View Full Version : Too Many Posts On SLRs?? Have Things Changed?
While I know that we all do need diversions now and then, and we all own more than one camera of the same or different type, but dontcha think there are a lot of new threads on SLRs and posts in gallery of images taken by them? While I personally can tolerate images posted by P & S or panoramic cameras, as I find them not too far off from a rangefinder, SLRs do seem to be bit much.
I remember not too long ago, one of our esteemed moderators mentioned that images taken by cameras other then rangefinders would be removed from the gallery.
Websites do tend to change with the times and people change as well. Are things changing here and is RFF becoming more of general interest photo site?
I'm just posting this as an observation, not a criticism.
Thoughts?
Ken Ford
07-11-2007, 04:33
I don't know if I'd put SLR images in the gallery, but so long as SLR talk is within its own forum, what's the harm? I'm probably typical in that I use an SLR more than I use a RF.
I suspect the quantity of posts is due to pent-up demand.
Agree with Ken. Remember the flood of photo-critique threads after that was established a few months ago? For weeks it seemed that was the main focus of the forum. Now it has settled down again. SLR-talk is the same - if anything it will mean that a few people will have their SLR discussions here instead of going elsewhere. And I would maintain that rangefinder people see differently and use SLRs differently. If TLRs are ok here, why not SLRs?
oftheherd
07-11-2007, 04:42
We have always allowed ourselves to comment on SLR's in the forums. We have usually self-policed ourselves about photos in the gallery being for RF unless an illustration with a digital. Certainly we have as far as I know been good about identifying non-RF when placed in the gallery.
Granted, a forum on SLR's was a bit of a surprise to me, but I think the two most talked about ( despite my heroic attempts :D ) SLR's have been Olympus OM and Pentax. Two cameras that have things much liked in RF, mainly, small and lightweight, as well as versatile. Obviously, many who have some RF, also have SLR's, and many of those are OM or Pentax (mostly MX or ME). If we want to comment on changes, how about what seems to me to be more of an emphasis on Bessa and Leica, from the FSU and fixed lens (mostly Japanese) RF?
All that said, who knows, you may be right. But so far, one thing doesn't seem to have changed. The politeness and comradrie that has always been enjoyed here. As long as we have that, I am satisfied. Well actually not. Why am I the only enlightened one with an ST 901? :D :D :D
I think a lot of members use SLR's in addition to their rangefinders. I posted some photos to the gallery about a week or two ago and was not sure which camera they were from. Then I saw frame #25, a self portrait in the mirror with--gasp--OM-2. So I removed them. I guess a picture or two taken with a digicam or SLR is OK but posting a bunch kind of dilutes the special character of the RFF. I just post my SLR stuff to flickr now.
Chris (N), you made a good point and I agree with you. But I share Keith's fear (or his questioning). I thought the same this morning when I post some pics in a Pentax MX thread. I thought: what am I doing now?
I'm less troubled by SLR threads than SLR pictures in the gallery ... I know I posted a few pictures taken with my TLR, but I would be bothered if there were a lot of TLR pictures in the gallery. And that's why I'm a bit troubled when I see that the gallery is full of Nikon SLR pictures ... "RF Forum" means something, isn't it?
It's just a matter of balance and restraint, I guess.
Best,
Marc
I don't see the significance here. For every post in the EvilSLR forum, there's like 10 posts in the other forums. But hey! you can't prevent the inevitable.. SLRs are good stuff. Like that saying: "Don't hate. Appreciate"
Nikon Bob
07-11-2007, 05:00
I was informed by a moderator a few years ago that there was some tolerance for SLR photos in the gallery and that members were good about self policing. Perhaps a separate gallery for members non RF photos might be in order now?
Bob
I agree that numerous pics by SLR's in the gallery is a bit much and I also agree that the sudden burst of SLR posts is a little to do with deprivation and will probably die down shortly. Mind you I do have an OM-2 in the post from the US which could arrive any day now ... and the way certain people keep banging on about Fujica ST901's, I may wake up any day now and have to have one of those too! :D
Over all though ... I think the 'Evil SLR' forum was a good move and in spite of it's current larger than life persona it will dilute naturally over time. :)
I agree that numerous pics by SLR's in the gallery is a bit much and I also agree that the sudden burst of SLR posts is a little to do with deprivation and will probably die down shortly. Mind you I do have an OM-2 in the post from the US which could arrive any day now ... and the way certain people keep banging on about Fujica ST901's, I may wake up any day now and have to have one of those too! :D
!! ST901 is an SLR……………I thought it was something you caught from infected Levis
:D
sepiareverb
07-11-2007, 07:39
I'd bet that 3/4 of us migrated to RF's from SLR's, so there is a lot of knowledge about the 'evil slappers' out there. I certainly don't miss my Nikon kit, and don't forget, you can always just pass by the SLR threads. I'll second that they will probably drop in frequency in a few weeks time. Till then- I'll more often than not just pass them by. (Unless Keith keeps up with those irresistable titles:D )
Tuolumne
07-11-2007, 08:15
I posted in the Evil SLR thread about the Nikon follow-on to the D200. Why?
1) Because there is now a category for SLRs, without which I wouldn't have imposed it on this forum.
2) I use both SLR and RF cameras.
3) I spend all of my time here and don't know anyone at any other forum.
4) I wanted to share with the people I spend my time with.
I think the main reason that there is a flurry of SLR posts now is that having a category for them legitimizes it. I don't think it will take over RFF, though.
/T
I also agree that the sudden burst of SLR posts is a little to do with deprivation and will probably die down shortly.
Time will tell, but I agree. We have a new toy, so it is getting played with.
oftheherd
07-11-2007, 08:38
...
... and the way certain people keep banging on about Fujica ST901's, I may wake up any day now and have to have one of those too! :D
...
Well, won't that be the day! :D
I am not sure who you are referring to but he must be an OK guy if he praises the ST 901. :D :D :D
If you do, be sure and tell us. Don't keep it a secret. :D
CameraQuest
07-11-2007, 08:39
As you know, there are many separate RF forums at RFF, satisfying most any RF owner.
I envision only one Evil SLR forum at RFF. That alone will help keep RFF from being overpopulated with SLR posts. IF you want a dedicated SLR forum, go to http://www.dslrexchange.com/
Stephen
shadowfox
07-11-2007, 08:40
This post is very timely! At first I thought it's about protesting the new sub-forum, but it brings up a very good point:
Please don't polute the Gallery with SLR pictures!! This is where we should draw the line. Why? Because the Gallery is a showcase for a forum, it is closely tied to what the forum stands for. And this *is* the RangefinderForum.
