Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Rangefinder Photography Discussion

Rangefinder Photography Discussion General discussions about Rangefinder Photography. This is a great place for questions and answers that are not addressed in a specific category. Take note there is also a General Photography forum.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Exploding heads over at APUG
Old 01-29-2005   #1
Gordon Coale
Registered User
 
Gordon Coale's Avatar
 
Gordon Coale is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Whidbey Island -- north of Seattle
Age: 74
Posts: 817
Exploding heads over at APUG

I've recently decided to get back into black and white and even plan for a darkroom thanks to the bad influence of the friendly people here. So I have been also checking out Analog Photography Users Group (APUG). There is a flame war currently going on because some people want to do hybrid analog/digital threads (which I'm also interested in) and the hard core purist analog only crowd really needs to not drink so much coffee. It's the What does traditional really mean? thread.

It's a contrast to the acceptance in this forum of things that are non-rangefinder. A little tolerance goes a long way to promoting the reason for this forum -- those cute little rangefinders. Thanks to everyone here for making this a better place. I doubt I will be going back to APUG. There are some scary people over there!
__________________
What I am currently shooting:
35mm: 1949 Leica IIIc, 1937 Leica IIIa, 1935 Leica Standard, 1951 Canon IVSB, Voigtlander Bessa T, Asahi Pentax K, Nikon F, Nikon F4s
Medium Format: Bronica SQ-A, Isolette II, Mamiya C330
Digital: Panasonic GH3, Olympus Pen Mini E-PM2, Olympus Pen E-P2 converted to IR
gordy's camera straps for sale * my feedback
 

Old 01-29-2005   #2
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
i better go check that out!
 

Old 01-29-2005   #3
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
i'm back!

it's 11 pages long and i wasn't THAT interested.

joe
 

Old 01-29-2005   #4
peter_n
~
 
peter_n's Avatar
 
peter_n is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,772
I think they're just upset over the fact that it's intended to be an analog site and that's pretty obvious. One or two of them have gotten real cranky over what they see as an invasion by the digital types (who actually have their own sub-forum there). I'm a member but I lurk over there and generally the tone is OK. Maybe people are getting cabin fever with this bad weather...
__________________
_
~Peter

My RFF Gallery
 

Old 01-29-2005   #5
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,912
I just peeked over there. If they do not like digital anything, how do they manage to have a Gallery? Back in the early computer imaging days, I used a Nikon F3 with 80~200 F4 zoom to record the computer generated images from my Image Processors. Is that a Digital Negative? I alternated between Kodacolor and Ektachrome. Is that a Digital Slide? I have another device that takes Video Output and records it onto film using a copy camera. AHHHH!!!! How do they display their prints in the gallery without using a scanner! That takes a Lot of typing to enter a Jpeg Image Directly!!! And then you are just a human digitizer.

Last edited by Brian Sweeney : 01-30-2005 at 07:44.
 

Old 01-29-2005   #6
wlewisiii
StayAtHome Dad & Photog
 
wlewisiii's Avatar
 
wlewisiii is offline
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Age: 55
Posts: 5,259
They need a spanking. All of them. Far more than my 3 yr. old on his worst day.

Foo.

Thank you, RFF'ers, for being sane folks.

William
__________________
My Gallery
My Best Pictures

Playing and learning daily with: 4x5 Crown Graphic, Leica IIIf w/ 50/2 Summitar, Nikon F2 Photomic w/ 50/1.4 & Olympus E-PL1.

"Some people are 'the glass is half full' types. Some people are 'the glass is half empty' types. I'm a 'the glass is full of radioactive waste and I just drank half of it' type. And I'm still thirsty." -- Bill Mattocks
 

Old 01-29-2005   #7
Ken Tanaka
Camera Owner
 
Ken Tanaka is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 65
Posts: 71
I had never seen that site before coming across this thread. Chances are high that I'll never see it again.

Fundamentalism in all of its forms is such a counter-productive drain of energy and waste of time.

I prefer to spend my time and energy on more creative endeavors. I suspect most folks here share that preference.
__________________
- Ken Tanaka -
 

Old 01-30-2005   #8
g0tr00t
Registered User
 
g0tr00t's Avatar
 
g0tr00t is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: South Pasadena, Florida
Age: 49
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by wlewisiii
They need a spanking. All of them. Far more than my 3 yr. old on his worst day.

Foo.

Thank you, RFF'ers, for being sane folks.

William
NOW that is funny! Lucky this place is mellow so you won't get flamed about spanking....LOL!

APUG has a wealth of info from the old timers. Don't ignore it because of the hot heads....
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=721'>My Gallery</a>
 

Old 01-30-2005   #9
taffer
void
 
taffer is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: BCN
Age: 42
Posts: 3,450
Brian... LOL !
 

Old 01-30-2005   #10
Solinar
Analog Preferred
 
Solinar's Avatar
 
Solinar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 2,511
If dwelving into the multifaceted world of electronic image processing is one your key interests, then APUG isn't a web site that will not cater to your wants or needs. There are other web sites that fill this need.

I agree with Ed Sukach. This really is a tempest in a tea pot.

I highly recommend reading the archives, if you are at all interested in analog printing. APUG may be the only place on the web where a answer to color RA-4 printing question will be answered accurately and quickly.
__________________
- Andrew in Austin, Texas -

35mm Gear Bessa R, Leica II, - IIIg, - M2
Just for fun 35mm Gear a Kodak Retina II, Retina IIa, a Rollei 35 S, plus an Oly 35RD and XA
Modern Medium Format Fuji GW 690III
Vintage MF Folders a Voigtländer Perkeo II and Bessa II, 2 of them - a ZI Mess Ikonta 524/2 - plus an Agfa Super Isolette & a Record III
Digital a D300 and a D700 with some primes - still going over a decade later

"Who spilled the Dektol on the bathroom carpet?"
 

Old 01-30-2005   #11
HBC
Registered User
 
HBC's Avatar
 
HBC is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Philadelphia Pa.
Age: 56
Posts: 30
This one of the things i love about this site besides the great photography of it's memmbers wich IMHO i considers far superior than most of the stuff at apug (wich i am a member of) is the acceptance of different views and processes it seems that here the image is what matters, and the galleries show it.
 

Old 01-30-2005   #12
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
i think we have developed a very tolerant mix of ideas and equipment while keeping the main focus on rf gear and allowing the occasional use of other machines, be they digital or tlr etc.
i agree that we are sane, also respectful of each other and i think we follow the 'rules' because we like coming to a place that treats us well.

i thank you all for making a moderator's job that much easier.

joe
 

Old 01-30-2005   #13
ddimaria
Registered User
 
ddimaria's Avatar
 
ddimaria is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Boston
Posts: 242
I think the people who contribute to this site all have a deep love of photography and a deep respect for their fellow photographers. I find some of the other forums and sites to be truly ridiculous and pompous. Three cheers for us!!!
__________________
No Particular Place
 

Old 01-30-2005   #14
RubenBlaedel
photoholic imaginist
 
RubenBlaedel's Avatar
 
RubenBlaedel is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Denmark
Age: 57
Posts: 249
Well I checked out APUG and it seemed pretty harmless - strange how someone critizising a place makes everyone want to go there? Anyway this place (rff) is truly a gem - one of the really great things are that when you just "drop by" you almost always find something amusing, something interesting and something new - not that many forums offer that + this place seems to be a bunch of nice people (so there is 1000 - 8 = nice people in the world :-) )
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=862'>My Gallery</a>
 

Old 01-30-2005   #15
peter_n
~
 
peter_n's Avatar
 
peter_n is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,772
Brian APUG is OK with scanning a neg, they have a special gallery there for the scans - can't remember what it's called. But Andrew is right, apart from the B&W Photo - Printing & Finishing forum on photo.net, there is nowhere else to go for really good analog printing information. I just bought an enlarger this week and I'm anxious to learn so I visit there quite often. Yes there are photographic bigots over there but I stay clear of the wars, just like I did on the Leica forum nearly a year ago.

