When is Analog photography not Analog???

JBrunner said:

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.

Click to expand...

JBrunner said:

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.

Click to expand...

APUG isn't elitist

Click to expand...

mr rusty said:

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?

Click to expand...