Similar issues have occured with nearly every website I have followed over the years. The site starts out with a spefic focus that appeals to a particular branch of a hobby or art. A community forms. Over time, the site becomes more and more popular and the focus widens. People who liked it better when it provided unique perspective and focus complain that it is no longer as useful. Others embrace the broadening of focus. Ultimately it's a stalemate with traditonalists on one side, accomodating types on the other, and various shades of gray in between.
I personally don't see the *need* for non RF images here. As others have mentioned there are numerous outlets on the web for exposing one's work to the masses no matter what format one uses. RFF is unique and I don't see why that should be compromised for the sake of being accomodating.
I was a member of a really fun and interesting group on Flickr dedicated to urban photography. As membership grew, more and more flower macros began showing up in the pool. When challenged, posters said, "Well, I live in a city and this flower is in my front yard so therefor it is an urban photo." While semantically correct, the images added nothing aestheticlly to what was previously a great expose on a variety of urban landscapes suchs as industrial wastelands, traffic jams, skyscrapers, alleys, street people, street life, human density, concrete, steel, smog and the like. Once it was decided that the flowers could stay, a precendent was created that then led to people including photos of their bathrooms, coffee cups sitting on their dining room tables, etc. As with the flowers, it was argued that these objects were within the boundary of a city and so they counted, too. Long story short, the group began to fall apart and last time I checked, seems to have lost its focus entirely.
People want to be liked. People want to be friendly. People want to be accomodating. People prefer not to mix many rules in with their hobbies and escapes. While generalizations, these concepts are more true than not. While I value consorting with people who agree with these generalizations, I do feel there is *sometimes* a need for rules in some situations and that *sometimes* it is better to be narrowminded than free and easy. Nonetheless, here is a possible solution to appease all sides:
If RFF had a gallery for images taken with RF cameras and one for "other" then there would be clear bounds for policing. Individual users could individually choose to view ALL galleries mixed together, ONLY the RF gallery or ONLY other. This way, folks who feel that the final result is all that matters can bask in the diversity of contributions. Likewise, those who feel that an RF dramatically contributes to the specific look and feel of images and only wish to see those, can simply ignore everything else. In other words, introduce optional technological filters into the site so that individual preferences can surcumvent a needless global compromise.