You want to see/post SLR pictures, go to the other hundred forums out there.
Now, I am a big fan of the new Evil SLR sub-forum. Most of us who have SLR's and like to use them really appreciate a place where we can discuss the merits of our SLR's *in light* of the spirit of the RangefinderForum.
About the sub-forum dying down soon, I don't think so, there's a lot of us who use SLRs daily. And I'm sure oftheherd won't rest until there's a Fujica and Coffee thread :)
oftheherd
07-11-2007, 09:30
...
And I'm sure oftheherd won't rest until there's a Fujica and Coffee thread :)
There isn't?!#? :eek:
I must fix that right away. :D
Of course, it would undoubtedly be one of the loneliest forums ever. I have yet to see anyone jump and admit to having any flavor of Fujica 35mm SLR except myself.
I feel so alone and abused. sigh. :D :D
xayraa33
07-11-2007, 09:47
but how can one sell anything on our classifeds that is SLR related and bring in a good price?
so one has to discuss and laud SLR gear on this forum, even though it should be for RF related sujects mostly.
While I know that we all do need diversions now and then, and we all own more than one camera of the same or different type, but dontcha think there are a lot of new threads on SLRs and posts in gallery of images taken by them? While I personally can tolerate images posted by P & S or panoramic cameras, as I find them not too far off from a rangefinder, SLRs do seem to be bit much.
I remember not too long ago, one of our esteemed moderators mentioned that images taken by cameras other then rangefinders would be removed from the gallery.
Websites do tend to change with the times and people change as well. Are things changing here and is RFF becoming more of general interest photo site?
I'm just posting this as an observation, not a criticism.
Thoughts?
I like good photography and I don't care what kind of camera it came from. Certainly if we want to be technical there seems to be more non-rangefinder photography that did not come from an SLR - TLR, viewfinder, view camera, etc.
But I think being the RANGEFINDERFORUM.COM is enough to keep the riff-raff away. Rangefinder owners are a more decerning breed whether they own an SLR or not. Even the ones who shot digital.
No, I am not a snob; I just happen to be better.
Of course, it would undoubtedly be one of the loneliest forums ever. I have yet to see anyone jump and admit to having any flavor of Fujica 35mm SLR except myself.
ST701 here with a couple of Fujinons here :cool:
I was informed by a moderator a few years ago that there was some tolerance for SLR photos in the gallery and that members were good about self policing. Perhaps a separate gallery for members non RF photos might be in order now?Well, there IS a related but separate gallery dedicated to SLR photos, both film and digital, here: http://www.dslrexchange.com/photopostdslrx/index.php
It seems to me we are missing the most important: the Range Finder camera identity, and our common denominator with SLRs: FILM.
In view of the increasing digital avalanche, it will not be too wise to break ranks with other film users. We are not any more the majority.
As for the range finder identity, or intrinsic personality, how are we supposed to deepen our understanding and feeling, if not by comparizon ?
And how can we possibly broaden our audience and attracting more people to our camp, by "La Migra" policies ?
Creating The Evil SLR subforum seems appropriate to me, in view of the abovementioned concerns. Creating a sub-gallery for non rf images seems to me appropriate too.
Don't force, convince !
Cheers,
Ruben
Nikon Bob
07-11-2007, 11:54
Well, there IS a related but separate gallery dedicated to SLR photos, both film and digital, here: http://www.dslrexchange.com/photopostdslrx/index.php
Cute, but it was in regards to this forum that the comment was made by a moderator. Or are you hinting that dslrexchange needs more traffic?
Bob
I agree with Shadowfox - the gallery should be kept for RF photos.
If you want to show your SLR photos then the facility exists at dslrexchange.com.
If our goal is to cater to as many forms of photography enthusiasm as possible, and attract as many users as possible, shouldn't we change our name to something more inclusive? "Photo.net" would be good, if that name isn't already taken...
...Seriously, I was warning you guys last year that this would happen. I got interested in RFF because it was specifically dedicated to the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinder cameras. Trying to make the forum more inclusive is just diluting its utility.
Cute, but it was in regards to this forum that the comment was made by a moderator. Or are you hinting that dslrexchange needs more traffic?
Bob
Doug's the mod on DSLRX... he needs more work :D
I agree with Shadowfox - the gallery should be kept for RF photos.
No chance to see your future F3HP pictures in the gallery then ? ;)
Doug's the mod on DSLRX... he needs more work :DRight on! :D
ChrisPlatt
07-11-2007, 14:16
We meet together here because we all have an interest in rangefinder cameras,
but sharing our experiences and enthusiasms in all things photographic
is what RFF is really all about...
Chris
If our goal is to cater to as many forms of photography enthusiasm as possible, and attract as many users as possible, shouldn't we change our name to something more inclusive? "Photo.net" would be good, if that name isn't already taken....
According to me, our goal is to strenghten rangefinderdom. With all due respect, according to you, what is OUR goal ?
Photo.net doesn't dedicate the specific space RFF dedicates to the main RF breeds, nor enables the type of open dialogue whe have here. At Photo.net the idiot asks and the bunch of wise guys respond. I seriously doubt this very thread could exist there.
At RFF we chat, we laugh a lot, we exchange, sometimes we tease and beyond, and in this open climate we can really learn too. Photo.net is a great sized website for info. RFF is a website where we live and breath. Haven't you noticed this difference beyond the formal ones.
...Seriously, I was warning you guys last year that this would happen. I got interested in RFF because it was specifically dedicated to the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinder cameras. Trying to make the forum more inclusive is just diluting its utility.
"diluting its utility" for who ? What is out there beyond your own needs, your own interests, your own utility ?
Haven't you ever thought that perhaps the long term survival of your legitimate utility and interest is connected and dependable upon others than you ? Had I been in an hilarious mood, I would imagine you comfortably sitting with your best suit, driniking a glass of champagne amidst the sinking Titanic.
Fortunately RFF is growing at great pace, despite your warnings last year, and at every thread we find newcomers we are not used to talk with. RFF is becoming less intimate, less narrow, but stronger with new blood, many of them youngers. Do you want to narrow their vision or enhance it? Can you enhance it by narrowing ?
Why don't you appear at the SLRs threads speaking on behalf of "the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinders" ? Wouldn't be appropriate ? Is someone blocking you ? Do you think no one would be interested in hearing your opinion about this crucial issue. I am.
If you want to maintain your seat, take care of the ship we both and we all are navigating with.
Cheers,
Ruben
Hi kgb,
Yes things do change. There is no single thing in the whole universe that doesn't change. Change is change, it depends upon each of us to find the good and the bad in it. But we cannot stop change, only freeze our minds for a while.
