View Camera Conference

[steve simmons]

The Second Biennual View Camera conference will be April 23-25 in Monterey, CA. There will be a trade show with more lf equipment on display in one place than at any other show except possibly the NYC show in the fall. In addition to the trade show (attendance is free) there is a keynote speaker on The Legacy of Large Format on the Monterey Peninsula. There are also panels on topics such as selecting equipment, preenting your work to galleries, museums and publications, alt processes, the art and craft of black and white, the digital darkroom, selecting and using color films, etc. The complete program is in PDF format one our web page

www.viewcamera.com

steve simmons

[Richard Fenner]

Hi Steve

In view of the prior criticism you have received, I feel I need to begin a gentle prod by thanking you for the enormous work for LF you've done with View Camera magazine (and I'm one of the foreigners who pays twice as much as the US readers per issue, yet is still grateful for this source of information and inspiration). Last year I was fortunate to buy the entire back collection of View Camera, and over several months had an amazing education into a world of LF, only a little of which I was already aware of. I would actually say I would be willing to pay twice as much for it to double in size (I'd rather not go monthly - I seem to pay more attention to less frequent publications).

However... there has been some tension here about commercial ads, and it was eventually (and I think, correctly) decided that some have a good basis for being here. Yet, this ad of yours is the fifth ad for this conference! It would seem tidier to at least keep the thread together and just update previous threads if there are changes, rather than always starting a new thread. And if there's no new business, maybe it should be left as is. In addition to this thread, threads were started:

2003-10-03 12:37 PM

2003-12-11 01:18 PM

2004-01-25 07:50 AM

2004-01-06

[Merg Ross]

I thought that this matter was previously addressed. What, exactly, is the purpose of the Large Format Photography Forum?

[QT Luong]

Richard's reminder is right on. Here are the guidelines in case you missed them:

"Regular posters may announce, in a non-repetitive way, educational events such as workshops and conferences, as well as gallery openings."

[Tito Sobrinho.]

Keep reminding us about the conference! If it had not been for Fred Picker's Zone VI Workshop and your magazines (as it used to be called View Camera - The Journal of Large Format Photography) I would not have had the boldness to expose 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10. Due to the articles in the VCM I started to appreciate and expose negatives using old LF lenses. In my busy medical field, I receive many fliers (at least once a month, via Fax) concerning medical conferences following the original conference pamphlets. People do forget! The majority of people forgot 9/11.

[David du Busc]

Without getting weepy about this...this is a comercial listing, complete with a website address. One posting is adequate.

[Donal Taylor]

Come on guys give poor old Steve a break - it's a psychological affliction he has no control over, a set of maxims to live by if you will - never take no for answer, always have the last word, push everything as far as you can, always outlive your welcome and if you are told the limit to something is one try for at least three or four.

[Michael Kadillak]

I agree. Steve is wanting to make sure that everyone has had an opportunity to consider the conference. If I were in his shoes, I would be doing the same thing. Sure hope that it is successful. It will be interesting to see how this one fares in attendance to the past ones in New Mexico.Unfortunately, there is no middle grey when it comes to California. It either works for you or it simply does not.

[Lyle Aldridge]

I agree completely with Tito and Michael. I’ve always assumed that “non-repetitive” was the appropriately vague way of saying “tastefully infrequent.” As far as I’m concerned, Steve has met that standard under any reasonable view. I have low tolerance for nagging myself, so if these reminders were coming out every day or every week, I could see someone being bothered. But if I found one reminder a month to be unduly repetitive or irritating, I'd never have managed to cope with marriage and/or children.

[steve simmons]

I've repeated the info becasue there are new people listening and joining is all the time. Also, I am not sure this is a commercial announcement as the trade show is free as is the field trip to Pt. Lobos. You do not have to buy or pay for anything.

steve simmons

[steve simmons]

Your conference sounds fine. I am sorry to be a continent away from it. Your announcement, however, is for an event that charges a substantial fee (not many people are going to attend the trade show and field trip without also attending the seminars), so please stop this silly pretense.

