ADMIN: Guidelines for Adhering to Topic

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by rowlett, Feb 27, 2005.

  1. rowlett

    rowlett Moderator

    PLEASE HELP THIS FORUM by keeping more to its topic.
    There have been a lot of off-topic posts over a long period of time, and there have been times when there were more off-topic or stupid posts than on-topic, interesting posts.
    In order to reduce the amount of archived off-topic content, we are going to start making more frequent use of the "Delete" and "Expire" functions of this forum. Posts that are deemed too far off-topic will be deleted as soon as we find them, and no notice, explanation, or apology will be given. Posts that are off-topic but sufficiently interesting to a majority of our forum participants will be expired a certain number of days after posting, based on the amount of time the thread remains relevant and interesting.
    This will better serve photo.net by making it more suitable for people searching for photography-related advice
    Sometimes, threads that start out perfectly on-topic wander somewhat into different subject areas. While it would be ideal to always remain perfectly on topic, we are all human and there is a natural tendency to touch upon subjects that are technically different than Leica Photography and therefore off-topic. This does not mark the end of the world, and I will continue to deliberatly allow certain threads like this to stay as long as a few common-sense (and sometimes obvious) conditions are met.
    I have always been very lax when it comes to moderation of this forum. Mostly it is because I am just a laid-back kind of person, but recently, over the last few years that is, even a much more active - rambunctious? - moderator would have a difficult time going through each thread in search of topic-worthness. Our forum has grown in number of participants and activity to a breathtaking level, but it's not all worthy of being archived as "photographic" information.
    I have been accused over the years for being ambiguous. For that reason, I will now try to "spell out" a few things that could mean the survival or the death of a thread.
    • All threads must be mostly about Leica Photography or they will be expired or deleted.
    • All threads, in their entirety, must remain polite, tactful, and supporting of one another.
    • No part of a saved thread will have fallen into a dark area like politics, vulgarities, religion, racism, moderation policy, etc. (That list is not all-inclusive; there are many "dark" topics, unrelated to Leica Photography, which will doom a thread.)
    • Saved threads will have been initiated with a good, valid, on- topic and interesting question made in good faith and with a reasonable expectation of interesting reponses that remain in the vein of Leica Photography.
    • Threads that are mostly off-topic in their content, even when when initially made on-topic, should be deleted or expired, based on the severity of the threads off-topicness and/or the interest level of the thread content.
    • Threads that are silly or just plain stupid will be deleted.
    • From time to time, humorous posts will be allowed to stay so long as they follow other rules above (they're not vulgar, political, etc.)
    • "Words/No Words" threads are of course welcome.
    • "YOUR photo of the week" threads are of course welcome.
    • "FS/WTB" threads are of course welcome.
    • "Mad projects" are great.
    • "What is Leica Photography" is also great, but it shouldn't deteriorate into a "Leica v. Digital" thing, either.
    • I am not trying to be heavy-handed. I am trying to get a better handle on a forum that some view has gotten so far out of control that it will eventually not be taken seriously at all, and that is a very bad thing for photo.net AND our forum. I have always felt that if I moderate with a light touch, the forum will chug along and everything will be just fine, but as you know, this is no longer the case. Can you please help me out? There is no way that I can tell you everything that is allowed and everything that isn't. I need your cooperation so we can keep this forum an asset to photo.net.
      Please post your ideas and suggestions here. You are also welcome to email me if you feel comfortable with that.
      Thanks for reading. Sorry for the book.
     
  2. All threads must be mostly about Leica Photography or they will be expired or deleted.
    I wonder if I'm alone in being uninterested in the Leica brand but interested in use of or results from cameras inspired by (or ripped off from) Leitz/Leica or indeed made by Leitz/Leica. I've always wondered why this forum combines Leica RF (more or less) and Leica R; they seem to me to have few points in common. "Rangefinder forum" seems a more sensible name to me; still, I don't care what the name is, but hope that talk of the use of (say) the Canon P or Canonet is still welcome. (If it isn't, where should it go?)
    Oh, and while I happen to loathe using the few digital cameras I've tried, I enjoy a lot of the Leica-utterly-unrelated digital photos that have been posted in this forum.
    It seems to me that the problem here isn't one of subject-matter; it's instead one of a handful of small-minded people with bizarre grudges against others, or desires to score points off them. I shan't name them, but at least one familiar quasi-name was active here as recently as yesterday (perhaps today too, but I haven't yet read much from today).
     
  3. I find many individuals in the Leica Forum having extensive knowledge about "photography". This does not necessary limit their knowledge to Leica cameras or Leitz optics. Would a posting be deleted unless it includes a question or comment about Leitz or Leica? I hope not.
     
  4. Tony,

    "What is Leica Photography" is also great, but it shouldn't deteriorate into a "Leica v. Digital" thing, either."

    Why is that topic or discussion not relevent in the Leica Forum? Seems extremely revelent to me, since that is the world most photographers are living in today, and since Leica's slowness in coming around with digital products that will take the place of their diminishing M sales (i.e., the digital M body so many of us want), is one reason for their current economic situation. I think you should reconsider this "ban."

    Thanks,
    Charles
     
  5. I just hope that the measures will not stop people from coming here and making it a fun learning experience.
     
  6. Tony,

    I think that you are a genial person and perform a valuable and not sufficiently thanked service as moderator. However, on reading your guidelines, it appears like a handbook for being a Stepford Wife. I think an interesting forum must have a modicum of spice, dissent, and some range in order to remain interesting. That is not to say I approve of mean spirited attacks one's character, but I must remind the forum that some of the most proficient Leica users were buddies of der feuhrer. I do agree that "will Leica survive?", and "film vs. digital" are getting old. I think the topic list can include Leica originals, of course, but also Leica lookalikes, Leica rivals, like Zeiss, and emulation of the "Leica spirit" what ever that is. Mention of "bokeh", of course, should result in instant and permanent banishment. BTW, I own three Leica screwmounts, and would use them, If I could load the film into them. Regardless, they are unsurpassed as neck jewelry
     
  7. maybe it's finally time for that canon p forum!!? heck, maybe all the rf canons could be included. joe;)
    00BJew-22095184.jpg
     
  8. Wow, Tony you've put a lot of thought and effort into that. Thanks. I think we'll have a much better meeting place with the new rules. I suspect it'll be a few months before the kinks are worked out, but essentially you're saying that a lot of borderline things will be allowed to stay for a short while, and there'll be no tollerance for wise guys trying to start a flame war by putting people down.

    What I've notice about those people is the never seem to offer any useful information anyway, so they won't be missed in the least. The last couple days here have been so much more pleasant. We have a lot of people who read this forum and have been afraid to post anything because of fear of being criticized and "screamed at".

    You'd be amazed at how much Leica Forum stuff never makes it to photo.net at all. I often answer people by email because my answer might wander off topic, or fear of being flamed, and I suspect others do it also. I know that I often get questions emailed to me rather than being posted. Having it all posted would be so much nicer. More people could learn from the discussions. Thanks, Tony.
     
  9. Agrees with Tony Rowlett. No harm in keeping things focused and it does get a bit off
    track sometimes. I also agree with some earlier comments on quality of pics that are
    posted . New here so hoping I don't get lynched by siding with the purist element.

    To me, Leica rangefinder is a different kind of photographic experience and you either like
    it or don't. I happen to love the excellent images I can get wide open and hate it when I
    look at the quality of my so called pro level SLR.

    Just my opinion. I'm not quite ready to excahnge my camera as often as my operating
    system and I think this room should be for the sick people that prefer the fine art of
    gelatine and polyester.

    Cheers

    Dan
     
  10. awahlster

    awahlster Moderator

    Back alley can my Canon model III and L-1 come play at your P forum?
     
  11. Perhaps the street/doc forum will get more traffic now. Never
    knew why such great gear independent forum get so few users.
    As much as I like this leica forum and my Ms, it's getting more
    restricted and boring every week imho.
     
  12. mark,

    the more the merrier!

    joe
     
  13. I think that we should continue to allow "Leica clones", whether they be Niccas or Canons from the old days or today's line-up of new Bessa bodies and glass. Thirty years ago you could pick up older model Leicas quite cheaply. That's no longer true, and the price of new ones is way beyond the reach of most younger photographers. We need a way to allow these people to join us that fits their budget!
     
  14. All threads must be mostly about Leica Photography or they will be expired or deleted.

    Expiring threads is cool -- very little of what anyone says is worth anything to posterity.

    OTOH, just what exactly is "Leica Photography"? Is that like "Rangefinder Style Photography" AKA surreptitious b/w butt shots? Can I talk about my CM since it's not a "real" Leica, or do I have to post test results showing that a CM's glacial focus speed isn't so bad that one will miss the decisive butt shot (on Tri-X, of course)?

    Seriously, can anyone explain "Leica Photography"? I'd settle for an explanation of why it's capitalized. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
     
  15. It's worse than that Leslie, I'm afraid.

    It's just not as good feeling to open up or to enter into a thread where you never know if you or another participant has crossed some line that may or may not be clear to the participant. You are walking between two narrow lines whose distance is determined by someone else and you don't know when you might step across them and your entire conversation will be invisibly deleted with no explanation.

    That's not a good feeling to enter a discussion with, Tony. It has a "Soviet" air about it.

    I have always sympathised with your plight, Tony, in the face of the melees and the donnybrooks that have occasionally surfaced here, but I think now that last week's obscenity-fest has pushed you off the deep end.

    Tony I think all of your goals could be achieved and the creative, exciting nature of this forum maintained with only one rule: Show Respect to Others, or your post/thread will be deleted.

    If you mercilessly followed that one rule no one could honestly complain. The other stuff is just too restrictive.
     
  16. If you accept Canons and Nikons, what's next, digital?

    Hate to break it to you, Dave, but Leica makes puts their name on several several digital cameras and folks seem to be foaming at the mouth for a digital M. No one knows how the foreground bokeg will turn out, though.
     
  17. I'm still amazed at how many digital photos they let get posted.
    Ummm, Dave, ... they're all digital by the time they get here...
     
