Shooting film in a digital world-a mini documentary

[Hatchetman]

Blansky, Carnie, Jorge, Sandy King, and Denise Ross per the past few posts. I dunno, I haven't been here that long.

I'm always interested in a good photography site. This seems about the best I guess. (shrug).

 

[Bob Carnie]

Blansky, Carnie, Jorge, Sandy King, and Denise Ross per the past few posts. I dunno, I haven't been here that long.

I'm always interested in a good photography site. This seems about the best I guess. (shrug).

Sorry I don't follow this post.

 

[Hatchetman]

Sorry I don't follow this post.

Michael R asked what "sages" I was referring to. I was talking about the names mentioned in the previous 5-6 posts as people who were "pushed away" from APUG or left completely for one reason or another.

I don't want anyone to leave, especially if they have some knowledge of film photography.

Message boards are not for the thin-skinned. You're going to get blasted by somebody if you ever say anything interesting.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Ok I get it , I do not see that persons posts.

Blansky and Carnie have not been pushed away , I am talking with you right now. You are right keeping people here with years of experience is precious.

Michael R asked what "sages" I was referring to. I was talking about the names mentioned in the previous 5-6 posts as people who were "pushed away" from APUG or left completely for one reason or another.

I don't want anyone to leave, especially if they have some knowledge of film photography.

Message boards are not for the thin-skinned. You're going to get blasted by somebody if you ever say anything interesting.

 

[MDR]

I wouldn't call them sages they were people that helped make Apug a special place.

 

[David Brown]

Well they go make prints and forget about the wankers who bring them down here.

 

[Wayne]

Blansky, Carnie, Jorge, Sandy King, and Denise Ross per the past few posts. I dunno, I haven't been here that long.

I'm always interested in a good photography site. This seems about the best I guess. (shrug).

Sandy is still active on the Large Format Forum. Jorge quit photography and while I found most of his viewpoints quite compatible with my own (a rare thing for me) he was, quite frankly, a total prick who should have been kicked off the site but AFAIK was not. Blandsky is hardly a sage, just a verbose stream of self-justification who will hopefully go back to "Wine Country" and shoot digital.

 

[Dinesh]

.... Jorge quit photography and while I found most of his viewpoints quite compatible with my own (a rare thing for me) he was, quite frankly, a total prick who should have been kicked off the site .......

Apparently you have more in common than just viewpoints.

 

[Wayne]

Apparently you have more in common than just viewpoints.

You think I should be kicked off the site, or that I'm a prick? Please read through my posting history and come back with one good reason for either. I expressed one (long overdue) opinion you don't like, and that's about all you're going to find.

 

[blansky]

Blandsky is hardly a sage, just a verbose stream of self-justification who will hopefully go back to "Wine Country" and shoot digital.

 

[pdeeh]

The grace, dignity and beauty of human interaction never ceases to amaze me.

I believe there's something in the site rules about personal attacks isn't there?

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The grace, dignity and beauty of human interaction never ceases to amaze me.

I believe there's something in the site rules about personal attacks isn't there?

Yes. And it might do for a couple of individuals to read through them.

[h=2]Rules For The General Forums[/h]
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Sean]

Sean just contacted me and told me I'd used up my word allotment and was costing him too much money.

Not unless my account was hacked..

 

[Sean]

I hope I am misreading this post, People like Blansky and Bob Carnie even if they are "misguided" are necessary for this forum to thrive, without opposition and some injections of painful truths (for the analogue world) this forum would get seriously boring and wither away.

I think Blansky was joking, to clarify I never contacted him..

 

[MDR]

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[dwross]

Meanwhile...

How about Bob's request that APUG welcome digital negatives into the fold? Perhaps we could rebrand? I like "hybrid" just fine, but maybe another name would offer a fresh start. "Integrated Printing" (?) That's not quite right, but something along those lines. Constrain the discussions to one sub-forum and anyone who wants to can ignore the subject.

 

[MDR]

+1
How about the X-Forum or X-printmaking. X is the accepted symbol/sign for hybrid so instead of Hybrid use the sign and make the whole thing sound cool like Generation-X or X-men.

 

[MattKing]

Meanwhile...

How about Bob's request that APUG welcome digital negatives into the fold? Perhaps we could rebrand? I like "hybrid" just fine, but maybe another name would offer a fresh start. "Integrated Printing" (?) That's not quite right, but something along those lines. Constrain the discussions to one sub-forum and anyone who wants to can ignore the subject.

Maybe this would work better than the last time it was tried.

I still think greater integration between the two sites would be helpful.

 

[Sean]

Meanwhile...

How about Bob's request that APUG welcome digital negatives into the fold? Perhaps we could rebrand? I like "hybrid" just fine, but maybe another name would offer a fresh start. "Integrated Printing" (?) That's not quite right, but something along those lines. Constrain the discussions to one sub-forum and anyone who wants to can ignore the subject.

This has been discussed at length. In a nutshell we got rid of the hybrid area on APUG years ago because "constraining" discussions became next to impossible. Not only digital bleed over into analog areas but also a general attitude of 'not enough' leeway in the hybrid areas (calls for full digital on APUG came soon and loudly after hybrid was allowed, and the cycle of demand continued).. calls for more digital subforums, digital images allowed in the galleries, etc. We had hybrids dipping into analog threads prodding members to go digital or to try what they are doing in digital instead, adding further conflicts. It became a nightmare to manage, so I took a step back and say to myself, "I will never please everyone, so I can draw a line in the sand or continue this nightmare for myself and the mod team". I decided to upset the minority by aligning APUG strictly to it's original charter.

APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes.

It wasn't a perfect solution but it is a no win situation, no matter what solution there will be many upset on both sides. There is a Hybrid Group on APUG here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) It allows for basic discussion, even image sharing. It does lack a lot of functionality but for now it's that or DPUG. I am still trying to find a feasible way to share a single user account between APUG & DPUG so they are integrated but still their own entities.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

That sounds totally reasonable to me. I can think of many places I can go to discuss digital and hybrid forms of photography... I can think of very few places where it's all about analog. Thank you, Sean.

 

[cliveh]

For me, as long as the image originates on film, there after I don't care.

 

[dwross]

OK. May I, then, make a suggestion/request? I wasn't aware of the hybrid group. It's far too well hidden. Could you create a permanent link to it from near the top of Alternative Processes pages? And/Or, a separate link on the homepage like the one you made to dpug? It might actually work out fine if people can find the discussions easily.

 

[Bob Carnie]

That subforum looks good too me , I too was not aware of its existence.

This has been discussed at length. In a nutshell we got rid of the hybrid area on APUG years ago because "constraining" discussions became next to impossible. Not only digital bleed over into analog areas but also a general attitude of 'not enough' leeway in the hybrid areas (calls for full digital on APUG came soon and loudly after hybrid was allowed, and the cycle of demand continued).. calls for more digital subforums, digital images allowed in the galleries, etc. We had hybrids dipping into analog threads prodding members to go digital or to try what they are doing in digital instead, adding further conflicts. It became a nightmare to manage, so I took a step back and say to myself, "I will never please everyone, so I can draw a line in the sand or continue this nightmare for myself and the mod team". I decided to upset the minority by aligning APUG strictly to it's original charter.



It wasn't a perfect solution but it is a no win situation, no matter what solution there will be many upset on both sides. There is a Hybrid Group on APUG here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) It allows for basic discussion, even image sharing. It does lack a lot of functionality but for now it's that or DPUG. I am still trying to find a feasible way to share a single user account between APUG & DPUG so they are integrated but still their own entities.

 

[Bob Carnie]

plus one

OK. May I, then, make a suggestion/request? I wasn't aware of the hybrid group. It's far too well hidden. Could you create a permanent link to it from near the top of Alternative Processes pages? And/Or, a separate link on the homepage like the one you made to dpug? It might actually work out fine if people can find the discussions easily.

 

[MDR]

Another plus one