Now I must confess something quite personal. I hate, really hate those silly threads polling or asking about the colour of my underwear. Well, "hate" may be a too exaggerated term. But I strongly dislike them.
But it never crossed my mind to raise a thread proposing their suppresion, directly or undirectly. Nor I want them to be whiped out for a single reason. People have interest in them, and I must respect other's people interests, beyond mine. You do have in my opinion every right to criticize, as I am doing it now and at other opportunities.
But there is a totally different thing to stand up calling for the suppresion of things people are interested in within photography, under the claim that you are "just posting this as an observation, not a criticism" . I understand this last sentence of yours as an intentional jocke by you. That's why I rebuked your jocke here, for a single time, in slightly altering your nickname.
Range finders identity is to be taken care for, and maintained at the forefront of RFF, but by our strenghts - not our weaknesses. Shutting up other people's interests will equal to shutting up their mouths, and both will equal to shooting a bullet into our own foot.
Cheers,
Ruben
nikon_sam
07-11-2007, 16:10
I posted in the Evil SLR thread about the Nikon follow-on to the D200. Why?
1) Because there is now a category for SLRs, without which I wouldn't have imposed it on this forum.
2) I use both SLR and RF cameras.
3) I spend all of my time here and don't know anyone at any other forum.
4) I wanted to share with the people I spend my time with.
I think the main reason that there is a flurry of SLR posts now is that having a category for them legitimizes it. I don't think it will take over RFF, though.
/T
I totally agree with your four points as to why I visit RFF...
I found this website quite by accident but liked what I saw and read here...
People here loved photography too...It's just too bad that some want to limit themselves to RF cameras...(I know this is a Rangefinder Website)...I do own, at last count, 4 working and 2 spare parts Rangefinder Cameras...therefore I felt that I qualified and was allowed to visit and share.
Along with the RF's I also shoot with SLR's, a TLR and a 4x5 Field Camera.
I totally love photography and don't really care what equipment does the job.
For some reason a category "Evil SLR's" was placed in this site...I guess to tolerate or appease the ones who would openly admit using the evil cameras...
Maybe a separate link to post photos taken with such equipment should be available to those who would like to...(I just checked and while in the "Evil SLR" forum the link there to post photos goes to the main Photo Gallery...)
I have seen the DSLRExchange site but I don't shoot digital...
I know I posted 37 photos last night to the Gallery and also named the camera that was used...while many would argue that I'm full of cr*p...I believe that many if not most would have no clue what camera was used to take them if I hadn't mention the SLR and by the way it's a Nikon F4e...
I originally was posting photos for the RFF Los Angeles Assignment...the rules we came up with included the use of SLR's...no problem there!!!
I just wanted to share some of the shots I came up with and then while there decided to post other pictures I was proud of and thought some would like to view...
Now if someone wants to take another POLL...How about this...
New Poll...Do we remove all pictures not taken with a RF...OR...Leave them and just enjoy...Let's vote...
If anyone has a problem with the Non-RF photos I or anyone else has posted please have the b*lls to "Name Names".
Let us know in an open thread how you feel and which pictures offend you enough to want them removed...As for me & I speak just for me I'll remove any unwanted photos in my Gallery...
Thank you...
Remember...Say what you mean...just don't say it mean...
I can respect the concern over this site changing. Some of the concern does seem a little premature though.
I have not been here long, and in fact ownwed a RF for many years that I had never shot one picture on. I have always loved my SLRs and in 2000 moved into the DSLR world, and I love that world also. But when I finally got off my duff and looked through that RF one day I was convinced and captivted all in one second. Luckily I found this site which has taught me a lot about my RF.
I shared this experience with a good friend of mine. Next time I saw him I made him look through my RF, he called me later that night to tell me he found a Minolta RF his father had "retired". He found this site on his own, before I could share it. Now the RFs go everywhere when each of us shoot.
I just wanted to share this with you all as you discuss the future of this site, and the changes taking place. I think a lot of people are finding RFs, young and not so old, my friend and I are perfect examples of this. This sites focus on RFs does not seem to be compromised by the inclusion of some SLR talk.
Thanks everyone by the way! Tolerating questions from people new to RFs that most of the regulars here have been through many times is unique and appreciated. Yet another reason why I don't think this site will loose any dedication to RF photography.
I will leave, as I do not have a rangefinder, thus RFF can then be pure again. Sorry for polluting your environment! I guess everyone who owns a RF and a SLR, better not talk about SLR's, nor sell SLR's on RFF, or sell any gear that is SLR. Thus Tony from Popflash should be band from selling SLR gear in the classifieds, and no one else for that matter sell SLR's gear. Nor can anyone talk about their Nikon D200, or their Pentax, for that matter. All photos posted can not be from a digital point & shoot, nor a point & shoot, nor a SLR, only and only a rangefinder with film in it. Not even a medium format camera can be talked about. Those RFF meets then should only be for those who have rangefinders, nor can anyone bring there digital point and shoot to have a group photo, only a rangefinder can be used with only film in it. Nor should anyone talk about photographers who used a SLR or a medium format camera. Only photogragher's who have used only a rangefinder can be discussed.
Is that pure enough for you! :D
thank you
MArk
Quito, EC
Hi MArk,
It is a good policy to avoid threatening to leave, as some dwellers may request you to do it indeed, in quite brutal manners.
And if you leave upon such request, you will weaken me, and all other supporters of your viewpoint.
Cheers,
Ruben
Matthew55000
07-11-2007, 16:55
All photos posted can not be from a digital point & shoot, nor a point & shoot, nor a SLR, only and only a rangefinder with film in it. Not even a medium format camera can be talked about.
Nothing wrong with digital Rangefinders or Medium format rangefinders.
You seem a bit confused.
And I thought you were leaving instead of sitting and watching the replies on the post.
Sorry fellows but maybe it's because of my broken english but I can't see/understand the point for such a hot discussion...
this is a Rangefinder cameras dedicated forum. That's a fact. Dslrexchange is another - good, friendly as this - website dedicated to srl (digital and non I guess). Then there's a thread for slr dedicated discussions here (previously discussed in the OT forum...).
Can't see what we have to "argue" about ...
Anyway, there's also a Gallery here (and on Dslrexchange too); about this last point I agree that a good photo is a good photo no matter the gear used to take it but I'm just interested to see what other people do with the same gear I have so I can learn something ... that's why I prefer to have photos shot with rf gear in the gallery ... it's just about this for me ... it's not a religious or ideological matter...