As everyone points out, it doesn't happen here. This week I was reading a thread on a Leica forum that was congratulating itself for being so international. I started to write a post about the fact that it was nowhere near as international as RFF. I finished the post and then thought about it for a bit. There is an individual on that forum who has been an abusive pest on several photographic forums, and has been banned from almost all of them. He has mellowed a little but to be honest, I wouldn't be happy if he turned up here, and neither would any of you. So I deleted the post.
__________________
_
~Peter

My RFF Gallery
 

Old 01-30-2005   #16
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,912
I had a recent PM from a new member concerning my Canon 50mm F0.95 gallery. I felt very complimented, he stated that based on the colors in my gallery that he was going to pursue buying the lens. He wanted to know if I had used Photoshop to get the colors, or if the lens rendered them that way. I offered to send him some original 5x7's. I try to match up the scans to my prints, and often lose saturation because I impose a limit on what I do in Photoshop. It is impossible to replicate even a machine print with a scanned negative, decimated image, JPEG'd to fit in a few 100K, and viewed on a Monitor, ESPECIALLY a modern FlatScreen. I had better luck taking pictures off of my old 1984 Professional Graphics Monitor (PGC) with the Nikon F3 using Ektachrome. I try to get the "flavor" of a lens when making a folder for it; at least one can view the out-of-focus areas fairly well. With cameras, people can see that the cameras WORK, useful when listing them.

But with all that said, can someone please tell me what the term "Digital Negative" means? Does it just refer to a raw scan of a film negative? I go back with Digital long enough to remember when Livermore Labs used film for a Digital Storage Medium, they wrote computer files onto good-ol chemically processed film. To me, THAT is a digital negative.
 

Old 01-30-2005   #17
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
 
Pherdinand's Avatar
 
Pherdinand is offline
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: by the river called the Gender
Age: 42
Posts: 7,819
With this nameless-faceless digital age, one has to learn to step over written manifestations of little frustrations and bitter answers and people fighting in a childish way about something absurd or personal. Most of the forums i've seen can be useful, you eventually get those answers, you take a grain of salt with them, you say "thank you" and that's all. If you need a 100% reliable answer, you should not ask on Internet forums.
I find it especially funny when people ask advice in serious legal matters on an international photography forum on the 'net. Pretty naive expectation.
The photo.net B&W stuff related forum, e.g., is full of experienced and helpful people but everybody has his bad moments. And the experiences can also be contradictory, no matter how many years stand behind.
__________________
Happy New Year, Happy New Continent!
eye contact eye
My RFF Foolery
 

Old 01-30-2005   #18
RML
Just live it.
 
RML's Avatar
 
RML is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Holland or Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Age: 49
Posts: 4,795
For me "digital negative" would mean the (untouched?) scanned image from a film neg, or the original (untouched) JPG or RAW file from a digital camera.

Since I got my Eos 300D I've been struggling with this matter. Do I keep the original file I shot, or not? I've decided that I will keep them. How else will I be able to make a new version for print or pblication if all I have left is an altered (cropped. adjusted, sharpened, JPG'd) file? It's not like I have a film-based neg lying around somewhere, do I?

I mainly shoot Large Fine JPG as I have not much use for the RAW files unless I'm shooting for a project. Am I selling myself short? Could be, but the future will have to tell.
__________________
My photo blog

Join the Rangefinder Blog/Site Ring.
 

Old 01-30-2005   #19
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,912
I promise that I will not sue ANYBODY if there explanation of what a digital negative is not 100% correct. You guys are more reliable than most text books. The definition of commonly accepted terms keeps changing every few years. I feel like a Digital Dinosaur.

Remy, That is what I would suspect. The lossless-compressed, digital image. If it is of a negative, you need about 30MBytes to store a 24mmx36mm B&W image, and about 3x that for Color. I figure (100LP/mm*2 pixels/line*24mm)*(100LP/mm*2pixels/Line* 36mm)* 2bytes/pixel, and a typical 2.5:1 compression using lossless techniques. 3x for color because you need one image for Red, Green, and Blue. Does that make sense? I figure 100lp/mm is a good lens.

Last edited by Brian Sweeney : 01-30-2005 at 11:50.
 

