the joy of photography

ferider said:
I know he has, Joe.

Which has much added to my frustration when reading the many very active political threads in the recent past, in which (mostly the same, and sometimes prominent) members add their obviously controversial opinion. Things like American healthcare, gay marriage laws, a member's democratic vs. republican standing, or standing up against oppression in Tibet have nothing to do on RFF, IMO (unless you do it via photos ...). Some members have openly stated that they use RFF to express and promote their political opinions with no interference from site owner or moderators.

The other thing that bothers me is frequent emphasis of money, gear prices, assumptions about what other members can afford or not, etc., often implying that "if you can buy camera XYZ", you have the right to look down on everybody else.

I used to come here to get away from propaganda. And to find a healthy mix of gear description, photographic process and photography. I learned a lot. However, we continue to loose good photographers, who used to share photos and describe how they were done.

Gear and good photography may not be directly related. Whatever. I'm fully convinced however, that one's political opinion or budget have nothing to do with one's photographic output.

You have a tough job, Joe. But I do recommend to systematically close political threads as they show up; and act firmly against rude post(er)s.

And for the teachers: wisdom and modesty often grow together. My deepest respect to Bill P. and Tom A. We can all learn from them.

Roland.
Click to expand...

Dear Roland,

Is that really the assumption? It seems entirely reasonable to me to say, "If you can afford it, buy it, but it's bloody expensive, so ask yourself (a) how badly you want it and (b) whether you can really afford it without miring yourself in debt."

That's all I mean when I refer to prices. I've never been able to afford all the gear I wanted, and most of what I do own, I've made sacrifices elsewhere to buy -- like I don't buy new motor-cars or fashionable clothes. This is why (for example) I don't own a 50/1: I can't afford it.

Of course there are great photographers with indifferent cameras -- one of the best I ever knew was a retired submarine commander with a Mamiya Press, the early one with the mostly bad lenses -- and of course there are rotten photographers with the most expensive gear in the world. But in a forum where a good deal of attention is paid to gear, affordability must surely be a consideration.

Finally, I find others' politics very interesting. Presumably Stephen doesn't worry too much about it, or he'd insist on a much more one-dimensional forum. But I'd find it pretty dull (and unrealistic) if we only ever talked about equipment, and had to pretend that price played no part in what we choose. The pleasure of a conversation is that it can wander in an interesting manner. As Greg says, we're not robots.

Cheers,

R.
 
When I first came across this forum it seemed to me (as one who only dabbles in photography) very intimidating. However when I eventually joined I found the opposite to be true. I`m still amazed that I can ,should I wish, get first hand advice from some of the most knowlegable people in the field.
I am new to this internet malarky and so find some of the "rants" rather alarming and do wonder why people would act in such a way. Having said that, I have found some of those threads to be interesting to say the least. Rudness however can never be justified.
 
ferider said:
I know he has, Joe.

Which has much added to my frustration when reading the many very active political threads in the recent past, in which (mostly the same, and sometimes prominent) members add their obviously controversial opinion. Things like American healthcare, gay marriage laws, a member's democratic vs. republican standing, or standing up against oppression in Tibet have nothing to do on RFF, IMO
...
Click to expand...

I don't get it. Why on earth would you find it frustrating?? No-one is forcing you to read the threads, or participate in the discussion. The threads are easy to avoid, and have obvious names.
 
dfoo said:
Is it really so bad around here? I don't find the general tone of forum rude, even when the discussion does get into politics :)
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same while reading .... Maybe we are just (too) accustomed to wrong behaviour to notice it ?

In general, I find the people on this forum very responsive, helpful and knowledgable. There's even a lot of humor (humour ?) around here. I regulary have a good laugh behind my PC (and I should be less behind my PC and more outdoors, taking pictures).

Stefan.
 
Keith said:
As this forum's grown in numbers it has changed IMO. When I joined it had the personal hands on friendly feeling of a small country town ... with around five thousand members!

At more than six times that original membership it's now taken on the feeling of a slightly impersonal competitive and often combative metropolis!

