Andy K
Well-known
hinius said:
Here's my method. Take photographs, develop film, store negs in inert sleevs in metal storage case. I can see how that is too expensive and complicated.
An Open Letter......
- Thread starter Rick Waldroup
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 122
- Views 7K
Here's my method. Take photographs, develop film, store negs in inert sleevs in metal storage case. I can see how that is too expensive and complicated.
Sonnar Brian
Established
jaapv said:
Roger repeatedly dragged politics into mainstream discussion. He was, as he often stated, a European Gentleman whose responsibility it was to enlighten the rest of us. Other RFF members began to resent it. He left of his own accord. Most RFF members stated there were other forums for political discussions. Some of his threads, such as the bombing of "Hirishima" (sic), were moved to the Something Completely Different forum.
Here is one that Roger opened on the RangeFinder General Discussion forum. Joe moved it, something that Roger did not like.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9620&highlight=hirishima
Last edited by a moderator:
hinius
Member
Andy K said:
Maybe I'm not getting it, but if you lose that box, you're still in trouble aren't you? People complain about digital, sometimes rightly so, but it does introduce the very useful concept of redundant, multiple backups. To be honest, I worry more about my film negatives than my digital files.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
It's shame that vBulletin software does not have the same controls as some other similar systems. I know I checked in the manual.
In my own forum I can set a member to be moderated, meaning that anything they post has to be approved before it goes online.
Also my members have a 'Report Abuse' button on each and every post. If they click it I get a notification to go and check it out, and can remove that post if appropriate.
In my own forum I can set a member to be moderated, meaning that anything they post has to be approved before it goes online.
Also my members have a 'Report Abuse' button on each and every post. If they click it I get a notification to go and check it out, and can remove that post if appropriate.
Andy K
Well-known
hinius said:
Well how often do you hear of someone losing all their negs and how often do you hear of people losing files through failed HDs, corrupted files, failed memory cards and degraded DVDRs and CDRs?
I have said this before and I will say it again, if digital storage was safe and reliable there would be no need for back up copies of everything. If that is a person's choice then good luck to them, it doesn't make them a bad person, but I personally will not trust any of my work to digital storage.
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Some time ago, I was asked to do a presentation of the wildlife in the Faklands. Most of my work was E6. I did the presentation in the evening and then was invited for some "refreshment" later. To protect my slides, they were locked away in a safe place and I was to collect them the next day. The buiding burnt down overnight and all I had was melted together piece of plastic. Fortunately I have prints of most of the slides. Accidents happen and the only "safe" way to store images safely is in at least 2 places.
Kim
Kim
Andy K said:
VinceC
Veteran
The Voyager spaceships, our interstellar emissaries to distant worlds in the far-off future, were launched in the 1970s. Each of the two spaceships contains a phonograph record (!!), instructions on how to build a record player (!!) and, along with the sounds of Earth, some digitally encoded images of such things as the building blocks of carbon-based life. This combined digital/analog storage medium has an indefinite lilfespan. It does anticipate a certain degree of intelligence on the part of whatever/whoever attempts to retrieve the data.
Last edited:
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Brian Sweeney said:
I didn't intend to get into the rights and wrongs of that one, Brian. I just wanted to point out that he left of his own accord, not because he was banned. As for his reasons, please note, that I added "or so he felt". Of course everybody on this forum that was round then knows there is more than one side to the story (isn't there always?) As I posted before, water under the bridge.....
P.S.I consider myself a European Gentleman too; we don't talk politics in our Gentlemen's Clubs, so I don't do so here.
Last edited:
S
Socke
Guest
Andy K said:
If you say so, it must be so.
Bertram2
Gone elsewhere
Brian Sweeney said:
this must be the sort of bad-mouthing he hated enuff to leave at the end.
Brian, is that junior high here or what ? How can you embarrass yourself with such a childish and ugly insinuation ? 😡
Don't you realize that this says much more about you than it says about Roger ?
bertram
hoping I haven't overseen any typo in this post 🙄
VinceC
Veteran
I just googled this. There were actually 115 images on the Voyager records, stored in a combination binary/analog format. No doubt some of these are RF photographs, as the list contains several photojournalism type images from around the globe.
