How about a ULF forum

[Hugo Zhang]

I really miss the old ULF section. Come on, you don't need to know vacuum frame if you only shoot 8x10 or smaller.

[Mike A]

Any moderators want to render a verdict here? I mean come on, two seperate forums catering to digital, the "lounge" please. Why does APUG need to brought into this, not everyone subscribes there. I do subscribe there but there are people that do not, they maybe considering a larger format and can access information easier here. I know there are times when having a ULF forum made visiting here much more convienent.

Mike

[Capocheny]

Whether there's an independent ULF forum here or not, it certainly won't make much difference to me.

If there's an independent ULF forum set up, I'll most likely peruse it occasionally just to see what's new and for general "information purposes only."

If the decision is not to set up an independent forum for ULF and to leave things "as is"... it's still easy enough to refrain from viewing postings related to subject matter I'm not interested in!

IMHO, we might just be making a mountain out of a mole-hill! But, that's just my two cents worth!

Cheers

[robert]

I agree ULF does have some very distinct problems that other formats don't run into. I for one don't visit this site as near as much since the ULF tag was eliminated. I'm all for a ULF forum.

[John Bowen]

I too would appreciate a ULF forum.

Thanks

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think there are enough separate issues to justify a ULF forum--transporting equipment, finding film and organizing group orders, dealing with less standardized filmholders, lenses that cover, scaling up alt-processes, increased customization and custom fabrication of equipment, etc. Organizing all the threads into one forum could be useful for someone wanting to get into ULF who wants to find out what all the complications might be and doesn't necessarily know what to search for or what questions to ask.

Arguably, many ULF issues also apply to smaller formats that have become or always were non-standard (7X11, 4X10, 5X12, full plate, half plate, quarter plate, etc.), so maybe the new forum might be "ULF and other less common formats" or something along those lines for formats other than 6x9cm, 4x5", 5x7", and 8x10".

[BrianShaw]

IMHO, we might just be making a mountain out of a mole-hill! But, that's just my two cents worth!

I hear that making mountains out of mole-hills is soon to be instituted as an Olympic sport!

[Ole Tjugen]

...so maybe the new forum might be "ULF and other less common formats" or something along those lines for formats other than 6x9cm, 4x5", 5x7", and 8x10".

Include 6.5x9cm, 9x12cm, 13x18cm and 18x24cm in the "exceptions from the usual", and I agree.

That way we won't have to argue about whether ULF is "larger than 8x10" or "11x14 and larger", and my 24x30cm plate camera will unarguably belong.

[Ralph Barker]

As Tom mentioned earlier, it can be easily done. The question, however, is what goes into it? Gear? Film? Processing? Technique? Digital? Etc.? As such, it could easily become difficult to sort out, or become a hodge-podge of threads that only peripherally relate to ULF. If much smaller, non-standard formats are added, the issue becomes even more complex.

The "higher-level" separation of topics was an effort to separate the issues from being format specific, making the topics more subject-related than format-related.

What if those posting ULF-related threads in the current categories simply added "ULF" to the thread title as a matter of practice? Would that make it easier for ULFers to find what they are looking for?

[Brian Ellis]

Good grief, if they have to deal with all those special (not to say peculiar) problems the rest of us don't face they must be very special (not to say peculiar) people. Give 'em their special forum and let's move on.