions of fanboys the best.
Bye, bye
Bill McClure
I think this was rude and Jeff's reply appropriate? He is no longer a "new folk" but one who has voluntarily departed. :o
-
If some don't find this site to be up to the standard they think it should be then it would be interesting to see what they consider to be "better"?
Exactly; they might also try to set up one of their own and grow that...
I think that LuLa has several things very much going for it, quite apart from the 'what's new' sort of thing which will probably please those people still buying stuff and filled with the dream that the next lens or body will ring the doorbell to heaven.
For myself, probably atypical of most Internet travellers, I enjoy some of the regular writers here and much appreciate the digital help that I've had, willingly offered, by a lot of folks in sections where I don't normally contribute anything other than SOS signals; to me, that's pretty cool!
Additionally, I rather like the overall attitude of the 'management' which is not hung up on strict disciplines of one sort or the other, and allows conversations to develop naturally, which for myself, makes reading and writing interesting. Tied to what would amount to a digital remodelling of people and their nature, a strict 1 or 0 thing, I doubt I would have lasted this long; as it is, I've felt disenchanted a couple of times but that was to do with assholes in particular and not the site and its denizens in general. We have a great thing going here - let's hope it continues to support the freedoms that it does right now.
Rob C
-
Michael, I took the original post as constructive feedback, but it appears that is neither wanted or valued.
The arrogance is astounding.
I wish you and your millions of fanboys the best.
Bye, bye
Bill McClure
Bill, I think the post was taken as constructive feed back and Michael has thanked people for their views. However I do actually admire the fact that he is honest about his motivations in running LuLa and is sticking to his (and now Kevin's) gut feeling about how the site should evolve. It cannot be run by a committee of hundreds of visitors and Michael and Kevin did not ask for this post either. Seeing as the vast majority of the visitors to LuLa do not contribute either financially or in the forums at all, they cannot aim to please everyone. Perhaps a PM to the sites owners would be more appreciated if you feel strongly about something rather than posting in the forums (though I appreciate you did not start this thread). Yes the site has changed, and I do find less to interest me - though there have been some excellent articles recently too.
Keep it up Lula - I might even consider a subscription!
Jim
-
Truth is, I found little "constructive" in the OP "comments".
The desire for certain tests is understandable. I'd like to see them as well. But we do what we can do, and hope that others in the industry fulfill unanswered needs. We don't see it as our mission to satisfy everyone's requests.
Articles on printing? Really? Between our articles, reviews and video tutorials this site has published more about printing than anyone else on the web. Literally more, not hyperbolically. The sad truth though is that the printing side of digital imaging has hit the wall, with little really new by way of printers, papers and inks in some four years. In fact, I forecast this on these pages three years ago. The technology had made rapid advancements over the previous ten years and then plateaued.
But, enough of this. If people think me rude, then so be it. Having a hissy fit and storming off simply shows immaturity, but frankly if someone does I don't give a shit. We have 999,999 other people to try and satisfy. Oh yes, and ourselves first and foremost.
Michael
-
I wouldn't worry about it Michael, some will come and some will go, it is the nature of the business, but I think you will find the vast majority of us are going to remain here for the long haul :)
Dave
-
Michael and lula team,
You have learned little from the previous posts except that some of what you are doing is pleasing most of your readers. With only 3 pages of comments most viewers are abstaining from commenting, so I would like to commend you and your team for having a very educational and fun site.
The complainers didn't put the hours in, put up the monies to travel and gather the facts. But best of all they come to your site, whether they want to or not is not the question. They come because they have to if they want the facts, where else are they going to go. Michael your strongest point is that you have surrounded your self with people in the industry that help LULU tell the real story.
Regards
-
Michael and lula team,
You have learned little from the previous posts except that some of what you are doing is pleasing most of your readers. With only 3 pages of comments most viewers are abstaining from commenting, so I would like to commend you and your team for having a very educational and fun site.
The complainers didn't put the hours in, put up the monies to travel and gather the facts. But best of all they come to your site, whether they want to or not is not the question. They come because they have to if they want the facts, where else are they going to go. Michael your strongest point is that you have surrounded your self with people in the industry that help LULU tell the real story.
Regards
Lulu is a Scots lass; even more importantly, a Glaswegian one: she can tell her own story - and quite forcefully at that, should she need so to do!
;-)
Rob C
-
And, your point is?
If the site is less interesting to some but more to others what is the problem?
This stuff averages out over time...if you give it time.
I will give it time. I don't know of a better site, which is not really saying much these days frankly. Maybe I am just outgrowing these type of forums or maybe you guys have just run out of steam or both. Frankly maybe I think the whole industry is in the doldrums-very little being offered which is really exciting and all forums maybe reflect that. Digital is no longer a revolution, increased resolution is an "ok that's nice, ho-hum", IQ increase is largely incremental. What is there to get excited about? Mirrorless? Seriously? Another trip to a well traveled region like Iceland or the Antarctic? That was interesting a few years ago, but not really now. Another moronic article on the ubiquitous overcooked landscapes? I think not.