Old 01-30-2005   #20
Gordon Coale
Registered User
 
Gordon Coale's Avatar
 
Gordon Coale is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Whidbey Island -- north of Seattle
Age: 74
Posts: 817
Brian -- Digital negatives are big with the contact printing crowd. The image is manipulated in Photoshop, sized to the print size they want, inverted, and then printed out on a clear plastic stock. They now have a negative they can contact print. It's a hybrid process that uses the best of analog image capture on film and analog contact printing on platinum, Azo, or whatever, with the best of adjusting the image in Photoshop to give a negative that can be printed straight.
__________________
What I am currently shooting:
35mm: 1949 Leica IIIc, 1937 Leica IIIa, 1935 Leica Standard, 1951 Canon IVSB, Voigtlander Bessa T, Asahi Pentax K, Nikon F, Nikon F4s
Medium Format: Bronica SQ-A, Isolette II, Mamiya C330
Digital: Panasonic GH3, Olympus Pen Mini E-PM2, Olympus Pen E-P2 converted to IR
gordy's camera straps for sale * my feedback
 

Old 01-30-2005   #21
RML
Just live it.
 
RML's Avatar
 
RML is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Amsterdam, Holland or Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Age: 49
Posts: 4,795
Brian, you're not a dinosaur. You're just perhaps a smidgen slow in catching up.
__________________
My photo blog

Join the Rangefinder Blog/Site Ring.
 

Old 01-30-2005   #22
Brian Sweeney
Registered User
 
Brian Sweeney's Avatar
 
Brian Sweeney is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,912
We had an old "drum Printer" from the '70s that made incredibly sharp negatives. It used lasers and all that. I also used Dicomed's and the lot to print digital images to film "way back When", ie over 20 years ago. The resolution was 1st rate. It was Vector Technology, not raster. Digital Negative. Hmmm... Nope don't remember that one! We should have coined it.
 

Old 01-30-2005   #23
GeneW
Registered User
 
GeneW's Avatar
 
GeneW is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Port Credit, Ontario
Age: 74
Posts: 3,223
I agree with all that's been said about the civility and tolerance I find on RFF. It's a special place!

Digital Negative? I think it's a moveable definition, Brian, with no single answer. To me it's the 'rawest', first-generation digital capture you have -- whether that's in RAW, TIFF, JPG whatever format. It's the mother image you go back to for starting over. Of course it's usually not a negative image at all, but a positive one.

When I owned a Digital Rebel I shot everything in RAW format and saved the RAW files for my archives, not any derived files. The RAW image, being a transfer of the unmanipulated data off the sensor, seems the closest, in my mind, to a true definition of 'digital negative'.

VueScan was mentioned in another thread. One of its features is its ability to take a RAW image from the scanner's sensor and store that (in a TIFF format). It truly is a 'negative' image and thus might qualify, if a slide or negative didn't precede it.

Very confusing terminology -- more of a 'concept' term than a meaningful description I suspect.

Gene
 

Old 01-30-2005   #24
Gordon Coale
Registered User
 
Gordon Coale's Avatar
 
Gordon Coale is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Whidbey Island -- north of Seattle
Age: 74
Posts: 817
Here is the bible for digital negatives: Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing. Using inkjet printers to print an inverted image on plastic stock is a godsend for contact printers. Until now, if you wanted to contact print a larger image you had to use a larger camera. Now you contact your 35mm image on 8x10. This is something I plan on getting into.

The frustration at APUG is that it is the best source for analog processes. Those that use the hybrid analog image capture-digital manipulation--analog printing process need that information but are treated as second class citizens. There is a sub forum for hyprid processes but you have to register for it and it's hidden from those with digitalphobias.
__________________
What I am currently shooting:
35mm: 1949 Leica IIIc, 1937 Leica IIIa, 1935 Leica Standard, 1951 Canon IVSB, Voigtlander Bessa T, Asahi Pentax K, Nikon F, Nikon F4s
Medium Format: Bronica SQ-A, Isolette II, Mamiya C330
Digital: Panasonic GH3, Olympus Pen Mini E-PM2, Olympus Pen E-P2 converted to IR
gordy's camera straps for sale * my feedback
 

Old 01-30-2005   #25
Gordon Coale
Registered User
 
Gordon Coale's Avatar
 
Gordon Coale is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Whidbey Island -- north of Seattle
Age: 74
Posts: 817
I'm not sure which is worse, the Digital Evangalists who are convinced that their 6 megapixel point and shooter has now replaced large format contact prints or the Fearful Film Fundamentalists who's very existence seems threatened by the D... word.

