Too Many Posts On SLRs?? Have Things Changed?

[Doug]

I was informed by a moderator a few years ago that there was some tolerance for SLR photos in the gallery and that members were good about self policing. Perhaps a separate gallery for members non RF photos might be in order now?

Well, there IS a related but separate gallery dedicated to SLR photos, both film and digital, here: http://www.dslrexchange.com/photopostdslrx/index.php

 

[ruben]

It seems to me we are missing the most important: the Range Finder camera identity, and our common denominator with SLRs: FILM.

In view of the increasing digital avalanche, it will not be too wise to break ranks with other film users. We are not any more the majority.

As for the range finder identity, or intrinsic personality, how are we supposed to deepen our understanding and feeling, if not by comparizon ?

And how can we possibly broaden our audience and attracting more people to our camp, by "La Migra" policies ?

Creating The Evil SLR subforum seems appropriate to me, in view of the abovementioned concerns. Creating a sub-gallery for non rf images seems to me appropriate too.

Don't force, convince !

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Nikon Bob]

Well, there IS a related but separate gallery dedicated to SLR photos, both film and digital, here: http://www.dslrexchange.com/photopostdslrx/index.php

Cute, but it was in regards to this forum that the comment was made by a moderator. Or are you hinting that dslrexchange needs more traffic?

Bob

 

[kully]

I agree with Shadowfox - the gallery should be kept for RF photos.

If you want to show your SLR photos then the facility exists at dslrexchange.com.

 

[jlw]

If our goal is to cater to as many forms of photography enthusiasm as possible, and attract as many users as possible, shouldn't we change our name to something more inclusive? "Photo.net" would be good, if that name isn't already taken...


...Seriously, I was warning you guys last year that this would happen. I got interested in RFF because it was specifically dedicated to the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinder cameras. Trying to make the forum more inclusive is just diluting its utility.

 

[Kin Lau]

Cute, but it was in regards to this forum that the comment was made by a moderator. Or are you hinting that dslrexchange needs more traffic?

Bob

Doug's the mod on DSLRX... he needs more work 😀

 

[Marc-A.]

I agree with Shadowfox - the gallery should be kept for RF photos.

No chance to see your future F3HP pictures in the gallery then ? 😉

 

[Doug]

Doug's the mod on DSLRX... he needs more work 😀

Right on! 😀

 

[ChrisPlatt]

We meet together here because we all have an interest in rangefinder cameras,
but sharing our experiences and enthusiasms in all things photographic
is what RFF is really all about...

Chris

 

[ruben]

If our goal is to cater to as many forms of photography enthusiasm as possible, and attract as many users as possible, shouldn't we change our name to something more inclusive? "Photo.net" would be good, if that name isn't already taken....

According to me, our goal is to strenghten rangefinderdom. With all due respect, according to you, what is OUR goal ?

Photo.net doesn't dedicate the specific space RFF dedicates to the main RF breeds, nor enables the type of open dialogue whe have here. At Photo.net the idiot asks and the bunch of wise guys respond. I seriously doubt this very thread could exist there.

At RFF we chat, we laugh a lot, we exchange, sometimes we tease and beyond, and in this open climate we can really learn too. Photo.net is a great sized website for info. RFF is a website where we live and breath. Haven't you noticed this difference beyond the formal ones.

...Seriously, I was warning you guys last year that this would happen. I got interested in RFF because it was specifically dedicated to the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinder cameras. Trying to make the forum more inclusive is just diluting its utility.

"diluting its utility" for who ? What is out there beyond your own needs, your own interests, your own utility ?

Haven't you ever thought that perhaps the long term survival of your legitimate utility and interest is connected and dependable upon others than you ? Had I been in an hilarious mood, I would imagine you comfortably sitting with your best suit, driniking a glass of champagne amidst the sinking Titanic.

Fortunately RFF is growing at great pace, despite your warnings last year, and at every thread we find newcomers we are not used to talk with. RFF is becoming less intimate, less narrow, but stronger with new blood, many of them youngers. Do you want to narrow their vision or enhance it? Can you enhance it by narrowing ?

Why don't you appear at the SLRs threads speaking on behalf of "the challenges and opportunities inherent in the use of rangefinders" ? Wouldn't be appropriate ? Is someone blocking you ? Do you think no one would be interested in hearing your opinion about this crucial issue. I am.