It appears as though you guys are not really interested in any criticism, constructive or otherwise but literally the only thing I continue to find worth checking in here everyday is the thread on "Recent Professional Works 2" where pros around the world (many in my own field) show what they are working on.
-
Michael, well stated. Enough said.
Jed
-
I think it's unfair to suggest that they're not interested in criticism. Sometimes it will resonate with them, other times it won't - they're just being honest.
It's like posts complaining about printers or cameras - a few vocal examples does not a market make. It's important those concerns and examples are made and recorded, but there shouldn't be any expectation of instant or mass change as a result.
-
I think it's unfair to suggest that they're not interested in criticism. Sometimes it will resonate with them, other times it won't - they're just being honest.
It's like posts complaining about printers or cameras - a few vocal examples does not a market make. It's important those concerns and examples are made and recorded, but there shouldn't be any expectation of instant or mass change as a result.
Well said.
-
Aloha,
I have read and re-read things on this site for nearly a decade, is that possible?
I needed a place to get information after I switched to Digital Photography, and maybe a place to get affirmation in regards, to the validity of "digital" photography.
It was a big deal for me, I was investing in something that was not particularly well regarded at the time.
It was a time in my life when each dollar counted, and I usually felt pretty confident that the information I read in the articles here would be presented in a very professional manor, and you could "take it to the bank" as they say.
One article on digital work flow was no less than a game changer for the way I handled my digital files!
This site has been a go to place for enjoyment, information and humor (in the forum sections, as the comments degenerate into a screeching tribe of monkeys in the treetops.) for a long time.
To hear some people talk about the changes here in a negative way to me is just nonsense. Today's insights given FOR FREE! By Alain Briot offered some very timely for me thoughts in regards to Business; "Its' the marketing Stupid" :-)
Three years ago I took the plunge, and started earning my living Full time as a photographer, something I had dreamed about and had been working towards for a very long time. (nothing you can't accomplish with 14 hour days!)
On February 1st, I will take over a full gallery space in a very high end location. (or maybe 16 hour days!)
For all the time effort and content I personally owe a very large thank you, to Luminous landscape and everyone connected with it, just well done, in every respect, even the boring stuff is ok...
Luminous Landscape has always been a very fine place and I am sure will continue to uphold its well earned reputation, irregardless of what a very small minority of people have to say.
I am sure there are countless, numbers of photographers, like me that have similar stories and owe Luminous Landscape a debt of gratitude, so onward and upward to the site!
warmest regards,
Lee Rylee
Honolulu, Hawaii
-
I think it's unfair to suggest that they're not interested in criticism. Sometimes it will resonate with them, other times it won't - they're just being honest.
Really? Have you read their responses above?
-
Yes, Kirk. I read them. I didn't read into them. Important difference.
Take things at face value whenever you can and always give the benefit of any doubt - it makes life a lot easier, particularly on the internet (and I speak with some experience, having been a netizen for nearly 23 years).
-
Never look a gift horse in the mouth...
-
Having been a moderator of a pretty busy and contentious, not-for-profit, photography forum for many years (over 1 million posts, nearly 100,000 threads, 27k members). We have (I am no longer a moderator-too busy with my photography) no need for warm bodies but I think we are more receptive to criticism than what I discern here. This site needs warm bodies so I don't get it.
-
First, part of the problem may be that we have all been beneficiaries of LuLa and thus are much more informed than we use to be, which might make us a bit more/too :) picky.
Second, Michael has left number crunching to others, and for one, I prefer his two cents worth over most other equipment reviews.
Third, making money is good.
Fourth, Michael has a bit of the mama bear in him so be careful about messing with his cub.
-
First, part of the problem may be that we have all been beneficiaries of LuLa and thus are much more informed than we use to be, which might make us a bit more/too :) picky.
Second, Michael has left number crunching to others, and for one, I prefer his two cents worth over most other equipment reviews.
Third, making money is good.
Fourth, Michael has a bit of the mama bear in him so be careful about messing with his cub.
agree completely!
-
Grrrrrrr
-
Looks like Michael's decided to take a quick break from the forum....
(http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1421054!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/bear9n-3-web.jpg)
-
Perhaps he's bearly there?
-
I agree that the forum isn't as interesting as it used to be, but that's because the revolution is over. A few years ago, there were wide variations in the quality of equipment and sensors, and to get the best out of the equipment, you had to climb a pretty steep learning curve. Now, not so much, and the technical stuff has grown increasingly arcane and inane. I do think the forum could use a little refurbishing, a push from the leadership in the direction of aesthetics and technique, and a withdrawal from the emphasis on technology. To take two recent articles as examples (and they were both good.) Mike wrote a good review of the new Sony, but I suspect the interest was extremely limited. Sure, it's a decent camera, but the world is lousy with decent cameras. Then there was the article on landscape astrophotography. I thought it was excellent, and it was one of the few articles I've seen here in the last year or so that made me think, "I gotta do that." With hundreds and possibly thousands of excellent photographers frequenting this site, would it be possible for the management to reach out to certain of those photographers to suggest that an (unpaid) submission on their particular photographic enthusiasm would be welcomed here? A couple of landscape astrophotography-like articles a week would really change this place around, and for the better, I think.
(But I really like it here, and will keep coming back.)
-
I do think the forum could use a little refurbishing, a push from the leadership in the direction of aesthetics and technique, and a withdrawal from the emphasis on technology. To take two recent articles as examples (and they were both good.) Mike wrote a good review of the new Sony, but I suspect the interest was extremely limited. Sure, it's a decent camera, but the world is lousy with decent cameras. Then there was the article on landscape astrophotography. I thought it was excellent, and it was one of the few articles I've seen here in the last year or so that made me think, "I gotta do that." With hundreds and possibly thousands of excellent photographers frequenting this site, would it be possible for the management to reach out to certain of those photographers to suggest that an (unpaid) submission on their particular photographic enthusiasm would be welcomed here?
That option is there and I think it was mentioned earlier in this thread.
With regard to gear, LuLa is not going to compete with DPReview and has never wanted to. But what I always liked LuLa were the more general and longer musings about how a camera worked or didn't work for photographers whilst actually taking photos. Maybe a bit more of that other than in relation to street or landscape photography could be of interest. There are some very good studio photographers in the forums here for example.
Along with more articles like the excellent astro-photography, pretty please.
-
As a publisher myself I'm of the opinion they can do whatever they like. I have though seen a slow shift over the years, as generally as I can tell it's been from how-to's, to essays and musings. I like the how-to's myself. Everything changes though - even Strobist, another of the old greats.
-
Life would be pretty dull if things didn't change.
-
That option is there and I think it was mentioned earlier in this thread.
Information on writing for us can be found Here . . . (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/about/write_for_luminous_landscape.shtml)
As a publisher myself I'm of the opinion they can do whatever they like.
I'm of the opinion they should do whatever they like.
Lula is a business. Most forum users are not customers, we're the product being served to the customers (advertisers).
-
I'm of the opinion they should do whatever they like.
Lula is a business. Most forum users are not customers, we're the product being served to the customers (advertisers).
I have heard the suggestion made elsewhere before about Internet life, much to the effect that if you get it free, it's because you are the product. In some senses it might well be argued thus, but from my point of view, as long as I derive what I want from the Internet experience, just as long as nobody is ripping me off, that it may benefit others is just fine.
I agree with you: they should do exactly as they please. I certainly would. And do.
Rob C
-
I agree with you: as we're mostly not customers, there's not that much basis for complaint about the business.
-
It appears I joined LuLa's forum more than 10 years ago...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It appears I joined LuLa's forum more than 10 years ago...
Cheers,
Bernard
Good grief, Bernard, you're older than I! I'm not quite nine yet, a mere babe.
Tell me, does it get better as one get's older? Do some of the more troublesome urges depart and stop tormenting one? Do things finally balance out?
;-)
Rob C
-
Sheesh, I just looked and I am just a couple of months shy of 10, joined in Feb. 2004. Like most things, it has all changed...and in some ways it is still the same...... ;D
Alan
-
I find it actually more interesting now than when I joined some years ago.
There was a time (short it's true) when even MR was involved with the DoX stuff and all the pseudo scientific BS and that was truly
preocupating because it could have become a Canadian version of DPR. Fortunatly it didn't.
It's more interesting in many ways, Chris video prods are better, the LR stuff with Jeff is truly interesting, there is more to see
and to learn in many aspects and the gear involved are more exciting and diverse than the very few MF gear that were on air.
Michael is playing with whatever falls in his hands, from a GoPro to a Phase and I prefer that than an old boring fox that only shoots film
in a view cam for the art snobery BS. Michael is Young in actitude, update his knowledge with the tech fload, so as the team.
The adverts are not intrusive and great that they make money and sell videos, workshops etc...We all need money, don't we?
Now...the only thing I'm sort of missing are the big useless wars versuses as in the good old days. With Schewe irrupting at one point
kicking in the ass with his non-politicaly-corrected lenguaje; acusations of all sort, Guy M indignation, semantic interpretations etc...
and Michael closing the thread. Then the number 2 appearing just after...re-closed.
This was a gas from time to time.
It became a bit "quiet" recently.
-
Lol. Just a vicious circle Fred that gets nowhere . Seriously not worth my time anymore. I hate bullshit and bad info so it's easier to just ignore it. Besides I have my own personal things to take up a lot of my time. And to top it all off its just boring shit with wash and repeat. LOL
Rather make money. As far as this site, sure it's changed. Not sure for the good or bad but it is what it is, bottom line everyone needs to make money so that's not the issue but it is how one goes about it. Forums have there up and down cycles. That's pretty normal which usually comes when something new hits the streets you see a upswing. But honestly nothing but the same old stuff coming these days. The new Sony is interesting but the more I read the bugs, non features and such is keeping my finger off the buy button.
Be well and Happy Holidays Everyone
-
Now...the only thing I'm sort of missing are the big useless wars versuses as in the good old days. With Schewe irrupting at one point
kicking in the ass with his non-politicaly-corrected lenguaje; acusations of all sort, Guy M indignation, semantic interpretations etc...
and Michael closing the thread. Then the number 2 appearing just after...re-closed.
This was a gas from time to time.
It became a bit "quiet" recently.
Bravo! ;D ;D
-
Now...the only thing I'm sort of missing are the big useless wars versuses as in the good old days. With Schewe irrupting at one point
kicking in the ass with his non-politicaly-corrected lenguaje; acusations of all sort, Guy M indignation, semantic interpretations etc...
and Michael closing the thread. Then the number 2 appearing just after...re-closed.
This was a gas from time to time.
It became a bit "quiet" recently.
Truth be told, I really got sick and tired of the petulant and shrill behavior that some here on LuLa expressed after Adobe announced Photoshop CC and dropped the CS7 perpetual license...in trying to explain the reality of the situation and some of the reasons and thinking from Adobe's point of view, I was tarred and feathered. It was akin to the Salem Witch Hunts where anybody who didn't agree with the "Adobe Haters™" were shouted down and accused of being an apologist or anti-photographer. The whole thing took on an aroma of the Tea Baggers in the US Congress. Irrational and ignorant and mean spirited...honestly, I don't need that sort of bullshyte in my life.
The main reason LuLa has changed is that the industry has changed. Revolution has changed to evolution. There are a lot of places to get the latest news and rumors but if there isn't a lot to talk about, there isn't a lot to talk about ya know?
Mike has gone through some personal things this last year...Kevin has come on to take over many duties–and I think he's done a great job so far. The "usual suspects" are still around (for the most part) but the incentive to be involved may have waned. I'm more than happy to help people out and engage in healthy debate but the subjects that I'm will to engage in has been narrowed...
If you want to know who is responsible for how LuLa has evolved, look into the mirror.
-
Truth be told, I really got sick and tired of the petulant and shrill behavior that some here on LuLa expressed after Adobe announced Photoshop CC and dropped the CS7 perpetual license...in trying to explain the reality of the situation and some of the reasons and thinking from Adobe's point of view, I was tarred and feathered. It was akin to the Salem Witch Hunts where anybody who didn't agree with the "Adobe Haters™" were shouted down and accused of being an apologist or anti-photographer. The whole thing took on an aroma of the Tea Baggers in the US Congress. Irrational and ignorant and mean spirited...honestly, I don't need that sort of bullshyte in my life.
The main reason LuLa has changed is that the industry has changed. Revolution has changed to evolution. There are a lot of places to get the latest news and rumors but if there isn't a lot to talk about, there isn't a lot to talk about ya know?
Mike has gone through some personal things this last year...Kevin has come on to take over many duties–and I think he's done a great job so far. The "usual suspects" are still around (for the most part) but the incentive to be involved may have waned. I'm more than happy to help people out and engage in healthy debate but the subjects that I'm will to engage in has been narrowed...
If you want to know who is responsible for how LuLa has evolved, look into the mirror.
It's true that the industry has changed, and a lot.
I really think that it's way more exciting now than some years ago.
Remember what was the panorama? There were basicaly 4 leading camera brands,
2 or 3 editing soft, video was not even an option, combocams were still conceptuals
and for the big part all that was
happening during many years was an adaptation to digital of an old and "dusty"
craft.
I tend in this aspect to think that the real revolution is starting now.
We have more choices and options than we never had. And...each time more cost
effective. A Da-Vinci suite was undreamable for the common mortal, now they are free
New players like Red, raw video for all is on the corner etc etc...
Not a long time ago, if Lu-La was doin an interview for ex, it was reading
reading and reading an entire page. Now it's a video.
Members like CB who were living from still images are now compeating also
in film festivals.
The list is long.
Adobe choosed a path and IMO it's a valuable option, not suitable for all,
but an option that is unique. If people aren't happy, well they just
follow other paths but we all have an amount of choices that weren't
disponible, from prod to distribution.
Has Lu-La reflected those changes? I think it did. Gone are the time
of being an "image maker" was a privilege of a choosen elite.
The days of star photographers like Lindberg are gone. Everybody
can do an indy movie at home included DCP and take care of the
distribution.
IMO, I find Lu-La more fun and fresh and more natural than 5 or 6 years
ago.
But you know, there is always somebody to complain. There are always
people who tend to look back with nostalgy.
-
<snip>
The main reason LuLa has changed is that the industry has changed. Revolution has changed to evolution. There are a lot of places to get the latest news and rumors but if there isn't a lot to talk about, there isn't a lot to talk about ya know? <snip>The "usual suspects" are still around (for the most part) but the incentive to be involved may have waned. I'm more than happy to help people out and engage in healthy debate but the subjects that I'm will to engage in has been narrowed...
So Jeff -- and I ask this in a genuinely interested way, I'm not trying to an ass*ole here -- why don't you write articles here more frequently. Not the paid films, but just articles. You've recently published two books on processing and printing, and I bought both of them. While it's obvious that you seriously know what you're talking about, it's unlikely that you've covered every single subject that you know about -- so why not a few Schewe essays on a few processing/printing details that you think might interest folks here. I'm sure a lot of people would be happy to see them. I wouldn't even mind if you mentioned your books in the course of the essays...
If you want to know who is responsible for how LuLa has evolved, look into the mirror.
-
So Jeff -- and I ask this in a genuinely interested way, I'm not trying to an ass*ole here -- why don't you write articles here more frequently. Not the paid films, but just articles.
Coming from you John, I find that very amusing...I do author books and articles (and do videos) but I don't do stuff for free so I don't write for LuLa (Michael doesn't pay for articles as far as I know).
We've talked about doing book excerpts on LuLa but so far, nothing has really come to fruition. The main magazine articles I've done have been for Digital Photo Pro and they actually pay pretty well for articles and they even pay for excerpts!
So, now that Kev is leading the charge, maybe he'll get me to write something for LuLa (likely not for free :~)
-
I don’t really think that the problem – such as it may be – has much to do with LuLa per se. I think it actually lies elsewhere: information overload. We have seen everything, over and over again. The value has to be, eventually, for those starting out in a new direction, for whom the Internet, including LuLa, becomes a source of new information; for those, there is much here to gain.
The camera/lens conversations have covered pretty much all that can be said on the matter, and are turning into never ending debates about forms of testing, fanboyism, deeply held opinions about esoterica such as bokeh, which a few years ago bothered absolutely nobody until the term was invented, a brilliant stroke of new marketing possibility, and which currently appears to make or break the purchase chances of an optic. Or at least, amongst those who frequent chat rooms. That those lenses may or may not ever be used in anger is a moot point: I seldom find anything that opens my eyes that tiny bit wider other than in some rare, professional photographers’ websites. As others point out, technology has pretty much plateaued, thank God, and one might have hoped the interest would revert to actual images. Has it? I think not. The same topics are being milked by the readership beyond their point of having run dry.
There are a few really good photographers who post in the ‘pro’ sections here, and I would love to hear them on the topic of their work, but few have the time or, perhaps, the interest to spend hours at a non-rewarding keyboard baring their souls.
Of the images that do get posted in the pro section, most strike me as technically excellent, but by virtue of their subject, often leave me cold. Others I find amazing and stir fond memories in my own mind. Does the ‘amateur’ section fare as well? Who knows? It’s ever the same thing, only different versions of it, just like my Cokes, which are now only of interest to me and that because they are all I can find to do these days. They keep my mind occupied and off other things that are equally unproductive but more bothersome. As my images must now bore, so those of so many others, and the best work (IMO) that I see here is usually older stuff that was shot to a purpose – see cjogo, for example, or some of Michael’s older stuff. Most casual stuff is just that: casual.
Unfortunately, once the photographer knows how to do it, he comes up against that bloody red brick wall: why do it? Just liking it isn’t enough. Like Jerry Lee Lewis sang, there must be more to love than this. Donovan and he were both dreadfully right.
Rob C
-
Good grief, Bernard, you're older than I! I'm not quite nine yet, a mere babe.
Tell me, does it get better as one get's older? Do some of the more troublesome urges depart and stop tormenting one? Do things finally balance out?
The transition into the 10th year is a magic moment that changes everything.
I hear that the 10,000th post is also breathtaking, how was it for you?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
We should all remember that we are visitors in a private room here at LULA (as in other fora). So if we don't feel comfortable with the room decoration or entertainment we can politely inform the hosts (in private?), leave the room, or we can try to do better by inviting guests to our room. Those complaining loudest among the guests should perhaps consider the latter option?
I for one are grateful for the opportunity to visit and use LULA, in particular being a very, very small and insignificant part of a loose virtual community. I could have wished for some things to be different, but if I complain to loud about LULA its as useful as shooting myself in the foot.
So, on my wish list; more text / images, less video content. But regardless of wishes please keep up the good work :-*
-
The transition into the 10th year is a magic moment that changes everything.
I hear that the 10,000th post is also breathtaking, how was it for you?
Cheers,
Bernard
Like 60th birthdays: you forget they even happened unless someone has it in for you and reminds you. And even then, you think they must really be talking about someone else.
I don't send birthday cards to anyone anymore; I learned the lesson well. Christmas is a bit more difficult, but even there you can make improvements over time!
;-)
Rob C
-
We should all remember that we are visitors in a private room here at LULA (as in other fora).
Actually that's an unduly deferential attitude towards sites like this.
The success of Lula, and sites like it, is not just due to their content, but their readers and contributors. If readers like the content they tell others and drive up page views, without that peer recommendation the site never can become popular enough to be self supporting.
Similarly without all the contributors to the forum, it would just wither and die. It's worth considering that it's just a few hundred members out of the 45k registered that make major contributions to that content, they have a stake in it by virtue of their own freely given efforts.
So we have a right by our support and contribution to comment on where the site is going.
For me I agree with the OP that the quality of the site has slipped recently.
Originally most content came from Michael himself and always seemed to be aiming high, both with respect to technical articles that had real world usage at their core and with great photography.
As the front face of Lula has used more articles and photography from other authors, that standard of aiming high seems to have slipped. Commercial interests now seem to drive things more and mass appeal is more important.
I find it a shame, I always liked that Lula was a place for serious, considered work and not somewhere where people posted pictures of dogs with hats, there's plenty of other places to have "fun" if that's what you want.
-
I do not know of a more civilised forum devoted to photography. I have learned a great deal, been mightily entertained by several spats, appreciated occasionally high standards of forum writing and a number of rather good articles, and benefitted from reasonably priced videos full of excellent content.
And I am a practised curmudgeon ...
-
I always liked that Lula was a place for serious, considered work and not somewhere where people posted pictures of dogs with hats, there's plenty of other places to have "fun" if that's what you want.
I recall cat photos being explicitly frowned upon, though personally I find them quite useful for testing camera/lens quality as fur and whiskers are quite challenging to reproduce well. One of my test models is currently residing on top of my monitor, though 3 balancing on the pair of them is the record so far. I would post a photo, but I may get banned. ;D
-
My footer sums this up for me. Thank you.
-
... I would post a [cat] photo, but I may get banned. ;D
Not if it would be a selfie :)
-
This comment doesn't relate to the main topic here, but I have to say that I hate the word "fora" being used as the plural form of "forum." It ain't. Fora is a plural form for squares or plazas in ancient Rome. Like, "Let's go out an hit a few fora and have some laughs." The plural form of "forum," everywhere except certain internet forums where people are trying too hard, is "forums."
-
This comment doesn't relate to the main topic here, but I have to say that I hate the word "fora" being used as the plural form of "forum." It ain't. Fora is a plural form for squares or plazas in ancient Rome. Like, "Let's go out an hit a few fora and have some laughs." The plural form of "forum," everywhere except certain internet forums where people are trying too hard, is "forums."
Thanks for correction. Perhaps we should take some time to consider if the word has changed in any meaningful way since its heritage? I just been to Roma two trips, and is amazed of how the Latin language has influenced all European languages. I believe you state it yourself, its really not any difference from its origin to todays meaning. Its simply a place to hang out to meet people.
My native language is not English, so its natural for me to allow some slack in language and to be corrected. When it comes to this particular word "fora" I will however say that I am more happy to lean on ancient Rome than any unknown Internet-grammar-critic (no offense meant).
And LULA is and will be one of many fora where I go to have some laughs, and I thank for this one :). I would however find this and other fora a better place to be with some more focus on content, less on grammar and more indulgence for non-English speakers.
Sorry about a bit OT, but this is perhaps a good example of what LULA should not be?
-
John is correct. In English, the correct usage is forums. If you're not a native speaker, it might be wise to consider listening and learning.
-
The plural form of "forum," everywhere except certain internet forums where people are trying too hard, is "forums."
Turning a personal preference into a commandment is a common heresy on internet "forums", about photography and everything else. I would also usually prefer "forums", because "fora" sounds a bit mock-pedantic to my ear, so I would use it only if I wanted to sound that way, and had in mind a reader with a good enough ear to notice. But "fora" is not, in any meaningful sense, incorrect.
One of its virtues is that Lula is usually tolerant of this kind of off-topic pedantic spat, as long as it isn't taken too far. In that spirit, I will head back to the topic and say that if the site continues to expand, and thus increase its capacity to support paid help, the help of a professional editor might be in order. I have read plenty of interesting articles on the site but only a few which would not have been improved by stylistic editing. I have also read one or two which a professional editor might have have mercifully killed. I won't mention any names, except that of the one author I absolutely do not have in mind in making that comment - Michael himself, who maybe doesn't write quite as well as he photographs, but comes close.