  18. If this became a "Leica-only" forum I would definitely be looking around for
    some other place on the net. While I have (and use) a Leica M6 (but no Leica
    lenses) I'm not really interested in Leica itself. And I definitely wouldn't be
    interesting is a forum where only Leica-made photos were welcome. I do
    have some general interest in a "rangefinder style" forum, despite the
    ridiculousness of trying to define what that means. Personally, I'd rather ban
    dull photos of flowers and statues -- even if made with a Leica than interesting
    photos made with a digital camera (cheapo or otherwise).
     
  19. Dave, that seems to be a very narrow perspective -- one not uncommon to
    new Leica owners. I mean you shelled out a lot of cash for your Leica gear
    and you'd like some assurance that you were "right" to buy a Leica. The sad
    fact though is that such proof just doesn't exist. An "all-Leica" Leica Forum
    would quickly degrade into a self-congratulatory "rich guy" club. It's the other
    photos that keep us honest. If you yourself find your made-with-a-Leica
    photos wanting in the face of photos made with a 2MP digicam, well you've
    learned something really important there!
     
  20. It seems to me that the rules you posted are generally followed. Threads occassionally bog down into mud fights once in a while that have little to do with photography, let alone Leica photography. You will have trouble making the Digital versus Leica ban stick for too long, because Leica itself is becoming digital. RE: "David Allan Harvey's review of Epson RD1" thread posted recently. I could go for a definition that includes any lenses that fit a Leica camera and any camera that my Leica lenses will fit. The former includes all the clones and the latter includes the new RD1 which will take the lenses, plus the 2006 Leica digital camera if it ever appears. Discussions about whether Nikon/Cannon digital cameras are better or worse than Leica film cameras are a useless waste of time and space, and should be discouraged. Most of us also have SLR cameras and some now have digital SLR cameras as well. There are other forums to explore issues related to those cameras.
     
  21. This photo was made with a Leica. Or was it?
    00BJhl-22096384.jpg
     
  22. To Dave Mirra: a few days ago you left a compliment on one of my photographs on W/NW forum saying it must have been taken with a Leica. I don't have a Leica, David. I have a nuked Nikon F3. But ... when I recall the amount of fondling my F3 had received, the words of support and love I whispered into its shutter release, the kilometers of TriX are loaded into its silken belly -- well, Dave, the resemblance to Leica becomes irresistible. You still say no? Oh please, oh please, don't shatter my dreams. Wait a second, I know what I'll do -- I will scratch off the Nikon logo and put the Leica label instaead --- now which model should I pick? Will yo email me with an advice, please? Sincerely, Maria.
     
  23. This photo was NOT made with a Leica.
    00BJiN-22096784.jpg
     
  24. See David, let's be clear: Tony does not say anything like that. So, I still need your advice re the logo on my Nikon.
     
  25. Sorry, Dave. Leica M6TTL. And you may be right. It might not be a very good
    photo -- like a great many of the Leica-made photos posted here.
     
  26. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Perhaps it's Dave, and anyone else that thinks likewise, that should go wander off and find the appropriate place on the net that he desires instead of trying to mold this forum into something it's not and never will be?
     
  27. Hey David, I'm surprised you didn't hear about Leica F3HP model? It's been a custom made babe, only few examples exist and all in private collections. Let me know if you're interested cause I might go digital.
     
  28. I'm all for them, Tony, as long as they are truly, justly and universally enforced from now on. Hope they won't again be merely words (or arbitrarily applied to only some threads, topics or members) like many other published "rules" of this forum quoted in the earlier ADMIN thread about profanity.
     
  29. well,i have a few questions,but it is almost 02:30, so i will only ask the most
    important one: will we see the pancake bunny now and then...?
     
  30. Tony

    I'm sure you have deliberated very thoroughly before posting these guidelines and most of the comments here have probably crossed your mind at one time or another.

    I only wish to say that I fully support your guidelines without amendment.

    Thank you for making this place enjoyable.
     
  31. Tony, I do respect all the work you and other do to maintain our little corner of
    Photo.net but keep in mind that online moderation has been compared to
    "cat-herding." It is not easily done and the stricter one is the further away the
    cats wander.
     
  32. Tony

    I too fully support your guidelines and thank you.
     
  33. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Dave, did you even read Tony's points?

    ""What is Leica Photography" is also great, but it shouldn't deteriorate into a "Leica v. Digital" thing, either."

    The first post you make is;

    "I come to this forum so I can see other Leica users photos, not some cheapo digital camera photos."

    Now look what you've done. This thread has to go becasue...

    "Threads that are silly or just plain stupid will be deleted."
     
  34. Dave, I hate to tell you this but there simply IS no look. It you spent $3000+ dollars for a look, you're fooling yourself. But then maybe it would have been a good photos had I used a Leica 28 instead of a Voigtlander 28. I do belief that rangefinder cameras "can" aid in learning to see the world differently. However, I also believe that once the way is learned one can do with with any camera -- and the RF path is by no means the only path. BTW, I do love my Leica but just can't see any difference between the photos I make with it and the photos I made with my D70.
    00BJjG-22097284.jpg
     
  35. And just so you don't have to be guessing that photo is with the D70 with a
    Nikkor 24/2 manual focus lens (wide open of course).
     
  36. Distracting foreground bokeh Donald.
     
  37. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    "I think the title of the Forum explains itself quite well."

    then why are you venturing off topic? go somewhere else for your Leica only content, facist.
     
  38. ADMIN/moderator threads and Leica demise threads are the most popular here. Amazing! Now who is that dealer, mentioned on the Hezar RF thread, that is selling new Hexar RF bodies for $600 USD?
     
  39. Sam, I tend to agree. I had just bought the lens and did a test shot during
    dinner. I'm still undecided on the quality of this lens. But then it does open up
    a range of photos that I could never have made with a lens with a smaller
    maximum aperture.

    And more importantly using a manual lens like this (which doesn't allow
    metering) on my D70 forces me (allows me) to shoot in a more rangefinder
    manner. And if that's not relevant to this forum then I'm definitely in the wrong
    place.
     
  40. "What's a facist?"

    I think it's a reference to that guy who put Al's face on the t-shirts.
     
  41. BTW, to put the shoe on the other foot, Dave, what if someone began lobbying
    here (as some might prefer) to define the type of photography done here as
    "manual only" and that because you shoot with an AE M7 your photos should
    properly be excluded? Many of the Leica purists here do, in fact, feel like this.
     
  42. In my opinion this is silly and there should if anything be less involvement by moderators. What is wrong with threads that resemble actual conversations, rambling from time to time or even devolving, rarely, into debates, arguments, etc.? Isn't that part of what makes a community? Why not allow the antidote to "bad speech" be more speech? It's tiresome to see so much hand-wringing over the imagined sensibilities of whatever delicate flowers are supposed to be harmed and offended by goings-on in an internet forum. Moreover, the technology for searching archived content will only improve. Who is to say what will be important to those searching this forum in the future? Why should information be excluded from the future searchable universe based on ad hoc judgments made in the present by even the best and wisest handful of moderators?
    If we want to start enforcing rules that have been around for a while, here's an instructive passage found by clicking the "Subscribe!" link below: "But people who have been using the site frequently over the course of several weeks, and who can afford it, are expected to upgrade their 'Trial/Guest' membership to a Subscription membership. For frequent visitors who can afford it, subscriptions are not optional, but they are on the honor system: each person is trusted to decide for himself when his access has become frequent enough and whether he can afford it. As guidelines, you should consider subscribing if you are visiting the site more often than once per week on the average, and if your disposable income is sufficient for you to purchase photography equipment, film and processing, books and magazines, internet access, etc. In other words, if you have a photography budget at all, and you are visiting photo.net regularly, the site should be part of your budget, the same as any other photography expense."
    Should we begin deleting postings by those who continute to ignore the plain language of the above passage? If so, perhaps we could start by deleting their opinions about forum content. I'm not convinced they have standing to express such opinions.
     
  43. "Leicas....the price of new ones is way beyond the reach of most younger photographers.
    We need a way to allow these people to join us that fits their budget!"

    Al, I see where you're coming from but I can't agree. If younger photographers just cut
    down on the drink, drugs, and fast living then they could easily find the deposit for an a la
    carte
    MP. Let's keep it clean round here, let's keep it Leica.......
     
  44. Matthew,

    ; )
     
  45. Oh dear, soon only Dave and a few other obsequious fondler's, plus Herr Kapitan will remain here to collectively to blow hot air up each others .............. in an ultra protected enviroment.

    One of the best things about this forum was the cross section of types that contributed, with interesting and diverse photographic discourse, Sure some recently committed hari kari for losing the plot in a major way, but without SOME artistic licence.

    This place could really become just like an Leica old boys camera club meeting and that would be a sad and boring thing. A Leica is only a box to hold a lens after all.
     
  46. "Herr Kapitan"

    Y'know Erin, I'm getting really sick of you and the other haters taking your cheap pops at
    Al. Since the overdue departure of Grant things have been really great round here. Why do
    you want to drag us back into the gutter?
     
  47. I'll abide by any of the rules as long as we welcome Jay back to the forum.
     
  48. I don't get the anti-Al thing either. The guy has a point of view. So what?
     
  49. Heads up. As I mentioned a couple of times on other threads, photo.net is a great place. It is the best place. Let's keep it that way.
     
  50. Let me be clear: I have nothing against Al *but* I rather have
    interesting OT(photo related or not) threads than photos of Al,
    coffee with Al, my friend Al, Al's hair, poster boy Al and Al this Al
    that posts. What's up with that? The *old* LF kicks ass
    IM*F*HO.
     
  51. Thank you, Peter A.
     
  52. Peter, very well spoken.
     
  53. Oh great, another "Who are we?" and "The law's an ass" thread.

    The most annoying feature of thoughtless rudeness on this forum is when later posters get a worthwhile thread deleted through no fault of the poster or of like-minded respondents. So please, just think before you wade in, guys.
     
  54. Out of curiosity, who 'owns' the various forums on pnet? and who appointed the admins?<br />
    It would seem to me that if it's Tony's show, and you don't like his rules, you can take your ball and go home. Everyone's email is available, so go to another forum (or, heaven forfend, set up your own - it's an infinitely more rewarding hobby than storing Leicas in boxes while you await the Grim Reaper) and tell whoever you want where that is. Is there some particular cachet of pnet that I'm missing? Anyone can sign up to the forums; thus, the signal/noise ratio is just as high as anywhere else on the hyperweb.<br />
    <br />
    For the record, I don't necessarily agree with Tony's manifesto, but then I don't come here for sub-par snapshots and rapturous descriptions of what pristine gear is sitting on people's shelves - I come here because the forum is a reliable source of advice on a narrow range of topics, as well as a great place to buy used gear from reliable, honest people. I can do without the bickering of retired men with a fetish for German mechanics, my contemporaries do a far better job than you could ever hope to.
     
  55. Tony is trying to do his best by cleansing the forum of dilentantes and undesirable topics and unwelcome threads. This cleansing job is making the forum, well, sterile.
     
  56. Sorry Eric if I use it. But now it's time. Too much has been said. Leica or not here's the Puncake Bunny [​IMG] Not from a Leica...so what??
     
  57. Gabrielle,<br />
    I feel that you are dishonouring the memory of Oolong (for that was his name) by referring to him as 'Pancake Bunny', your litany of other transgressions regarding on-topic, leica-centric posts aside.
     
  58. I suppose that some of you would rather not see my name and photos of me here. It's pretty dang obvious. I'm not the one that started it, other than to get a bunch of local Leica Forum folks to meet for breakfast, although I'll admit that I probably played along with it. Why? Ego? No! I thought that it seved a higher purpose of bringing people together. Unfortunately it has alienated a few of you, but by and large I think that it has served its purpose.

    Here on forum you're only seeing what I post here, not the emails that I often send out to forum members when I feel that answering their questions would involve a LOT of off topic information of little interest to any others here. Originally I decided that it might be nice if the board regulars that live in my area might get together and meet. Ten or more years ago we would have bumped into one another, gotten to know one another, around the always full coffee pot at one the local photo shops, several of which were Leica dealers, or the local pro color labs. Those days are gone. Now I suspect most of us get a lot of our equipment either via an 800 number, credit card, and UPS, or order directly on line with the credit card. The pro lab is now a printer next to the computer in most photo studios today. I was trying to get together with other like minded photographers, trade ideas, and make new friends.

    Then a trip to North Carolina came along and I did the same thing there. Since then I regularly meet with Leica photographers who are either visiting the South Florida area, or are en route to someplace else but coming through Miami. I've made some good new friends here. Should I travel to any number of places in the future I know that I can dash off an email or make a quick phone call to a friend in that city, someone that I first met here. In fact I was just interupted by an email from a forum regular who's planning of visiting Miami in a few months. And the invitation is open to any of you if you find youself travelling to South Florida. Thanks, Al
     
  59. Since we're hopelessly off topic at that point anyway:

    Al, any chance you'd be willing to pose for a shot of you with a pancake on your head? Think of the effect on board morale. . .
     
  60. Tony

    Your dilemma is not to be envied. I believe that the best and most effective rules are those that are straightforward and simple.
    It seems that you are trying to 'change the world' with so many regulations, that won't be adhered to because of their complexity and length.
    Just as we should accept it with good grace, when we are wrong, I feel the moderators should as well. It's not a case of them and us, we're all part of this virtual community.

    Why has it got to be done in one fell swoop? Why not do it in stages, such as by starting off with banning all offensive and disrespectful posts and those that are silly/stupid or completely off topic [ Nikon slr v Canon slr],plus racism and bigotry, and see how it goes? You may find that what follows is acceptable and you would have no need to sanitise or 'Stepford'ise the forum.

    Leicas are not [in general] studio or sports cameras,but are used to record life, all of it, whether it's uncomfortable or not, and if you start to censor, it would no longer be leica photography but Photo.net Photography, and that would be a great shame.

    Regards

    Bruno
     
  61. Sure thing Mike. No butter and syrup please! Perhaps with all this disagreement and indecision we should use a waffle instead? Just let me know when you want to shoot it. We'll keep Tony at bay by shooting in front of a mirror so both the Leica that I'll be holding and the one that your using to photograph me will be plainly visible in the photo.
     
  62. You asked for suggestions. So here goes. Yep, there is a lot of digression, provication and hijacking in threads on this forum.

    Just remember, if the hostile, derogatory and combative filter had been in effect already, this web site would have had to ban Scott Eaton long ago.

    Someone in an above post mentioned photography in the "Leica spirit", which I presume includes posts relating to a lot of L mount / M mount bodies and lenses that are not specifically Leica. Call this third party gear if you will.

    I think it would be a BIG MISTAKE to eliminate those postings or questions related to L mount or M mount photography of non-Leica rangefinder gear and optics. Many of these posts may be of interest to those photogs on their way to becoming Leica photographers and are testing the waters. A case in point, both V/C and Soviet LTM gear are, in my opinion, are affordable entry level gear that should be considered stepping stones towards Leicadom. Canon LTM and Nicca are two other gray areas.

    Digressing a moment and with regards to the gray area getting grayer, it will be interesting to see how this forum evolves now that photogs are using Leitz glass on their V/C RD-1 bodies and some cases a digital EOS.

    In short my recommendation is that you don't scare off future candidates on their way to full Leicadom by becoming too elitist.
     
  63. Tony,

    I fully agree to banning insults, personal attacks, rudeness. Delete offensive, disrespectful and silly posts but do not kill a thread because somebody has posted a "dark" message. This would be rude to the bona fide members who invested time and good will with their contributions.

    On the rest, do not issue too many rules and do not be heavy-handed, lead the horse on the long rein and it will be much more willing to go along.

    The Leica world is getting wider. Reflex is part of it, digital is part of it. And cross-breeds are getting more and more popular. CV, Russian, Canon lenses on Leica RF bodies, Leica R lenses on EOS or Alpa bodies, Kilfitt lenses on Leica R bodies, Leica lenses on Panasonic Lumix bodies are part of the present Leica world. Why for instance should we not discuss the relative merits of a certain Leica lens vs. a corresponding Canon lens on an EOS body?

    By being too strict, the Leica Forum might become a get together for elitist, well-to-do, clubby people talking about the 'specialness' of their gear. Try to avoid this pitfall.

    Best regards,

    Peter
     
  64. Too bad some of you whiners wouldn't start your own forums. My, my, it's easy to complain when you're NOT ACTUALLY DOING ANY WORK. As always this is one of the best photo forums out there...in large part due to the time and effort of the moderators. Some of you really do need to get a life.
     
  65. Bob, spot on.
     
  66. My, my, it's easy to complain when you're NOT ACTUALLY DOING ANY WORK.

    Oh, but we are doing work. It takes time and effort (i.e. WORK) to write and respond to postings, make critiques, etc. Some of the folks posting to this thread probably do more WORK than the moderator.
     
  67. "Selfish bad mannered behaviour is poor form. the best way to improve the mood of the forum is for everyone who chooses to post to treat people with respect and the forum with respect - a gentle reminder that this isn't the Al Kaplan Forum isn't a declaration of war - a differing point of view on gear or method shouldn't be a declaration of war."

    Well said Peter? You must be joking right? Peter its yours and others like Erin's constant sniping about Al (including Tony's own thread amazing!) is whats dragging down the forum and its that constant badgering of others like Jay that caused problems before. If you dont want to talk about gear, fine dont, no one has ever said you cant keep posting your photos and talking about them, but dont tell people what they should give to the forum or take out of it because its their choice, demanding people post photos to prove themselveslike you have been with Al and others did with Jay are totally out of form and are the threads that always get out of hand. I dont think you even realize your causing friction from what you have just written! None of the people who like to talk about gear have demanded that the W/NW posters should talk about gear to prove their knowledge, nor should they have to. How about you leave people to post what they want and how they want within the rules and let Tony handle those outside the rules and leave those who have offered their experince for years in their own way to continue to do so.
     
  68. If you come in to any forums with the notion of :" let's see how I can help" you should be fine: We should all be fine
     
  69. well said, Travis.
     
  70. Bob

    You say that the success of this forum is largely due to the time and effort of the moderators, but Tony stated that he "has always been very lax with regard to the moderation of this forum". If that's correct then you both can't be right?

    regards

    Bruno
     
  71. Tony, if you want the biggest postive result from your investment in time as a moderator, you might consider focusing your attention more on context than than content. From where I sit, neither off-topicness nor an occasional cuss word undermines the forum as much as posts that are on-topic and cussless but mean-spirited and purposely meant to demean, humiliate and inflame.
     
  72. Intentional or not, Al has become as polarizing a figure here as
    Jay was.
     
  73. Dave, nothing against Al, but how do you know he's a "great" photographer?

    Also, before you start giving advice on how to best run the place, how about chipping in with your $25; I'm pretty sure money, unlike advice, is always appreciated.
     
  74. Oh god, not the $25 dollar nonsense again.
     
  75. Just like to add my voice to those who are sick of all the sniping at Al.
    As far as I can see he does his best to give genuinely helpful advice and is mostly courteous and non-reactive. Given that it has become almost a fashion to do him down, that is not a bad record.

    OK, he likes using Leicas and B&W (don't many here?), he likes and values the traditional darkroom, and he likes to air his extensive knowledge of lens arcanae; is this so wrong? He may be digital-averse, for all sorts of reasons, is that a crime? Given that he was photographically active and successful long before many others on this forum were born, is all this at all surprising?

    The other thing that seems to bring out sour grapes is that those who go down to see him a) seem to like him, and b) like to show his photo and have even made T-shirts with his picture on as if he is some sort of celebrity. Is that HIS fault?

    Give the guy a break, if Peter A and Boris O'Chan (and others) get wound up by him, calm down, move on, skip his posts, and please, shut up.
     
  76. After reading the original question and all the the comments that followed it the thing that I do not understand is where are non-Leica rangefinder cameras and lenses to be discussed?
    Is there a place for them anywhere on photo.net or should they all move over to http://www.rangefinderforum.com/ ?
     
  77. You guys are going to have to decide exactly what cameras you will and will not discuss in this forum, or at least the forum moderators will have to decide.

    One choice would be any 35mm interchangable lens rangefinder or scale focusing camera. That would allow the Nikon and Canon rangefinders and the new Bessa models.

    A second choice would be any equipment which is compatible with Leica bodies or lenses which would include the new Bessa stuff, but exclude most of the old Nikon and Canon stuff (I think!).

    The third choice would be that if it doesn't have Leica written on it, it's not appropriate for this forum.

    Other suitable forums could be the Classic Cameras forum which deals with stuff made before around 1970. The older Nikon and Canon rangefinders would fit there quite well. There's also a catch-all "Camera Equipment" forum. I would not in passing that the Classic Cameras forum is very active and requires essentially ZERO moderation. For some reason the people who post there are far less opinionated and dogmatic and far less hostile that people who post in some other (nameless) forums...

    Whatever you decide, make a decison and put it in the forum guidelines.

    You're also going to have to decide what "Leica Photography" is or "Leica style Photography" is, and how it differs from anything that might be posted in the "Street and Documentary Photography" forum.

    Also I'd add that you cannot expect the forum moderators to nursemaid you. They're volunteers with a limited amount of time to devote to the task of trying to keep the forum functioning as a non-hostile environment in which to discuss "Leica stuff". It's not their job to pounce on every deviation from that goal within seconds of it being posted. It's you job not to post it in the first place. Don't expect the moderators to clean up after you, and if they have the time and spend the effort to do it, thank them for it, don't abuse them.
     
  78. Y'ALL GIVE AL A BREAK!


    As for Tony's requests, they sound reasonable to me and include wiggle-room when needed.


    Finally, long live the Pancake Bunny.
     
  79. For Messrs. Dixon and Kaplan:
    00BK62-22104084.jpg
     
  80. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    ?Whatever you decide, make a decison and put it in the forum guidelines.?

    The guidelines are fine. The forum is fine. The same thing happened last year about this time. Threads got deleted, people left, moderators started talking about rules, and everyone was yelling and voicing opinions. This is an eclectic forum and the more interference the mods put in the sandbox, the less and less people play in the sandbox. Its simple, just delete the threads that contain swearing and insults and any resulting stupid thread that may be sparked from it and stop trying to fix something that works and let us get on with it. What's this place going to look like in a couple of years if you keep getting get tighter and tighter? The whole essence of this place is it loseness and diverse bunch. And reinstate the polar opposite to Al, Grant, while your at it.
     
  81. right on Eric ~
     
  82. Sorry Eric, I hadn't realized that this was a sandbox for kiddies to play in. I'd mistaken it for a place for adults to discuss their opinions and experiences with Leica equipment. My mistake.
     
  83. Robert, nobody is out to get anybody. But when someone posts thread after thread of incorrect information, shouldn't they be called on it? If someone continually offers their professional opinion about digital cameras when it is evident they have never used one, and touts the superiority of a certain type of equipment, but can show no results, doesn't that matter at all?

    It appears that the Leica forum is drifing away from being the most open, inclusive and fun forum on pnet and towards being just an internet hangout for gear-obsessed old timers who gather here to reassure each other that their money was well spent.
     
  84. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Nothing wrong with a metaphor? Why are you apologizing and being condescending Bob? I expect more from our referee, silent, objective, and in the background. This is our hang out, our tree fort. If you where here daily and contributed and posted photos and help make this place what it is, then I'd pay attention to your suggestions. But you don't and I'm not. Sorry.
     
  85. Sorry Eric , but it's not your tree house. As Philip Greensupn once said, photo.net isn't a $100,000 chat room. While it's intended to be a friendly place, it's also intended to be an educational resource and forums are expected to stay, more or less, on topic, while users are expected, more or less, to be civil to each other.

    Yes, last year there was a bit of a clean out. A few members took their toys and made their own tree fort which had a much wider scope than this forum, with little moderation and areas for political dicussion, off-color jokes and photo.net bashing. It lasted a few months before dying a natural death.

    Anyone at any time is welcome to form their own Leica club with their own rules (or lack of them). In fact anyone who is really unhappy with the way the photo.net forum is run is positively encouraged to do so.
     
  86. "I come to this forum so I can see other Leica users photos, not some cheapo digital camera photos. I think it should be Leica only, being that this is the LEICA forum." - Dave Mirra
    I suppose this will then transform the forum completely into a noob Leica user asking dumb questions of nostalgic old farts club. So have you finally tested out your camera for the precious "foreground bokeh" yet?
    "OK, he likes using Leicas and B&W (don't many here?), he likes and values the traditional darkroom, and he likes to air his extensive knowledge of lens arcanae; is this so wrong? He may be digital-averse, for all sorts of reasons, is that a crime?"
    It's not a crime to be digital-averse as a matter of valid opinion. However, I think it's a disservice to the forum and P.net at large to allow silly and baseless anti-digital ranting to go unchallenged. Otherwise I have no beef with Al.
     
  87. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    I never said it was mine. I said it was ours. But if you want to keep demeaning my thoughts by picking apart my juxtapositions and going off topic with new irrelevancies and not discussing what I am actually saying, then there's nothing I can do. This place was fine two weeks ago. You've swept the current mess under the rug like you should have. It's done, it's over. There's no need for anything else.
     
  88. Wow, Al in an edible beret. How chic!
     
  89. Wow, Al with an edible beret. How chic!
     
  90. "...This place was fine two weeks ago..."
    That's a matter of opinion.
     
  91. Why is it that so many who complain about whether or not a pic was taken with a Leica tend to only post to complain? They never contribute anything else. Since they don't participate, I don't see why anyone would care much what they think.
     
  92. Most of Al's digital-averse comments have often boiled down to: I've got on fine with what I know till now, it can do everything I want it to do, with very good value and simplicity thrown in, so why should I bother with this new-fangled digital complexity.

    So you know better; you know he doesn't really understand; so be it. Now leave him with his delusions and move on. Why get hot under the collar?
     
  93. In a Forum that wears a financially struggling brand's name (Leica) on its front door, a strange thing has happened. Here, "business" has boomed. We have a wide spectrum of photographic abilities, experiences, interests, attitudes, gear, philosophies, and objectives. We're from different countries, on different continents, and of different races, faiths, and backgrounds. We have collectors and shooters, gearheads and gear-skeptics (and some who straddle the fence), pros both current and retired, advanced hobbyists, rank amateurs, and novices. Some of us post photos; some don't. Some take outstanding pictures; many of us would like to do that.

    I think this place is worth visiting because there's variety here. Want to find out which "IFLOOFA" fits on the backside of your APB - Teletubby? Somebody here knows and you'll get an answer, often within an hour. Want to know if the d.o.f. or other characteristics of a new Voigtlander or old Canon lens make that lens a good fit in your bag? Ask -- you'll get opinions. Want to post some recent shots of your town or your travels, or a serious set of pictures devoted to a theme or an issue? Put 'em up. Want your photos critiqued? Ask (or don't even ask) -- it'll happen. Want to make some online friends who share your interest in photography? They're here.

    Rules: This isn't rocket science. If we keep from swearing at or about one another; stay out of politics; avoid racial, ethnic, and religious taunting and stereotyping; disagree with and criticize one another respectfully and avoid nasty personal attacks; then we'll be just fine.

    Those who do not observe these guidelines should be warned gently, then warned sternly, then suspended, and finally, if they still do not conform their conduct to these guidelines, they should be asked to leave altogether. Rules don't work unless they're enforced consistently and uniformly. A massive "crackdown" once or twice a year is a bad thing for two reasons: (a) it's ineffective, because it doesn't create an atmosphere in which participants understand that they're always expected to adhere to the guidelines; and (b) it raises serious questions of fairness and selective enforcement.

    I'd hate to see the place dragged down by personal rivalries or jealousies, or made unpleasant by a few malcontents or pentium-emboldened pugilists who thrive on nastiness and one-upsmanship. We shouldn't let that happen.

    There is zero risk, in my opinion, that we'll be harmed if other cameras are used or mentioned. This has not in recent memory been a "Leica exclusive" place. If it becomes one, I believe it would be both much smaller and much less interesting. True gear questions in this Forum are properly focused upon Leica and Leica-compatible or Leica-similar equipment. There are better places on photo.net to ask gear questions about Canon dslr's or pro backs for medium format photographers.

    But I'd be strongly opposed to limiting photos to those certified to have been snapped with Leica cameras and/or lenses. The fact that we cannot precisely define "Leica photography" or "rangefinder photography" is a good thing, not a bad thing.
     
  94. whether or not a pic was taken with a Leica tend to only post to complain? They never contribute anything else

    I agree with Heather. Moan, moan, moan that's all some folks do.Post some photos, have a laugh, share some knowledge....that's what it's all about.
     
  95. rj

    rj

    "This is our hang out, our tree fort. If you where here daily and contributed and posted photos and help make this place what it is, then I'd pay attention to your suggestions."

    I have to agree with Eric here. Not that we should NOT include anybody, but if you were more of an active participant and contributed to threads about leica gear or leica shooting, than people would be more inclinded to care what you write about.

    I think everybody should go back and read Tony's bullet points. It seems like the list is pretty inclusive to what should be on-topic to the leica forum. I don't really see the need to limit the photographs on the forum to non digital leica m shots, that makes no sense. The photos shown on this forum are not a problem, its the attacking and non-polite answers to perfectly good questions. (yes, I believe bokeh to be a perfectly good subject, at least it has something to do with photography)
     
  96. this forum needs a facelift.<br><br>
    a month ago someone posted a query as to how best guestimate exposure when he used an early Leica rangefinder sans meter. my suggestion, was to use his digi-cam, assuming he had one (who doesn't these days), and note the exposure values compared to his best guessing. I was flamed by the Leica Elite, to essentially 'get out of Dodge' for suggesting a digital alternative to a Gossen analogue meter of some vintage era or Barnack's original selenium-cell design. my high-school science project in 1966 was a lightmeter of far greater accuracy.<br><br>

    two suggestions: discuss Leica photography, or pay for your pleasures.<br><br>
    $25 - basic subscription<br>
    $50 - you are a sanctioned Leica-phile<br>
    $100 - you can argue and flame against anyone, and will be allowed to site your thirty-plus years of Leica ownership as validation and membership in the certifiable Leica Elite.<br><br>

    for those sardonically-challenged - stick to photography and get a life.
     
  97. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    nice Michael.
     
  98. and before someone suggests that I 'get out of Dodge' once again, I am here for two reasons. to help answer questions and lend an oblique perspective at times, if I can, and because of my deep love for the best lens ever designed - the Noctilux.
     
  99. Much ado about nothing...
     
  100. Hey, after the rain.........
    00BKC2-22105784.jpg
     
  101. This thread shows that we are either all kids in a sandbox or we are adults with immature ticks. That includes the moderators as well.

    The majority of Leicas run on film. Therefore the it is safe to assume the membership here will have a slight preference for film. I would like to see the moderators whip those who don't participate here, yet those who feel the urge to come here and call us wankers and losers.
    Nothing good comes out of that behavior. It only starts a flame war.

    Those who don't contribute here should also not be allowed to jump in everytime someone speaks their preference to film. All they do is to come here and start a flame war. There aren't any LF members jumping onto a digital photography forum and posting one liners about how digital sucks.
     
  102. Firstly - Tony - Thank you for your work here - politically speaking it's like being a mayor in New York for you dealing with the Leica forum - not easy and an educated group as well.

    Secondly - As Tony said in his posting - he's pretty laid back about things here - let's let it go & continue & not feel as though we're losing a buck an hour - let him say his piece & respect it - as opposed to testing the threshold as to - "what about this?" & "what about that?" kind of response.

    I have to admit that although I enjoy these forums I end up more often feeling like so many are trying to resolve past issues or anger - and way to many people are attached to the "brand name" of their choice. I use Leica, Linhof & Nikon & only choose the cameras that serve me best for the given situation.

    It's my opinion that we should all try to get along ... - relax & ask for help here and there - offer assistance when you can ... - and leave the bad attitudes out of it - if your response is not beneficial to the thread then stay out of it - email the person in question & leave us out of it & go nuts on your own terms. This is why I don't come here to witness the "Hardball Leica Forum" where people treat others as lowlifes for having posed such a ... question.

    Lutz recently had some very good constructive critisim's regarding how the threads get out of hand & leave the issue of the original question in the dust and go on and on and on ... in the wrong direction. Kudos Lutz.

    My feeling when it comes to opinions is that the discussion should serve to enlight other's thoughts as to such - but it so often ends up being a raging battle between two people's opinions. For those that choose to engage in such a way I say - get a room & go away once the attitudes escalate & let it go - does it really matter? You will never convince this person as to why you or your opinion is right - just let it go ... .

    Back to Tony - I'm surprised that you have not killed this thread thus far but based on the "testing the limits" posters I guess they don't get it & feel threatened & are afraid they can't go there down the road & just don't get it.

    People - we are not in line at Wal-Mart waiting to return mechandise - we are lucky to have a forum like this where we can openly discuss our hobby whether we pay a fee or not & note that the professionals would never waste their time on these issues.

    If your want to help or learn - go there & enjoy.

    If anyone is annoyed with me feel free to email me offline -

    Best Regards to all
     
  103. Digital is here. Get used to it. Leica have (almost) a digital back for the R9. There are Leica digital cameras (well, digital cameras with "Leica" printed on them) and digital cameras which use Leica lenses. Leica digital posts belong here, like it or not.

    Nobody needs to "qualify" to post here. Everyone is welcome as long as they are civil to other forum members. All views are welcome as long as they aren't simply posted in order to start an argument. You don't need to be an expert to have an opinion.

    If you want a film-only totally digital-free Leica forum, you're welcome to start one. This isn't it.

    However this also isn't the place for endless film vs. digital debates. I'm sure the moderators will moderate those threads in an appropriate manner. Personally I usually toss them into the non-archived forum where they die a natural death in 48 hrs.
     
  104. I love that Photoshopped pic of me with the two pancakes on my head! Great! But if you used 2 pancakes with Eastman Double-X would you use 3 with Tri-X? I'm sure glad that they stopped making Panatomic-X ~ it might look like dandruff!
     
  105. Eric ~ , feb 28, 2005; 02:50 p.m.
    The guidelines are fine. The forum is fine. The same thing happened last year about this time. Threads got deleted, people left, moderators started talking about rules, and everyone was yelling and voicing opinions. This is an eclectic forum and the more interference the mods put in the sandbox, the less and less people play in the sandbox. Its simple, just delete the threads that contain swearing and insults and any resulting stupid thread that may be sparked from it and stop trying to fix something that works and let us get on with it. What's this place going to look like in a couple of years if you keep getting get tighter and tighter? The whole essence of this place is it loseness and diverse bunch. And reinstate the polar opposite to Al, Grant, while your at it.
     
  106. There's a thought.
     
  107. Bob, it seems to me as if one has to qualify for this forum.

    This used to be a fun place and I did learn a lot but as I traded my IIIf against a Contax TVS which I use together with a Contax G2 I don't feel welcome here anymore. Especialy after reading this thread.
     
  108. Bob, no one suggested that this is to be film only forum. The observation was there are some people who never contribute here yet they only show up to leave a sarcastic or insulting remark. It would be nice to admit that this behavior is not a hallmark of good manners and deal with it swiftly.
     
  109. Rene - you're asking for the moderators to read the mind of posters, i.e. infer their reasons for posting. You really want moderators desciding what your motives are when you post and removing your comments if they don't think they were made in the right spirt even if their wording wasn't provocative? You can have that, but I don't think you'd like the consequences and I don't think the moderators would want to do it.

    Volker - that's a pity. It's not the way it should be and it's not the way it's intended to be. Perhaps we need a "non-Leica Rangefinders" Forum, where everyone except for Leica owners would be welcome? I can easily create one if the demand is there and owners of such camers no longer feel welcome here.
     
  110. I understand your point Bob. My intentions for posting are positive. I was merely talking about a scenario like this:

    poster #1:
    I was wondering whether anyone had an experience with the Titanium version of M6?

    poster #2:
    Yeah. Like some someone really needs a Titanium to fondle, you wanker!

    ;-)

    There is no need to read minds in these situations but I guess it is asking for too much.
     
  111. I still shoot. I'm just not booked solid with assignments. I was shooting today on the beach, partly cloudy, hazy sun, 79 degrees, 15 MPH west wind. I'm spending more time in the darkroom printing old stuff. I still spend several days a month running film through the Leicas I have a few hundred images picked out that I want to print, and still haven't gone through the 120 film contact sheets yet, mostly from the 60's and 70's when a lot of editors still wanted the larger negative whenever possible.
     
  112. Some people think talking about photography is talking about gear and some think it's talking about photographs. The gear people have won out on this forum; the people interested in making and sharing good photographs are going to the street forum.
     
  113. Rene - your point is well taken and the example you cite is one where a moderator could, and probably would, clearly step in.

    However, like I said earlier. Moderators are generally volunteers who have to work for a living. So it could be hours, possibly sometimes even days, before they saw the posting, even assuming they have the time to read every single post on the forum.

    In that time World War III has usually broken out.

    The correct response to such a comment would be to totally ignore it, but I'm afraid that the day that this forum shows that degree of self control, hell will probably freeze over and further discussion of forum activities will be moot.
     
  114. Bob, you say that we are just going to have to decide what kind of cameras
    we will discuss. Why does the photography pie have to be split up like this?

    I mean I can understand that as photographers we often have questions and
    opinions about the gear we use but aren't discussions about the use of
    equipment -- and the aesthetic values that underlie that use -- as vital as talk
    about the gear itself? The reason I found myself gravitating to the Leica
    Forum vs. other PNET forum is because it seems to be the one place with they
    actual issues of photography are discussed. That and the fact that there are a
    WHOLE LOT more actual photos posted here than on any other forum.
     
  115. Hmm, 2 Eurocents, anybody?
    I notice that a good number of Leicaforum regulars are having quite some fun across the corridor, and frankly, their pics rock! Reading the names of the posters over there, in the Street&Documentary Forum, I have the impression that many of those who have expressed problems with the at times restrictive policy here in the past have found a new home...
    In fact, I think it has been a very beneficial move to re-baptise the People Photography Forum and give the kind of photography that has historically been the domain of RFs (but only until the advent of SLRs with fast and good lenses) a more democratic and modern place, free of any brand related ties. My prediction is, that just by the drift of people being attracted by this new playground a lot of tension which has arisen within this forum here lately will be taken off. In fact, I guess that many of us might want to bookmark both of the forums as our future favourites...? I will.
    That might leave just the silly digital vs. film debate unanswered. Well, I guess that will have to be our common fate. In times of a change of paradigm, there always is struggle, within and amongst each of us. But any attitude of superiority (on whichever side) appears to be just plain stupid, more so in the light of Leica having flirted and still going on to flirt with digital technology. Fifteen years ago we wouldn't have dreamed to be sitting in front of computers, exchanging pictures - digitally. And to be discussing them more or less in realtime, worldwide. Today, we already take this technology for granted, which allows us to rant pro and against traditional as well as current and upcoming photographic techniques...
    My point is, there's so much to be discovered, old and new. Beginners learning traditional knowledge and veterans stupefied by what can be achieved with the most modern gear. There's room for all of us, and for a little bit of respect, isn't there? I remember Al posting that he would be gladly willing to embrace digital publishing of his vintage negs and slides to be able to better share his body of work to illustrate his wealth of experience. If I were living in Florida, Al would have a website of his own by now and an online portfolio to blow each and every sceptic away. But I don't live in Florida and so I would love somebody else who does to give him a hand.
    At the same time I recall many respectful comments and encouragements given to others in the past by fellow forumers who tend to prefer digital and (non-Leica)SLR gear. Not by all of them. Many very talented photographers have preferred to restrict themselves to posting their own photographs and - at best - engage themselves in technological or brand related discussions. As much as I find the latter counterproductive and feticious I do miss the artistic input they have given until recently.
    Tony, maybe it's just a question of letting some water run down the stream and see if this thread of yours for one and the revival of the Street&Documentary Forum on the other hand can release the tension that has been building up lately...? I wish it would. I remember this forum from the old Greenspun Forum days and I do miss quite a number of regulars which seem to have been driven away by the rougher goings on the photo.net highway. This forum has been the kindest and most helpful and enlightening place by far. Panta rei, everything changes, that's for sure. But in this case it can (and will) only change for the better. Just give it some time.
    Oh, and a last thought: having watched the Academy Award and seeing Prince, formerly known as The Artist Formerly Known As Prince, again after years, the thought crossed my mind: what if the name of this forum (dare I say Our Forum?) changed to The Forum Formerly Known As The Leica Photography Forum? Just for a while... ;-))))) Cheers.
     
