View Full Version : Large Format Poll 2
Saulius
21-Mar-2007, 23:23
Should non view camera made images and techniques, such as stitching together smaller than 4x5 images files, and discussions be allowed on the forum?
JW Dewdney
22-Mar-2007, 00:31
As long as it's sheet film, why not?
Walter Calahan
22-Mar-2007, 03:04
Freedom of speech.
If it's photography that employs large data gathering, why not. It's not as if people using alternative techniques are evil doers. Grin
MJSfoto1956
22-Mar-2007, 04:34
Should non view camera made images and techniques, such as stitching together smaller than 4x5 images files, and discussions be allowed on the forum?
What about baby view cameras like the Ebony SW23 -- typically used with rollfilm? (but sometimes used with sheet film) While I understand that some would scoff at 6x9 as merely medium format, the fact that it was taken with a real view camera kinda makes it "large" if you know what I mean.
naturephoto1
22-Mar-2007, 04:53
I presume roll film backs such as 6 cm X 12 cm on 4 X 5 and 6 cm X 17 cm on 4 X 5 and 5 X 7 cameras would be acceptable.
Rich
Michael Graves
22-Mar-2007, 05:27
Your choices are biased against voting to allow them unconditionally.
Frank Petronio
22-Mar-2007, 06:06
I'd let anyone post anything. Peer pressure self moderates (with a gentle hand from the real mods), at least on this forum.
Actually this forum is amazingly nice, probably the best one in history.
MIke Sherck
22-Mar-2007, 06:09
I didn't see a "yes" choice.
Mike
What problem are we trying to solve? I don't see a lot of 6x9 folks causing trouble here. Why would we vote to formally exclude them? They are part of our community and help keep the market alive for lenses, film, cameras, light meters, tripods, books, magazines, processing labs, photographic paper, etc. that we all benefit from across the entire spectrum of camera sizes.
I started out with 35mm, went to MF, then got a 4x5 and now have ordered an 8x10. Someday I am likely to buy or build an 11x14. That is probably a pretty typical evolution path. Why build a wall between MF and 4x5 that makes this transition less likely for folks to make? The more people who make the transition, the longer film will continue being made for us all to use and the more likely it is that the vendors who serve us will be able to stay in business. I vote to be inclusive. Just my $0.02.
Cheers,
Dave B.
Greg Lockrey
22-Mar-2007, 06:30
I'd let anyone post anything. Peer pressure self moderates (with a gentle hand from the real mods), at least on this forum.
Actually this forum is amazingly nice, probably the best one in history.
Dittoes to Frank's statement. I personally have a pretty good time here. There are some very knowledgable people here and it's pretty easy to navigate to specific topics. I get a lot of new information along with being able to tweek some of the "lefties" in the Lounge like I do at my favorite coffee shop.:) Yeah, it's like being at the coffee shop.
Michael Graves
22-Mar-2007, 06:37
While I don't personally consider stitched digital images to be "large format" I still love seeing what people are doing digitally to emulate large format. Therefore, I would vote "No" to "Is it large format" and "Yes, unconditionally" to "Should we let them post the images." Too many rules makes me feel like I'm back in boot camp again. And I thought I had those memories long since buried.
Ted Harris
22-Mar-2007, 06:48
As Frank noted,if you want to poll the participants here then make it anunbiased poll giving a full range of choices. OTOH, I think you are beginning to see that there is a rather 'laid back' atmosphere on this Forum. Speaking only for myself, one of the reasons I spend a great deal more time posting and answering questions here than on APUG is precisely because of the reasonably non restrictve approach.
From a substantive point of view keep in mind that most LF photographers also shoot other formats and much of what gets discussed in terms of other formats also applies to LF as well.
Finally, film v. digital should never be a part of the argument as many shoot with digital backs, etc.
tim atherton
22-Mar-2007, 07:17
The poll is flawed and biased towards a particualr answer
that said, the answer right now appears to be "officially" yes, and the list will continue as it generally always has - self regulating
Ron Marshall
22-Mar-2007, 07:17
No restrictions.
Steven Barall
22-Mar-2007, 07:18
Why isn't there a voting option for "yes" ? There are many issues that large format and medium format users have in common such as all things having to do with film and processing, scanning and printing. I assume that there are some pretty smart medium format users out there and it would be great to get their expertise on things.
Anything that makes our world bigger is fine with me.
I'd let anyone post anything. Peer pressure self moderates (with a gentle hand from the real mods), at least on this forum.
Actually this forum is amazingly nice, probably the best one in history.
what he said
John Kasaian
22-Mar-2007, 07:24
I'd let anyone post anything. Peer pressure self moderates (with a gentle hand from the real mods), at least on this forum.
Actually this forum is amazingly nice, probably the best one in history.
I'm with Frank!
Kirk Gittings
22-Mar-2007, 07:29
People are trying to solve a non problem with these discussions on what is LF and trying to turn the moderators into the large format version of the Taliban.
I have used roll film backs in my 4x5 for 20 years. We have talked about that option ever since I have been a part of this forum and I will continue to as long as I care to. As a matter of fact I will talk about anything that I think my fellow LF photographers might be interested in here. This whole discussion is nonsense.
I personally think we should ban all anonymous posters who try to control the content of this forum.
David Luttmann
22-Mar-2007, 07:30
Your choices are biased against voting to allow them unconditionally.
I agree. The only options allowed are those that fit his bias.
Oren Grad
22-Mar-2007, 07:44
Ebony SW23 -- typically used with rollfilm? (but sometimes used with sheet film)
The swing-open back on the Ebony 2x3 cameras doesn't accept sheet film holders, only rollholders.
Brian Ellis
22-Mar-2007, 07:53
Where's the "none of the above" choice?
Gary J. McCutcheon
22-Mar-2007, 07:58
The crossover information between formats is valuable and restrictions , I feel, would constrain the educational opportunities of the forum. I say leave it as is.
People are trying to solve a non problem with these discussions on what is LF and trying to turn the moderators into the large format version of the Taliban.
I have used roll film backs in my 4x5 for 20 years. We have talked about that option ever since I have been a part of this forum and I will continue to as long as I care to. As a matter of fact I will talk about anything that I think my fellow LF photographers might be interested in here. This whole discussion is nonsense.
I personally think we should ban all anonymous posters who try to control the content of this forum.
Why only anonymous? ;) The way I see it, this whole discussion was started by people who have a problem with digital and who are trying to solve the problem by eliminating the topic, the rest is just embroidery.
I fully agree with your willingness to talk about anything that others on this forum might be interested in, as long as the discussion remains civil. This forum has proven amazingly successful in this so far, so why ruin it?
paul stimac
22-Mar-2007, 09:37
I'm interested in all processes. Let's not turn this forum into APUG....if you don't want to hear about digital then go over there.
I'm interested in all processes. Let's not turn this forum into APUG....if you don't want to hear about digital then go over there.
apug has been having a similar discussion over there ...
its too bad ---
it seems that it doesn't matter where one spends their time,
eventually it becomes "exclusive", and people who just want to enjoy themselves
and show people what they have been up to end up having to leave
and going somewhere else ... because they don't use the right film or tools.
Pat Kearns
22-Mar-2007, 10:26
This is a relative civil photography site. Granted there have been heated discussions about topics and images. IMO this poll is rather pointless. Besides, the site is owned by QTL and he has been quite generous letting the public participate freely. It is his privilege to disallow stitched images.
Jim Ewins
22-Mar-2007, 10:38
Like Mike, I don't see a choice for Yes. Is it getting out of hand? Too many Helga images??? Oh horrors.
Mark Sampson
22-Mar-2007, 10:48
These things will find their own level. I doubt if we'll be inundated by stitchers, digicammers, or Minox fans any time soon. Let QT Luong set his own rules, and let the rest of us live by them.
Walter Calahan
22-Mar-2007, 12:02
I love photographing with my 8x10, 4x5, 6x7, 6x6, 35mm, and DSLR cameras. It's all photography.
Let's have a big tent, instead of a pup tent. Let's celebrate how people see, not what type of machine through which they see.
How about pinhole camera using 14x17 film? Is that a "view camera"?
David Vickery
22-Mar-2007, 15:51
The title of this forum is "Large Format Photography". Large Format is why I found this forum some time ago and is why I still pay attention to it. There are plenty of general interest/all inclusive photo websites and forums on the internet. But this is one of only a few that is specifically for Large Format. I hope that it stays that way.
I vote to allow painting, prose, poetry, and sculpture here too, as long as the finished work is large. Short stories would be fine too, as long as they are packaged in a compilation. Why are we discriminating against these other nice artists by restricting this forum to only Large Format Photography?
Wayne
Saulius
22-Mar-2007, 17:08
Well I wrote these polls last night right before going to bed. So yes I did goof up and should have included another vote for yes, any and all formats and processes. On this and the other poll I wrote I had more wording to go with each possible vote but was limited by 80 characters to a line. So I quickly redid it but in retrospect should have put more thought into it when I wasn't so tired. My intention was not to simply stir the pot or create divisions but to just get a better feel for the opinions of forum members. I thought a poll would give more numbers as most people just read posts and don't actually write responses. If anyone cares to they can make a new poll, better worded and structured and we can just kill these.
Wayne Crider
22-Mar-2007, 17:11
I vote yes since I shoot a 3x4 SLR; Auto Graflex.
Dave Parker
22-Mar-2007, 17:43
Myself personally don't really care, I do however wish that those who choose all the different imaging solutions would not try to tell me, theirs is better or yours are worse, we really are blessed now a days, we have ever increasing solutions to attain the goal and the vision of what we see, I don't believe several images merged on the computer constitutes large format, but that said, it is a valid format and time will tell, what definition it will be...I do believe in the ever changing world of photography/imaging, the title of this chat system, does set some parameters on what the chat system is, now that could be changed, I hope not, but with all the evolutions going on now a days, I would not be surprised..to see a change..
I will promise this, don't tell me stitched images are large format and I won't tell you film is better!
:D
Digital is digital, film is film, we are all capturing pictures.!
As far as this poll, it was worded in a very articulate manner to derive a set outcome, which in its self, says it is not a poll, but an opinion.
Dave
Andrew O'Neill
22-Mar-2007, 20:51
No. Absolutely not. This is supposed to be a large format forum. Large format photography entails using 4x5 film and up.
Andrew O'Neill
22-Mar-2007, 20:54
If you guys want no "restrictions", then why don't you just use photo.net??
If you guys want no "restrictions", then why don't you just use photo.net??
Because it's too commercial. If you say something that rubs their advertisers the wrong way, you may see your post rewritten by a moderator.
Besides, what's wrong with "no restrictions"? Nobody's gonna prevent you from ignoring the stuff you're not interested in...
:D
Dave Parker
22-Mar-2007, 21:20
Because it's too commercial. If you say something that rubs their advertisers the wrong way, you may see your post rewritten by a moderator.
:D
Or completely deleted, like mine has over that way for years now!
However would like to see this forum stay in the context of which it was originally started for..as there are plenty of other places to discuss the other processes on the net.
:D
D. Bryant
22-Mar-2007, 22:03
Well I wrote these polls last night right before going to bed. So yes I did goof up and should have included another vote for yes, any and all formats and processes. On this and the other poll I wrote I had more wording to go with each possible vote but was limited by 80 characters to a line. So I quickly redid it but in retrospect should have put more thought into it when I wasn't so tired. My intention was not to simply stir the pot or create divisions but to just get a better feel for the opinions of forum members. I thought a poll would give more numbers as most people just read posts and don't actually write responses. If anyone cares to they can make a new poll, better worded and structured and we can just kill these.
How about not having a poll? Let's just forget this and move along.
Don Bryant
adrian tyler
22-Mar-2007, 23:50
it's not a poll a poll woul have a "yes" option, so, where is the "yes" button?, or don't you want a "yes" button?
takes just as much thought to make a stitched photo as a sheet photo.
PViapiano
23-Mar-2007, 00:51
Large Format implies using a view camera and that's what should matter here. That's why this board exists and that's why most of us gravitate towards it.
Almost everyone here also uses a dSLR or equivalent, but I don't post here about it and most others don't either. I've done a lot of stitching, too, but I don't post here about it or try to force others to believe that it's "large format" or even ask them if they think it's "large format". It's not, plain and simple...
David Hockney pasted hundreds of Polaroids together for one of his art pieces. Is that "large format"? No, of course not...
It's not a digital vs analog issue either. Many of us scan our negs and enjoy a workflow that encompasses both worlds.
I shoot medium format a lot more than large format, but I'm not here trying to interject that fact every chance I get or start tedious flame wars. I don't go on photo.net and post something unrelated to the forum categories. Why would you do that? It doesn't make sense...
Brian K
23-Mar-2007, 05:45
David Hockney pasted hundreds of Polaroids together for one of his art pieces. Is that "large format"? No, of course not...
Are we here to better ourselves as photographers or to put up some sort of barricade against other film formats or methods? Personally if David Hockney wanted to post work here and participate in discussions I would be thrilled to have him.
Wayne Crider
23-Mar-2007, 07:35
No. Absolutely not. This is supposed to be a large format forum. Large format photography entails using 4x5 film and up.
So what your saying is that although I shoot 3x4 film cut out of 4x5 and I use cut film holders and enlarge on a D2 I cannot according to you be considered a large format photographer because I'm shooting under 4x5?
I really present the following B.S. for the author of this thread.
It's funny that at a point in the past anything under 8x10 was considered small format. I.E. 4x5!
And I remember something quite awhile back in the past when the issue of defining "what LF photography is" for this forum went thru a thread. In View Camera Magazine I've noticed that submissions were considered for 2x3 formats and above; (This may have changed)? I've always thought that was a pretty good definition. Then along comes rollfilm backs, essentially a medium format film being used on a, let's say, camera with movements, and there is a crossover. Then some might say that the Fuji 6x9 cameras (among others such as a Noblex) are large format? Hmm....
Well my definition is, and really nobody should give a crap about it, is; 1. If a camera has the ability to use cut film holders or has some sort of movements it is a LF camera regardless of the ability to use a rollfilm back and present images here; Or if it is a fixed back and front camera or panoramic camera (pinhole being one) with a dimension beyond 6x9 it is LF. I don't consider stitched images from a digital camera LF, but I like to look at them and it would be interesting to continue to see such work maybe in a sub forum. Beyond this I think this is a pissy thread and it should be removed.
If you guys want no "restrictions", then why don't you just use photo.net??
Because it's too commercial. If you say something that rubs their advertisers the wrong way, you may see your post rewritten by a moderator.
Or completely deleted, like mine has over that way for years now!
Deleting is fine, sort of. Having someone else rewrite your post so a third party would like it better is something else entirely! I never thought I would ask for my post to be deleted, but that's exactly what happened when my second - and last - post there got rewritten. At least they had the lingering sense of decency to remove that post upon my explicit request. Makes you wonder what would they do to your images if someone important enough didn't like them...
PViapiano
23-Mar-2007, 11:58
Are we here to better ourselves as photographers or to put up some sort of barricade against other film formats or methods? Personally if David Hockney wanted to post work here and participate in discussions I would be thrilled to have him.
This is a niche forum, that's all I'm saying...there are plenty of places to exchange info on other things photographic. Photo.net, for example, has a ton of forum categories, but there is very little out-of-place posting happening there.
This forum doesn't exist as part of an all-encompassing-catch-all photo site. It exists as a narrowly defined niche.
Lately, the thing that bugs me most is the feeling that others, mostly new to the forum, have started to push stitching (with dSLRs) and dSLR file resolution as another description of Large Format. Sorry but that doesn't cut it with me...
What do you think would happen if I went over to DPReview and posted about how my 8x10 film images just knock the socks off the current crop of dSLRs and digi-med-format backs? You'd get crucified and never hear the end of it...
By the way, Brian...wonderful images on your site!
This forum doesn't exist as part of an all-encompassing-catch-all photo site. It exists as a narrowly defined niche.
Lately, the thing that bugs me most is the feeling that others, mostly new to the forum, have started to push stitching (with dSLRs) and dSLR file resolution as another description of Large Format. Sorry but that doesn't cut it with me...
Yes, this is a niche site, but it is not a film-only niche either, and yet there has been an increasing number of digital-hostile posts lately as the talk started turning toward digital possibilities within the large format.
As for those stitching threads you mention - they didn't happen out of the blue, they all started out as a way to add an economy digital capability to view cameras. I don't really understand why would an alternative and obviously niche-within-a-niche technique bother anybody with an open mind.
Those threads later degenerated into another digital vs. film pissing match not because of format, but because of digital in the first place. My impression is that format was/is only an excuse.
Robert Hughes
23-Mar-2007, 16:24
Somehow I can't back a proposal intended to exclude people and ideas just because they don't fit my preconceived notions of what is appropriate for this forum. I shoot 4x5, but I do it with a press camera - does that mean I'm not pure enough? I also shoot 6x6, 35mm, Super 8 and 16 movies, DV video and digital still formats. And I've even stitched photos, albeit in 35mm, with a sewing machine. They all add to my experience and aesthetic growth. It would be a shame to say that someone who uses other formats in addition to LF may not share their experiences with the community of peers this forum offers.
Heck, if you wanna get in a religious war, take it someplace where they do it with guns.
Dave Parker
23-Mar-2007, 16:41
Robert,
I don't see this thread having any bearing at all on Baning or allowing anything, it was just one of those threads.
Dave
Saulius
23-Mar-2007, 17:36
How about not having a poll? Let's just forget this and move along.
Don Bryant
If I would have known there'd be so much negativity to go with the poll I wouldn't have done it and if i knew how to remove it I would.
Why more and more rules are needed for something that tends to work out by itself is a mystery to me. It seems that there shouldn't be much need for rules banning other formats, because in general, people stay on LF related stuff here. Most people would probably seek out the appropriate online forum to find the most useful opinions.
It does seem inappropriate to discuss DSLR cameras here most of the time, yet sometimes such cameras serve as replacements for pen and paper, perhaps even a light meter of sorts. Light meters are not banned from discussion. Obviously, if non LF stuff predominates too much, that dilutes the forum from the purpose expressed by at least its title. Surely people here would suggest to a poster that they post in another place if it gets way out of hand or if there is no audience.
Of course, some people wish to feel superior for having possession of a particular physical thing. The inferior / superior thing is snobbery, something that is perhaps a part of human nature. I'm not in favor of creating hard rules that would have to have a jury to decide fairly. While I'm not in favor of creating a hard rule for it, the forum would be well served to have people do more searching for existing threads on topics and then add to them, which would keep them better organized. I believe that "rule" is already stated, yet how many people actually attend to it? So, for violation of that rule, are people then banned? Hmmm, we'd be without a lot of great posts, even though the whole is a bit less organized.
There are many aspects of composing, printing, marketing and developing where LF photographers can benefit from the knowledge of 35mm shooters without specific discussions of 35mm.