-
how the Latin language has influenced all European languages.
Not quite all - think of Hungarian and Finnish.
-
John is correct. In English, the correct usage is forums. If you're not a native speaker, it might be wise to consider listening and learning.
I will keep that in mind when visiting different fora. I will also try to listen and learn from those being friendly, helpful and open. So thanks for useful reminders about how to distinguish contributors "bart from snørr" (Norwegian) 8)
Back to LULA. I cannot see that the fora has degraded in any way since I started visiting. I still find threads in the fora that I consider of really high quality however you judge them. For me the articles and fora in this site as others are two really two different worlds with little correlation.
Sorry for neglecting the Finnish-Urgish (dont know if this is correct named) language family. Actually my second native language (Sapmi) is within this family.
-
But "fora" is not, in any meaningful sense, incorrect.
I wonder what you mean by "incorrect" --
"The plural of forum is usually spelled forums (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/forum?q=forums); the plural fora (as in the original Latin) is chiefly used when talking about a public square in an ancient Roman city."
-
'Fora' - an Italian golfing term...
-
So... the plural of alumnus and alumna is now... alumnuses and alumnas???
This is ridiculous. >:(
-
For me I agree with the OP that the quality of the site has slipped recently.
Originally most content came from Michael himself and always seemed to be aiming high, both with respect to technical articles that had real world usage at their core and with great photography.
As the front face of Lula has used more articles and photography from other authors, that standard of aiming high seems to have slipped. Commercial interests now seem to drive things more and mass appeal is more important.
I find it a shame, I always liked that Lula was a place for serious, considered work and not somewhere where people posted pictures of dogs with hats, there's plenty of other places to have "fun" if that's what you want.
Well expressed, and I concur. I've been a member here since Michael began the site in the early 1990s. Michael's images and commentary have been inspirational even to this old pro with almost a half century of experience. I miss those days. But... I also understand his need to finally decompress a little from his long "Type A" mode and take some time for just himself and his loved ones. He's not replaceable, but with any luck, someone will step up to the plate with a best effort to return the site as close as possible to where it was. In any case, it is still one of the best photography resources on the planet.
-
So... the plural of alumnus and alumna is now... alumnuses and alumnas???
This is ridiculous. >:(
Indeed, there is something ridiculous about your comment ;-)
alumni (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/alumnus?q=alumnus)
alumnae (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/alumna?q=alumna)
'Fora' - an Italian golfing term...
I was hoping we'd take that to be the last word.
-
Why the hell can't people be happy with a tiny bit of new knowledge? It's not the end of the world, and neither do I see any unfriendliness aimed at anyone with less than perfect grammar, neither towards folks with English as mama-tongue nor otherwise (in Spanish, mama means something else - just as, if not even more delightful, in some cases).
Thank you John; I have sometimes wondered which to use but didn't feel inclined to ring up the dictionary; now you've done it for me.
;-)
Rob C
-
Sounds like little boys comparing p#nises - mine is bigger than yours.....we never grow up do we?
-
As someone who is unlikely to ever earn so much as a bean for the owners of this site I’m just grateful for what I get.
Don't dismiss your contribution.
Those that comment a lot are the life blood of online communities, even if they're only the ones that ask the questions to which the experts answer.
If the questions aren't asked there's no interesting content to drive people to visit.
-
I think I have a thing or 2 to add here in the Schewe's style, because I'm boiling by a lot of what I'm Reading.
Who the hell some people think they are?
Rights? wich rights?
I read Paul talking about the fact that as contributors, we have some divine rights on this website...
But the reality is that there are people like Paul, extremely knowledgeable and talentuous in their craft (video)
and what is his contribution in the motion forum of this site? Zero! None! nada! nil.
Actually where he knows the most he never posts, probably because he thinks that his knowledge is not
reachable by the low-enders that we are.
Now let me tell you something: I'm a member also in the Cow, in the Avid forum. At least I know 2 members
that are very top filmakers, recognized world wide and extremely knowledgeable in the tech aspects,
respected and listened by all filmakers, editors, operators...
and I saw several times how they helped total beginners, answering silly and basic questions and even sometimes
answering 3 or 4 times when a dude didn't get it and was lost.
That's what I call a contributor.
Those guys actually are producing and operating in billionaire film industry, included 3D and Hollywood effects.
And they are able to be humble enough to take their time to contribute even in things that for them it's absolutly irrelevant
considering their level. That's contributing.
Not this ego elite attitude that some have because they know a few things, have a sort of curriculum and would like
this website to feel like their high-end "serious" own website.
So before this grandiloquent attitude of criticising this website under the drama that it sunk into decadence,
start first to contribute with your knowledge in the areas you know or can...