  116. A simple definition for Leica photography :<br><br>
    Photos and discussion related to Leica cameras, lenses, both M and R; M mount Zeiss RF and lenses; Leica thread mount bodies and lenses, from Leica O. Barnack screw mount to Canon RF and lenses, CV LTM and M mount Bessas and lenses, as well as LTM Fed and Zorki. Oh yea, Minolta made a LTM camera and a few lenses as well. Furthermore, Leica P&S film cameras, and yes, Leica and Panasonic P&S digital cameras. More peripherally related, let's also include Leica R lenses used via adapter on Canon digital bodies. And lastly, one thumbs up for Al Kaplan!
     
  117. Why does the photography pie have to be split up like this?
    I don't know. Why don't different religious groups get along?
    Some peole here clearly want this forum to be for Leica discussion or discussion of, by or about Leica users themselves on almost any topic under the sun. Seems reasonable given the name.
    Others want it to be open to discussion of all and any rangefiner cameras, even non-Leica cameras. I doubt those groups will get along well.
    BTW I was perfectly serious about a "non-Leica rangefinder forum". If there's a demand, one could be created. Might be a way to keep peace here and provide a forum for a wider discussion (of camera equipment and techniques) than seems welcome here. There are lots of non-Leica rangefinders, from Contax to Bessa, Nikon to Canon and no doubt a number of cameras that I've never heard of. It could even (gasp) include users of fixed lens rangefinder cameras like the Canonet QL17. It could even be open to MF rangefinders like Bronica and Mamiya as well as digital rangefinders like the Epson RD-1. Not a Leica among them. Such a forum would probably exclude FS/WTB ads, like all the other photo.net forums do, but would allow image posting.
     
  118. It could even (gasp) include users of fixed lens rangefinder cameras like the Canonet QL17
    and there's Konica I and II, and all the Yashica RFs too, plus the Olys like the RC etc and the XA, yay! a rangefiner forum would be cool imho.
     
  119. It seems to me that everything was going fine here but if I have to go to the Street&Doc forum to see and post photos because all the shooters are going there that's not a problem. It seems to me most of us like photos AND are interested in the gear to get them to a greater or lesser degree. If the authorities feel they have to split up the community into little pieces it seems like an inordinant amount of intervention but we'll get by.

    What is clear to me is that given the choice, and we're all at choice here, it is easier on everyone who comes here to treat each other with respect. If you cannot feel any respect for the poster or cannot find it in yourself post a reply that is civil then just leave his post alone. The fault could be in either yourself or the person for whom you feel no respect. Why not give the other guy and the forum itself the benefit of the doubt. For a bunch of intelligent people we seem to be deficient in emotional IQ.
     
  120. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    "BTW I was perfectly serious about a "non-Leica rangefinder forum"."

    Why? The problem isn't amongst RF users in general. It's amongst RF users and non-RF users that are allowed to post in the rangefinder style. There is no such thing as 'rangefinder style' and that's how we've ended up with this talented bunch. However, it's about certain mind sets that keep arguing with one another. Many Leica owners own many different kinds of RF's and hybrid outfits from bodies coupled with different lenses and appreciate one forum where everyone is all gathered together smoking and drinking coffee. Many RF users are into SLR's and DSLR's. How many times has an OT post been made here with an introduction like "I know this probably belongs in x forum, but I feel more comfortable posting here..."? All I gather from your suggestion Bob, is that you want to make this place smaller and more exclusionary. You'll find most of us are dead against it.

    (If you want to make another forum for the heck of it, I recommend a Studio Photography Forum, a huge part of photography that isn't represented here, covering both still life and people. I'll put my hand up and help you with it if you want.)
     
  121. On restoring our members, I've written to Tony and Bob Atkins and posted the question several times here on the page and had NO response from either of you. To repeatedly ignore the requests of members shows little respect on the part of the Administration for us.

    Once more: will you consider reinstating Grant to our forum.
     
  122. From Bob's comments, this discussion is shaping up increasingly as some good old fashioned Leica snobbery. Let's take the gear in my bag as an example. I use a Canon 7 RF and a Minolta CLE. So if I want to discuss the Canon 7, I go to the 'non-Leica' RF forum, but the CLE is ok here. Humm. If I mount my Leica 90mm Elmarit M on my CLE, I'm ok here, but if I mount a CV 21mm lens via screw mount adapter on my CLE, do I discuss this on the Leica forum or the 'non-Leica' forum? My point is this: Leica RF includes various clones, both old and new, that IMHO have a place here. If it's non-Leica MOUNT gear, then it belongs elsewhere. This includes all the Nikon SLR, Contax G and the like that show up on this forum from time to time. Folks, this is not complicated---at least it doesn't have to be. Do our moderators understand that Leica 'cousins' belong at the family gathering?
     
  123. Well, I can make a "non-Leica Rangefinder Forum" and those who don't want to use it wouldn't have to. However those tired of feeling like "poor relations" here would have an alternative place to post, hopefully in a forum with a more focused view and less hostility.

    I'm not just going to make such a forum for the hell of it, but if I see a demand, I'll seriously consider it after discussing the matter with other forum moderators.
     
  124. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    this thread is a classic example of trying to fix something that ain't broke.
     
  125. Because Grant is such a great photographer and a prolific poster, his negativity has that much more force. I've had nothing but politeness and good crit from him, but he really stings sometimes, and the target tends to overreact. I'm not sure he acknowledges his nastiness either. My guess is his attitude comes from an inflated sense of his own talent and a not-so-inflated view of some of us.

    If he returns with the same 'tude, the same thing might happen again.

    No need to change this forum, Bob. Leica made reflexes, makes digitals, Canon and VC and others make/made lenses for the RF Leicas. The loose rules of content here have made it an interesting place to visit and hang out.

    BUT STOP CALLING PEOPLE NAMES! Nobody here is a fascist. You want to hit them take their ideas apart. It's stronger.

    Name calling is why we're having this thread.
     
  126. I wasn't calling you a name-caller. Not sure if that's clear.
     
  127. Bob,

    Others want it to be open to discussion of all and any rangefiner cameras, even non-Leica cameras. I doubt those groups will get along well.
    I tend to agree with much of what Gary Williams said
    Photos and discussion related to Leica cameras, lenses, both M and R; M mount Zeiss RF and lenses; Leica thread mount bodies and lenses, from Leica O. Barnack screw mount to Canon RF and lenses, CV LTM and M mount Bessas and lenses, as well as LTM Fed and Zorki. Oh yea, Minolta made a LTM camera and a few lenses as well. Furthermore, Leica P&S film cameras, and yes, Leica and Panasonic P&S digital cameras. Let's also include Leica R lenses used via adapter on Canon digital bodies.
    I would also keep the Epson RD-1 here, they use Leica-mount-compatible lenses and - in the absence of a digital RF Leica - many here look at them as substitutes for Digital Leica RFs, in the same way as the EOS is considered by many as a substitute for a Digital Leica R.
    Also include third party lenses in Leica mounts, such as Nikon, Kilfitt, Kinoptik, Angenieux, Astro Berlin.
    Non-Leica-mount compatible rangefinders such as Nikon and Contax and Non-Leica fixed lens rangefinder cameras and MF rangefinders like Bronica and Mamiya would find a new home in a rangefinder forum.
     
  128. Those who are more into equipment ownership and Al worship stay here. Others, who are
    more into shooting and crafting photographs, know where to go. Easy and everyone is
    happy.

    BTW, everyone needs a kick in the butt once in awhile regarding their pix. Would you
    rather get it from a great shooter like Grant, or someone that can help you with difficult
    chrome/paint decisions?
     
  129. rj

    rj

    Just because grant shoots doesn't give him the right to verbally slap others in the face. The thread that got him booted was a absolute shame and he brought it on himself. There just isn't room in an internet forum to tell others to *&(* themselves. Frankly, I can't believe edmo is still allowed to post, his behavior in that thread was just as bad, if not worse, than grants.
     
  130. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Thanks for clearing that up John. But the shoe fit Dave, it wasn't name calling.

    Fascist-somebody who supports or advocates a system characterized by dictatorship, centralized control, repression of all opposition, and extreme chauvinism.
     
  131. RJ, I'll take some attitude from G & E any day over what otherwise gets posted here.
    You are entitled to your opinion for what suits you best.
     
  132. I'm suprised about all the talk here about splitting the forum in two; most of the really off-topic stuff -- the stuff Tony is most concerned with in his initial post -- has nothing to do with non-Leica rangefinders; typically has barely anything to do with photography at all. Many of the non-Leica rangefinders mentioned in an earlier post tend to get discussed in the Classic Cameras section. The modern non-Leica rangefinders all have Leica mounts. The medium format rangefinders get discussed in the Medium Format digest. I haven't observed a lot of angst within this group (until just now) about non-Leica rangefinder talk - maybe I've missed it. The real flames are over digital, politics or perhaps Leica's financial situation. I think it's nice the way it is; like Eric said, there's nothing broke about the way things are, as long as the majority of members are OK with some of us folks with Leica-like cameras dropping in from time to time.
     