That's progress I guess!
Click to expand...

Not wanting to change the subject, but if the forum has more then six times more members, that's a good sign for rangefinder-photography, right ?

Stefan.
 
I think this thread proves the point. Ruby just deleted most of his posts made up to this point.

This forum has become much too nasty. Too many people making posts just to piss people off.

The forum is much larger than it used to be, and is too large to manage with two moderators. Joe did not know that Stephen deleted a post in the off-topic forum for almost a day after it was done. Just too many posts in a lot of forums.

Personal attacks should not be tolerated. Rude and obnoxious behavior should not be tolerated. This is a photography forum, not a soap box for those with a political agenda.

Loud mouth drunks at a bar tend to drive off those wanting a drink after work to relax with their friends. If the bouncers let the loud-mouth drunks run out of control, pretty soon the decent customers find someplace else to frequent. A lot of my RFF friends have moved off because of the loud mouth drunks.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
I think this thread proves the point. Ruby just deleted most of his posts made up to this point.

This forum has become much too nasty. Too many people making posts just to piss people off.

The forum is much larger than it used to be, and is too large to manage with two moderators. Joe did not know that Stephen deleted a post in the off-topic forum for almost a day after it was done. Just too many posts in a lot of forums.

Personal attacks should not be tolerated. Rude and obnoxious behavior should not be tolerated. This is a photography forum, not a soap box for those with a political agenda.

Loud mouth drunks at a bar tend to drive off those wanting a drink after work to relax with their friends. If the bouncers let the loud-mouth drunks run out of control, pretty soon the decent customers find someplace else to frequent. A lot of my RFF friends have moved off because of the loud mouth drunks.
Click to expand...

There's a proverb for this in French: "Si tout les dégoutés s'en vont, il ne reste que les dégoutants" ("If all the disgusted leave, there are only the disgusting who remain").

Stefan.
 
gliderbee said:
http://www.photo-freeware.net/bdsizer.php
Click to expand...

Thanks for the hint (bookmarked for possible future use)!

I found that the export function in the current beta version of Lightroom is very easy to use, once configured. I can specify that I want my copies, say, 1280 pixels wide and maximally 200 KB big.

I only fear that I get used to Lightroom so much that I will want to buy it once the (free) beta expires...
 
back alley said:
should we shut the place down?

we carry on as best we can and we ban the most obnoxious drunks.
Click to expand...

I believe the forum has become big enough to assign moderators to the individual forums. Photo.net did this. Photo.net also posted some new rules and cracked down on posters that just enjoyed pissing people off. It did not shutdown, but is a much less nasty place these days. We are getting their throw-offs.
 
back alley said:
we carry on as best we can and we ban the most obnoxious drunks.
Click to expand...

"Ban" is such a harsh word. vBulletin has many different ways to make the drunks go away. You can "miserable" them, or you can "Tachy goes to Coventry" them. There are lots of options. Be creative!
 
Last edited:
photonet is a dying forum, at least the leica section, with barely a dozen posts a day.

a mod for every section and we would be tripping over each other.
 
How many people here think that the mods are doing a rotten job, and should be replaced?

And how many think the opposite? Maybe I should do a poll. I'd vote for the opposite.

Cheers,

R.
 
back alley said:
photonet is a dying forum, at least the leica section, with barely a dozen posts a day.

a mod for every section and we would be tripping over each other.
Click to expand...

You need more than two mods. Whether a Mod trips over each other, depends on the permissions and authorities granted.

As to whether the Leica forum on Photo.net is dying, that should indicate that a lot of posters just love a good fight and pissing people off. If that's what it takes to make a forum successful, let it die.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
You need more than two mods. Whether a Mod trips over each other, depends on the permissions and authorities granted.

As to whether the Leica forum on Photo.net is dying, that should indicate that a lot of posters just love a good fight and pissing people off. If that's what it takes to make a forum successful, let it die.
Click to expand...

i'm saying that tolerance and a heavy hand need to be balanced or you get a dying forum.

the argument is moot for me anyway as i don't make the rules here and those decisions belong to stephen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom