IF THIS SITE WENT AWAY....

[Chuck_P]

Insofar as we are discussing APUG that is. It takes a certain personality type to want to post and post on a forum, and this forum is not representative of photography users. It is probably representative of photography users who find the internet forum a useful site though.

You certainly have the right to make them, but these arguments are utterly rediculous. Your basis for this is................? Must we all be some type of professional before this forum can be thought of as representative of photography users? I mean, what is your point? I'm an avid hobbyist and so are many of the others who post here---what are you?

Your statements stink with a stench that I find indescribable at the moment. I may completely misunderstand, and if so, please back up those comments with something palatable.

Chuck

 

[jstraw]

Yes, an Internet forum is self-selecting for people that would use an Internet forum.

Whether or not such a group is a good or poor sampling of photographers in general, is not a fact that naturally follows from that bit of truth.

 

[Sirius Glass]

My thoughts,

If this site went away ... I would lose a great source of information and the best site that I have found to keep track of the ever diminishing comsumable products. I would be very disappointed, but I probably would survive.

My $0.02, that and $20US will get you a cup of coffee at $t*rbucks.

Steve

 

[my_lonely_eye]

Well digital isn't necesarrily a bad thing , it's just that people take terrible pictures, use photoshop and call it photography. If we have an impact on film photography, it's very little. They still teach film in schools though, I'm actually in that class at the moment. A fair amount of people signed up to take this class, so perhaps film will be around longer than we expect it will be. No matter what, as long as there are those who grew up with film, it will be used until they are dead, unless some new blood decide to pick it up.

 

[Rob_5419]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_5419 View Post
Insofar as we are discussing APUG that is. It takes a certain personality type to want to post and post on a forum, and this forum is not representative of photography users. It is probably representative of photography users who find the internet forum a useful site though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck1 View Post
You certainly have the right to make them, but these arguments are utterly rediculous. Your basis for this is................? Must we all be some type of professional before this forum can be thought of as representative of photography users? I mean, what is your point? I'm an avid hobbyist and so are many of the others who post here---what are you?

Your statements stink with a stench that I find indescribable at the moment. I may completely misunderstand, and if so, please back up those comments with something palatable.

Chuck

That's quite an amazing hysterical outburst.

You might actually try and read what is written instead of interpreting your own hang-ups in other comments. Good luck in clearing up your own stench too; it has nothing to do with me.

jstraw Yes, an Internet forum is self-selecting for people that would use an Internet forum.

Mr Straw's comment might actually give you a clue.

If you read the original question:

How vital is APUG to preserving film photography?

 

[jstraw]

I was trying to point out that your statement that "this forum is not representative of photography users" may or may not be true...but that it does not directly follow from the fact that the participants opt in and are not randomly sampled.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I was trying to point out that your statement that "this forum is not representative of photography users" may or may not be true...but that it does not directly follow from the fact that the participants opt in and are not randomly sampled.

I don't know. Maybe it is just me, but I got it the first time.

I never understood the confusion. You must have hit a tender spot.

"You can't please everyone, so just please yourself" - Garden Party Ricky Nelson

Steve

 

[ic-racer]

I have been on the internet since 1988 (back in the old InfoMac and FTP days) and have been doing traditional b&w photography since 1973. However, I only just recently discovered this site. It says it was founded in 2002, which I would consider still pretty recent. I suspect there are others that have yet come aboard.

 

[Chuck_P]

That's quite an amazing hysterical outburst.

You might actually try and read what is written instead of interpreting your own hang-ups in other comments. Good luck in clearing up your own stench too; it has nothing to do with me.




Mr Straw's comment might actually give you a clue.

If you read the original question:

Ok, the stench comment was too strong. My apologies on poor usage of forum communication. I probably should stay away from the forum in the moring time when still a bit foggy eyed.

However, though you have responded with indignation toward my comments, you still have not explained your comments I was questioning you about. So, in a civil manner, I ask that you shed some light on them, especially the "this forum is not representative of photography users". What do you mean by that? Or, answer it this way--what would be representative of photography users, as you see it? I understand your statement that "this forum is representative of photography users who find the internet forum a useful site" as I fall into that category myself.

Sorry again for my rudeness this morning.

Chuck

 

[Brian Miller]

How vital is APUG to preserving film photography?

Since PhotoEngineer is getting people interested in making their own paper and film, I'd say that its quite vital. Its also highly influential for manufacturers, such as Ilford and Fotoman, to put manufacturers in touch with customers.