LuLa, what's happening to you?

[Rhossydd]

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.

[Eric Kellerman]

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 ...

[jjj]

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. 

[Todd Suttles]

My footer sums this up for me. Thank you.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I would post a [cat] photo, but I may get banned. 

Not if it would be a selfie

[John Camp]

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."

[AlfSollund]

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?

[Farmer]

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.

[kencameron]

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.

[PeterAit]

 how the Latin language has influenced all European languages.

Not quite all - think of Hungarian and Finnish.

[AlfSollund]

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) 

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.

[Isaac]

But "fora" is not, in any meaningful sense, incorrect.

I wonder what you mean by "incorrect" --

"The plural of forum is usually spelled forums; the plural fora (as in the original Latin) is chiefly used when talking about a public square in an ancient Roman city."

[Christopher Sanderson]

'Fora' - an Italian golfing term...

[stevenarnott]

So... the plural of alumnus and alumna is now... alumnuses and alumnas???

This is ridiculous. 

[Ken]

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.

[Isaac]

So... the plural of alumnus and alumna is now... alumnuses and alumnas???

This is ridiculous. 

Indeed, there is something ridiculous about your comment ;-)

alumni

alumnae

'Fora' - an Italian golfing term...

I was hoping we'd take that to be the last word.

[Rob C]

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

[seanconnery]

Sounds like little boys comparing p#nises - mine is bigger than yours.....we never grow up do we?

[Rhossydd]

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.

[fredjeang2]

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?