is there a 'digital only' website?

[Addy101]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/

As far as I know that is a Canon forum, like http://www.dyxum.com is a Sony site. Fred Miranda is a possible general, more digital oriented site. But most fora assume you're using digital, this is the only ons I know of where it makes sense to state you've used digital or film.

 

[Melancholy]

There is a digital sister site to apug and you can find it at dpug.org

It´s a bit funny, I checked dpug.org when I saw this topic, and the first thing you see in the "Site news & more" is almost just analog posts 😀

 

[MartinP]

The posts in your screenshot are all digital ones. Three on digital scanners and one on digital printing. At the non-digital APUG.org those threads would be all off-topic (and rightfully so).

 

[kshapero]

dpreview seems oblivious to all things film.
http://www.dpreview.com/

Yes that's the one.

 

[Melancholy]

The posts in your screenshot are all digital ones. Three on digital scanners and one on digital printing. At the non-digital APUG.org those threads would be all off-topic (and rightfully so).

Yeah, you are right about that and I see the link to digital, I just thought it was a bit funny since it wasn´t all about sensors, menues and so on 😉

 

[msbarnes]

Finding a digital-only forum may not be so difficult. I believe that most photo forums are that by default exept for RFF and Apug (maybe a few others?). I think RFF is mostly film because digital rangefinders are too expensive.

 

[hepcat]

How has photography seemingly come to be so binary... either/or? Why the polarization? Are there not more folks like me who do both?

 

[back alley]

i only shoot digital...but not because i have anything against film...i'm 62 and started shooting film when i was 19...quit it only a few years ago mostly because i don't want to do darkroom work any more and i like seeing my shots when i get home.

i see digital as different from film...neither is better but they are different.

some folks, and not just here, cannot accept that difference and want to see film as the best for everyone.

i'm tired of seeing/hearing...how film is better, how film is for real men, how film is for real photos etc.
it's a load of crap!

if you like film more than life itself that is fine with me...just don't assume it's better for me or anyone else besides yourself and keep your mouth shut about it!

i'm thinking maybe this bull**** wont be out there on a digital only site.

 

[pete hogan]

Digital has made film more effective.

 

[Chris101]

It´s a bit funny, I checked dpug.org when I saw this topic, and the first thing you see in the "Site news & more" is almost just analog posts 😀

I joined that site when it was the hybrid photography site. Then they tried to make it digital only, and a lot of the regulars there just dropped out. (Many came here I think. Or just kept posting film and hybrid stuff there.)

But yeah, DPR is the digital site. But I find the pitch there to be a bit unbearable for very long.

 

[back alley]

Digital has made film more effective.

what does that mean?

 

[pete hogan]

The reach of film pictures processed digitally has grown. When I started in 1952, the prints went on the refrigerator door or in the mail to Grandma. Now they can be sent anywhere.

The technical term is "latency" or time delay in the system.

 

[kuzano]

Oh, It's There as well

Oh, It's There as well

i'm thinking maybe this bull**** wont be out there on a digital only site.

It's there. It just comes in other Forms.

On digital sites, the film vs digital arises in a reverse fashion. But the discussions that really "Chap" me on the digital sites are the RAW vs. Jpeg. Those turn into threads more vicious than any I have seen on film vs digital.

I think it's simply human nature and the anonimity of the internet. I don't really think you can escape reactionary and ill natured people in any context on the internet.

I know one site that is primarily digital, almost no film, NOT mfr or camera dedicated.

I pointed out to them, by a scrutiny of their logs, that there had been over 80 RAW or RAW vs Jpeg threads in the last 12 months. The majority of those degraded rapidly into "hate", and name calling exercises.

Another attribute of the digital forums I have visited are "gear oriented". Many questions about "which camera", or this happened to my camera..... NOt as much about help with photography, ie exposure, composition, and yet a lot of subscribers who clearly need that type of help instead of which camera will "make" me a professional photographer in the shortest amount of time, without having to "learn a bunch of STUFF?:
:

I wish you luck in your hunt. When I need a bit of sanity in forumspeak, I come back here, or Large Format Photography/forum.

 

[oftheherd]

What happened to the RFF sister site for digital? Did it just die from lack of use?

Also, you might try the forums at the Popular Photography site, http://forums.popphoto.com/. It used to be analog mostly, but now film hardly gets a mention. There is a cadre of regulars there but I don't know how much traffic that site gets. The parent company of Popular Photography pretty much abandoned the site, but left it up and running. It almost died but I think it has gained some popularity again.

 

[KM-25]

i'm tired of seeing/hearing...how film is better, how film is for real men, how film is for real photos etc.
it's a load of crap!

if you like film more than life itself that is fine with me...just don't assume it's better for me or anyone else besides yourself and keep your mouth shut about it!

i'm thinking maybe this bull**** wont be out there on a digital only site.