Am I sounding Jeff enough?
-
... Am I sounding Jeff enough?
No. Not once you used 'bud' ;D
-
That's contributing.
Yes!
-
Now let me tell you something: I'm a member also in the Cow, in the Avid forum. At least I know 2 members
that are very top filmakers, recognized world wide and extremely knowledgeable in the tech aspects,
respected and listened by all filmakers, editors, operators...
and I saw several times how they helped total beginners, answering silly and basic questions and even sometimes
answering 3 or 4 times when a dude didn't get it and was lost.
That's what I call a contributor.
Those guys actually are producing and operating in billionaire film industry, included 3D and Hollywood effects.
And they are able to be humble enough to take their time to contribute even in things that for them it's absolutly irrelevant
considering their level. That's contributing.
Thats one of the main reasons, why I as a lowly amateur love this site so much and feel like getting christmas presents every time I am reading the forums and am allowed to learn from this kind of people.
I often wonder what I can do to give something back and try to do my best when posting (at least most of the time - when not feeling in a ridiculously silly mood like sometimes).
-
'Fora' - an Italian golfing term...
Batti il ferro finché è caldo. ;D
-
I read Paul talking about the fact that as contributors, we have some divine rights on this website...
I've never said anything about "Divine rights" go back and read what I actually said. If you disagree with what I've said address that please.
But the reality is that there are people like Paul, extremely knowledgeable and talentuous in their craft (video)
and what is his contribution in the motion forum of this site? Zero! None! nada! nil.
Actually where he knows the most he never posts, probably because he thinks that his knowledge is not
reachable by the low-enders that we are.
If you actually understood about what I actually do for a living you'd understand that my expertise in multi-camera broadcast operation has virtually no relevance in the sort of video work that people on Lula participate in. If I can't offer something constructive and helpful I'll not post.
Am I sounding Jeff enough?
No, just a bit foolish really.
-
Batti il ferro finché è caldo.
The 4 iron?
-
If you actually understood about what I actually do for a living you'd understand that my expertise in multi-camera broadcast operation has virtually no relevance in the sort of video work that people on Lula participate in. If I can't offer something constructive and helpful I'll not post.
I know Paul that your expertise stands in multi-camera broadcast. But to be there you know your basics and way more than the basics. I also know that your technical knowledge covers more territories in what image engineering is concerned.
We're missing your posible contributions in a forum that is each time more important and relevant because you know as well as me that this business is not still only any longuer.
"Divine rights" was indeed a personal expresion I used (and not you) to be sarcastic.
-
The 4 iron?
No actually the 'Four A' iron - infrequently seen used with purpose in the Canadian rough
-
I also know that your technical knowledge covers more territories in what image engineering is concerned.
We're missing your posible contributions in a forum that is each time more important and relevant because you know as well as me that this business is not still only any longuer.
Sorry Fred, but you're wrong. I've told you this before in PM.
The aspects of television camerawork that I have a reasonable competence in don't have much, if any, relevance to the sort of work most people on Lula are involved with.
There's no magic recipes or arcane knowledge I'm withholding here.
This site isn't about television production, let's leave it that way.
-
Sorry Fred, but you're wrong. I've told you this before in PM.
The aspects of television camerawork that I have a reasonable competence in don't have much, if any, relevance to the sort of work most people on Lula are involved with.
There's no magic recipes or arcane knowledge I'm withholding here.
This site isn't about television production, let's leave it that way.
Ok, I respect your point of view. I think clarified and sorry for not having understood it the first time we talked about it. I think you are right.
The reason why I jumped on you with the shotgun in hand is that I know you're extremely knowledgeable in your office, and for me that has
an great value in a forum. And it truly pissed me-of not seeing you frequenting the motion forum. But, as you pointed, the work we are involved in
has no really connection with your expertise field.
-
Why the hell can't people be happy with a tiny bit of new knowledge? It's not the end of the world, and neither do I see any unfriendliness aimed at anyone with less than perfect grammar, neither towards folks with English as mama-tongue nor otherwise
Exactly.
-
I apologize for my fora/forums comment if my tone offended anyone. There are some things that I have a hard time with, and fora/forums is one of them, along with looser and a couple others.
Further up, I suggested that Lula might be richer if Schewe would chip in with some of his expertise, and he came back and said he was surprised to hear that from me. That's because, like Jeff, and as Jeff knows, I'm a professional writer, and like all professional writers, we really want to get paid for writing. Writing for free is like the grocery store giving you a free sack of potatoes because they're feeling good about you. Won't happen. I know professional writers who volunteer for all kinds of things, no pay required...but they generally are very reluctant to write free things.
However, I've got a concept in the back of my head, but I've got to talk to one of the forum members before trying it out. If he goes along, we'll probably try it out here. We'll see.
-
Time for this thread to die, don't you think?