... I think we all know that there's a difference between shootin with a rf than a srl ... and i prefer to see (in order to learn) what the other members do with their rf cameras ... but if someone wants to share some shots took with slr, or tlr or pinhole there should not be any restriction about it ... but still i'd like to have mainly photos took using rf cameras.
No need for anybody to quit here.
That's all for me ...
Ciao :)
There isn't?!#? :eek:
I must fix that right away. :D
Of course, it would undoubtedly be one of the loneliest forums ever. I have yet to see anyone jump and admit to having any flavor of Fujica 35mm SLR except myself.
I feel so alone and abused. sigh. :D :D
Send me one ... then you won't be so alone! :D
Simon Larbalestier
07-11-2007, 17:32
We meet together here because we all have an interest in rangefinder cameras,
but sharing our experiences and enthusiasms in all things photographic
is what RFF is really all about...
Chris
I agree with Chris' point which is very well reasoned and concisely expressed.
In case anyone is interested in stats ... I have just gone back over the last four weeks and counted the SLR posts.
Over seven hundred .... :eek:
Talk about lifting the lid off Pandora's box! :D :D :D
... whatever we choose to talk about, this is a great forum and is now the only one I frequent ...
landsknechte
07-11-2007, 18:11
I personally have no problem restricting the galleries to RF photos, but it should be explicitly stated if that's to be the case. I'd imagine that the recent rush of SLR images posted is a backlog of images taken by those that shoot both styles of cameras, and not some sort of wholesale invasion. If the forum is going to take a harshly purist stand that the only real purpose of the forum is to be rangefinders, then we should leave it at rangefinders regardless of format. If you're trying create common bonds of brotherhood with film SLR photographers to the exclusion of digital RF photographers, then you ought to consider APUG.
One SLR sub-forum isn't going to be the end of the world guys. Relax. What's one more sub-forum in an already over subdivided forum?
shadowfox
07-12-2007, 08:27
We meet together here because we all have an interest in rangefinder cameras,
but sharing our experiences and enthusiasms in all things photographic
is what RFF is really all about...
Chris
I agree, but let's be more specific. As an analogy, you guys wouldn't say that the 4x4 Truck magazine or Hot Rod Magazine's are really about all things auto/car, would you?
There are reasons why they remain to be specialty magazines.
Similarly, RFF needs to maintain its affinity towards everything photographic that emphasizes the style that a Rangefinder camera is strong at. For example, people/street/life/wedding/photojournalism/story-telling/etc. but not macro/sports/wildlife (Why? because it'd be difficult/weird/not exciting to use a rangefinder for these type of photography).
Notice I use the word 'affinity', not blind fanaticism, without a healthy sprinkles of variety and controversy, this forum would be worse than boring.
So, I don't think we'll attract too many SLR fanatics in our Evil SLR sub-forum whose sole intention is to turn RFF into yet another photography forum.
... if we do, we'll convert them into sleek RF photographers in no time, yes? :cool:
Tuolumne
07-12-2007, 08:41
A forum is more like a conversation than the formal published conetnt of, e.g., a magazine. And just as conversations wander a bit, so do posts in a forum. No harm in that.
/T
Does this thread really belong on the Evil SLR forum? :D Mods mods!!
Seriously, I can't be objective. I was seduced by rangefinders which brought me here. Right now I am being seduced by an SLR, and haven't touched my rangefinders for a while. I'd be sad to have to stop talking about it, and would probably visit progressively less. Then, in a few months, when the RF addiction kicks in again, I'd be less likely to return.
From my selfish perspective, I like this little SLR corner, and don't need it to expand. I'm quite happy keeping the gallery RF only too.
oftheherd
07-12-2007, 11:25
Send me one ... then you won't be so alone! :D
Trade one for an OM1? Not!
Sorry, while I can be subject to OM1 GAS as anyone else at current prices, I would never give up an ST for one. It would be like trading a child. :D :D
If it’s going to be a big church then it’s going to have to be a wide one; I think we are all bright enough to understand that we need to play nicely to be allowed in the sand pit so I don’t really see what the problem is.
I don’t post none RF photos personally, but that’s a discipline I impose on myself I don’t feel I need to impose it on anyone else
vincentbenoit
07-12-2007, 12:27
I got interested in RFF because it was specifically dedicated to the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinder cameras.Same here.
Trying to make the forum more inclusive is just diluting its utility.Definitely.
Vincent
Matthew55000
07-12-2007, 12:38
If anyone has a problem with the Non-RF photos I or anyone else has posted please have the b*lls to "Name Names".
Let us know in an open thread how you feel and which pictures offend you enough to want them removed...As for me & I speak just for me I'll remove any unwanted photos in my Gallery...
Thank you...
Remember...Say what you mean...just don't say it mean...
Ok, I'll bite. Remove your SLR photos. This is a rangefinderforum (check top-left corner if you don't believe me).
Also, it's kinda fun you would end with 'Remember...Say what you mean...just don't say it mean...' a couple of sentences after "please have the b*lls to "Name Names"
Will, I feel you as a friend, so I will speak to you more from my heart, than from my brains.
I simply don't get what is really annoying you so much, leading you and other members to propose measures of force, restriction, "discipline" or plain censorship. You have went so far as to use the word "pollution", refering to images, photographic images Will, PICTURES !
The feeling you transmit to me is that you have in front of your eyes a kind of coup de etat or conspiracy to take over RFF, and I frankly don't get it. So there has been lately an Olympus OM festival, but it was just that. What is causing such feelings leading you and other members to go so extreme ?
And from the depht of both my heart and mind, I cannot get why do you and supporters of the same views, feel so weak ? Who is preventing you and your alike thinkers in this case, from taking wise initiatives of opening threads attracting high broad attention ? you are not a man lacking ideas nor opinions.
Therefore if you feel RFF is sliding out of its healthy path, why not competing for the interest of the audience, instead of calling for measures of force ? I simply don't get it, believe me.
I happen to love my OMs, I am ready to sing them prize, but from a certain point in my life i couldn't stand anymore that mirror flap in my face and ears, and that's the end of the story. One day, if i travel overseas and go for postcard type of images, instead of street type, i will take my oms with their teles and will be happy to post the images here, in a separate sub-galllery if you want. But where is the desperation.?
If you read my previous post at this thread, you will hear me quite harsh, but from a totally different angle. If RFF starts to adopt measures of force to remain "pure" then we are becoming a religious sect, maintaining its identity by forcefull isolation.
What about maintaining our identity by open competition ? By example ? by gathering interest where interest is ? Why do you feel debacled in a struggle that hasn't even taken place ?
Since I joined RFF I have been shooting rf exclusively, i am your ally, not your enemy. And what if for some weeks some folks me included went to jocke and exaggerate our adulations for the oms ? Is this an earthquake ?
There are a lot of newcomers asking questions about RFs every day. Give them your heart, your attention, answer them with utmost patience, and you will be achieving our common goal in the most effective way. There is nothing more refreshing and live that being in contact with young people. And these young people flocking RFF are expecting it from you.
So what are we going to show them ? the police stick, or the years of photographic experience we have gathered and they want us to tell ?
Cheers,
Ruben
c'mon...as long as those threads stay in SLR forum....not too many of us use/collect exclusive RF cam's
wow such a heated thread for such an insignificant point. are people actually "freaking out" that there are SLR related posts in RFF? talk about not having enough things to worry about... worry about something more worthwhile.
i equate a thread on SLR concerns akin to something like: "I've noticed that people recently are not capitalizing the first letter of a sentence in their posts. I wonder if RFF members are letter their grammar slip when posting in our forums."
Too many SLR posts?
or
Too many posts about Olympus?
c'mon...as long as those threads stay in SLR forum....not too many of us use/collect exclusive RF cam's
Not in my case. With my slr gear I am over done. With rf gear it depends a lot, on many factors, Mr K future surprises included. Although Kievs are an issue of irrational love, floating out there regardless of anything at Earth.
Cheers,
Ruben
If you don't like the SLR post then you ought to stay away. Thats how I see it. There are plenty of topics in other forums to keep one busy. As for me i'm glad to see it. It's a shame all these great old film slrs stuffed away in a closet. I just picked up a 50/1.4ssc lens for my Canon and I am having loads of fun with it, and only gave around 25 dollars for it. As for posting photos I don't wan't to see RFFs gallery with slr photos. I'll have to keep a watch on dslr exchange to see how it develops, but as of right now I don't care for it very much.
wlewisiii
07-12-2007, 21:32
I would rather read many SLR posts here, from folks who know and appreciate all cameras, than many other places. Pnet comes to mind.
Now, there are truely good alternates for SLRs - Nelsonfoto to mind - but still, this place was the first one I found that had decency towards all the users & respect towards all styles.
I'd prefer to talk about all of my Canons here.
William
jan normandale
07-12-2007, 21:50
If I want a Buick I go to GM if I want a Toyota I go to... you got it.
If I want to talk specifics on rangefinders, guess where I go. I've got other cameras that aren't RF's and I don't discuss them here. How hard is that for me? Not hard at all.
Keith has made a fair observation.
BTW I can't tell if someone puts up an SLR shot; so I don't think his point's about the image on the 'net
[QUOTE=jan normandale]If I want a Buick I go to GM if I want a Toyota I go to... you got it.
If I want to talk specifics on rangefinders, guess where I go. I've got other cameras that aren't RF's and I don't discuss them here. How hard is that for me? Not hard at all.
/QUOTE]
Fair enough for you Jan, a vet in in photography, and member of RFF since 2004. Fair enough for many others in the same situation, perhaps me included.
But what about the youngers gravitating towards film, but still unsure of what is what, and the differences between rf and slr ?
Would you like the first thing they see here is a checkpost, 2 armed vigilantes and some big dogs around ?
i am confident you don't.
Cheers,
Ruben
If I want a Buick I go to GM if I want a Toyota I go to... you got it.
If you want a BMW car, you don't complain to the dealer that he's also selling BMW bikes. And if you don't want to read about SLRs, nobody forces you to read the "Evil SLRs" subforum. Problem solved.
If at some point traffic under "Evil SLRs" develops to the point where it spills out because it's too numerous to live in its little tongue-in-cheek subforum, it gets spun off into a new SLRF community, and everybody can be happy.
Philipp
Well, everyone knows that it is the equipment that defines photography. That is why talent is marginal if you have great gear. And I completely agree with purging non-rangefinder images. All images taken with the following equipment should be deleted:
Holgas
Viewfinder folding cameras
Lomos and other plastic cameras
Widelux, Noblex, Horseman, Linholf panoramic cameras
Brooks Veriwide
Alpa
Viewcameras without rangefinders
Bessa L
Zeiss Icon super-wide body
Rollei, Yashica, and Mamiya TLRs
In short, if it does not have a focusing mechanism that works by determining object distance by triangulation, the results from those cameras must be deleted. We should have simply two catagories - mechanical rangefinders and electronic rangefinders.
And since scanning and darkroom techniques can be applied to the unclean varieties of camera gear, we should delete any reference to those topics - unless you find a rangefinder enlarger.
This will make these forums pure and sanitized. It will be populated by only the worthy and will be so dull as to wonder why you would ever want to participate.
Please remove any non-rangefinder gear from you signatures as well.
Tuolumne
07-13-2007, 05:09
You guys are a hoot!
/T
perhaps there should be a separate sub-forum for the for the purists, the Real RFF or the Provisional RFF, they could get some RFF balaclavas made, like the baseball caps, to raise funds for the struggle
:angel:
Ruben,
I couldn't care less about the color of yours, mine, or anyone else's underwear, or how anyone uses specific photographic equipment. I am not trying to hide any secret intention of my original post. I am just curious as how people feel here with all the recent threads and posts on SLRs. As i said, a lot of us own and use cameras that are not rangefinders. This site, as the titled says is " Rangefinder Forum ", and we all came here due to our interest, love, dicussion, and use of these specific cameras. I am not trying to prevent change of any kind. As far as I am concerned change is a wonderful thing. I am just wondering if this site is moving into a different direction, and if it is, so be it. This site is a reflection of its users and a place for open honest discussion. If you want to get angry and make a joke of my post by changing the arrangement of my RFF ID, knock yourself out. My real name is in full view under my post. In case you can't read, it's Keith.
Oh yes, I never suggested anyone be banned.
Shalom,
Keith
micromontenegro
07-13-2007, 05:37
Hmm, I gather SLRs with split image focussing screens are OK. They triangulate, don't they? :angel:
Hmm, I gather SLRs with split image focussing screens are OK. They triangulate, don't they? :angel:
No, they don't. No wonder there is confusion.
Robert Price
07-13-2007, 06:16
ok now that I have read all of this and had a good laugh at a lot of it. All i have to say is..... "WHAT"
A camera is a tool. If i choose to use the right tool for the job then my job is easier. SLR, RF, TLR, what have you, so be it. If a person or persons wants to try and impose a restriction on the type of "TOOL" i use well that is just absurd and ignorant on their part. I use all of my cameras to achieve one goal...... to make beautiful photos.
If a photo can't or won't be appreciated because it was not created by a certain type of "TOOL" then the person judeing it is too arrogant and ignorant to be of concern.
Yes, this may very well be the RFF, and it is by all means more RF orientated, what harm is a little sub form going to have. It could be very helpfull in my mind. I just may learn something too, ANd that in my book is a good thing to be able to do.
micromontenegro
07-13-2007, 06:42
No, they don't. No wonder there is confusion.
Oh my! How dare I post such a nonsense! No wonder I am not a genius! :eek:
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/5800/wedgekf5.jpg
Oh my! How dare I post such a nonsense! No wonder I am not a genius! :eek:
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/5800/wedgekf5.jpg
Look!!! More deviation from the true path, when will this heresy end????
;) ;)
Film dino
07-13-2007, 07:12
Well, everyone knows that it is the equipment that defines photography. That is why talent is marginal if you have great gear. And I completely agree with purging non-rangefinder images. All images taken with the following equipment should be deleted:
Holgas
Viewfinder folding cameras
Lomos and other plastic cameras
Widelux, Noblex, Horseman, Linholf panoramic cameras
Brooks Veriwide
Alpa
Viewcameras without rangefinders
Bessa L
Zeiss Icon super-wide body
Rollei, Yashica, and Mamiya TLRs
In short, if it does not have a focusing mechanism that works by determining object distance by triangulation, the results from those cameras must be deleted. We should have simply two catagories - mechanical rangefinders and electronic rangefinders...
& anything taken with a Visoflex
David
Tuolumne
07-13-2007, 08:00
You guys are a hoot!
/T
Uncle Bill
07-13-2007, 08:12
I shoot both Rangefinder and SLR but I post only photos from my leica M3, Contax IIIa, Canonet and Kiev III here. If people want to see my SLR output I have a massive account over at Flickr.
Bill
Don't care about the SLR threads as they can be easily ignored, but the gallery should mainly be for RF photos...isn't that RFF's raison d'etre? When I view the gallery I want to see and learn about what I can attain with an RF, afterall, that's why I'm here. Otherwise I'd be on a general photo forum.....
Perhaps non-RF photos could be identified as such so one doesn't have to wait for it to load before finding out it's not an RF shot.
I am guilty of a few visoflex shots myself, but they're so damn hard to use I assumed an exemption was in order.....
............When I view the gallery I want to see and learn about what I can attain with an RF..............
if this is what you see at RFF gallery, or whenever looking at photographic images, well amigo... Vaya con Dios.
Cheers
Ruben
Although i seriously doubt even him can be of help in your quest.
shadowfox
07-13-2007, 08:39
Hi Ruben, sorry I didn't see this post addressed to me until today.
I too regard you as a friend (funny forum this RFF is in this regard :)). Moreover, you and I both loves OMs and Kievs. So I don't want you to read me wrong.
Please take a moment to see my previous posts to at least get the pattern of my thinking. I am one of the staunchest supporter to get the now called Evil SLR sub-forum going. I am so glad that Steven decided it's a good idea and implemented it. And I've been active in that forum since with my OM rants (what else? :rolleyes:)
However, as someone put so aptly in a prior post, this is the RangefinderForum. Not a sect or religion, but a forum with an identity.
And in my mind, a Gallery that showcases the member's work/master-pieces is closely tied to what the forum stands for. Well, this forum is not called "All Photography" or "Nice Photogs" is it? it's again called RangefinderForum.
So, the gallery should be mainly populated by shots by Rangefinder cameras.
As I stated in my previous post, shots from an RF camera will be different than those from an SLR because of the different style, techniques, and limitations.
It's not "weak" or "purist" to put a boundary that will challenge our creativity and spur a more focused learning experience. Don't you agree?
I will give that a separate sub-gallery that is specifically designated for non-RF camera shots may be OK, even useful, but not required. Why? because I can go look at 100 other galleries on the internet and see SLR shots. But not all of them have the sizeable RF shots like we have here (or maybe on the Leica forum where I don't feel worthy to tie some of their shoelaces of the people over there ... yeah, right :rolleyes:)
Forgive my usage of the word "pollute", I don't mean that the SLR shots are "pollutant", rather, out of context. I am as proud of my SLR shots (as lame as they are) as my RF shots (even lamer).
As for giving my all to embrace new comers, I think I've done that, at least I tried, I used to be a newcomer myself not too long ago.
Finally, thanks for the heartfelt "letter" to me, if we must disagree, at least it shouldn't be based on misunderstanding.
Cheers,
Will
Will, I feel you as a friend, so I will speak to you more from my heart, than from my brains.
I simply don't get what is really annoying you so much, leading you and other members to propose measures of force, restriction, "discipline" or plain censorship. You have went so far as to use the word "pollution", refering to images, photographic images Will, PICTURES !
The feeling you transmit to me is that you have in front of your eyes a kind of coup de etat or conspiracy to take over RFF, and I frankly don't get it. So there has been lately an Olympus OM festival, but it was just that. What is causing such feelings leading you and other members to go so extreme ?
And from the depht of both my heart and mind, I cannot get why do you and supporters of the same views, feel so weak ? Who is preventing you and your alike thinkers in this case, from taking wise initiatives of opening threads attracting high broad attention ? you are not a man lacking ideas nor opinions.
Therefore if you feel RFF is sliding out of its healthy path, why not competing for the interest of the audience, instead of calling for measures of force ? I simply don't get it, believe me.
I happen to love my OMs, I am ready to sing them prize, but from a certain point in my life i couldn't stand anymore that mirror flap in my face and ears, and that's the end of the story. One day, if i travel overseas and go for postcard type of images, instead of street type, i will take my oms with their teles and will be happy to post the images here, in a separate sub-galllery if you want. But where is the desperation.?
If you read my previous post at this thread, you will hear me quite harsh, but from a totally different angle. If RFF starts to adopt measures of force to remain "pure" then we are becoming a religious sect, maintaining its identity by forcefull isolation.
What about maintaining our identity by open competition ? By example ? by gathering interest where interest is ? Why do you feel debacled in a struggle that hasn't even taken place ?
Since I joined RFF I have been shooting rf exclusively, i am your ally, not your enemy. And what if for some weeks some folks me included went to jocke and exaggerate our adulations for the oms ? Is this an earthquake ?
There are a lot of newcomers asking questions about RFs every day. Give them your heart, your attention, answer them with utmost patience, and you will be achieving our common goal in the most effective way. There is nothing more refreshing and live that being in contact with young people. And these young people flocking RFF are expecting it from you.
So what are we going to show them ? the police stick, or the years of photographic experience we have gathered and they want us to tell ?
