if you want to talk about photography - then do so!

It's been said before, and I'll say it again: if you are not interested in a thread then ignore it. Don't add negativity to this site by posting criticisms of threads you personally do not find interesting. An internet forum is defined by the posts of its members. If RFF does not suit your tastes, look for a site that does or simply interact with the topics you do find of interest here.
 
back alley said:
i tried apug and they don't seem anymore into photography than here.
but i i visited only a few times.

i think we have a bad rep on the photo part as i think we do talk about pics here too, especially in the gallery comments section.

Joe, personally, I would see myself getting more involved in the Gallery section if it was more responsive. I've always found it to be sluggish and the interface is not all to friendly either. In fact, it's been so long since I've used the gallery, I almost never think of it whenever I'm browsing RFF.

Jon Claremont said:
But when it's about a camera strap...

Why can't you understand that not everyone share your views. Just drop it, and admit that you shouldn't have started a thread calling out everyone who didn't participate in your cappa thread.
 
Last edited:
I was going to post to the infamous camera-strap thread but the site was running at a glacial pace when I saw it.

I think straps are important because they are how we physically interact with the camera on our person when not taking photos. I prefer a longish wide black strap that can hang the camera around my shoulder or around my neck, as I see fit. I often like to then twist it around my hand several times so that it becomes a wrist strap. I also attach the strap to the camera using nylon ties. These make it all but silent (instead of the metalic clank of metal fittings).
 
Yes Frank. I can ignore a camera strap thread myself.

But it is amazing to me that many people here would seemingly click on 'Which bag is best?' and not on 'Unknown Cartier-Bresson images online now'.
 
Jon Claremont said:
Yes Frank. I can ignore a camera strap thread myself.

But it is amazing to me that many people here would seemingly click on 'Which bag is best?' and not on 'Unknown Cartier-Bresson images online now'.

Maybe some of us perfer the photographic style of Dave Allen Harvey? Maybe HCB doesn't get me excited like DAH?

Again, you're back into your notion that everyone should think like you do, when we don't, we're like offending you or something.. 😕
 
It is what it is. Enjoy what you can, ignore what can't. If you find a higher concentration of what floats your boat somewhere else, then stop wasting time here. It is what it is.
 
I agree Frank. But can you see the 'Recent Photo' thread started a short while ago is getting many posts by members who never normally post.

The place is coming alive.
 
I'm a bit tired off Cartier Bresson, it seems as if there weren't any other photographers.

What I like is portrait and fashion shots from the 50s and 60s, especialy the B&W ones.
 
Thank god people are finally getting into something slightly related to photographical issue here....
Beats the "congrats" . "nice setup" and other laddy-di-da threads here, ... sticking roses up each others ass is easy.... and also very boring.
Hopefully some meaningfull, or less meaningfull discussions will arise on this website ... without getting deleted that is.
 
Jon Claremont said:
I agree Frank. But can you see the 'Recent Photo' thread started a short while ago is getting many posts by members who never normally post.

The place is coming alive.


Did you begin that thread, Jon? One can effect greater change by taking a positive role than with being negative.
 
back alley said:
i tried apug and they don't seem anymore into photography than here.
but i i visited only a few times.

i think we have a bad rep on the photo part as i think we do talk about pics here too, especially in the gallery comments section.

Most weeknights (North America, that is) I and a few others post W/NW threads with pics.

Some of these thread "take off" with great response. Others are duds.

Such is life.

But we do post pics.

I almost never see the Asian or Euro members pick up these threads as the day progresses!

Now, tonight, on another thread there is all this flurry of pic posting! :bang:

And, guess what, on weekends I am at a different location and do not have access to my photo database -

Feh to all of you who are now getting pic posting religion on a weekend! 😛
 
Fedzilla_Bob said:
Photos without cameras. We don't see many of those.

I think a forum named the Rangefinder Forum indicates that a specific kind of photography gear is the main topic here.

APUG - just as gear oriented. Photo.net - same.

Where theres a photographic image, there is gear.

Admittedly what we are aiming for is the capture of an image. Hopefullya good one. Which leads us back to what is good for capturing the image.

A snake eating it's tail. Chickens and eggs. Gog and Maygog. Fred and Ginger.