If you want to maintain your seat, take care of the ship we both and we all are navigating with.

Cheers,
Ruben

Hi kgb,
Yes things do change. There is no single thing in the whole universe that doesn't change. Change is change, it depends upon each of us to find the good and the bad in it. But we cannot stop change, only freeze our minds for a while.

Now I must confess something quite personal. I hate, really hate those silly threads polling or asking about the colour of my underwear. Well, "hate" may be a too exaggerated term. But I strongly dislike them.

But it never crossed my mind to raise a thread proposing their suppresion, directly or undirectly. Nor I want them to be whiped out for a single reason. People have interest in them, and I must respect other's people interests, beyond mine. You do have in my opinion every right to criticize, as I am doing it now and at other opportunities.

But there is a totally different thing to stand up calling for the suppresion of things people are interested in within photography, under the claim that you are "just posting this as an observation, not a criticism" . I understand this last sentence of yours as an intentional jocke by you. That's why I rebuked your jocke here, for a single time, in slightly altering your nickname.

Range finders identity is to be taken care for, and maintained at the forefront of RFF, but by our strenghts - not our weaknesses. Shutting up other people's interests will equal to shutting up their mouths, and both will equal to shooting a bullet into our own foot.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[nikon_sam]

Let's Name Names...

Let's Name Names...

I posted in the Evil SLR thread about the Nikon follow-on to the D200. Why?

1) Because there is now a category for SLRs, without which I wouldn't have imposed it on this forum.
2) I use both SLR and RF cameras.
3) I spend all of my time here and don't know anyone at any other forum.
4) I wanted to share with the people I spend my time with.

I think the main reason that there is a flurry of SLR posts now is that having a category for them legitimizes it. I don't think it will take over RFF, though.

/T

I totally agree with your four points as to why I visit RFF...

I found this website quite by accident but liked what I saw and read here...
People here loved photography too...It's just too bad that some want to limit themselves to RF cameras...(I know this is a Rangefinder Website)...I do own, at last count, 4 working and 2 spare parts Rangefinder Cameras...therefore I felt that I qualified and was allowed to visit and share.
Along with the RF's I also shoot with SLR's, a TLR and a 4x5 Field Camera.
I totally love photography and don't really care what equipment does the job.
For some reason a category "Evil SLR's" was placed in this site...I guess to tolerate or appease the ones who would openly admit using the evil cameras...
Maybe a separate link to post photos taken with such equipment should be available to those who would like to...(I just checked and while in the "Evil SLR" forum the link there to post photos goes to the main Photo Gallery...)
I have seen the DSLRExchange site but I don't shoot digital...

I know I posted 37 photos last night to the Gallery and also named the camera that was used...while many would argue that I'm full of cr*p...I believe that many if not most would have no clue what camera was used to take them if I hadn't mention the SLR and by the way it's a Nikon F4e...
I originally was posting photos for the RFF Los Angeles Assignment...the rules we came up with included the use of SLR's...no problem there!!!
I just wanted to share some of the shots I came up with and then while there decided to post other pictures I was proud of and thought some would like to view...

Now if someone wants to take another POLL...How about this...


New Poll...Do we remove all pictures not taken with a RF...OR...Leave them and just enjoy...Let's vote...

If anyone has a problem with the Non-RF photos I or anyone else has posted please have the b*lls to "Name Names".
Let us know in an open thread how you feel and which pictures offend you enough to want them removed...As for me & I speak just for me I'll remove any unwanted photos in my Gallery...

Thank you...

Remember...Say what you mean...just don't say it mean...

 

[daaris]

I can respect the concern over this site changing. Some of the concern does seem a little premature though.

I have not been here long, and in fact ownwed a RF for many years that I had never shot one picture on. I have always loved my SLRs and in 2000 moved into the DSLR world, and I love that world also. But when I finally got off my duff and looked through that RF one day I was convinced and captivted all in one second. Luckily I found this site which has taught me a lot about my RF.

I shared this experience with a good friend of mine. Next time I saw him I made him look through my RF, he called me later that night to tell me he found a Minolta RF his father had "retired". He found this site on his own, before I could share it. Now the RFs go everywhere when each of us shoot.

I just wanted to share this with you all as you discuss the future of this site, and the changes taking place. I think a lot of people are finding RFs, young and not so old, my friend and I are perfect examples of this. This sites focus on RFs does not seem to be compromised by the inclusion of some SLR talk.

Thanks everyone by the way! Tolerating questions from people new to RFs that most of the regulars here have been through many times is unique and appreciated. Yet another reason why I don't think this site will loose any dedication to RF photography.

 

[mw_uio]

I will leave, as I do not have a rangefinder, thus RFF can then be pure again. Sorry for polluting your environment! I guess everyone who owns a RF and a SLR, better not talk about SLR's, nor sell SLR's on RFF, or sell any gear that is SLR. Thus Tony from Popflash should be band from selling SLR gear in the classifieds, and no one else for that matter sell SLR's gear. Nor can anyone talk about their Nikon D200, or their Pentax, for that matter. All photos posted can not be from a digital point & shoot, nor a point & shoot, nor a SLR, only and only a rangefinder with film in it. Not even a medium format camera can be talked about. Those RFF meets then should only be for those who have rangefinders, nor can anyone bring there digital point and shoot to have a group photo, only a rangefinder can be used with only film in it. Nor should anyone talk about photographers who used a SLR or a medium format camera. Only photogragher's who have used only a rangefinder can be discussed.

Is that pure enough for you! 😀


thank you

MArk
Quito, EC

 

[ruben]

Hi MArk,
It is a good policy to avoid threatening to leave, as some dwellers may request you to do it indeed, in quite brutal manners.

And if you leave upon such request, you will weaken me, and all other supporters of your viewpoint.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Matthew55000]

All photos posted can not be from a digital point & shoot, nor a point & shoot, nor a SLR, only and only a rangefinder with film in it. Not even a medium format camera can be talked about.

Nothing wrong with digital Rangefinders or Medium format rangefinders.
You seem a bit confused.

And I thought you were leaving instead of sitting and watching the replies on the post.

 

[nico]

Sorry fellows but maybe it's because of my broken english but I can't see/understand the point for such a hot discussion...
this is a Rangefinder cameras dedicated forum. That's a fact. Dslrexchange is another - good, friendly as this - website dedicated to srl (digital and non I guess). Then there's a thread for slr dedicated discussions here (previously discussed in the OT forum...).
Can't see what we have to "argue" about ...
Anyway, there's also a Gallery here (and on Dslrexchange too); about this last point I agree that a good photo is a good photo no matter the gear used to take it but I'm just interested to see what other people do with the same gear I have so I can learn something ... that's why I prefer to have photos shot with rf gear in the gallery ... it's just about this for me ... it's not a religious or ideological matter...
... I think we all know that there's a difference between shootin with a rf than a srl ... and i prefer to see (in order to learn) what the other members do with their rf cameras ... but if someone wants to share some shots took with slr, or tlr or pinhole there should not be any restriction about it ... but still i'd like to have mainly photos took using rf cameras.
No need for anybody to quit here.
That's all for me ...
Ciao 🙂

 

[Keith]

There isn't?!#? 😱

I must fix that right away. 😀

Of course, it would undoubtedly be one of the loneliest forums ever. I have yet to see anyone jump and admit to having any flavor of Fujica 35mm SLR except myself.

I feel so alone and abused. sigh. 😀 😀

Send me one ... then you won't be so alone! 😀

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

We meet together here because we all have an interest in rangefinder cameras,
but sharing our experiences and enthusiasms in all things photographic
is what RFF is really all about...

Chris

I agree with Chris' point which is very well reasoned and concisely expressed.

 

[Keith]

In case anyone is interested in stats ... I have just gone back over the last four weeks and counted the SLR posts.

Over seven hundred .... 😱

Talk about lifting the lid off Pandora's box! 😀 😀 😀

... whatever we choose to talk about, this is a great forum and is now the only one I frequent ...

 

[landsknechte]

I personally have no problem restricting the galleries to RF photos, but it should be explicitly stated if that's to be the case. I'd imagine that the recent rush of SLR images posted is a backlog of images taken by those that shoot both styles of cameras, and not some sort of wholesale invasion. If the forum is going to take a harshly purist stand that the only real purpose of the forum is to be rangefinders, then we should leave it at rangefinders regardless of format. If you're trying create common bonds of brotherhood with film SLR photographers to the exclusion of digital RF photographers, then you ought to consider APUG.

One SLR sub-forum isn't going to be the end of the world guys. Relax. What's one more sub-forum in an already over subdivided forum?