FYI, click here for the list of images
This gets my vote as the ultimate archival storage ... and its a combination analog (TV signal) with binary (digital) encoding. The best of both. (And there's also a backup copy in the form of the second Voyager).
FYI, click here for the list of images
This gets my vote as the ultimate archival storage ... and its a combination analog (TV signal) with binary (digital) encoding. The best of both. (And there's also a backup copy in the form of the second Voyager).
telenous
Well-known
I am fairly new here. My camera knowledge is rather rudimentary and it has increased exponentially ever since I joined the forum. My impression when joining was of a very inclusive, friendly community. I 've never hesitated asking for advice even when my questions were blatantly naive and I have received knowledgable replies in return. I have come to see members of RFF as friends if anything. If someone were to make fun of my questions or my amateurism I would be surprised because I have learned to expect different.
Having said that, I have also learned that humor is a very personal thing and it cannot be conveyed easily in the web. To give an example, contrary to photography I am (or can be) very opinionated when it comes to other matters, for instance wine. Once I attempted to joke about the wine preference of another member and I realised that this was not taken well (although this other member was gracious enough not to make a point about it). Perhaps it was a feeble joke, you 'll say. Perhaps, I say too. But my point is that the forum is ultimately a tool for exchanging information on camera equipment and photography and not a place to enforce opinions on matters of a photographic, political, or even vinicultural nature. I am particularly pessimistic about political discussion, which I think does not amount to anything else but self-justifying monologues (and please do not bombard me with replies explaining the virtues of dialectics). If that means that the forum will be less entertaining, less humorous or what have you then that is the cost of having a civilised conversation on the topic of photography in the web.
Obviously I am not saying that you have to agree with all that or that you should do as I have elected to do; But I think it is a straightforward inference that if someone strays from the perceived rules of conduct then understandably they are in the jurisdiction of the moderators. I do not know how they judge this or that or the other; Thankfully it's not my business to know.
Having said that, I have also learned that humor is a very personal thing and it cannot be conveyed easily in the web. To give an example, contrary to photography I am (or can be) very opinionated when it comes to other matters, for instance wine. Once I attempted to joke about the wine preference of another member and I realised that this was not taken well (although this other member was gracious enough not to make a point about it). Perhaps it was a feeble joke, you 'll say. Perhaps, I say too. But my point is that the forum is ultimately a tool for exchanging information on camera equipment and photography and not a place to enforce opinions on matters of a photographic, political, or even vinicultural nature. I am particularly pessimistic about political discussion, which I think does not amount to anything else but self-justifying monologues (and please do not bombard me with replies explaining the virtues of dialectics). If that means that the forum will be less entertaining, less humorous or what have you then that is the cost of having a civilised conversation on the topic of photography in the web.
Obviously I am not saying that you have to agree with all that or that you should do as I have elected to do; But I think it is a straightforward inference that if someone strays from the perceived rules of conduct then understandably they are in the jurisdiction of the moderators. I do not know how they judge this or that or the other; Thankfully it's not my business to know.
FrankS
Registered User
Brian Sweeney said:
This description of RH's behaviour is accurate according to my memory.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I find this whole film vs. digital argument tiresome. They both have their pluses and minuses. Who the heck cares what you use as long it's the right tool for you to express yourself. Each of us are on our own paths to our own respective destinations. Whether I take a bus, plane, automobile, etc., is my business, as long as it gets to me to where I want to be. The journey is a process, or the other way around, and it's this process that brought me to RFF. This is what we all share and if people want to argue that this film or lens is better then that, then so be it. In the end it's moot. Even after 30 years of doing photography, I'm still open to new equipment, processes, etc.. I enjoy hearing about others experience with lenes, films, etc.. It is important to keep one's eye open to new things, to expand, to experiment, and experience. This is what we bring to our work. We can always return or alter what works best for us as individuals. Two people can do things the same exact way and still the result comes out different. Nothing is definitive. This is what makes life and the journey interesting.
Rant over.
Rant over.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
*ahem*
I think the horse is dead; in fact I think it's been dead for a while and it's actually already gone on to the glue factory - can we cease the flogging now?
Cheers
Dave
I think the horse is dead; in fact I think it's been dead for a while and it's actually already gone on to the glue factory - can we cease the flogging now?
Cheers
Dave
VinceC
Veteran
We here can't agree on optical bokeh, let alone wine bouquet. And our tempers boil over with the endless debate of whether or not Leica is the crown jewel of human photographic achievement.
It seems inevitable that, in the context of this forum, discussions about politics, historical-perception and cultural comparissons are going to quickly degenerate into a verbal slugfest/name-calling/I'm-right-and-you're-full-of-it type of exchange.
I think some of these discussions can be appropriate when trying to understand the historic context of how our cameras evolved. Beyond that, a reason I've visited here frequently in the past was a refreshing lack of politics and name-calling. I work among diplomats, academics and journalists, so I get plenty of that on my side of the computer screen already.
It seems inevitable that, in the context of this forum, discussions about politics, historical-perception and cultural comparissons are going to quickly degenerate into a verbal slugfest/name-calling/I'm-right-and-you're-full-of-it type of exchange.
I think some of these discussions can be appropriate when trying to understand the historic context of how our cameras evolved. Beyond that, a reason I've visited here frequently in the past was a refreshing lack of politics and name-calling. I work among diplomats, academics and journalists, so I get plenty of that on my side of the computer screen already.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
dcsang said:
Dave,
Actually it's not. I see posts on this and other agruments almost every week. It should all be laid to rest.
Cheers.
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Andy,
Under normal circumstances, I would not discuss anything said in private in an open forum. However, you seem to want to debate this publicly so here is my reponse:
You started the Think I'll stick to film thread. Your post on that was not pro film but a link to an article talking about the raw problem. Not surprisingly, it provoked some strong responses. You reported the thread to the moderators saying: This person is making a civil discussion unnecessarily aggressive and insulting. In reponse to that Joe made a post saying to calm it down and later Ralph made a similar post. When it got even more heated and despite the attempts of several members to get you to promote the advantages of film rather than being ant-digital, the thread was locked. Other than this there was no moderation and the only threads deleted were by a member.
It appeared that you did not like it because you had not had the last word and started another thread, the Digital Insecurity thread. It started with you calling on certain members accusing them of trashing the thread. I sent you a PM saying:
Andy,
I missed the start of the original thread as it started after I went to bed and was flying most of the day. I have only just got your "complaint". Some of the replies might have been a bit hot and both Joe and Ralph made comments. However, you are not in the least blameless in this. Your original post was not pro analogue ie I like film because. It was anti dig. I am film because dig sucks look at this Throughout that post several members tried to turn the thread into "film is good because...." You persisted in acting like a martyr and bashing dig. Now that the thread is locked, you have tried to re kindle it in another. Personal attacks are not tolerated. By all means express your views, preferably in a positive manner but do not attack other members views just because they do not accord with your own.
I received this reply:
I was extremely polite right through that thread. It is pretty obvious you choose to take sides in this matter. I have made NO personal attacks even though I was subjected to at least TWO personal attacks from 'ywenz' in the original thread. Have you sent a PM to him? I was also baited right through the thread by RJBender, have you sent a PM to him?
I did not bash digital, I expressed a concern at the future of photography if proprietory file formats are permitted to continue. Are you saying these things can not be discussed on RFF?
Andy.
My reponse to that was:
Andy,
I am not taking sides. I believe in tolerence of others views. I only use digital for low quality webwork, if the image has to end up in digtal format, why not take it in that form. Saves time and money. All my "serious work" is on film. Besides I would rather let the lab do my mundane work and use my time on things I enjoy more rather than spending hours on the PC.
If you go into a field with bull and wave a red rag, you cannot complain if he charges no matter how polite you are. 3 points:
Joe closed the thread and yet you seem determined to re-open it.
I will not discuss other members with you and I will not discuss you with other members.
You were polite in what you wrote but you were being provocative! Read some of the replies from other members in the original thread with a clear mind!
Kim
You replied:
I was not being provocative. I was being provoked right through the thread by ywenz, RJBender and Socke. You seem to ignore that. Is this how RFF is run? The "good ol' boys" can behave as they want, but any outsiders get moderated?
That is why I have posted a new thread. I want to know why these three think they can behave in such a way.
And I will ask you again, have you PM'd the people who were really causing trouble in that thread?
I don't believe you have.
Andy.
In the meantime, two of the members had either apologised or explained their posts which you appeared to ignore. So I sent:
Andy,
Please stop this vendetta. I have told you that I will not discuss what has been said to others with you. In your recent thread Socke offered an apology but you seem to choose to ignore it but seem intent on trying to fan the flames.
Kim
You did not reply to that PM but instead chose to make a post in this thread complaining about heavy handed moderation. During the course of events in this period, only one post has been deleted by the moderators and that was IAW the owners guidlines on profanity and no threads have been censored. The owner banned one member for that offending thread. One thread was locked, the one in which you complained that members were being uncivil!
FWIW, I share many of your views. I prefer film and indeed wines from other regions (although I tend to cook with whatever is open rather than buy wine in specially for the purpose). You are welcome to express you views. If you do it in a positive way promoting those views and other members attack you personally, the mods will consider taking action. If you post in a negative way and attack other peoples views, I will have little sympathy if you attract strong responses from those members who decide to defend their way. If this is heavy handed and blinkered moderartion, I am sorry. No you did not start this thread but any PM's sent to you were in direct reponse and as a result of the complaint that you raised. These recent attacks on the moderation would appear to be in reponse to the fact that we did not act in the way that you wanted. Had we done so, Rick's prophecy in the first post of this thread would have come one step closer.
Kim
Under normal circumstances, I would not discuss anything said in private in an open forum. However, you seem to want to debate this publicly so here is my reponse:
You started the Think I'll stick to film thread. Your post on that was not pro film but a link to an article talking about the raw problem. Not surprisingly, it provoked some strong responses. You reported the thread to the moderators saying: This person is making a civil discussion unnecessarily aggressive and insulting. In reponse to that Joe made a post saying to calm it down and later Ralph made a similar post. When it got even more heated and despite the attempts of several members to get you to promote the advantages of film rather than being ant-digital, the thread was locked. Other than this there was no moderation and the only threads deleted were by a member.
It appeared that you did not like it because you had not had the last word and started another thread, the Digital Insecurity thread. It started with you calling on certain members accusing them of trashing the thread. I sent you a PM saying:
Andy,
I missed the start of the original thread as it started after I went to bed and was flying most of the day. I have only just got your "complaint". Some of the replies might have been a bit hot and both Joe and Ralph made comments. However, you are not in the least blameless in this. Your original post was not pro analogue ie I like film because. It was anti dig. I am film because dig sucks look at this Throughout that post several members tried to turn the thread into "film is good because...." You persisted in acting like a martyr and bashing dig. Now that the thread is locked, you have tried to re kindle it in another. Personal attacks are not tolerated. By all means express your views, preferably in a positive manner but do not attack other members views just because they do not accord with your own.
I received this reply:
I was extremely polite right through that thread. It is pretty obvious you choose to take sides in this matter. I have made NO personal attacks even though I was subjected to at least TWO personal attacks from 'ywenz' in the original thread. Have you sent a PM to him? I was also baited right through the thread by RJBender, have you sent a PM to him?
I did not bash digital, I expressed a concern at the future of photography if proprietory file formats are permitted to continue. Are you saying these things can not be discussed on RFF?
Andy.
My reponse to that was:
Andy,
I am not taking sides. I believe in tolerence of others views. I only use digital for low quality webwork, if the image has to end up in digtal format, why not take it in that form. Saves time and money. All my "serious work" is on film. Besides I would rather let the lab do my mundane work and use my time on things I enjoy more rather than spending hours on the PC.
