What's going on??

bvy said:

I was also happy for the announcement, but I think it addresses only part of the problem. People can come off in an abrupt or standoffish way without blatantly violating site rules. This is just as unwelcoming and potentially detrimental to retaining new members. Not much you can do about that, I suppose. It behooves us all to be civil, especially to newcomers.

Click to expand...

Excellent point; some have a way of purposely skirting the spirit of the rules. I, too, doubt anything will come of it.

michael_r said:

I guess we have a different view of what "complex" means, that's all.

They can be "difficult" if the negative requires a lot of difficult dodging/burning at multiple grades. But the concepts are not complex (in my opinion). To me, "complex" is something more like emulsion engineering .

Click to expand...

I have been split printing since the early 90's - I have always wondered where this 0 and 5 thing comes from, I never work that way these days.
I agree with Michael emulsion engineering is beyond my brain scope, split printing just takes practice and thought.

... deleted...

[In hindsight, I never should have written this post. Publically... my apologies to Peter for any misconstrued implications were implied.]

I just had my dosage of anger when I posted a ethical question in the wrong forum. Including a certain user who I guess found my name somewhere and appeared to be using that knowledge to be super creepy. I got over it but quite off-putting. I still like apug, but I try to dig in the archives before subjecting myself to the forums.

BrianShaw said:

... so is our job done? After 16 pages of chatter did you get the results you desired, Peter Schrager?

Click to expand...

Peter is either out take photos or going to gallery shows... He has been consistent member here for as long as I have been here and he actually was one of a few who made the time
to come to APUG first workshop and as well came to my show and supported me in California.

I think that the "Resources" section of this (and any other) forum can be a powerful instrument to avoid this kind of problem.
Not every forum has a "Resources" and some newbie don't actually think about browsing it or searching into it.

People who feel they are bothered in reading the same questions asked "again and again" (they are not asked "again" because they are asked by different persons) could point to the helpful "Resource" in this site, or in other sites.
A "Resource" is not just an "essay" on a particular subject, in this site it could be a collection of useful links on a certain matter, links to other sites or links to other resources of this site, some sort of a roadmap.

Personally, if I were to set the rules of this (or any other) forum, I would consider taboo the answers:
1) Google it;
2) (even worse than the above) try the experiment yourself instead of asking.

Answer n. 2 is particularly useless: the "experiment" usually would require a complicated setup or some days of work. Sometimes it's easier to ask "would that work", that's one of the reasons for fora to exist, to spread knowledge instead of telling people to build a wheel themselves and see if it is better than an Indian sleigh.

People who don't feel like giving a constructive contribution should abstain from commenting. "Moderation" should IMHO be attentive about this "constructive" aspect of the forum. Answers of the 1) kind are, IMHO, much less rude than answers of the 2) kind.

Also, an answer of the kind "I answered to this question several times already" is moderately useful. A forum research would not be made much easier.

Better would be: "I answered to this question on this thread: (link)".

Or even better, if one feels so inclined and willing, would be making a Resource with a "distillate" of the knowledge and pointing to it very simply and effectively. That avoids repeating the same answer over and over, while helping the community in a very effective way.

Bob Carnie said:

I have been split printing since the early 90's - I have always wondered where this 0 and 5 thing comes from, I never work that way these days.
I agree with Michael emulsion engineering is beyond my brain scope, split printing just takes practice and thought.

Click to expand...

Bob, would you teach split printing over this forum? You can discuss it but not teach it.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

Bob, would you teach split printing over this forum? You can discuss it but not teach it.

PE

Click to expand...

Yes I would Ron, I have done so in the past describing a bunch of my methods but I would be willing to discuss my thoughts on how I attack a negative to get a desired result. But remember I am a layman printer not a scientific one .
I once got scolded here about my grammar and spelling so I will make no excuses for that .
Last summer I printed 40 Vivian Maier prints using my method, with Stephen Bulgers permission I may be able to use a few of those images and my notes about how I attacked the negatives .
I would think a separate thread if there is those interested and I can get permission.

Well, I won't scold for grammar or spelling, but to use your own words, you say you will "discuss your thoughts". That is the key and matches my wording exactly. Good teaching is done by instruction. The best is by personal interaction which you cannot get on a forum.

PE

Does APUG have a Mission Statement? If so I have never seen one. Anyway a mission statement describes the purpose of an organization, what the organization does and does not do. Perhaps Sean can start a thread for input on this subject. Seems like a good time to do it.

It would seem to me that this whole thread could have been avoided by making it clear that we offer help and information whenever possible. Lacking that we try to point people to other sources for their questions.

Gerald C Koch said:

It would seem to me that this whole thread could have been avoided by making it clear that we offer help and information whenever possible. Lacking that we try to point people to other sources for their questions.

Click to expand...

I think you've missed the entire point.

There's nothing wrong with pointing people to other sources; It's the manner in which it's often done by some people but mostly the seemingly increasing frequency of unhelpful, condescending and rude posts in general that's the issue.

Bob Carnie said:

Last summer I printed 40 Vivian Maier prints using my method, with Stephen Bulgers permission I may be able to use a few of those images and my notes about how I attacked the negatives .

Click to expand...

That's pretty awesome. One of the faculty members at our college had her as a nanny, she got fired for putting her in a trash can as a toddler for a photo op.

Now that I have arrived to this thread and read it all, I wonder, and what is the conclusion after 17 pages?

To my way of thinking, it's showed repeatedly:

1. That the message counters continue to rise and the user date with them (as a counterpart, knowledge & behaviour do not go in that same proportion).
2. It remains to be seen then that both the basic concepts of photography (for both, beginners and veterans) as well as the basic concepts of social relationship between individuals, are huge and overflowing but sorely lacking, not to mention the structure of these community organizations (which takes large part of the blame).
3. That the Internet is overrated (and therefore any forum, including this one).
4. That if half of the messages of APUG are wrong, you can put this in that bag.
5. And, last but not least, that people spend a lot of time pounding keys ...

And all this has reminded me that shortly, as soon as I am one year old I will leave this forum. Nothing has to do with this thread of course (it is a long decision made beforehand, when registering). It has been a pleasure to read this thread, especially for the funny part, that enjoyable aspect I am always satisfied with.

Thank you all.