"Gog and Maygog". I can never get enough pop culture references! HCB? Sure.
But I prefer Elliott Erwit. He's the only Still photographer who has had any influence
on me.

Fred
 
Jon Claremont said:
I agree Frank. But can you see the 'Recent Photo' thread started a short while ago is getting many posts by members who never normally post.

The place is coming alive.

So how come you never participate in the W/NW threads?

I have never seen you post a photo on any one of them - much less initiate one!

Seems to me you want to be "in charge" rather than "participate"!
 
FrankS said:
It's been said before, and I'll say it again: if you are not interested in a thread then ignore it.

To Frank's excellent point I'd like to add that if existing threads aren't to your liking then start one that is both relevent and interesting.

In truth, there are many threads that I don't open because I don't find the subject of interest. Others do and keep it going. That's good because diversity keeps the members coming back to see if there's anything they happen to like being discussed.

This forum isn't here just for a few people; it's here for all of us. While we're all here because of rangefinder cameras, not all of us are interested in the same marque, lenses, film etc. There are a variety of subjects for everyone. That's good.

This is - HANDS DOWN - the best photography site and forum on the web. Lets not allow it to become a clone of the other sites that have more arguments than friendly discussion.

Joe, that 50mm Serenar will be there soon and then you'll be happy playing with it. 🙂

Walker
 
markinlondon said:
I just like well made things. It's the reason I shoot with a Leica when a Pentax K1000 would do the same job (I have got a Pentax K1000 BTW). It's why I write my notes in a Moleskine notebook and not a 50p one from WH Smith. It's why I prefer to play my guitar through a hand wired Fender guitar amp and not a digital modelling amp. If I could afford one, my bike would be a Rivendell (it's a Surly). These all fall into the category of old-school nice things IMO.
Funny thing, this...On Rivendell's own site, you'll hear about CV Bessas and the like, an interesting bit of cross-pollination between seemingly disparate points of interest (bicycling and photography), but, upon closer inspection, common interests are apparent: an appreciation of palpable quality versus pursuit of the technology du jour for its own sake (if you think film vs. digital is a hot-button issue, just dive into steel vs. aluminum or carbon-fiber frame material in cycling circles...and I won't even start with friction vs. index-shifting). Appreciation of quality equipment need not get in the way of its use. All those justly-famous photographers who consciously chose Leica didn't dote excessively on their choice of photographic tool (well, mostly, anyway), but they didn't make their choice on a lark, either.


- Barrett
 
amateriat said:
Funny thing, this...On Rivendell's own site, you'll hear about CV Bessas and the like, an interesting bit of cross-pollination between seemingly disparate points of interest (bicycling and photography), but, upon closer inspection, common interests are apparent: an appreciation of palpable quality versus pursuit of the technology du jour for its own sake (if you think film vs. digital is a hot-button issue, just dive into steel vs. aluminum or carbon-fiber frame material in cycling circles...and I won't even start with friction vs. index-shifting). Appreciation of quality equipment need not get in the way of its use. All those justly-famous photographers who consciously chose Leica didn't dote excessively on their choice of photographic tool (well, mostly, anyway), but they didn't make their choice on a lark, either.


- Barrett

Rivendell bikes are interesting - their catalog is even more of a "hoot".

Yes, they are ultimo-luddites in the bicycling world and I am glad that they are around.

But I don't go for "preachy, preachy" with bikes or cameras.

Fact is, Rivendell's framesets are heavy, lumbering steel dinosaurs. They provide neither the stiff responsiveness of aluminum (which is, admittedly, unforgiving in it's transmission of road shock to rider) nor do they provide the "reasonable responsiveness with forgiveness" of carbon fiber.

Also, Rivendell does not make its frames - it buys them from a Japanese manufactuer. No big deal in that - but it begs the question given their price markups that they are just a "middle man" supplier as opposed to say Serrotta or Calfi - just two of the US-based framebuilders who are active today?

Further, if you really delve into the Rivendell catalog, you find out that they are sell a lot of non-bike stuff (e.g. pencils) just to "prove" their Luddite "bona fides".

Why would I buy a pencil from them? Who cares?

In nearly 30 years of "serious" cycling, including many large group rides, I have seen exactly ONE Rivendell bike frame being ridden. I did also see them once display gear at the pre-El Tour de Tucson registration center.