Back in the 1960s and into the 1970s the great bugaboo was color. Real photographers shot black and white. Color photography wasn't really photography.
__________________
What I am currently shooting:
35mm: 1949 Leica IIIc, 1937 Leica IIIa, 1935 Leica Standard, 1951 Canon IVSB, Voigtlander Bessa T, Asahi Pentax K, Nikon F, Nikon F4s
Medium Format: Bronica SQ-A, Isolette II, Mamiya C330
Digital: Panasonic GH3, Olympus Pen Mini E-PM2, Olympus Pen E-P2 converted to IR
gordy's camera straps for sale * my feedback
 

Old 04-29-2014   #26
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by djhurley92 View Post
Resurrecting an old thread (apologies...) Just tried out Apug, within my first 2 posts I made the mistake of mentioning Ilford's digital printing service. Immediately got a private message from a stranger telling me to back off because no one wants to hear about that 'bull****' on that website. Not much seems to have changed in 9 years. I'm glad I found RFF first!!

Good grief! I joined there several years ago and after a bit of a browse gave it a big swerve ... way too many intolerant zealots!

RFF is definitely the 'coolest' photography forum on the web.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
 

Old 04-29-2014   #27
Spicy
Registered User
 
Spicy is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: DC
Age: 32
Posts: 671
I don't think it's that bad... Not great for bumping this dinosaur of a thread, but it's a good forum with loads of knowlegable folks. I don't find it as bad as some people are making it out to be -- I think a lot of old-timers aren't familiar with how things are on Internet forums and tend to be a bit thin-skinned about things in general.

It isn't a face-to-face conversation and should not be treated as such, although I will certainly concede that "kids these days lack social skills" [/old man grumble]...

That being said, if you guys find APUG vitriolic, you should see the forums I usually lurk on. It would light your hair on fire.
__________________
ID7P0M2F854Ior+50PdV3MSFcC05MNC00
[:º] ['☼º]
 

Old 04-29-2014   #28
helenhill
Chasing Shadows ... Light
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,513
"Intolerant Zealots" , I like that Keith.
I think I might know a few
__________________
Flickr.

________________________
 

Old 04-29-2014   #29
Rodchenko
Olympian
 
Rodchenko's Avatar
 
Rodchenko is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Exiled from Hyperborea
Posts: 2,990
I joined, but didn't feel I fitted in. Glad I found RFF instead.
__________________
Auspicious Light on Mount Takachiho
E-PL1
35SP





 

Old 04-29-2014   #30
YYV_146
Registered User
 
YYV_146's Avatar
 
YYV_146 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Durham, NC
Age: 32
Posts: 1,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by djhurley92 View Post
Resurrecting an old thread (apologies...) Just tried out Apug, within my first 2 posts I made the mistake of mentioning Ilford's digital printing service. Immediately got a private message from a stranger telling me to back off because no one wants to hear about that 'bull****' on that website. Not much seems to have changed in 9 years. I'm glad I found RFF first!!
I'm genuinely curious - how do they reconcile their intense hatred towards digital imaging and printing with the fact that they are using a (very) digital service?
__________________
Victor is too lazy for DSLRs

Sony A7rII Kolari mod

Noctilux ASPH, 35lux FLE, 50 APO ASPH, 75 APO cron, 21lux, Sony/Minolta 135mm STF

500px
 

Old 04-29-2014   #31
helenhill
Chasing Shadows ... Light
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by YYV_146 View Post
I'm genuinely curious - how do they reconcile their intense hatred towards digital imaging and printing with the fact that they are using a (very) digital service?
How perfectly analyzed....Their lies the Beauty of their Stupidity
And we can All Chuckle
__________________
Flickr.

________________________
 

Old 04-29-2014   #32
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,553
I like apug - but there is one member in particular who is incredibly abusive towards other members, insulting their intelligence and making personal attacks whenever they disagree with him, and they've ruined the whole thing for me so many times I don't bother posting there anymore. They seem to suffer from a high level of narcissism and paranoia.

I took a year break from apug once, and when I returned one of the first things that happened was this A-hole replied to a post of mine with a link to an ages old thread where I had made a "mistake".

I haven't been back since.

I do still check out the classic forum on photo.net sometimes, people over there are a lot more easy going.
 

Old 04-29-2014   #33
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,579
I guess the poor sods feel that they're under siege from the digital tide.

The abuse is their version of pouring boiling oil from the ramparts! LOL
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
 

Old 04-29-2014   #34
djhurley92
Registered User
 
djhurley92 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 62
the site is certainly useful and I will go back to read it for advice, but I don't think I'll post again
 

Old 04-29-2014   #35
DominikDUK
Registered User
 
DominikDUK's Avatar
 
DominikDUK is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,029
RFF is certainly more diversified in what they accept or not. APUG has a lot of great info a few mad hatters who have brilliant ideas but not so great people skills and they also have analogue zealots who hate everything digital. Unfortunately a lot of great APUG contributors moved to digital and are now being treated like lepers by some members of APUG
Blansky comes to mind as victim as well as Sandy King, Bob Carnie doesn't seem to have an easy life on Apug either.

The view a lot of APUG zealots have is that there are a lot of places to discuss digital content on the web but very few places to discuss analogue photography and they are somewhat right. The near dismissal of Kodak and some Fuji stunts have also created a bit of fear which resulted in some severe reactions (short fuses) towards people asking hybrid questions.

But for the most APUG is still a great place to be and the tread that is being discussed here is a bad example.
 

Old 04-29-2014   #36
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,491
Lots of forums are strict, some are not.

This is a RF forum, yet people post about digital SLR cameras and it is tolerated. Well lots of people can not afford digital Leicas. Epson RF was the only alternative and was not even a good second in my opinion.

Digital is stronger all the time. Cheap it is not. Cameras go obsolete or unrepairable. One needs really good computers and monitors that are calibrated and software. Most film lenses needed updating. Wide lenses on digital rf are a problem. If you are a pro who does thousands of images, digital will save you money. If you do a roll a week, probably not.

If you are tolerant, this is the place . If you are purist, perhaps you will prefer APUG.
 

Old 04-29-2014   #37
Lawrence Sheperd
Registered User
 
Lawrence Sheperd's Avatar
 
Lawrence Sheperd is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Charleston SC
Age: 60
Posts: 344
The apostate have been banished to The Land Beyond the Pale.
__________________
Regards,

Larry
 

Old 04-29-2014   #38
Murray Kelly
Registered User
 
Murray Kelly's Avatar
 
Murray Kelly is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 517
I do find Analogue Photgraphic Users Group interresting and have certainly seen far worse behavior especially in news groups.

But if you go and scroll down the home page you will see a reference to DPUG.org

http://www.dpug.org/forums/f38/

and there's apparently plenty of activity. I have a couple of digitals and appreciate the immediacy of the medium (so to say) but am not seriously into it.

I have to admit the original poster had a nasty example of zealotry but it does pay to concentrate on the subject pretty closely.

The one digital site I visit isn't labelled as North American but the users tend to be pretty restricted in their view of the world. Monthly contests reflect northern hemisphere seasons, events and so forth.
 

Old 04-29-2014   #39
Takkun
Ian M.
 
Takkun's Avatar
 
Takkun is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sunny South Seattle
Posts: 747
This is completely unrelated to the direction the topic is going, but I remember hearing about digital contact pritnting about 10 years ago, then forgot about it, then when I went searching around a few months ago, I wasn't even sure if it existed.
Now I know it wasn't just a crazy memory.
__________________
Ian M., Seattle
Current bag contents: Just a Fuji GX680iii. Nothing else will fit.

--
my infrequently updated blog
Finally on Instagram
 

Old 04-29-2014   #40
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,579
One of the problems I have with digital prioritised sites is the style of photography that seems to dominate them ... which sounds a trifle snobbish I realise but the standard of photography here whether digital or analog is very good and not too cliched thankfully!

One site I was frequenting quite regularly a year or so ago was seriously into biscuit tin imagery ... it drove me away eventually.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
 
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Heads up! Leica auction pshinkaw Rangefinder Photography Discussion 7 02-18-2005 19:45
Heads up, Doubs43! st3ph3nm Other RF 4 01-13-2005 22:22
Heads up: free Digiflow convention Natalia Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film 3 01-07-2005 10:54



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:22.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.