  133. Brad - "... Would you rather get it from a great shooter like Grant, or someone that can help you with difficult chrome/paint decisions? ..."
    When Grant asks, in his ever so polite manner, for someone to fornicate with his mother, I think most people would say he crossed the line. For you to kowtow to him, is your choice. I hope he spares your mother, unless his words are like pearls of wisdom to you.
    It's one thing to be a good photographer (your subjective opinion). It's quite another thing to continuously insult almost everyone he comes across (except for his small entourage). Mr. Atkins and Mr. Rowlett wouldn't be upset if people maintained some sense of civility towards their fellow man. Is that asking too much?
    If Grant is so great (in your eyes), why does he love to be a big rude fish in this small pond of politeness. Is he not good enough to run with the big boys? For instance, I don't see his stuff on the POW. Or is he too good for that too?
    A lot of people were put off by his infantile behavior. Are you that mesmerized by his talent that you don't care when he asks you to fornicate with your mother?
     
  134. For you to kowtow to him, is your choice. I hope he spares your mother, unless his words are like pearls of wisdom to you.
    What a sorry person you are. I'll stop there...
     
  135. Well, I can make a "non-Leica Rangefinder Forum" and those who don't want to use it wouldn't have to. However those tired of feeling like "poor relations" here would have an alternative place to post, hopefully in a forum with a more focused view and less hostility.
    I hope it wasn't me (in the very first reply in this thread) who suggested this. Because, however well-intentioned it might be, I think it's a daft idea. I don't use any Leica gear for any number of reasons -- I'm too mean, I'm too stupid to appreciate it, take your pick -- but I've never felt like a "poor relation". No, the reason why I asked w a y back was that I read, or misread, Tony's list of proposed rules as restricting discussion to the products of Leitz and Leica.
    I don't think there's any reason to change the forums, as long as this one continues to have "Leica" interpreted very broadly indeed. But if people want to do so, and want to do so according to the technology used, I'd suggest doing so according to lens mount. That's what's already been done for "Canon FD" and "Canon EOS". However, since screw/M adapters are commonplace and (I'm told) virtually trouble-free, dividing M from LTM is silly.
    Anyway, having one place for "Leica" and another for Canon LTM, Hexar, etc. (but not Leica) seems ludicrous.
    What has irritated me and perhaps others hasn't been any off-topicness. (When talk turns political, the opinions with which I most strongly disagree usually seem so stupid that they have an unintended comedy value.) What has irritated me are snide, mean-spirited attempts to attribute motives to other people, or to psychoanalyse them: "The only reason you do X is because Y", etc.
     
  136. Brad, why don't you get off your high horse and ask those who were insulted by Grant, how they feel. Or is it simply that you couldn't care less. He insulted their mothers. I suppose that's ok with you, since he is such a great photo shooter, your leader, your visionary, your God. Who are their mothers anyway, just fodder for his perverse manners. His genius transcends such trivialities.
     
  137. I'm hardly on a high horse. And the only "person" that's insulted my mother has been you.
    Grow up Vic.
     
  138. Keep it up guys. You'll be your own downfall in the end. Don't say you were not warned.
     
  139. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    For instance, I don't see his stuff on the POW.
    Strange, I haven't seen Ralph Gibson's stuff on the POW either.
     
  140. "When Grant asks, in his ever so polite manner, for someone to fornicate with his
    mother......."

    In fairness to grant's mother I'd like to point out that she's a mighty fine looking woman.
     
  141. I appologise to you Bob. It's when someone brings up my mother...
     
  142. Brad, I apologize, I didn't mean to insult your mother. I was trying to convey the feeling that others had when Grant insulted their's. I hope you know how it feels. It doesn't feel good in the least, it's really low. It says a lot that he never apologized to anyone, ever.
     
  143. Spirer, that's completely silly logic, and you know it. If Grant hangs out on photo.net, he's had ample opportunity to flaunt his "skills" to the world of POW. Perhaps he can't handle rejection.
     
  144. Brad, you and Grant are among the elite photogs on this forum, and if I'm not mistaken, friends off the net. But talent should have responsibility. Grant has insulted people; hurt them, picked at their pride (I wasn't privy to the obscenity thread). It's an honour for him to crit your pic -neg or pos-but name calling diminishes the speaker.
     
  145. Well, I've had it. Bye, bye Leica-onians.
     
  146. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Vic, some people choose not to use the galleries on photo.net, which is required for POW. This includes grant, me, Brad, and Ralph Gibson.
     
  147. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    there's galleries on PN?
     
  148. Where's the quote where Grant did that Vic?
     
  149. Ray, it doesn't exist. It's a fabrication.
     
  150. Ok look - Yes name-calling is juvenile. But to take it personally is also juvenile. Maybe it's easier for me because I have never felt attacked by Grant. But to loose his contribution here, for me personally, is huge. We will not be the same. I think bannishment is midieval. Maybe we are as well.
     
  151. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    At least out of all this mess, Grant is updating his blog again.
     
  152. gentlemen.

    as a notorious photonet badboy (who was once banned for a considerable period), i'm surprised to find i hold some very conservative positions here. first off, i think that, as a general principle, photos posted should have been captured through a leica. non-leica photos should be restricted either to matters of comparison OR solicitation of leica members' views regarding things such as bokeh, 3-dimensional luminescence or other traits that are firmly/exclusively in the leica camp. second, there should be more than a little tolerance of off-topic discussions by long-standing members of the community: do we really want people who only wish to chat about gear? finally, there should be no tolerance of non-leica owners who parade in occasionally to insult everyone. it's interesting that leica users don't wander into the canon or nikon forum to berate people over a bit of enthusiasm (even though they'd probably have good cause), yet we routinely have to endure lectures/posturing from guys who believe things like "exposure compensation" are sophisticated technological advances and the reason leica can't "compete"...

    let me add that, for me, leica is very much about the rangefinder style of shooting, but even more about the glass (so much so, that i even own the clumsy R4 because i can stick a summicron 50 on it).

    vuk.
     
  153. Ok, so i stopped reading at about Peter's "Lieca Photography Forum" post b/c i was laughing too hard. Two questions:

    1) where officially are people who shoot/want to shoot and are gaining more info about Bessa rangefinders/39mm screwmount stuff supposed to post?

    2) perhaps more importantly, (and maybe someone said it and i missed it), will this thread get archived???
     
  154. PN can always be counted on for good info about Leica products and the going rate in chat forums for living rent-free in someone's else's head. MP al a carte - $3500, used 50mm cron - $550, online bickering - priceless.
     
  155. It probably be edited a little tighter and then be archived. There's a lot of strange postings here that don't have very much to do with the original direction in which Tony was heading.
     
  156. I have been lurking here because I have 4 Bessas and I am just learning how to use them. I've learned a lot here. I haven't posted anything because I don't have anything worth posting anywhere with these cameras yet. Maybe I never will have but I do enjoy getting out with them. Getting good shots is harder for me than with my SLRs.

    If you start a rangefinder forum I will have to migrate there since this will only be for Leicas now.

    Conni
     
  157. john Lo Pinto , feb 28, 2005; 08:37 p.m.
    Because Grant is such a great photographer and a prolific poster, his negativity has that much more force. I've had nothing but politeness and good crit from him, but he really stings sometimes, and the target tends to overreact. I'm not sure he acknowledges his nastiness either. My guess is his attitude comes from an inflated sense of his own talent and a not-so-inflated view of some of us.

    Anyone's negativity has only as much force as you allow it to have. E. Roosevelt (approximately). This politeness that we all crave and insist upon can mask a lot of darkness. That's the scary part to me: when you don't see it coming. Grant's open about it and his darkness is right out front. No hiding there. He never lied to you about that and his photography is in accord with what he speaks. So I trust him.
    His photography is pretty much universally acknowledged here as some of the best we have. And you want to loose him? Or should we change him and then everything would be okay. I think your guess about his attitude is exactly that: your guess. Life is not a reality TV show where we bannish members that have not collected enough political points. We're in this together.
     
  158. conni.

    i should have added that bessa is certainly more than welcome here. the lenses can be mounted on leica, leica lenses can go on a bessa and mr. kobayashi is obviously a sensible man.

    vuk.
     
  159. Perhaps we should simply agree that this is a forum for Leica enthusiasts. Some are active photographers, mostly amateurs but with a sprinkling of pros. Some are basically collectors. Many are both.

    Some want to post photos. Some want to talk shop. There's room for both types, as long as the discussion remains civil.

    Any post should be okay as long as it is has something to do with Leica. Let the moderators err on the side of being inclusive. If everyone acts in good faith and with common sense, there's no real need to define in advance exactly where the boundaries lie. Minor mis-steps can be overlooked and big ones can be deleted. The forum can continue to re-shape itself organically.

    What should be unacceptable are people who come here primarily to bash Leica, bash Leica enthusiasts in general or, worst of all, bash particular Leica enthusiasts. I honestly don't understand what motivates people to do such things -- not once, as an exception or in anger, but repeatedly. Why do they waste their time?

    Why would someone who is not a Leica enthusiast want to hang out in a place called the Leica Photography Forum?
     
  160. I think the exact Elenor Roosevelt quote is: <BR>
    Nobody can make you feel inferior without your permission."
     
  161. Eleanor Roosevelt:

    "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
     
  162. Thank you Michael, "without your consent" is perfect.
     
  163. i suppose grant was a hit here while i was away. just had a look at his website and the man certainly has an excellent eye for composition, but most of the final results look as if he's...

    1) shooting chinese tri-x at ISO 12800

    2) de-saturating images from a noisy digital point-and shoot (or cell-phone-cam)

    3) consistently/mistakenly underexposing by 4 stops

    4) trying to lure a new/young lady goth friend into bed by impressing her with adolescent effects/aesthetic acheived by one of the above

    vuk.
     