I have ordered a few components from them for my older bikes but would hardly miss them if they went away!

Oh, and having gone through my Pro Togs phase many years ago - there is NO WAY I would go back to using the wool bike clothing they sell! UGH!!!
 
If we could confine our discussions to photography (images or gear) rather than each other, I think this site would be more enjoyable for all. I seem to remember that once this was a defining rule here, and I think it's become ignored of late.

I don't think the problem is too much gear v.s. photo talk so much as way too much talk about other members.

The discussion about straps was really about how cameras are used in the real world to produce images. I certainly thought it had more to do with photography than the responding discussion on Capra's Strap (which -to my reading- was essentially a complaint about other people having different interests than the OP's, a comment on other people, not photography).

I'm not so sure that opening up the "Completely different" forum to carping about each other is all that great an idea. Personally I think the habit should be energetically stomped upon whenever the Moderators encountered it.

As to RFF getting a rep. for being a Gear-Head-only forum, who cares? Jealousy is usually expressed by misrepresented truth, and it wasn't so long ago that we had a rep. for being a forum of "sheep".
 
(At the risk of going a wee bit off-topic...)

copake_ham said:
Rivendell bikes are interesting - their catalog is even more of a "hoot".

Yes, they are ultimo-luddites in the bicycling world and I am glad that they are around.

But I don't go for "preachy, preachy" with bikes or cameras.
I don't find them any more preachy than the usual mainstream bike mag du jour.
Probably a tad less so.

Fact is, Rivendell's framesets are heavy, lumbering steel dinosaurs. They provide neither the stiff responsiveness of aluminum (which is, admittedly, unforgiving in it's transmission of road shock to rider) nor do they provide the "reasonable responsiveness with forgiveness" of carbon fiber.
I don't know about you, but the steel frames I've ridden over the last decade were anything but "heavy" and "lumbering", even compared to, say, OCLV. They've also been able to take useful items like fenders for other-than-fair-weather-riding. There's more to cycling than crits and mad-fast double-century rides.

Also, Rivendell does not make its frames - it buys them from a Japanese manufactuer. No big deal in that - but it begs the question given their price markups that they are just a "middle man" supplier as opposed to say Serrotta or Calfi - just two of the US-based framebuilders who are active today?
The frames with "Rivendell" on the downtube are, in fact, custom frames made here in the States, and – as with any custom frames made here by anyone else, of any material – they ain't cheap. All the other frames on offer by Riv (Atlantis, Saluki, etc.) are made in Japan, and, while also not cheap (if you're comparing them to off-the-rack bikes from the usual suspects), are nowhere near as pricey as the custom Rivs.

Further, if you really delve into the Rivendell catalog, you find out that they are sell a lot of non-bike stuff (e.g. pencils) just to "prove" their Luddite "bona fides".

Why would I buy a pencil from them? Who cares?
I suppose some of the catalog stuff falls into the catagory of schtick, but I put it into the "mostly harmless" category, and at least the stuff on offer is useful. A Hummer H2, by contrast, is an outsized example of schtick, and, IMO, decidedly not harmless.

In nearly 30 years of "serious" cycling, including many large group rides, I have seen exactly ONE Rivendell bike frame being ridden. I did also see them once display gear at the pre-El Tour de Tucson registration center.
In regard to the custom models, they don't make a lot of them each year (much to the chagrin of of those on a waiting list for one, which is rather long). One of the bikes I regularly ride, a 20-year-old Alex Moulton 14-speed, is an extremely rare sight on a group ride. Once in a great while it gives me a sense of snob appeal, but most of the time I pay no mind and just ride.🙂

I have ordered a few components from them for my older bikes but would hardly miss them if they went away!
I order stuff from them from time to time, and I would miss them if they went bust. They seem to be doing quite well, though, so I'm not at all worried about them.

Oh, and having gone through my Pro Togs phase many years ago - there is NO WAY I would go back to using the wool bike clothing they sell! UGH!!!
Modern wool is actually pretty nice. I also use a bit of the synthetic stuff where and when it makes sense.

Ride, wear, and shoot what'cha like. As George Harrison sang, it's what you value.

- Barrett (who now returns you to your regularly scheduled forum, already in progress)
 
Back
Top Bottom