When is Analog photography not Analog???

[Shawn Rahman]

Where and why would they "admit" to it?

That's part of the illusion/delusion that participation in APUG demands some sort of sacrosanct personal philosophy in regard to photography. Cripes I own and use five different digi cameras on a regular basis, and I'm a moderator here. I just don't talk about it here, because this isn't the place. That would be like talking about my Blansky fetish in church. Wrong place. It's like talking up a Ford on a Chevy forum or wearing a meat jacket at a vegetarian gathering.

Well said.

 

[Sean]

The usefulness of APUG is a direct result of its strict charter. The charter does not restrict how you go about creating, but rather what is discussed here in the forums. APUG exists to further the tradition and knowledge base of traditional photography and printing, and provide a forum for enthusiasts to discuss the subject unfettered by the analog-negative environments found elsewhere. There is a community and information base here that cannot be found anywhere else, and it is fully a result of holding the line on the charter. APUG has grown by leaps and bounds, and the mission statement has served it well. Persons shouldn't misinterpret the clear focus of this forum as anything but just that, a clear focus on analog photography. There isn't really anything to discuss about scanning and inkjet printing that can't be found in volumes with a quick google, and as such there is no reason to dilute our environment here with the unending and rotationally obsolescent pedestrian nuts and bolts of digi how-to, when it is so readily available elsewhere. APUG isn't elitist nor Luddite, although it's easy to understand why that may appear to be the case for someone just getting familiar with the site, but odds are that person came to the site looking for discourse on something not readily found on the myriad of other photo forums. APUG is a distillation, and a fine spirit it is.

Sean has made it clear that the charter and mission statement will not change, and APUG will continue to be exactly what it is that has enabled it to be an active and vibrant community of photographers sharing some common but not commonplace ground among countless working methods.

Thanks Jason! *Copies for further use since we'll need that paragraph every 6 months or so

 

[sanking]

Yawn . . . . . .!!

Sandy King

 

[mr rusty]

APUG isn't elitist

Maybe not intentionally, but it is.

It is not particularly friendly towards a newbie coming to APUG for the first time. Typically, someone who is new to film (perhaps because they are too young to have been involved before, but the lomography thing has sparked an interest) and wants to improve the quality of what they shoot. Obviously there is much here to help them - discussions on cameras, exposure, galleries of examples, but, and it is a huge but, the newbie is likely to D&P on the high street or, more likely if coming from the lomo world, D&Scan.

Our newbie is likely to innocently introduce questions regarding film type and improving quality for the scan/print part of the operation and at that point gets shot down in flames and pointed out of the site to somewhere else.

I understand the charter, I just think we are shooting ourselves in the feet by not embracing the reality of the D&scan users (including me), keeping them here and hopefully sparking an ongoing interest in all the other processes. That way we bring in new blood which ultimately is the only way anything can survive long term. Hybrid users buy film too!

It doesn't have to develop into a full blown digital processes forum, but surely there should be scope for someone to discuss the merits between, say, buying a scanner and using a high street scanning service, or the scanning performance of different films, without feeling unwelcome?

From a financial perspective, is there enough here for a hybrid user to warrant paying a subscription if they are pointed elsewhere for half the process?

 

[Mike1234]

Mr rusty, you're making far too much sense. I'd say the way to do it is have a special forum set up for hybrid discussion right here on APUG. They could call it "For Those Rotten Stepchildren With Nasty Hybrid Tendencies" forum.

The fact is, the Hybrid Photo forum just isn't catching on but it has NOTHING to do with there being too few hybrid users. The APUG forum is just so much better established and it's set up better.

But the powers-that-be say N-O-O-O!! And we have no choice but to accept that.

Mods... please don't ban me.

 

[JBrunner]

Maybe not intentionally, but it is.

It is not particularly friendly towards a newbie coming to APUG for the first time. Typically, someone who is new to film (perhaps because they are too young to have been involved before, but the lomography thing has sparked an interest) and wants to improve the quality of what they shoot. Obviously there is much here to help them - discussions on cameras, exposure, galleries of examples, but, and it is a huge but, the newbie is likely to D&P on the high street or, more likely if coming from the lomo world, D&Scan.

Our newbie is likely to innocently introduce questions regarding film type and improving quality for the scan/print part of the operation and at that point gets shot down in flames and pointed out of the site to somewhere else.

I understand the charter, I just think we are shooting ourselves in the feet by not embracing the reality of the D&scan users (including me), keeping them here and hopefully sparking an ongoing interest in all the other processes. That way we bring in new blood which ultimately is the only way anything can survive long term. Hybrid users buy film too!

It doesn't have to develop into a full blown digital processes forum, but surely there should be scope for someone to discuss the merits between, say, buying a scanner and using a high street scanning service, or the scanning performance of different films, without feeling unwelcome?

From a financial perspective, is there enough here for a hybrid user to warrant paying a subscription if they are pointed elsewhere for half the process?

I really don't see what there is to embrace besides a discussion of scanners and inkjet printers. That is readily available elsewhere. A case could (and has) been made for Dnegs, but other than that, everything that is on APUG that is relevant and useful for these shooters is here and accessible. We had a "gray area", as you suggest, already, and it didn't really add anything to the site, in fact, quite the opposite. Frankly, activity has shown, both on hybridphoto and here in the hybrid social group, that despite the vociferous pinings of a few, there is simply very little activity on the subject, and therefore little reason to dilute the focus of the site. I don't know how we can make it any more clear, except perhaps to repeat to all who read, and continue to try to make a case, this isn't going to change.

I think this thread has more than run its course, and is now simply repeating itself.