Cheers,
Ruben
jan normandale
07-13-2007, 08:42
@ Ruben/Ruben Bitterman, Philipp/RXMD/may contain traces of nut, Finder/genius etc... I think it's a sign of the times that my "complete comments" are taken out of context. My points were
• this is a rangefinder website
• Keith had noted a surge in SLR posts and images
• I have other cameras however I discuss rangefinder based ideas here not SLR, ideas ie: I have a TLR and folder etc but my focus is rangefinders at this forum simply because that is its intended purpose and I try and abide by that.
• Like I noted in my earlier post, I can't tell a RF image from an SLR image on the net.
My points weren't
• ban people
• ban threads
• SLRS are evil
• delete all references to other cameras, scanners, film etc..
I don't appreciate juxtaposing my words with your personal editorials. Do it to some other member of RFF not me please. I’ve never said a thing to date at RFF about SLR posts and still won’t. Yes I can decide not to read the posts and yes I do make my own decisions. How hard is it for you to figure that out when you have to spell it out for others?
End of my involvement with this topic. Sheesh!
Best regards, Jan
.............. I am guilty of a few visoflex shots myself, but they're so damn hard to use I assumed an exemption was in order.....
if you are "guilty", then don't get away so easy by Public Confession. Perhaps if you digg for some middle ages punnishemnts you could bring us more trendy ideas.
Cheers,
Ruben
back alley
07-13-2007, 08:48
ruben, are you trolling for arguments?
But what about the youngers gravitating towards film, but still unsure of what is what, and the differences between rf and slr ?
How, may I ask, could they ever understand the difference between SLR and RFs without that difference being underlined? This place had the unique virtue of being about Range Finders. Not about film or homespun philosophy. If this is simply a general photography forum or a social club for those delighted with the sound of their own voice, fair enough - but that was certainly not the reason I came here.
This is not some sort of Luddite nonsense - the Royal Institute of Oil Painters doesn't show watercolours. The Royal Watercolour Society doesn't show oils. Artists may practice both, but they recognise and celibrate a profound difference between the forms. And no-one is the poorer - rather the opposite.
I completely agree with Jan and think Keith raised entirely valid concerns.
Cheers, Ian
Hi Joe,
Perhaps this time you are right.
Cheers,
Ruben
Hi Will and Jan,
Showing the other side of your thoughts, makes a great difference for me in appreciating your previous posts.
Both of you have been right in feeling that you and others were leaving me the impression of supporting measures of force. And this impression, false as you remmark, quite pushed some red button in my head.
So as in so far of what really concerns me, we can all raise together a glass of beer again. I feel now a real desire to.
Cheers,
Ruben
Tuolumne
07-13-2007, 10:41
Ruling out extreme macro and long telephoto pictures, can anyone here tell from looking what kind of camera a post in the gallery was taken on? I doubt it. So, what's the difference between a photo taken on a RF or an SLR?
/T
Ruling out extreme macro and long telephoto pictures, can anyone here tell from looking what kind of camera a post in the gallery was taken on? I doubt it. So, what's the difference between a photo taken on a RF or an SLR?
/T
There is none! Photos are useful here to illustrate composition, new ideas, film choices, developing styles, lens characteristics. It makes no difference whether that particular photo was taken with a RF or SLR.
It seems to me we are missing the most important: the Range Finder camera identity, and our common denominator with SLRs: FILM.
In view of the increasing digital avalanche, it will not be too wise to break ranks with other film users. We are not any more the majority.
As for the range finder identity, or intrinsic personality, how are we supposed to deepen our understanding and feeling, if not by comparizon ?
And how can we possibly broaden our audience and attracting more people to our camp, by "La Migra" policies ?
Creating The Evil SLR subforum seems appropriate to me, in view of the abovementioned concerns. Creating a sub-gallery for non rf images seems to me appropriate too.
Don't force, convince !
Cheers,
Ruben
Ruben: This is a very important point that you have made.
Film based photography has become one entity again, whether people like it or not.
Let's unite and not separate. :bang:
.
Raid
It's like posting a bunch of film shots on the DSLR forum, and explaining how you pushed your Tri-X, what developer you used, times and agitation techniques....
One could do that, but that would be......well, dumb.
nikon_sam
07-13-2007, 13:26
Ok, I'll bite. Remove your SLR photos. This is a rangefinderforum (check top-left corner if you don't believe me).
Also, it's kinda fun you would end with 'Remember...Say what you mean...just don't say it mean...' a couple of sentences after "please have the b*lls to "Name Names"
Matthew,
As per your request the SLR photos have been removed from "My Gallery"...
Sorry if I offended you and the RFF site...As that was not my intent when I posted them...Just wanted to share images...
Again, I apologize for the photos and for upsetting you...
wlewisiii
07-13-2007, 13:39
Far as I'm concerned this is getting mighty silly. I'm with Ruben - film use outwieghs camera type.
Sam, thank you for sharing your images. As long as they were on film that's enough for me and I hope you will reconsider and place them back in your gallery.
William
I suggest that this thread be closed before additional RF members get insulted here.
Raid
back alley
07-13-2007, 13:52
this tread has migrated to a place that is not even close to the original post.
this is not a thread about film and/or digital.
this is not a thread that is about rf vs slr and who can tell the difference from looking at a web based photo.
it seems to me the o.p. was WONDERING if the flavour of rff is changing.
i will go one step further and WONDER aloud if the culture of rff is changing?
i have nothing against slrs or photography in general, be it film or digital.
but i came here in the first place because this is a place for folks who are into rangefinder photography and gear and i liked that it was a unique niche forum for like minded individuals.
"diluting its utility" for who ? What is out there beyond your own needs, your own interests, your own utility ?
People who had discovered (or rediscovered) rangefinder cameras, and who realized (or re-realized) that an RF camera's unique combination of strengths and weaknesses promotes a fairly specific worldview of photography, used to have a place to go where they could count on almost 100% of the content dealing with that specific worldview.
Some of the content was technical, some of it was philosophical, and some took the form of images. But they could be reasonably sure that ALL of it was applicable to opportunities and challenges similar to those that they were facing, or might face, in their own RF-camera photography.
Now they don't have that place and that certainty. In order to get that RF-specific content, they have to be prepared to expend time and energy going through general photography content, and SLR-specific content, and so forth.
That is specifically what I meant by "diluting its utility."
Whoever made the analogy to automobile-specific forums had a good point. Those of us who are driving enthusiasts all share some general interests -- e.g. cost of fuel, environmental issues, law enforcement, etc. -- which apply whether we're interested in plug-in hybrids or SUVs or custom monster trucks. There are many non-specific driving forums we can choose to share those general interests.
However, the driving enthusiast who is specifically interested in, say, British sports cars of the 1960s is also probably going to want to find a forum that caters specifically to that interest. If he wants to know, for example, whether the solid-axle or independent-suspension version of the Triumph TR-4A is better for vintage racing, he'll probably find better answers more easily on a Triumph forum than on a general-driving forum.
Same goes here. Back when this was a clubhouse for rangefinder-camera users, we could be reasonably certain that everything would be (no pun intended) focused on problems, solutions, and ideas that would help us. If I invited comments on one of my "problem" pictures, for example, nobody would tell me that it would have turned out better if I had used the DOF preview to evaluate sharpness, or switched to a different focusing screen, or used a touch of front tilt to take advantage of the Scheimpflug effect, or tried that spiffy new Sigmoid 18-600 zoom lens. We could be reasonably sure that people would "get it" that we were all talking about the application of rangefinder equipment.
And now we can't. That represents a loss of utility.
Note that since it would be rude to invite people in and then kick them out again, I am not proposing that we reverse course now. What I am saying is that in the future, RFF (maybe it's time to change those initials!) is going to be less efficient for its original audience that it used to be, because we'll need to spend more time and energy filtering out non-rangefinder content that isn't useful for us.
I also just want to warn y'all that as RFF gradually morphs into "Everybody's Photography Forum," you'll find that the definition of general photography content can be broad indeed. Watch for future threads on exciting subjects like these:
"I like to do landscape photography in rugged mountain areas, but my old Toyota Land Cruiser is no longer up to the task of hauling my 20x24 wet plate camera and dark-tent up into the Rockies. Which would be better, the new Land Cruiser or something fancier such as a Range Rover or a Hummer? Cost is no object, as my prints have been selling very well lately. Thanks... W.H. JACKSON"
"I capture the beauty of Nature in large-format photographs made painstakingly in our nation's most beautiful forests. But it seems there are always a few damn dead limbs in the shot! Who makes the best chain saw for photographers: Husqvarna? Stihl? Somebody else? Thanks for any info... SPAMSEL ADAMS
"I get a kick out of photographing steam trains at night, using about four thousand old-fashioned flash bulbs. The problem I'm running into now is that I miss a lot of shots because while I'm waiting for the train to come by, I have to go take a pee. Does anybody have any experience with this Avodart stuff I keep seeing advertised on TV? Advice appreciated! -- O. WINSTON LEAK
"Hello, I am wife of deceased former Nigerian oil official JOSEPH BIGCONOOSKI, who was avid foto enthusiast. To buy foto supplies in U.S.A. he established secret bank account containing THIRTEEN BAJILLION SQUILLION DOLLARS U.S. I need to find honest U.S.A. foto enthusiast to help retrieve these funds. You will receive SEVEN ZILLION SPILLION GAJILLION DOLLARS U.S. for your trouble. Please contact me direct for details. Thank you and God bless you -- MRS BIGCONEROOSKI"
See, you're gonna love the new EPF -- there'll be something for everybody!
Far as I'm concerned this is getting mighty silly. I'm with Ruben - film use outwieghs camera type.
Then you'd better call the bouncer and have me kicked out, because I do most of my photography with a rangefinder camera (Epson R-D 1) but haven't shot a roll of film in almost two years!
I'm not saying that a "Film Photography Forum" or a "Traditional Photography Forum" or whatever you guys like to call yourselves wouldn't be a great idea. I'm just saying that this ain't the place to do it...
CameraQuest
07-13-2007, 15:18
you know people,
it's amazing to me how many complainers in this thread want to complain about imaginary things that have not happened. Worst case, IF dire consequences did result, changes would indeed be made to bring RF photography back into focus. RFF is not going to be renamed into something else, or be allowed to become like so many other "all everything photography" forums. I find some of these dire "warning" posts honestly ridiculous.
There were literally thousands of SLR posts at RFF before the Evil SLR forum was created as a place to dump them into, instead of having misplaced in just about any forum you can think of. Ignoring them did not make SLR posts go away, or make RFF any less focused on RF photography. Neither will a single SLR forum change the focus of the other forums.
The best thing about this thread may be we have a lot of people really caring about RFF -- something as esoteric as an internet forum which concretely exists only in cyberspace. Relax folks. RFF is going to stay the # 1 destination on the net for RF photography.
Stephen
Thank you Joe and Stephen. The original intent of my post was for an open intelligent discussion based on observation of the last few weeks. If things are changing at RFF and moving in a different direction, so be it. Lets discuss where things are going. I never said or implied that people, images, or posts should be banned. Read my original post. Now I am curious why this post brought about so much ire?
Just in line with the reconciliation spirit that is appearing in this thread, I think it may be of help if like Will and Jan, I too reveal "the other side" of the coin.
I never intended that RFF become FILM users forum, uniting all types of cameras and delegating range finder cameras and phylosophy to second or equal place. There should be not doubt about this.
All what I was trying to avoid was just that "mixed users" (rf plus other types) and newcomers get slapped. To maintain RFF identity is not easy - I do acknowledge it upon the latest posts.
As well there is no reason to slap some of our loyal vet members, our friends, who started here to worry. I am sorry in so far I showed myself some lack of tolerance, instead of forwarding some rather humouristic posts. Well I am a human too, and RFF is close to my heart too.
Finally, I think that this thread shows a real issue: that to find the right balance among all concerns is a complex task, we all should be aware of its problematics, trust our Chief, and be ready to accept compromises. RFF is growing and this welcomed growth is to be managed.
Cheers to all,
Ruben
Ps
Thanks Keith.
I find some of these dire "warning" posts honestly ridiculous.
Well, at least in my warnings, I was being dishonestly ridiculous. "O. Winston Leak" asking about Avodart...?
Calm down everybody. This place is and should be almost entirely about rangefinder photography. There is no need to get too exited. All I would suggest is to allow occasional SLR adventures being mentioned in the Evil SLR scetion. I don't see any SLR takeover happening here. The beautiful aspects of RF photography and equipment is what made me come over here.
Raid
ChrisPlatt
07-15-2007, 08:25
If the flavor (or flavour) of RFF is going to change,
I vote for chocolate! ;)
Chris
Bike Tourist
07-15-2007, 08:42
I brought this up when I felt a little guilty for posting a few DSLR images. My sense of the responses was that a little is OK, a lot is to be discouraged.
My gallery is about 90% RF but, in all honesty, my images (good or bad) can't be separated into RF and DSLR by looking, unless I were to post an obvious 400mm tele shot . . . which I wouldn't do.
I think RFF differentiates itself from the pack by the quality of its words and pictures, not by an arbitrary filter of what can or can't be seen.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.