"I personally think we should ban all anonymous posters who try to control the content of this forum."
In some ways, a person can get banned here in a way. Perhaps I'm banned here already if Kirk has anything to say about it. After all, I don't state my full name here, so the quote attributed to him above asked that I be banned. Am I now banned? That seems like a rather strident quote. How about a rule to ban people who want to ban people or things? No thanks.
Ah, but this could be a troll survey, intended just to see who bites. I'd rather not see anyone ban anyone or create rules; even the survey has some virtue someplace, for someone.
Andrew O'Neill
23-Mar-2007, 18:28
So what your saying is that although I shoot 3x4 film cut out of 4x5 and I use cut film holders and enlarge on a D2 I cannot according to you be considered a large format photographer because I'm shooting under 4x5?
I have my definition of LF. You have yours. I have my opinion. You have yours. I just don't want to see too much digital slr crap here. That's all. Using digital slrs is NOT LF photography as far as I'm concerned.
I have my definition of LF. You have yours. I have my opinion. You have yours. I just don't want to see too much digital slr crap here. That's all. Using digital slrs is NOT LF photography as far as I'm concerned.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinions and your choices, just like everybody else here.
All you have to do is ignore what you don't want to read about. It's that easy. If, for whatever reason you cannot do that, this forum provides a very handy set of tools that can make it go away.
Just don't force your definition, your opinion and your choice on me. Please.
PViapiano
23-Mar-2007, 22:21
As for those stitching threads you mention - they didn't happen out of the blue, they all started out as a way to add an economy digital capability to view cameras. I don't really understand why would an alternative and obviously niche-within-a-niche technique bother anybody with an open mind.
You know...what-evva.
Stitching with dSLRs doesn't "add an economy digital capability to view cameras" but using a digital back on a view camera would....errr, except for the economy part ;)
Geary Lyons
23-Mar-2007, 22:52
Sometimes it is just amazing how some folks just like to promulgate controversy. This is a Large Format photography forum. It is the outgrowth of the Large Format site that provides practical information on the application of large format cameras for producing photographic images.
This site is neither pro nor con digital. IMO, there seems to be an "cyber-borne" cancer that infects niche sites for no other reason than to revel in the disruption caused. There are folks that post just to "stir the pot", making no contribution to the general knowledge or focus of the site. As has already been stated, there is a multitude of sites to discuss the multi-faceted aspects of digital imaging.
If the imaging process did not start in a Large Format camera, then this is not the best location for discussion. Posting otherwise is simply not being a good site citizen. Please rather than posting here for processes not related to the core focus of this site, why don't folks just use the same time and energy to go make images, regardless of the chosen tool or media? Everyone will be the healthier for it! Trolls need not apply!
Cheers,
Geary
Sergio Caetano
24-Mar-2007, 05:55
"...smaller than 4x5 be allowed ? "
If so, let's change the name of the forum to SMALLER FORMAT PHOTOGRAPHY .
Randy H
24-Mar-2007, 10:48
Sometimes it is just amazing how some folks just like to promulgate controversy. This is a Large Format photography forum. It is the outgrowth of the Large Format site that provides practical information on the application of large format cameras for producing photographic images.....
Yep. That seems to sum it all up. It is called LargeFormatPhotography. Not Everythingthatmayormaynotcaptureanimage. If that is what you want, and care to wade through all the miscellaneous to try and find any information, go ape-hug. Or far-fetched finders.
I personally like it here and like the way the mods and Q have it set up and run.
If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin'.
tim atherton
24-Mar-2007, 10:55
I personally like it here and like the way the mods and Q have it set up and run.
If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin'.
exactly, it will continue on it's way, having posts every now and then about 6x7 or 6x9 (as it always has done) as well as - now - the occasional post on stitching - and it won't make any difference to it being the LF Forum at all.
(All that will happen is the blood pressure of the AR's will go up every now and then)
DrPablo
24-Mar-2007, 11:32
Who cares about a rigid definition for large format photography? We're not doing a clinical trial here that requires strict inclusion and exclusion criteria.
As I see it, the phrase "large format photography" has a relatively limited number of potential definitions, and the content and membership of the forum will end up being some sort of variation about that mean.
In other words, some people think that real men only use 20x24, some people think that 2x3 rollfilm view cameras count, and some people think of stitching as an approximation for classical LF view cameras.
But those are the fringes that delimit a discussion that centers around a whole lot of common ground, and I see no reason to spend energy thinking about how we should constrain the fringe definitions. If it's close enough, then let it stay. It's not going to open flood gates to the Canon vs. Nikon or 35mm vs APS-C wars.
Andrew O'Neill
24-Mar-2007, 12:12
Just don't force your definition, your opinion and your choice on me. Please.
By writing my opinion is that forcing it on you??? How does one state their opinion by not trying to force it on you?? Please educate me.
Capocheny
24-Mar-2007, 12:57
Sometimes it is just amazing how some folks just like to promulgate controversy. This is a Large Format photography forum. It is the outgrowth of the Large Format site that provides practical information on the application of large format cameras for producing photographic images.
This site is neither pro nor con digital. IMO, there seems to be an "cyber-borne" cancer that infects niche sites for no other reason than to revel in the disruption caused. There are folks that post just to "stir the pot", making no contribution to the general knowledge or focus of the site. As has already been stated, there is a multitude of sites to discuss the multi-faceted aspects of digital imaging.
If the imaging process did not start in a Large Format camera, then this is not the best location for discussion. Posting otherwise is simply not being a good site citizen. Please rather than posting here for processes not related to the core focus of this site, why don't folks just use the same time and energy to go make images, regardless of the chosen tool or media? Everyone will be the healthier for it! Trolls need not apply!
Cheers,
Geary
Hear, hear!
Well said, Geary. :)
Cheers
By writing my opinion is that forcing it on you??? How does one state their opinion by not trying to force it on you?? Please educate me.
No, not by writing it but by requesting - or in your case implying - that everything else aside from what one considers kosher should be kept away from the forum.
I fully understand that you "don't want to see too much digital...crap here" and that's absolutely fine with me. One man's crap is another man's treasure, or something like that.
My point is - if you don't want to see it, ignore it, don't try to remove it. That's all.
Aside from that, it is the owner's definition of the proper boundaries that ultimately matters. Everything else is just makin' noise. :)
naturephoto1
24-Mar-2007, 13:51
If it is decided that digital imaging and stitched imaging is going to be accepted and common place, perhaps it would be appropriate to have a separate area for such discussions and presentations. That way those interested can participate, those who are not not and even put such discussions on ignore.
Rich
Wayne Crider
24-Mar-2007, 15:29
This is a fun thread...
Most of us probably shoot in multiple formats, including digital, and have at one time, or are even now, members of various forums where we discuss photography in general. Some of us may be pure LF shooters; probably many are not. I enjoy seeing all work, and enjoy discussions on a variety of photographic subjects, which is why I frequent Apug and Pnet where this conversation is more in line with the idea of their forums.
I personally don't object to a members references to other types of formats in this forum, but do believe that it was not created as a repository for all format information or even photographic submission. I would not chastise tho an established member for simply posting something that does not conform to the idea of the forum unless it was done repeatedly. Below is a link to the following title line:
About the Large Format Photography Info site
What is this site about ?
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/credits.html
It seems to me that there are those that are looking for some sort of a definition to this forum to apply some kind of rules for submission. Maybe they belong in Apug? I think the moderator will call to terms anyone who goes a little to far beyond Tuan's original idea for this forum and that belongs in his hands not ours; So party on dudes and enjoy the ride.
Carsten Wolff
24-Mar-2007, 19:32
What sort of poll is THAT? We've got enought doctrines in this world already. Tz, Tz.....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.