If you want suggestions for your periodical, I am sure that many contributors to this forum would gladly respond to a request (on another thread) with constructive criticism. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

There is no silly pretense. What I am promoting here is a free activity designed to promote large format photography. I get the same criticism when I tell people about free articles to help people get started in lf photography on our web site. The articles are free to everybody yet some complain when I refer to them as info. Why is there a problem telling people about free activities and articles? People can go to the conference trade show and/or the web site without any charge and not buy anything. In the case of the web site we do not track who comes and goes and do not send any followup solicitation.

Many people have called about just coming to the trade show. There is no better way to decide on equipment than to see it firsthand.

steve simmons

[Richard Fenner]

Steve, this isn't rec.photo.etc. This is a private forum - and our generous host has already said he agrees this thread is not in the spirit of the terms of usage. This isn't a matter of arguing over opinions of your post - it has been decided it doesn't belong here, in a subject much debated over many previous threads. I fully support notices of LF-oriented workshops, trade shows and conferences, whether paid for or free. But five is too many, and endangers the goodwill which allows such posts. I can imagine how frustrated MA Smith must be when he sees two, let alone five! I'm imagining Yosemite Sam jumping up and down shouting, 'I told ya to git off ma land - now stop arguing and git!'.

[steve simmons]

And is there a problem in my referring people to the free articles on the web site when the question is related????

steve simmons

[Andre Noble]

Wow!

Some of you people are really missing the big picture. We're a niche group to begin with. Steve is proactive for our interests. Sheet film will be facing extinction soon. Proactive people like Steve, Paula and Michael, etc. try to build respect with the manufacturers by showing the support that is out there for LF, and this conference is our chance do that.

I don't mean to stoop to a low level, but some people really need to stop the knee jerk censorship reaction and do some thinking!.

[Andre Noble]

And being born and raised in upstate New York with developed wit and sharp tongue, I do sense a bit of jealousy on the part of some for the real-world commercialism that is necessary to run ANY thing in this country.

Many of us LF’ers offered to give money to to QT Luong, et al as they took about a year to bring this site back online through solely volunteer work after it was shut down on the Greenspun site, (or whatever his name is).

I’ll say it one more time. If you need money to operate this site, ask for it. Don’t hold this martyr complex over our heads. I’ve already given money to Photonet, and would also give to this site. I feel Steve’s post is legit. Hell, he should feel free to post one more time in the week leading up to the conference as well.

Let’s air it out: Why has this site not recovered to its former glory?

[QT Luong]

Andre, can you elaborate a bit on that "martyr complex", and also on what it would take for you to consider that the site had "recovered to its former glory" ?

[tim atherton]

"Let’s air it out: Why has this site not recovered to its former glory?"

this message board and it's associated website for LF info seem to run quite happily on an entirely voluntary, non-commercial basis.

Photo.net by comparison seems to go down at least three or four times a week - despite scalping a good number of people out of money to further the owners adventures in web capitalism.

As for former glory - i'd say this list and it's associated website is where many mnay people now comes to both begin in LF and as a first port of call to find out any kind of info about working in LF. It's probably the premier site now for that. The list is both much more active and much more knowledgeable than the photo.net LF list (when you can get on it that is). It also functions more efficiently (i.e. you can sign up for emails of threads - not really possible on photo.net anymore since they "improved" it.

It's certainly now as good as the old greenspun list

[Donal Taylor]

"Wow! Some of you people are really missing the big picture. We're a niche group to begin with. Steve is proactive for our interests."

While Steve certainly does support the LF community he is also very pro-active in his own interestes - he has a commercial venture to run- his magazine. And the more publicity the better for his ventures. Same for his free articles - they are closely linked with his magazine - and are really a form of advertising for it - a billboard if you like.

Now I have now problem with Steve generating interest in/advertising his financial ventures, or pointign out to someone one of his free articles when it's appropriate to a question - as long as it's in the right place - and on this list - as long as it follows the established rules.

Currently I'm wondering exactly what part of "non-repetitive" he fails to understand...?

[Merg Ross]

Perhaps the term "non-repetitive" needs defining. Is it assumed that all of us in this "niche group", and that is an apt description, view this site on a daily basis? For those who do not, such postings as the one in question would not be repetitive.

[Francis Abad]

Here is a poll:

How many of those criticising and/or pointing out rules and regulations have spent the last week exposing at least 20 sheets of 8x10 film (developed and printed as well) and or the equivalent in 4x5, 7x17 etc.? Look at the greater good instead, please. The question one should answer every time someone advertises anything is: how does this affect my photography and my health.

[Sal Santamaura]

"Don’t hold this martyr complex over our heads...Why has this site not recovered to its former glory?"

André, I have detected nothing here that by any definition could be thought of as a 'martyr complex.' And, in my view, this forum *exceeded* its former glory within a few days of being reactivated late last year.

This site's guidelines are established by its operator. He will refine the definition of repetitive if he decides that's necessary, and he'll enforce the guidelines by deleting any posts he desires. That's his prerogative. Anyone who is unwilling to live with this situation is free to -- make that *encouraged to* -- stay away from this forum and enjoy the commercial endeavor that is photo.net.

[tim o'brien]

Well I be cornfused. It's QT Luong's forum, he can run it any way he wishes. But damn! It's a FREE event. Free. Freeeeee. It has information we all could want and use. Absolutely FREE. Free info. Free access to LF equipment. Free access to hundreds of others who do this better than me. FREE! How much is it? OH! zip, zero, zilch, nada, nix, FREE!

And if you don't like it, don't read the posts. I appreciate the update, cause it's only rolling around in the back of a mind that spends 70 hours a week writing code. And even with this update, I might still forget it.

Thanks Steve. Sorry it bothers the rest of you. I suspect it's because you're upset you can't be going there.

tim in san jose

[Michael A.Smith]

Seems to me that Steve's post is entirely appropriate. Obviously, as a participant in the conference, I know when it is, but if I were Joe LF user and could not get to this site every day, but maybe only once a week or even less, I would like to be reminded of what is going on in the world of LF photography, Steve's conference included.

From what I have read, for most people it takes seven repetitions of something (like Steve's announcement) for it to sink in. So, repetition, in and of itself, is not a bad thing.

I cannot understand why someone gets upset if Steve posts, or if I post, an activity like a conference or a workshop, or gives information on a product (like Azo) on which some money will be made.

Let's assume that Steve's LF conference is a good thing for LF photography. (His conference in Albuquerque in 2002 seemed to be that.) We all know LF photography is barely hanging on with the manufacturers. It is irrational to expect Steve to do things like hold his conference out of the goodness of his heart. I'm sure he is hoping to make some monry from this--but why? Not to get rich, but to be able to continue publishing his magazine's, which provide a benefit to all of us, just by the fact of their existence.

Likewise, though the money Paula and I make from Azo sales is shockingly little, we do make some and that is important to us. Why? Not so we can get rich from it, but so we can keep buying Azo to supply to the rest of the LF community.

There are really few places where LF users gather. This site is one of them. I really do not understand those who want to stiflle announcements that are of benefit to all, just because those who make those announcements may make a few (and I mean "a few" literally) bucks from it.

Would you rather have some not know about the conference or not know about Azo?

[J.L. Kennedy]

I agree that Steve's post is useful because I am one of those mentioned that can't visit the forum on a daily basis, sometimes going over a week without checking it out. However, it seems that this disagreement could be solved very easily by creating a another forum with a link at the top of this page, similiar to the one that says "Part of the Large Format Photography Home Page", that says "Commercial and semi-commercial announcements of general interest to LF photographer." Notwithstanding the initial programming task of setting this up (and I don't know how much effort that would require), it seems that there would be really no greater administrative effort on the part of QT Luong to simply transfer posts of this nature into the newly created forum. I am assuming he has to do a fair amount of deleting anyway when overzealous eBayers post links to their auctions and Midwest Camera Exchange types post lists of hundreds of their current offerings. In this way, those who don't mind (or actually desire) seeing blatently capitalistic posts (or even subtly capitalistic posts like this one) could click on the link. The rest of our esteemed colleagues of a more sensitive nature could simply breeze past the link, remaining unsullied by the unfortunate instances of capitalism that seem so persistent in our less that perfect world.

[Brian Ellis]

Michael Smith said: "Seems to me Steve's posting is entirely appropriate . . . I really don't understand those who want to stifle announcements that are of benefit to all."

Seems to me it's very strange that people are still telling us what they think is and isn't appropriate or what should and shouldn't be permitted here. As Richard stated at the outset of this discussion, the person who started and who runs the forum has announced what the rules are for conference, workshop, et al messages. He has also said, if I interpret his message here correctly, that Steve's fifth posting for his conference is inappropriate. That being the case, why are people still arguing the issue and why is anyone saying what they think is and isn't appropriate? That has already been decided by the only person whose opinions count. This isn't a usenet group where you can post anything you like whenever you feel like it.

So to me the situation seems very simple. Right or wrong, the rule relating to these kinds of messages exists so please respect if if you participate here. If you don't want to follow the rules don't participate. But please don't argue about it here any more If you wish to have the rules changed, send Q.T. a private e mail.

[steve simmons]

Same for his free articles - they are closely linked with his magazine - and are really a form of advertising for it - a billboard if you like. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

??????????????? A billboard is nothing but a sales pitch. Our free articles have substantive info that as been very helpful to many people for years. These articles have much more info than most answers in a discussion group and they are FREE!

It is a form of censorship to try and exclude these posts about the free articles. For some reason there are people who do not want others to know about this information. Since this forum, and others, have the opportunity to help people get into large format photography the only goal should be to make info available to people about lf photography. Personal issues should be put aside.

Now, lets put all persoanl issues aside and work together to make lf photography as viable an activity as possible.

steve simmons

[Paul Kierstead]

It is not like we are going to be swamped by LF conference announcements.

I don't want to see this site buried under spam, but I think steve should be given a break. For one thing, he contributes here regularly; for me, this makes it a much better "give and take" proposition. People who just come along and advertise and offer nothing else should be just given the boot. Beyond that I AM a LF newbie and quite frankly would never know about these things any other way.

QT is certainly free to run things his way (hey, he pays for it!) but non-counting vote is that those who participate in the community should be given a little leeway.

[Donal Taylor]

"??????????????? A billboard is nothing but a sales pitch. Our free articles have substantive info that as been very helpful to many people for years. These articles have much more info than most answers in a discussion group and they are FREE!

It is a form of censorship to try and exclude these posts about the free articles. For some reason there are people who do not want others to know about this information. Since this forum, and others, have the opportunity to help people get into large format photography the only goal should be to make info available to people about lf photography"

Presumably there would be no problem having the articles posted on the info section of this site then, if that were possible?

[Michael Kadillak]

If the moderators or those that control this forum want to delet these posts, let them do it. They are in charge and it is singularly their decision.

When this starts turning into an endless opinion diatribe, nobody is learning anything about large format photography and only ill feelings are manifested.

This circular discussion has prompted me to do what I recommend we all do -

Load some holders and get out of town in pursuit of some visual peace and tranquility .

Cheers!

[Dean Cookson]

FWIW, looking back in the "Workshops" archive, I only see two posts from Steve about this conference. Once back in January and this one. My knee tends to jerk pretty hard at the commercialization of non-commercial forums too, but 1 announcement and 1 reminder in the 3 months leading up to the conference seems reasonable.

[Richard Fenner]

Oops! Thanks for the clarification Dean - apparently that means I missed two, and there are actually seven. Does that count as repetitive yet? I was only referring to the ones posted inappropriately (because of their quantity) in the general forum, rather than the workshop specific one. As I'm too useless to post the links (a point which is probably becoming antisocial, so I should work on it), I posted their dates. You can easily come across them by clicking on Steve's name.
I guess this finally puts paid to the article I hoped to submit some years hence...

[steve simmons]

For the record I have posted announcement about the View Camera Conference on

Sept 18, 2003 Dec 12, 2003 Jan 6, 2004 Jan 26, 2004 March 14, 2004

other postings I have made about the conference are in response to responses/questions.

When I clicked on my name to see all the posts I have made there are almost 3 pages. The vast majority are in response to questions about a variety of questions about lenses, films, film developing techniques, etc.

steve simmons

[Matt Long]

Just an idea. How about a link at the top of the page titled "Events" -- with one click you can see a dated list of various LF events (workshops, seminars, etc.) for the current month. Since most of these activities are planned well in advance, I don't think that it would be too difficult to have a calender page that is current and easily maintained.

I think that it would be great to click on a link that provides a calendar page with a list of various activities taking place for that particular month. Like I said, just an idea. What do you think?

[Rob Barker]

I can't imagine anyone seriously objecting to Steve's post. It struck me as a perfectly reasonable pointer to a free event that must be of huge interest to many of this forum's readers. "View Camera" is, effectively, the academic journal for our particular obsession. Long may it prosper.

[Michael A.Smith]

Matt Long's idea is an excellent one. This site being LF central on the Internet, it would be entirely appropriate to have a section listing workshops (free or commercial), lectures, exhibitions, new books of LF work, and so on. Then those interested in equipment would not have to look at it if they did not want to and those who were interested in that kind of information could easily find it.

[f32 Large Format Photography]

Steve,





I have just posted a reminder about the View Camera Magazine conference on the f32.net Large Fomat Forum (http://www.f32.net/discus/) :-) It would be great to attend but it is touch and go at the moment.





I wish you all the best and hope that the conference is a great success. Anything that promotes large format photography should be supported by our community.





Cheers,





Clive

[Rory_3532]

Mr. Simmons already has an entire website to advertise his products. The remaining question is whether he can use other people's sites. He is not the only person in respect of which this is an issue. There are other people on this site doing it, and currently there is a participant in photo.net who ends just about every response to a question with a reference to one of his books. It is quite obvious that these people are marketing their products through other people's sites and are disguising it in one way or another. Either commerical announcements are allowed, or they are not, and it does not take a rocket scientist to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial. Myself, I think that Mr. Simmons should market his products on his own site. If that is not the arrangement, then I think that the alleged difference between this site photo.net is disintigrating and that the owners of this site should go down the photo.net road and have the sense to charge for advertising.

[steve simmons]

Rory,

I am amazed that you do not want people to know about free articles and activities that foster large format photography. This info helps all of us as it encourages manufacturers/distributors see there is a market and it helps photographers see that lf is something that can be done and may not be as difficult as they may have thought.



steve simmons

[Rory_3532]

Steve,

You are not running a non-profit organization, you are running a business. The post that started this thread refers not just to the trade show, but to acdtivities for which you are charging an entrance fee. No doubt you expect the trade show itself to generate money, either because it entices people to go to the conference events or because you are charging the exhibitors. As for "free articles" on your website, the function of these is to help sell subscriptions to your magazine. Given that you charge people to advertise on your own website, what gives you the idea that you have the right to advertise your products on other people's sites for free?

If this is the way this site is going to be run, my own view is that it should be opened up completely. Participation and pitches by camera, lens, film and acessories manufacturers would frankly be more informative than participation by people hawking magazine subscriptions, conferences and workshops.

[steve simmons]

Given that you charge people to advertise on your own website, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

who is paying for ads on the View Camera web site??? Please get your facts straight before posting inaccurate statements.

The trade show is offering people a chance to see and play with more lf equipment than any other place except for possibly the trade show in NYC in the fall. People do not have to pre-register and can come and go without us knowing who they are. Free with no strings.

The free articles are full of substantive info that has helped hundreds of people. They can go to the site and get the info free and with no strings. We do not track who comes and goes and do not send any type of followup solicitation.

I am sorry you have a problem with this service. The purpose of this forum, and others, is to provide info to people with an interest in lf photography. That is what we are doing and we are doing it without any cost to the person getting the info.



steve simmons

[Rory_3532]

Steve,

One of the ways that you make money is charging people to run classified ads that appear in your magazine and on your website.

If the owners of this site think that it is ok for you to advertise here, that's fine. In that case, perhaps they should also think about allowing ads from manufacturers, publishers, galleries and photographers and from people who want to sell equipment. Personally I'd find such ads at least as informative as ads for your magazine and your conferences.

[Paul Kierstead]

Rory, I think you are ignoring the aspect of contribution. I don't know if you have some kind of beef with Steve, but I for one appreciate his contributions to this site. It shouldn't be a black and white issue. If -- for example -- the lens manufacturers came here and answered questions about lenses frequently and offered help I -- for one -- wouldn't mind them pitching their lenses once in a while. In some ways HP Marketing does that; Bob gets a lot of subtle plugs in while helping out. There is a vast difference between what Steve (and Bob) does and a bunch of companies which offer no contribution spamming us with "Tripods for 30% off!". If you can't see that difference, then you have no concept of fair return and no flexibility.

Of course Steve is trying to pitch his conference to help it survive and maybe even make a buck. But he "pays" for this by helping answer questions almost daily here.

[Rory_3532]

Paul,

Let's not start with ad hominem arguments. It is easy to do, but it is a pointless exercise. First, I have no issue with Steve Simmons. I even buy his magazine occasionally. Secondly, I do know what the difference is between Bob Salomon's contributions, which in my experience are about facts rather than selling, and repetitive advertisements of the kind that have gone on about this conference. Mr. Luong will run this site as he pleases. He has already told Mr. Simmons (see the third post above) that he is over the line. Mr. Simmons refuses to accept this, and claims that it is "censorship" to tell him to stop advertising his magazine's website. I'd just like to know what the rules are, and whether Mr. Simmons has some special dispensation.

[Rob Barker]

OK let's lighten up now. I've nailed my colours to the mast and said that I think Steve's post was OK this time round. Steve is smart enough to take the earlier hint that repetitive announcements might be frowned upon. Moderation here is done with a light touch and that is only possible as a consequence of the good judgement, good humour and tolerance that characterises the vast majority of contributors here. Let's keep it that way!

[Rory_3532]

Rob,

I believe that the credibility of a publication, whether hard copy, electronic or interactive, depends on there being a clear line between editorial content and advertising. Mr. Luong has decided to allow people to run advertisements in the middle of editorial content. I would have thought that it would be a simple matter to vet these advertisements, or put them in a separate part of the site, but of course that is Mr. Luong's decision. Given the decision to blur the line between editorial content and advertising, the question now is the degree to which this is going to be permitted. The answer to that question has a direct bearing on the credibility and integrity of this site.

There are many professionals who participate on this site who do not use it as a vehicle to sell their wares. Lots of people provide useful information, and most of them do it without taking the attitude that the site and other participants must take their contribution and their advertising as a package.

While I have no doubt that Mr. Simmons is smart, he has rather clearly rejected the idea that he has gone over the line. At this point, the rules, if there are any, are rather unclear. It is not a question of lightening up. There is a very real question about whether the standards of the site, which was supposed to be a non-commercial operation, are at this point actually lower than those of photo.net, it being quite clear that photo.net would not permit Mr. Simmons's activities. These are very practical questions for people who want to decide which site to participate in.

[tim atherton]

"believe that the credibility of a publication, whether hard copy, electronic or interactive, depends on there being a clear line between editorial content and advertising. Mr. Luong has decided to allow people to run advertisements in the middle of editorial content."

getting way off topic here - but a) this isn't a publication so non of that makes sense to apply it here and it's credibility and integrity doesn't depend on anything like that and b) many "credible" publications do just that - it's a called advertorial...

You are applying entirely the wrong criteria - and as is usual in sucha case - you end up with the wrong conclusion (or in this case, an assumption)

[Mark_3632]

Wow this just wont go away will it? This site belongs to "Mr. Luong" and he has said his peace. Move on! If it upsets people so much they really can stop coming to the site. This is a dead horse and at this point it is a mighty smacked around one.

Hell, if I were Steve I would offer a hardy "thank you" to Rory for keeping this thread alive and well, bringing a lot of notice to the conference. This thread has been very high on the new responses link since it started. The more posts there are the more people are going to read it to see what is going on.

[Rory_3532]

Tim,

Thanks, because now we're getting to the real issue.

I do think that this is a publication, or analogous to one, and, in any event, that distinguishing between editorial content and advertising is absolutely critical to the integrity of this site. The failure to draw that distinction is the reason that many special interest magazines, including on photography, are not taken seriously. I am not aware of any "advertorial" publication that has any credibility, although that is certainly the right word to describe how this site is evolving.

I participate in a site on wine that is run by the critic for the International Herald Tribune and the major English language newspaper in the Middle East. The participants in the site include some important people in the wine industry. They absolutely ensure that they say nothing that involves their companies' products. Similarly, there are many professionals on this site who offer their views, but do not use it as an opportunity to sell their products. That is called class.

[Donal Taylor]

Rory - you are sadly mistaken - and in the process trying to make this site into something it isn't. There's not much point in saying a site like this is analogous to this or that - because it isn't really analogous to anything before the internet - except perhaps a bunch of enthusiasts meeting in the pub. And a few of them

Pertsonally the last thing I'd like to be equated with is a bunch of wine snobs (my feeling is that most on this list are a bit more dwon to earth than that?)

If you look at the site the way you do I have no doubt you will be constantly disappointed.

The only thing the reputation and credibility of this site depends upon is fair and even handed moderation and a good design that works. After that, if people want to particiapte they will - if not - well, that's their issue.

It isn't "editorial" - it is nowhere close to it - there is no editor, editorial board, no editorial guidlines. It's a friendly free for all with a few quidelines and a very gentle guiding hand - that's all. As someone who works in the news and magazien industry I can tel you that this site is about as far as you can get from some kind of editorial publication.

"I am not aware of any "advertorial" publication that has any credibility" Time, the New Yorker etc etc do it all the time.

[Rory_3532]

Donal,

Time and the New Yorker most definitely do no do avertorials except as advertising sections labelled as such. The idea of an advertorial that is not labelled as such, and is passed off as editorial content, is completely contradictory to anything approaching integrity.

I am sorry that you think anyone who is interested in wine is a snob although I am gratified that you think that the participants in this site, except for me, do not suffer from that affliction. If you look at a current thread on this site about refrigeration of wine, you will find that at least two of the participants talk about storing their film in a wine fridge. In any event, I don't quite understand how my point - which is that wine professionals who participate in the site that I referred to refrain from floggin their products - is evidence of snobisness.

It is entirely possible that I will come to the conclusion that this is not the right site for me. I'll make that decision when and if I receive a simple answer to a simple question that I have now asked more than once: given that this site, unlike photo.net, accepts posts that are advertisements without idetification as such or segregation, what are the rules? It really shouldn't be hard to get an answer to that question, but apparently it is.

[tim atherton]

"I'll make that decision when and if I receive a simple answer to a simple question that I have now asked more than once: given that this site, unlike photo.net, accepts posts that are advertisements without idetification as such or segregation, what are the rules? It really shouldn't be hard to get an answer to that question, but apparently it is."

take a little time to look on the site - it's easy to do for yourself - it's there in black and white

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/help.html

Classifieds (for sale or wanted ads) and commercial postings are not allowed in this forum and will be deleted. Refer to the LF page for links to places dedicated to them. Regular posters may announce, in a non-repetitive way, educational events such as workshops and conferences, as well as gallery openings.

[Andre Noble]

Men can be funny! O.k., raise your hand: who's REALLY upset with Steve not because of this purported anti-commercialization thingy, but because in the third week of April, in the place where you live (unlike in Monterey, CA) there will still be snow on the ground, or at best a cold drizzle with grey skies, and you simply can't convienently travel two thousand or more miles to the conference to join the big party?

Keep your hand up if you wish he had held it closer to your town, East Podunk? O.K., maybe next time he'll hold it closer to there and the rest of us can be upset.

O.K. thank you for being honest. This is called, 'jealousy'. It's a normal human emotion, and nothing to be ashamed about.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I participate in a site on wine



Hmmm...perhaps that should be spelled whine?

I am keeping this thread alive just to annoy Rory, and give the conference more exposure...



C`mon bubba, would you lighten up? This is not the same as having a bunch of ads from Gallo wines in the page! Better yet, QTL has not deleted this thread, if it is fine with him, what the heck is your problem?



Simmons can be annoying sometimes, but you have to give credit where credit is due, he is the only one who is actively promoting LF, his magazine has been for many years the only outlet for LF practitioners to get some exposure and if he makes a buck or two while doing this, why is this such a big deal?



Better yet, tell me what have you done to promote LF other than buy film? If Simmons organizes a conference he has to pay for the space in advance, is it such a crime to try and make sure he at least breaks even?



OTOH, do you realize that in your crusade you have now become as annoying? Other members have tried to tell you it is not such a big deal, to move on, yet here you are beating the same putrefied horse....really, you need to get out more and take some pictures and stop worrying about what other people are doing. If you dont like the way QTL is running this site, by all means create your on LF web site and run it as you see fit, but until then, do us all a favor a move on....ok?

[Bill_1856]

I'm a THUNDERBIRD man, myself, but RIPPLE will do in a pinch. More bang for the buck. As I recall, Mogan David has a sweet, nutty boquet though a triffle heavy to go with a Double Whopper with cheese extra mayo hold the pickle. Other than that, I can't tell one from another, except that anything more than $5/quart is a waste of money. Or is it a over $5/gallon -- I can't remember?

[Rob Barker]

Let's leave it now guys.

Rob (Moderator, for those who didn't twig).