Collodion websites closed

[paulbarden]

Maybe the most appropriate thing to do is start a new collodion forum. On Myspace.

I'm not sure if this is a serious suggestion or not. My impression is that MySpace is ostensibly for musicians to promote their craft and little else. When someone directs me to a MySpace page, I generally don't bother looking.

[Tin Can]

The Quinn link below is damaged, a half step to his site with offer, where another click sent me to Amazon. I bought his book with video. I could not retrace the steps, perhaps Quinn is an Internet expert also.

I was going to buy Coffer, however changed my mind.

Thanks for the advice all

I asked Quinn about the deletion of the forum and at no point in the conversation did he say anything about keeping an archive of it. I kinda doubt he did.

On the plus side, he has now made his 2019 edition of Chemical Pictures available as a non-limited edition version, and its much less costly than the limited edition: http://www.collodion.com/shop/vintag...iss-army-knife
Most of the more common questions about the process are covered well in this edition. Its an especially useful book if you plant to make collodion negatives and make POP prints from them.

[6x6TLL]

I'm not sure if this is a serious suggestion or not. My impression is that MySpace is ostensibly for musicians to promote their craft and little else. When someone directs me to a MySpace page, I generally don't bother looking.

I'm frankly suprised that MySpace still exists, I thought it died a decade ago.

Regardless, it's not an appropriate place for a collodion forum.

I would once again suggest groups.io, you would probably be able to import the existing database directly and pick up where the group left off.

[paulbarden]

The Quinn link below is damaged, a half step to his site with offer, where another click sent me to Amazon. I bought his book with video. I could not retrace the steps, perhaps Quinn is an Internet expert also.

I was going to buy Coffer, however changed my mind.

Thanks for the advice all

Quinn appears to be consolidating his various web sites, and so things are moving around. I cannot find a link to his 2019 edition at the moment.

[Jim C.]

This link seems to work, takes you to Amazon -
https://quinn-jacobson.squarespace.c...pictures-book/

[Tin Can]

Yes now it does.

It does link to the correct Amazon offer.

Searching Amazon minutes ago showed other older editions which are not this 2020 May 22 release.

Be careful what you buy.

This link seems to work, takes you to Amazon -
https://quinn-jacobson.squarespace.c...pictures-book/

[paulbarden]

This link seems to work, takes you to Amazon -
https://quinn-jacobson.squarespace.c...pictures-book/

Yup, that is the correct edition. Thank you.

[goamules]

Thanks George and Paul for your impressions of the WWW. They are close to what I noted too. And coincidentally, what the usual argument against digital photography is too. Digital content of any sort is not permanent. Not music sites, formats either. It's why I have a lot of analog in my life. Was reading a book about my home mountains in NC yesterday that my wife handed me. A fairly rare subject, we're doing genealogy constantly. These are the remembrances of a lady that lived in that county in the 1880s-1950s. Written in 1947, the inside is signed by my dad in 1970, when HE was trying to find our roots. That's quite a chain of data and tangible paper. Compare that to the rude, crude, and meaningless comments on ANY news report today, that comprise 96.5% of all digital content being "saved for the future." I'm aghast when I read them sometimes, cruder that what we sailors would say to a hooker in a red light district....all ephemeral on this Great Disinformation Highway. Forums weren't like that, too much.

[Corran]

Hi Oren, it is 1.7 GB.

Okay, with respect gentlemen, the WWW is indeed an AMAZING place to store information. In fact, it's probably the BEST option any of you have.

Anything in print can be lost in an instant. A properly-maintained digital archive can be forever. Do you want, in 20 years say, for a limited number of books sold to be the only thing left of the technique of WP? I remember the time and energy spent by a friend to find a few WP books from years past, and the money it took to get them.

Of course the "ease" of access and posting makes information less authoritative, but that's a wholly different discussion.

Anyway, as for the above - 1.7 GB is literally nothing today in 2020. I could store over 7,000 copies of the entire forum on my personal home server here. A <$100 hard drive is 4000 GB, available anywhere HDDs are sold.

Here's the question as it relates to the LFPF - how much bandwidth does it have, how much is currently used, and how much would it be increased to have that accessible here (assuming the forum's owner would allow it's storage) as read-only? I don't really know the back-end stuff but I feel like a read-only repository would not be that difficult to implement as a special subforum or link, assuming the data is in a usable format to this php-based forum. I assume the 1.7GB of new data itself would not be a big deal to the storage capacity of the current forum - cheap, bargain web hosting is often 100 GB of storage, and I assume this forum is not on the cheapest plan.

[paulbarden]

Okay, with respect gentlemen, the WWW is indeed an AMAZING place to store information. In fact, it's probably the BEST option any of you have.

Anything in print can be lost in an instant. A properly-maintained digital archive can be forever. Do you want, in 20 years say, for a limited number of books sold to be the only thing left of the technique of WP? I remember the time and energy spent by a friend to find a few WP books from years past, and the money it took to get them.

Of course the "ease" of access and posting makes information less authoritative, but that's a wholly different discussion.

Anyway, as for the above - 1.7 GB is literally nothing today in 2020. I could store over 7,000 copies of the entire forum on my personal home server here. A <$100 hard drive is 4000 GB, available anywhere HDDs are sold.

Here's the question as it relates to the LFPF - how much bandwidth does it have, how much is currently used, and how much would it be increased to have that accessible here (assuming the forum's owner would allow it's storage) as read-only? I don't really know the back-end stuff but I feel like a read-only repository would not be that difficult to implement as a special subforum or link, assuming the data is in a usable format to this php-based forum. I assume the 1.7GB of new data itself would not be a big deal to the storage capacity of the current forum - cheap, bargain web hosting is often 100 GB of storage, and I assume this forum is not on the cheapest plan.

All of what you say is true, Bryan. But what is also true is this: 95% of all published information (blogs, web sites, eBooks, etc) that I used to refer to 20 years ago is gone from the web. As you say "A properly-maintained digital archive can be forever.", and yet it rarely seems to be done. There has to be someone willing to do the work, and someone willing to pay for it. More often than not, one or both of these things goes missing after a few years. So although there is huge potential in the web for archiving data, it isn't happening as it should.