If you go into a field with bull and wave a red rag, you cannot complain if he charges no matter how polite you are. 3 points:
Joe closed the thread and yet you seem determined to re-open it.
I will not discuss other members with you and I will not discuss you with other members.
You were polite in what you wrote but you were being provocative! Read some of the replies from other members in the original thread with a clear mind!
Kim
You replied:
I was not being provocative. I was being provoked right through the thread by ywenz, RJBender and Socke. You seem to ignore that. Is this how RFF is run? The "good ol' boys" can behave as they want, but any outsiders get moderated?
That is why I have posted a new thread. I want to know why these three think they can behave in such a way.
And I will ask you again, have you PM'd the people who were really causing trouble in that thread?
I don't believe you have.
Andy.
In the meantime, two of the members had either apologised or explained their posts which you appeared to ignore. So I sent:
Andy,
Please stop this vendetta. I have told you that I will not discuss what has been said to others with you. In your recent thread Socke offered an apology but you seem to choose to ignore it but seem intent on trying to fan the flames.
Kim
You did not reply to that PM but instead chose to make a post in this thread complaining about heavy handed moderation. During the course of events in this period, only one post has been deleted by the moderators and that was IAW the owners guidlines on profanity and no threads have been censored. The owner banned one member for that offending thread. One thread was locked, the one in which you complained that members were being uncivil!
FWIW, I share many of your views. I prefer film and indeed wines from other regions (although I tend to cook with whatever is open rather than buy wine in specially for the purpose). You are welcome to express you views. If you do it in a positive way promoting those views and other members attack you personally, the mods will consider taking action. If you post in a negative way and attack other peoples views, I will have little sympathy if you attract strong responses from those members who decide to defend their way. If this is heavy handed and blinkered moderartion, I am sorry. No you did not start this thread but any PM's sent to you were in direct reponse and as a result of the complaint that you raised. These recent attacks on the moderation would appear to be in reponse to the fact that we did not act in the way that you wanted. Had we done so, Rick's prophecy in the first post of this thread would have come one step closer.
Kim
Andy K said:
S
SLEDGEHAMMER
Guest
WHAT DEAD HORSE IS BEING FLOOGED? This is a camera place to discuss camera stuff. Everything is good to read here! The only thing that bothers me is it is SO SLOW AND LOTS OF STUFF DOESN"T WORK!!! What am I missing?????
Rick Waldroup
Well-known
Regarding the link to the thread by Roger Hicks that Brian supplied- I went back and read that entire thread and it only reinforces my original premise in the open letter I wrote at the beginning of this thread. Roger's thread began not by talking about politics, but by talking about the general lack of knowledge concerning history. The thread then morphed into a discussion of the rights or wrongs of dropping the A bombs on Japan. The discussion was civil and interesting. At one point, one of the mods chimes in and bascially calls Roger a "shit disturber" and wonders why the thread even exists. I will quote below the last paragraphs of a post by Roger in that thread that maybe sums up what I have been trying to express in my original open letter.
"Relevance to rangefinder photography? Well that was part of the point of my AP article when I mentioned this forum. If you have a bunch of people, international in background, whose opinions you often respect, then to treat them as nothing more than rangefinder photographers strikes me as an insult and a waste of a fascinating resource for learning about other people.
Sure, it's not central, and it's not what most of the forum should be about. But I believe that threads such as this broaden people's minds and understanding and that must help make them better photographers. It's certainly more useful than another D76/Rodinal debate". Roger Hicks, August 7 2005.
Interesting isn't it that we seem to be having this very same debate right now.
"Relevance to rangefinder photography? Well that was part of the point of my AP article when I mentioned this forum. If you have a bunch of people, international in background, whose opinions you often respect, then to treat them as nothing more than rangefinder photographers strikes me as an insult and a waste of a fascinating resource for learning about other people.
Sure, it's not central, and it's not what most of the forum should be about. But I believe that threads such as this broaden people's minds and understanding and that must help make them better photographers. It's certainly more useful than another D76/Rodinal debate". Roger Hicks, August 7 2005.
Interesting isn't it that we seem to be having this very same debate right now.
Last edited:
