Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 148

Thread: Deleted View Camera Thread?

  1. #21
    Leonard Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Racine, WI
    Posts
    256

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    What about people who market thier websites on which they sell prints?

  2. #22
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    8,384

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    VC content is free if you go to the library or sit in a coffee shop and read it without buying it.

    Really, if that is the guidelines they need to be updated, because in essence MC and VC are doing exactly the same thing but under a slightly different business model. One should not be denied informing the public about their current issue because of a slight difference in how they get paid for their product.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    "When did photography become a desk job?" Kirk Gittings 2009

    KIRK GITTINGS
    WEBSITE

    LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)

  3. #23

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    "VC content is free if you go to the library or sit in a coffee shop and read it without buying it." -KG

    Well, I support the distinction made in the application of the forum policy between content I can obtain for free and content I cannot obtain for free. Steve's magazine has not reached the sort of massive penetration where I can find it easily.

    I've been thinking that the forum has mostly become a marketplace anyway, lately, and I find any voice for noncommerciality refreshing.

  4. #24
    Founder QT Luong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1997
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,193

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leonard Peterson View Post
    What about people who market thier websites on which they sell prints?
    Not permitted.

    However, if you write a wonderful and relevant article about some aspects of your photography, you can post a link to it, regardless on where it is hosted.

    The signature link is also authorized, as a courtesy, in recognition of the value of your postings.

  5. #25

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    Disclaimer - I am a contributing editor for View Camera magazine. Please keep that in mind when reading my thoughts on this topic.

    I've long been a firm believer in the non-commercial nature of this forum. That said, I didn't see any sales pitch or offer to sell anything in Steve's post. All I saw was information about the topics covered in the upcoming issue of View Camera. If that's advertising, it's a pretty ill conceived marketing plan. After all, some people may read the list of subjects and decide there is nothing that interests them in this particular issue and decide it's not worth the trip to their local bookstore to buy a copy. Putting the information out there merely lets people know what's in the magazine - not how or where to buy it. With no sales pitch, it's more of an FYI post than an ad or solicitation.

    I know there are exceptions in the fourm guidelines for workshops and gallery shows/openings, but if you ask me those are much more commercial and ad-like than this announcement by Steve. I can't see those shows online for free, I can't take those workshops online for free. Yet, those postings are considered acceptable. Please go back and read through the posts in the "announcements" sub-forum over the last month and I think you'll find a couple dozen that are far more commercial - complete with prices - than Steve's post that got nuked by the moderator.

    If the guidelines allow announcing workshops that cost hundreds of dollars to attend, but not an informational post about the contents of a book or magazine without any sales pitch, it is the guidelines that are broken. As they are written and applied today, they hardly seem consistant. The guidelines have been updated in the past to reflect the growth and changing needs of the community. Maybe it's time to consider a minor change that would allow such informational posts. If not, then maybe it's time to cease allowing workshop and galley announcements as those are surely for-profit ventures that are not available free online either.

    Kerry

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,670

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    <rant>

    Call me thick if you will, but I still do not understand how is this violating any rules? The way I see it, Steve is not advertising his magazine or any other services, he is simply announcing an upcoming issue of the magazine that so many of us have a keen interest in. That's why we have the Announcement section, after all, isn't it? And both Steve and others have done that freely in the recent past. Why this selective uptightness all of a sudden?

    And what of all the other announcements about any product at all - aren't those all just marketing tools anyway under these guidelines? So, if they all happen to be verbotten, then why keep the Announcements section in the first place?

    Unless there is something else going on behind the scenes that the general public such as us here is not aware of, but if so, and given the interest generated, it would be only fair toward all the members to clearly explain it.

    </rant>

  7. #27
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Minneapolis, Minnesota
    Posts
    1,157

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    I personally don't like the repetitive nature of either magazine's announcement posts. The magazine owners have their own web sites and can advertise there. People who are subscribers to the publications can put forth a little effort and go look to see what's coming up on the next issue on those web sites, or just wait and see. I subscribe to both periodicals and don't see the need for issue announcements. I get an announcement via email from MagnaChrome and I think that's plenty.

    It's good that we know that these resources are available, but single posts by their owners about their existence should be sufficient. If they are good, we'll hear about them in the course of general discussion. We do have a search function and if you look up "magazine" I'll bet both publications will show up in the archives more than once.

  8. #28
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Minneapolis, Minnesota
    Posts
    1,157

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    Also:

    ad&#183;ver&#183;tis&#183;ing
    n.
    1. The activity of attracting public attention to a product or business.

  9. #29
    Leonard Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Racine, WI
    Posts
    256

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Leonard Peterson
    What about people who market their websites on which they sell prints?

    Not permitted.

    However, if you write a wonderful and relevant article about some aspects of your photography, you can post a link to it, regardless on where it is hosted.

    The signature link is also authorized, as a courtesy, in recognition of the value of your postings


    Well lots of folks post announcements of their new websites by asking for opinions. Some sell photos and others don't, but it's still marketing. How about people announcing gallery openings or new books published?

  10. #30
    Eric Biggerstaff
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    1,155

    Re: Deleted View Camera Thread?

    The definition of advertising would probably include all posts about items for sale, magazine publications, "what do you think of my website" postings, equipment reviews, workshop announcements, "How To" DVD announcements, etc, etc.

    I am fine if we remove ALL of those things, but the rules should be applied fairly across all. As was mentioned in another post, there have been several far more commercial announcements recently and the VC thread that was removed was simply letting people know about the upcoming issue (very similiar to Michael's postings about MAGNAchrom). If Steve had posted, "Available at your local newstand for $6.95" or whatever, I think that is for sure wrong, but he did not do that.
    Eric Biggerstaff

    www.ericbiggerstaff.com

Similar Threads

  1. View Camera vs. Field Camera
    By radchad in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 3-Oct-2006, 14:45
  2. Field Camera vs. View Camera
    By Mark_3705 in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 26-Nov-2003, 02:03
  3. Camera delivery and service stories :an alternative view
    By bob moulton in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 6-May-2002, 12:15

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •