New Category for Alternative Printmaking via various digital means

[sanking]

What does everyone think about the sub-forum/thread we already have for this topic? Is it working for those using it?

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...s-or-Positives

Putting aside all of the other issues that is really all that is needed to satisfy Bob's request, a sub-forum called Alt-Process-Prints-from-Digital-Negatives-or-Positives.

I really don't understand why that should be an issue for anyone, the thread itself did not seem to bother anyone!!

Sandy

[Tin Can]

Putting aside all of the other issues that is really all that is needed to satisfy Bob's request, a sub-forum called Alt-Process-Prints-from-Digital-Negatives-or-Positives.

I really don't understand why that should be an issue for anyone, the thread itself did not seem to bother anyone!!

Sandy

+1

[Oren Grad]

Putting aside all of the other issues that is really all that is needed to satisfy Bob's request, a sub-forum called Alt-Process-Prints-from-Digital-Negatives-or-Positives.

I really don't understand why that should be an issue for anyone, the thread itself did not seem to bother anyone!!

Sandy, that thread is in the "Image Sharing (Everything Else)" section, which is a carved-out exception to our general rule of LF-only and is intended to be limited to discussion around member-made pictures. Setting up a separate subforum for general discussion of tools and techniques that is explicitly defined to include non-LF capture, as Bob would like, would be a deeper break with the long-established mission, policy and clear identity of this Forum and thus is a step that would require careful thought and strong justification.

[bob carnie]

All I can ask is some consideration on this request .. thanks

Sandy, that thread is in the "Image Sharing (Everything Else)" section, which is a carved-out exception to our general rule of LF-only and is intended to be limited to discussion around member-made pictures. Setting up a separate subforum for general discussion of tools and techniques that is explicitly defined to include non-LF capture, as Bob would like, would be a deeper break with the long-established mission, policy and clear identity of this Forum and thus is a step that would require careful thought and strong justification.

[Vaughn]

Sandy, that thread is in the "Image Sharing (Everything Else)" section, which is a carved-out exception to our general rule of LF-only ...

That is also my thinking, although I certainly would support the idea of an Alternative Photography sub-forum.

Sandy, your Carbron (carbon printing) Yahoo Group is a great resource, especially for those using digital negatives. The amount of information and the community there is just fantastic. Perhaps you would be willing to open it up to all alternative processes , including using digital negatives for silver gelatin printing. It would be a great asset to the photographic community.

[paulr]

Bob is raising an entirely different question: whether LFPF should host a forum whose core interest is not large format but rather a defined set of printing methods and associated processing techniques.

It's worth keeping in mind that most the digital negatives people are talking about are large.

Also many of the printing techniques people use them for are antique processes that this forum has always been friendly to.

In my mind the reason for a sub-forum is that this is a complex and specialized discipline. I don't do it, but if I did, I'd like to have a sub-forum dedicated to it. This is a pragmatic argument, not a political one. Political/religious analog vs. digital feuds just bore me.

[bob carnie]

I wish I could have said that at the beginning. thanks Paul

It's worth keeping in mind that most the digital negatives people are talking about are large.

Also many of the printing techniques people use them for are antique processes that this forum has always been friendly to.

In my mind the reason for a sub-forum is that this is a complex and specialized discipline. I don't do it, but if I did, I'd like to have a sub-forum dedicated to it. This is a pragmatic argument, not a political one. Political/religious analog vs. digital feuds just bore me.

[Oren Grad]

It's worth keeping in mind that most the digital negatives people are talking about are large.

Also many of the printing techniques people use them for are antique processes that this forum has always been friendly to.

In my mind the reason for a sub-forum is that this is a complex and specialized discipline. I don't do it, but if I did, I'd like to have a sub-forum dedicated to it. This is a pragmatic argument, not a political one. Political/religious analog vs. digital feuds just bore me.

There's no problem at all with discussion of any or all of those processes here. And as was noted earlier in this thread, a separate section to discuss alt-process wet printmaking for pictures that started as LF captures would certainly be within our scope. We're watching this discussion closely, and may yet post a poll to help us gauge interest. This has nothing to do with digital-vs-traditional: relevant digital tools and methods have been welcome here and will continue to be, as will other processes yet to be invented, if they prove to be useful to the LF photographer. So as you say, the decision about a possible specialty subforum is a purely a pragmatic one, and we'll make it on that basis.

But the extra wrinkle of Bob's proposal in particular is that he wants it to be explicitly *not* a subforum just about LF use of these tools. He would like to take advantage of the resources of the LFPF, which have been donated to the mission of sustaining a large format discussion community, to host a general-interest subforum on wet-print alternative processes. In Bob's vision of this subforum, all, including those whose work begins in small format and has nothing at all to do with LF, would be invited to participate. Accordingly, the subforum would host, among others, discussion threads addressing questions that have nothing to do with LF. Indeed, non-LF threads could well come to dominate such a subforum, because the number of people starting with small-format captures who might conceivably be interested in these methods is potentially quite a bit larger than the number of LF users who will be.

I think that these methods are wonderful tools for the artist and craftsman, that such an all-comers forum would have the potential to be a lively, productive community, and that the idea of launching one somewhere makes a lot of sense. But I have very serious doubts about whether it would be appropriate, or wise for the health of the LFPF, to host it here, and so far I've seen no arguments that address that.

[TXFZ1]

Sandy, that thread is in the "Image Sharing (Everything Else)" section, which is a carved-out exception to our general rule of LF-only and is intended to be limited to discussion around member-made pictures. Setting up a separate subforum for general discussion of tools and techniques that is explicitly defined to include non-LF capture, as Bob would like, would be a deeper break with the long-established mission, policy and clear identity of this Forum and thus is a step that would require careful thought and strong justification.

Too funny, irony at it's best. The ULF peoples cried for a new section by saying they used different processes than LF (still haven't figured that one out) received moderator support. Bob is asking for a section that is defined by real or true different processes than traditional LF, just happens that small format or digial is also supported by these processes but the moderators cry out foul. My 0.02, create an alternative process section and let the chips fall where they may, everybody learns from the processes.

David

[sanking]

Hi Vaughn,

Thanks for your kind remark about the carbon yahoo forum. Its success is due in large part to the generous sharing of knowledge and information about carbon printing by folks like yourself, so thank you for that as well. We are fortunate to have so many accomplished individuals contributing to the forum.

As for the rest, since the forum does appear to be working so well let's not leap into the wild unknown and open it up to the rest of the alternative community!! I truly wish some of the forums were more inclusive of the knowledge base, but I can not change the world, only my part of it.

Sandy