Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > RFF Polls

View Poll Results: Add Separate Film Manufacturer Forums?
No thanks, we have enough forums! 67 82.72%
Yes, new forums for Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Fuji etc would be much appreciated! 14 17.28%
POLL CLOSED - SEE POST 23 ABOUT POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS 0 0%
Voters: 81. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Separate Film Forums for Different Manufacturers?
Old 01-11-2012   #1
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 4,383
Separate Film Forums for Different Manufacturers?

Ok, RFF has a lot of forums, true.

But is it a good idea to add forums for different film types?
for Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Fuji, etc ?

Stephen
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #2
rover
Moderator
 
rover's Avatar
 
rover is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Connecticut
Age: 48
Posts: 13,945
I think the film/processing forum gets a healthy amount of traffic and has a higher than average On Topic threads compared to our other forums. (at least I think it does)

I think it is one of our more successful forums. I don't think any changes can improve it.

I vote, " If it ain't Broke...."
__________________
Dad with a Camera

Millennium M6TTL with Voigtlander 35/1.2 Nokton

rover's world at flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #3
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 46
Posts: 3,909
If it would help direct traffic here from Google searches etc. I say why not. Otherwise I agree with Rover.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #4
filmfan
Registered User
 
filmfan's Avatar
 
filmfan is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,877
I would say forget it. I have posted many questions in the film forum and never had any trouble getting quick, accurate responses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #5
thirtyfivefifty
Noctilust survivor
 
thirtyfivefifty is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: 대한민국
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by rover View Post
I vote, " If it ain't Broke...."
+1

(and a few more characters to make it at least 10)
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #6
johannielscom
985 & 532/16
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by f16sunshine View Post
If it would help direct traffic here from Google searches etc. I say why not. Otherwise I agree with Rover.
It ain't broke. The search function OTOH is, I say...
__________________
Cheers, Johan Niels

My photography & gear articles: www.johanniels.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #7
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,338
I think that much advice on film development is generic, although particular films have their nuances. Once you separate the film forum into sub-groups, Kodak users won't be as easily able to find useful information that happened to be posted by an Ilford user. Far from the current arrangement not being "broke," I would say that there are positive benefits to having film information in one place. This is more true, not less, in a shrinking film marketplace. Another way to approach this is to ask back, "What problem is it that you are trying to solve?"
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1566'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #8
rpsawin
RF Enthusiast
 
rpsawin's Avatar
 
rpsawin is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,495
I agree with Rover. It's fine as is.

Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #9
rover
Moderator
 
rover's Avatar
 
rover is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Connecticut
Age: 48
Posts: 13,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzardkid View Post
It ain't broke. The search function OTOH is, I say...
it is much improved, not perfect, but give it a try.
__________________
Dad with a Camera

Millennium M6TTL with Voigtlander 35/1.2 Nokton

rover's world at flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #10
johannielscom
985 & 532/16
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by rover View Post
it is much improved, not perfect, but give it a try.
Thanks , will do!

I've been using the google search for forum posts so long now, I haven't tried the forum search recently but now I will!
__________________
Cheers, Johan Niels

My photography & gear articles: www.johanniels.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #11
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 4,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
I think that much advice on film development is generic, although particular films have their nuances.
But many of these are not along manufacturer borders, but are sensitivity, type or even developer related.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #12
majid
Fazal Majid
 
majid's Avatar
 
majid is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 401
Kodak will be bankrupt within a year, and at that point, it will be only Fuji left, with a smattering of B&W specialists like Ilford, Efke and so on. It doesn't make sense to have many forums per manufacturer when the industry is consolidating onto a handful of players.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #13
back alley
just joe
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: searching for the perfect bag!
Posts: 37,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by majid View Post
Kodak will be bankrupt within a year, and at that point, it will be only Fuji left, with a smattering of B&W specialists like Ilford, Efke and so on. It doesn't make sense to have many forums per manufacturer when the industry is consolidating onto a handful of players.
pretty much sums up my thinking...
__________________
i don't know what art is...but i know what i like.


heart soul & a camera
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #14
desparengo
Registered User
 
desparengo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4
Yes. It would be useful to see specific results from different stock and dev combos in a much easier way. It would simplify keeping a tab on current deals, availability and re-branded emulsions. Who knows it might make it more attractive for the manufacturers to see what people like. It would be easier for them to establish a direct line of communication with their consumers as the feedback, knowledge and experience on display here is often of a very high quality. Potential RFF specific deals, as a result, would be welcome by many here I'm sure. The current search function makes filtering harder than it might be at times.

Sean de Sparengo
desparengo.com
coy-com.com/blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #15
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is online now
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 35
Posts: 3,736
I don't see any point, but nor would I have a problem with it. To be honest, I think there is too much brand loyalty in the world as it is, and separating us into "Ilford shooters" or "Kodak shooters" would just further that.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #16
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
 
rxmd's Avatar
 
rxmd is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kyrgyzstan
Posts: 5,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by rover View Post
I think the film/processing forum gets a healthy amount of traffic and has a higher than average On Topic threads compared to our other forums. (at least I think it does)
Maybe that's because there's only one forum, instead of separate different ones?

Perhaps we should instead consider consolidating some of the other forums that get like five posts per month.
__________________
Bing! You're hypnotized!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #17
taskoni
Registered User
 
taskoni's Avatar
 
taskoni is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Vilnius, Lithuania
Posts: 1,580
Why not. Sounds like a good idea. I can see the advantage of discussions about film, developer, times etc. on different boards. That will make reaching for information faster for trying new films, processing techniques etc. for example, not kodak vs ilford wars...
__________________
When in doubt, click.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #18
Rob-F
Old School
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 3,529
I'm just glad we still have any film to talk about.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-11-2012   #19
f6andBthere
-
 
f6andBthere's Avatar
 
f6andBthere is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 445
Dodo feathers ... nice idea!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2012   #20
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,883
I hope it doesn't get compartmentalized. First by brand, and then what, by color/b&w, by ISO, Pushable, Diafine (can/cannot), Frames (12/24/36), bulk.

Sure, you think I'm kidding...but...
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2012   #21
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 4,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel M.A. View Post
I hope it doesn't get compartmentalized. First by brand, and then what, by color/b&w, by ISO, Pushable, Diafine (can/cannot), Frames (12/24/36), bulk.

Sure, you think I'm kidding...but...
but don't forget nation of manufacture...

OK, the we won't have forums by film manufacturer any time soon.

but to ask another question,

can the rather busy image processing forum be improved upon?

how?

Stephen
  Reply With Quote

Regarding the question posed....
Old 01-12-2012   #22
kuzano
Registered User
 
kuzano is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,750
Regarding the question posed....

Nah! No! Nada!

Nah! was just too short a message. So much for energy savings?
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:10.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.