But this is the place you choose to spend most of your LIFE on sir, the time wasting, not photo making internet Joe! The only thing that is more lame than someone insisting that film is better for everyone is the notion that you can tune that kind of comment out. I think it is silly and provocative for anyone to insist that film is better for anyone but them selves....but that is the internet, time wasting, look at me garbage!

Can you imagine Joe...for a moment: Shooting over half a million professionally made and paid for digital images in the course of 19 years and then getting sick of it to the point that you just say to hell with what everyone else tells you is the second coming and then bail on it for film only? Risky? You bet sir but what choice do I have other than to give up photography completely, paid or not?

I'm sorry but you have plenty of places to spend all the livelong day racking up post counts talking about digital, it is the film user that has less and less places to go, not that I need them because I would rather be out shooting.

I think if you spent 90% less time on the internet you would be far less frustrated with this kind of thing because you simply would not see it as often. As long as you spend hour after hour on places like this, you will see commentary that will ruffle your feathers and this place is far better than most..but what a freaking waste of a life if you let it come to this man, seriously.

Just my opinion of course...😉

 

[back alley]

But this is the place you choose to spend most of your LIFE on sir, the time wasting, not photo making internet Joe! The only thing that is more lame than someone insisting that film is better for everyone is the notion that you can tune that kind of comment out. I think it is silly and provocative for anyone to insist that film is better for anyone but them selves....but that is the internet, time wasting, look at me garbage!

Can you imagine Joe...for a moment: Shooting over half a million professionally made and paid for digital images in the course of 19 years and then getting sick of it to the point that you just say to hell with what everyone else tells you is the second coming and then bail on it for film only? Risky? You bet sir but what choice do I have other than to give up photography completely, paid or not?

I'm sorry but you have plenty of places to spend all the livelong day racking up post counts talking about digital, it is the film user that has less and less places to go, not that I need them because I would rather be out shooting.

I think if you spent 90% less time on the internet you would be far less frustrated with this kind of thing because you simply would not see it as often. As long as you spend hour after hour on places like this, you will see commentary that will ruffle your feathers and this place is far better than most..but what a freaking waste of a life if you let it come to this man, seriously.

Just my opinion of course...😉

i am an amateur photographer...you are the pro...i spend my time where i choose...i shoot plenty, have done so all my life...all for the pleasure of it and never have had to sell my soul to any devil...

 

[MickH]

is there an 'digital only' website? - like apug only digital?

Give this place another six months, you won't have to look elsewhere :angel:

😉

 

[back alley]

Give this place another six months, you won't have to look elsewhere :angel:

😉

not looking to replace rff...just add to my list of visited sites...

 

[hepcat]

i only shoot digital...but not because i have anything against film...i'm 62 and started shooting film when i was 19...quit it only a few years ago mostly because i don't want to do darkroom work any more and i like seeing my shots when i get home.

i see digital as different from film...neither is better but they are different.

some folks, and not just here, cannot accept that difference and want to see film as the best for everyone.

i'm tired of seeing/hearing...how film is better, how film is for real men, how film is for real photos etc.
it's a load of crap!

if you like film more than life itself that is fine with me...just don't assume it's better for me or anyone else besides yourself and keep your mouth shut about it!

i'm thinking maybe this bull**** wont be out there on a digital only site.

Joe, I'm 58 and I started shooting film at 14. We're in about the same boat. What makes this forum different from most of them is that there are still photographers here. The medium isn't as important as technique and the images themselves. Yes, its still gear-centric, but there's still more discussion here about how to make images, and folks post more accomplished images than you'll find just about anywhere else.

I lurk on FM and participate only in a couple of other photo forums. I've abandoned DPR and a half dozen others altogether because the digital world is full of fanbois who are NOT, IMHO, photographers at all. They're camera owners... sort of, and after 45 years of shooting just about every kind of camera out there under just about every condition imaginable, those kinds of discussions don't offer me much. There are still interesting discussions here... some of them informative, some of them "out there," but interesting nonetheless.

Anyway, discounting the "film is king" bias, there's still much valuable here among photographers, and yes, even for those of us who shoot primarily digital (most of what I shoot is done now with an M8/M9P.) As I've said in other threads, film and digital are NOT mutually exclusive even though there may be those who believe otherwise.

I don't post much work on forums, although I enjoy looking at others' work. But if you want to discuss some fun things in digital, take a look at the lighting balance in the photo here... a horrible mix of incandescent, flourescent, and daylight and we can chat about white balance under those circumstances and making some approximation of natural skin tones... not a problem for the tri-x crowd.


L1005356 by chief1120, on Flickr

 

[back alley]

to be clear...i am not knocking rff...there are jerks everywhere...i like it here and realize what we have.