What's going on??

[Julie McLeod]

There are plenty of experienced and gracious forum members here who appear to be understanding of the limitations of beginners and offer their expertise without getting pissy. How about creating a beginner section where they can do what they do so well and which can be put on ignore by those forum members who get irritated by questions that have been asked before?

 

[Ian Grant]

There are plenty of experienced and gracious forum members here who appear to be understanding of the limitations of beginners and offer their expertise without getting pissy. How about creating a beginner section where they can do what they do so well and which can be put on ignore by those forum members who get irritated by questions that have been asked before?

I think that's what Matt King was suggesting, but there needs to be a basics reference section plus a discussion area where the reference section can be updated. Those of us with knowledge need to help others.

Ian

 

[Julie McLeod]

I think that's what Matt King was suggesting, but there needs to be a basics reference section plus a discussion area where the reference section can be updated. Those of us with knowledge need to help others.

Ian

The 'beginner' section should really be a series of links to publications by Ilford and Kodak. I usually tell beginners to start with those because so much of the information on forums is bad, and seems to lead to many of the problems beginners post about in the first place.

I think having a curated reference like that would be fantastic. But I think a forum section where beginners can ask questions, including those that relate to the information in those resources, would be extremely helpful. It would be less intimidating for beginners and would make experienced members more conscious of the fact that answers may need to be simple and straightforward. It would also potentially keep at bay the kinds of arguments that all too often take place between dueling expert members.

 

[BrianShaw]

Agreed, dueling "experts" can definitely muddy the waters for beginners.

That happens all the time. Take a look at the recent "How do I meter" discussion. A lot of detail about details, many of which are not very applicable. And some seemingly just to show that X "knows more" than Y.

But who's signing up to develop and operate this curated beginner's section?

 

[Helinophoto]

I agree.

Just pointing to the reference literature is like saying "red the effing manual", or "just google it", it's not really an answer, if it demands knowledge to understand the manual in the first place.
A forum is an interactive thing, so answers, combined with pointers IN the actual literature or trough google, in a positive manner, is IMO the best way to convey knowledge to anyone, especially new people.

 

[BrianShaw]

BTW, Michael... that was a very nice listing of resources, but possibly hard to locate/navigate to answer specific questions... especially if the question isn't very clear to begin with.

 

[removed account4]

That happens all the time. Take a look at the recent "How do I meter" discussion. A lot of detail about details, many of which are not very applicable. And some seemingly just to show that X "knows more" than Y.

But who's signing up to develop and operate this curated beginner's section?

LOL and sometimes "x" and "y" have no images in the gallery or anywhere on the internet,
just blustery know-all commentary on internet forums, so how does that help anyone...

 

[BrianShaw]

I don't disagree, and nothing's perfect, but the beginner stuff (particularly Ilford) is straight forward and probably circumvents 95% of the problems beginners post about. A basic foundation can be helpful when venturing into online discussions to ask questions etc. Just my opinion.

yes... definitely.

 

[Julie McLeod]

I agree.

Just pointing to the reference literature is like saying "red the effing manual", or "just google it", it's not really an answer, if it demands knowledge to understand the manual in the first place.
A forum is an interactive thing, so answers, combined with pointers IN the actual literature or trough google, in a positive manner, is IMO the best way to convey knowledge to anyone, especially new people.

Yes, this is exactly right. I always search the forum when I have a question. But if the search results lead me to old threads that prompt me to think of follow-up questions, I don't want to ask them in the aged thread, especially when I don't even know if the members who contributed to it are still participating here. I'd much rather start a new thread in hopes of "talking" to live people.

 

[Helinophoto]

That happens all the time. Take a look at the recent "How do I meter" discussion. A lot of detail about details, many of which are not very applicable. And some seemingly just to show that X "knows more" than Y.

I think it comes down to that photography has no definitive right answer.
Some people can create grainy, overexposed, super-high contrast photos, while others like to emulate Ansel Adems from their shoes to their paper.

Thing is, people in the past, often used dumb, "throw-away" p&s cameras which probably had one or two modes of exposures, regarding taking the photo -and people managed to get photos back then.

Many people operate similar, letting the camera meter away, others are very strict, others again. rely on long experience and others again don't even use a meter.
Some give advice, based on the theory of Adams, with references, others give advice on what seems to work pretty well and consistently, but it an easier approach which in the end gives a different explanation to how things work.

I see people share their various methods and experience in that thread and it is interesting to see the variety. The internal battles are easy enough to skim trough, I saw one thread on here, which begun by criticizing Hasselblad's and the way they are constructed, that discussion went from sour to a joy-fest on how some particular brand of ham-radio worked

 

[Julie McLeod]

I don't disagree, and nothing's perfect, but the beginner stuff (particularly Ilford) is straight forward and probably circumvents 95% of the problems beginners post about. A basic foundation can be helpful when venturing into online discussions to ask questions etc. Just my opinion.

When there are good resources like you mentioned, a beginner forum would provide the opportunity to point a beginner to the resource and then give them a place to ask follow up questions.

 

[BrianShaw]

I think it comes down to that photography has no definitive right answer.
Some people can create grainy, overexposed, super-high contrast photos, while others like to emulate Ansel Adems from their shoes to their paper.

Thing is, people in the past, often used dumb, "throw-away" p&s cameras which probably had one or two modes of exposures, regarding taking the photo -and people managed to get photos back then.

Many people operate similar, letting the camera meter away, others are very strict, others again. rely on long experience and others again don't even use a meter.
Some give advice, based on the theory of Adams, with references, others give advice on what seems to work pretty well and consistently, but it an easier approach which in the end gives a different explanation to how things work.

I see people share their various methods and experience in that thread and it is interesting to see the variety. The internal battles are easy enough to skim trough, I saw one thread on here, which begun by criticizing Hasselblad's and the way they are constructed, that discussion went from sour to a joy-fest on how some particular brand of ham-radio worked

Right, there is a lot of diversity in methods and needs. But when it comes to answering a question asked by someone who quite obviously is just learning the basics what value is there in discussing the details of color bias in meters or chatter about zones and placement of tonal values? "The past" is the present... most folks are pushing the button on an iPhone to take pictures.

Regarding the Hasselblad/ham discussion... I'm aware of it but don't see that stuff much anymore since I put them on my ignore list. There's not enough time in my day to waste on foolishness. Oh, drat... here I go being grumpy again.

 

[Julie McLeod]

Just to clarify a little further, I don't mean to say or imply that beginners shouldn't ask questions here, or that we shouldn't reply and try to help with specific things. Not much point to a forum without discussion after all. I just mean that sometimes a novice will post some question(s) and it is clear to me they would be best served taking a step back from the internet noise first. This isn't always the case, just sometimes. That's when I tend to point people to the references, although I will still try to answer the question.

Getting off topic I suppose.

Bottom line, be welcoming and helpful (hopefully) to new members.

I understand and agree. I think a lot of the internet noise comes from people who don't remember what it's like to be a beginner or don't understand that everyone learns differently. As a beginner, a lot of the replies in this thread dismay and discourage me (yours are not among them) and so I'm feeling a bit testy.

 

[Ian Grant]

The 'beginner' section should really be a series of links to publications by Ilford and Kodak. I usually suggest beginners start with those because so much of the information on forums is bad, and seems to lead to many of the problems beginners post about in the first place.

I tried to do something along these lines in a resources thread but I think by now most of the Kodak links are broken and need to be updated. Someone also cluttered it up with a bunch of irrelevant Foma reference documents, which shouldn't have been posted there.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

While those references are important there's a vast amount missing, by that I mostly mean topics not covered at all, sometimes slightly conflicting as well.

I think the whole Ilford Applications -getting started section is a very but it doesn't really address using cameras, different types of lenses, meters, when to use a tripod etc.

The biggest mistake people make is trying to mush too quickly instead of sticking to one film and one developer until they have a better understanding of what they are doing. Also getting practical help beats books/forums hands down and we should be looking at mentoring those that would feel it useful. I'm doing that with some LF workers at the moment. It can save a lot of time and waste/money.

Ian

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Peter, I see the same questions over and over and over. A simple search first might help.

PE

+1000

In addition I agree with others that APUG is NOT the place for lengthy HOWTO explanations. There are books available both new and used with that sort of information. Anyone who is seriously interested in photography should have started accumulating a library of reference books. In addition there are numerous websites dealing with particular aspects of photography. I disagree with the OP, providing HOWTO articles is not and never was the purpose of APUG. As stated several times in this thread it is designed to answer specific questions quite often of technical difficulty.

 

[4season]

... but mind, if the newcomer is a delightful young lady, they are all attentive and back on the scene ...

Never trust an avatar

 

[Luckless]

If you don't want to write a lengthy response to a new user's questions, then... Don't?

No one is twisting your arm to read or write replies to questions on basic subject matter.

 

[Julie McLeod]

Never trust an avatar

Or a screen name.

 

[removed account4]

If you don't want to write a lengthy response to a new user's questions, then... Don't?

No one is twisting your arm to read or write replies to questions on basic subject matter.

i couldn't agree more !

 

[MattKing]

I always search the forum when I have a question. But if the search results lead me to old threads that prompt me to think of follow-up questions, I don't want to ask them in the aged thread, especially when I don't even know if the members who contributed to it are still participating here. I'd much rather start a new thread in hopes of "talking" to live people.

I understand this, but I think it may be misdirected.
Most people here tend to participate in threads based on current interest. Whether or not the original participants in the thread are still active doesn't seem to make any difference on people's current interest in continuing the thread .
Essentially, I'm suggesting that you don't hesitate to revive a relevant thread, if the subject of your enquiry might very well overlap with it.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

If you don't want to write a lengthy response to a new user's questions, then... Don't?

No one is twisting your arm to read or write replies to questions on basic subject matter.

But that's not the point is it. APUG is by its very nature is designed to answer specific technical questions not rehash basics. It is NOT a HOWTO site. There are several of those already on the web. Adding one more seems rather pointless.

 

[Julie McLeod]

I understand this, but I think it may be misdirected.
Most people here tend to participate in threads based on current interest. Whether or not the original participants in the thread are still active doesn't seem to make any difference on people's current interest in continuing the thread .
Essentially, I'm suggesting that you don't hesitate to revive a relevant thread, if the subject of your enquiry might very well overlap with it.

Okay, point taken. My experience doing searches since I joined this forum is that many threads are confusing and rife with argument so I figured some are a lot better not brought to the surface.

 

[removed account4]

But that's not the point is it. APUG is by its very nature designed to answer specific technical questions not rehash basics. It is NOT a HOWTO site. There are several of those already on the web. Adding one more seems rather pointless.

i think apug is different things to different people.
it is were someone can get a 2 word answer or a tretise on the same subject.
it has been that way since 2002, and since 2002 there are been people who have not used the search function
for whatever reasons they might have, and posted a question already answered... to make mistakes is human

 

[Peter Schrager]

But that's not the point is it. APUG is by its very nature designed to answer specific technical questions not rehash basics. It is NOT a HOWTO site. There are several of those already on the web. Adding one more seems rather pointless.

Gerald...I always read your posts because you are well versed in chemistry etc...please remember you started somewhere too and it's important not to trivialize others questions
I've been doing this for 50 years and still am learning and asking questions..sometimes I do google but hearing it from someone like you clears it up quickly for me...

 

[~andi]

I guess it much depends how people relate to forums, what a forum is for them:

a library = using the search function
a community = asking the next best dude

Also Nielsen (https://www.nngroup.com/articles/search-and-you-may-find/) found out a long time ago there are search dominant users, the ones that head for the search function fist thing, and the others who browse around. Might make a difference to in how forums are used.

The social aspect not to be neglected. Some people prefer to communicate with others instead of the solitude of searching the library.

~andi