  164. Jeepers Peter, I guess I should have emailed that one directly to Tony also. I'm terribly sorry if I insulted your intelligence. Maybe I should just ignore the people who like me, go off into the Everglades, and put a 9mm hollow point through my brain? Which is the most effective? Forehead, temple or up through the roof of my mouth? Anybody want to photograph the event?
     
  165. Also Peter, when you YOU bold face selected portions of another person's writing you can distort the meaning.
     
  166. Look. Everyone is issued a flamethrower at the start of the Internet session. The point is not to burn each other to ^%#('n ashes before we're through.
     
  167. "Vuk ...any more cons you want to peddle while you are at it? Liek um rangefinder style photography? What IS that hmmm?"--Peter A

    one of the things that sets mature humans apart from other animals (and the occasional president of a superpower), is the ability to communicate with symbolic concepts.

    vuk.
     
  168. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

  169. made me laugh
     
  170. I've said this before and I'll say it again: Focus on Al is utterly misplaced. It's both inaccurate and counterproductive.

    Grant and Jay, just to name two former forumers, managed collectively how many *thousands* of posts [hint: over 10,000 I'm pretty sure] ... all while Al K. was an active part of this forum. And Pete, ole pal, you're up over 4,000 yourself (not exclusively to this Forum, but significantly here).

    I must ask: How can it be that "big bad Al" wasn't able to scare off these intrepid posters? Remarkable, isn't it?

    By the way, I believe you're also mistaken on another count. As memory serves, Al had about as much to do with Jay's departure as I did with the resignation today of Lebanon's government.

    Pete - You know I get a charge out of many of your comments and enjoy your photos a great deal. And we're teammates on the Leica Forum Shootout, too. But here, I think you're off base.
     
  171. Bob, my question wasn't a "why can't we all get along one." I don't object to
    spliting up the photographic pie -- I just questioned wny it need be along the
    lines of brand names. That seems like the silliest way to divide the pie.

    Anyway, I think I'll look for a new home on Pnet.
     
  172. "can you pick what type of camera was used to make a shot? Like, as in a Canon film body versus a Nikon film body or a Leica film body?"--Peter A

    peter.

    in no way did i mean to imply that a camera body had anything to do with the quality of a picture: that would be the domain of nikon/canon prosumers. i will, however, stand behind the annoying collective wisdom of rangefinders being better for the street--in terms of ergonomics making it simpler for you to capture the picture you're after. they are lighter to carry, less obtrusive, easier to hand-hold, have viewfinders more suited to anticipation, etc. i own 3 SLRs and they never go downtown with me. conversley, the M6 rarely gets packed for a trip to the rail-yard. horses for courses (although I must admit i make a lot money betting on certain "dirt" horses going to turf for the first time--yet it doesn't work the other way around).

    i'm either living out a photographic cliché or there's something to be said for listening to the advice of old geezers like al and ian.

    vuk.
     
  173. If only the shootout was so paticipative(sp?). Yes guys you are all great individually now get on with it!;0
     
  174. < Maybe I should just ignore the people who like me, go off into the Everglades, and put a 9mm hollow point through my brain? Which is the most effective? Forehead, temple or up through the roof of my mouth? Anybody want to photograph the event?>


    Al, I for one find this a bit disturbing considering your usual sunny, mellowed Hippite (that's a form of ex-hippie), S. Floridian self. It may have been frustrated tongue-in-cheek humor. I surely hope so!
     
  175. Al couldn't stand it once when a thread on Edward Weston was posted here, because he felt it had no relationship whatsoever to Leica photography. To him, the fact that Weston knew how to make great photographs apparently had no relevence for people trying to make good photographs with a Leica. No relevance or relationship at all. None. Nada.......Zilch.......black hole.
    Still, he seems dumbfounded that some of us complain about the fact that he thinks what he did in the '60's in the back of a VW bus is pertinent discussion here.
     
  176. "Others might say show me just one shot made with a Leica that couldnt be made with any other 35mm camera..."
    i think you missed a bit of what i said. it is definitely possible, lens quality aside (see below), to take any leica (rangefinder) picture with another camera, but it's also a lot more idfficult to do so, IMO. one thing i won't back down on, however, is that if leica glass is not in front, you will be missing something--mind you, that "something" may be trivial to most, and i can certainly understand why, but it is not trivial to me. the pictures i take are mainly for me.

    vuk.
     
  177. Vuk, I assume you think Picasso and van Gogh couldn't draw
    either.
     
  178. ray.

    picasso could draw better than just about any grand master. van gogh was a depressive tosser, but i have to admit being moved by the self-portrait hanging in chicago.

    i also think your "profile" pic on photonet, which is a very symbolic profile, would have been a masterpiece if shot a slightly different way (not being sacrcastic at all).

    vuk.
     
  179. van gogh a tosser? Well I think that about says it then.

    What profile pic? The pic of me with my sisters was taken by my
    mom when I was 6 or 7.
     
  180. Probably the biggest irony is that most of the people here who are open to the positive
    qualities of digital are also the people who I'd put my money on to be able to use a Leica
    and Tri-x meaningfully, and, for that matter, go into a wet darkroom and knock out a
    beautifully balanced fiber based print. I doubt that there's a single member of the lens cap
    and bokeh brigade who's a truly competent photographer (using any medium). Leicas are
    nice cameras, but let's be honest the glory days for Leica are well and truly over. Maybe
    this forum is coming to the end of its useful days just like the company that inspired
    it.
     
  181. Al, if it's not just a cry for help, then through the roof of the mouth is definitely the way to go. But it seems like an excessive reaction!

    About the Kap'n Al thing: this forum - maybe all forums - has a tendency to focus on certain individuals and elevate them beyond their deserved status as photographers every once in a while. It was my turn once, it was Mike Dixon's, it has been grant's and no doubt there'll be someone else after Al. Al got a T-shirt out of it, Mike got a 75 mm summilux as I recall. Soon enough there'll be a new photo hero to take the brunt of the forum's need to find a figurehead.
     
  182. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    van gogh a tosser? Well I think that about says it then.
    Worth repeating...
     
  183. in all fairness (and in reply to some private e-mail), i confess i left out one other option in my critique of grant's well-composed photos:

    5) cropping your original framing to 5% of the original

    vuk.
     
  184. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Is this jealousy week? I didn't realize it was here already.
     
  185. "through the roof of the mouth is definitely way to go"

    We're all anatomically different, for a significant minority between the buttocks is the way
    to go......
     
  186. maybe italics should be a no-no
     
  187. Pete -- Just a sec. In your formulation, if I were to ask a fellow forumer to refrain from swearing, sexism, racism, etc., and he [or she -:) ] were to respond with a vulgarity directed at me, then *I'm* responsible for "goading?"

    Nah. This form of communication isn't much faster than Morse Code. You gotta type it, then submit it, then confirm it. You mean to say that in all those steps there's no opportunity for one to regain his composure? I just don't buy it.

    I've spoken out against the deletion (you know that), but this "devil made me do it" argument you're making here just doesn't hold up.

    I do agree with Pete on the camera-selection-and-detection issue. If you believe the rangefinder is best for X, or the slr is best for Y, or the digital is best for Z, and you have one with you, great -- then use it. But I do think it's a terrible waste of time and energy to attempt to impose that orthodoxy on anyone else or attempt to restrict posted photos in that fashion.

    Finally, Pete, don't try to run any of that "uneducated buffoon" routine past us here. It won't fly:

    >>>>>>
    Peter A Photo.net Patron, aug 10, 2003; 09:13 a.m.

    Leanne the only person I have ever called a genius was one of my supervising professors for my doctorate - he was and is...but thats another story LOL..I am just into photogrpahy on this site.
    >>>>>>

    Mistaken you are. Buffoon you are not.
     
  188. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    "5) cropping your original framing to 5% of the original"

    You see Vuk, it's this senseless dribble that does no good. Just posting a negative comment for no reason at all.
     
  189. What Jeff said...
     
  190. "What profile pic? The pic of me with my sisters was taken by my mom when I was 6 or 7."--Ray

    even though van gogh was a tosser, i share his passion for art and it compels me to say, in light of the confession, that mom's photography puts your's to shame. sorry, mate!

    vuk.

    p.s. jeff, you don't own a leica but you spend a lot of time being angry in the leica forum. i don't own a nikon and i've never posted in the nikon forum.
     
  191. brad-eric-jeff-sycophant

    i was warned of this this, but i wouldn't have believed it...
     
  192. That's a pretty mean-spirited thing to say Vuk. It's not true of course.
     
  193. There has never been a requirement to own a leica to post in the leica forum. It appears it
    may end up being that way. Not that that's a plus for photography, here, in general.
     
  194. </i> I meant what you said about Ray's photography
     
  195. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    Vuk, you needn't group me in with anyone. But if can come up an argument about my comment, I'd like to hear it. (You see Vuk, it's this senseless dribble that does no good. Just posting a negative comment for no reason at all.) Was there a point to that? A positive reason to spend the time?
     
  196. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Funny thing, Vuk has never been to my home and has no idea what I own. Odd that he feels comfortable commenting on what he knows nothing about.

    I guess that's why he resorts to name-calling.
     
  197. Vuk, it may be more productive for you to spend more time with your photos rather than
    trying stir people up here. Just a thought...
     
  198. To my knowledge, Vuk, I've never been paired -- or "quarteted" -- with the guys you're taunting, but I'm offended nonetheless.

    The fact that you've chosen a $10 name rather than a gutter-level slur means you'll avoid being banned (or banned again, as the case may be), but still it's not a good thing.
     
  199. QUOTE: Eric ~ , mar 01, 2005; 01:02 a.m.:
    "5) cropping your original framing to 5% of the original"
    You see Vuk, it's this senseless dribble that does no good. Just posting a negative comment for no reason at all.

    on the record: eric thinks cropping to 5% of original is valid photgraphic technique. kinda makes the case for hair-shirt leica standards. i am accused of "negative comment for no reason" for disagreeing with absurdity.

    vuk
     
  200. I holding out for an enemies list: opposite of friends list. When someone from your enemies list posts you don't see it on your page. Shazaam! It would solve a lot of our problems.
     
  201. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    490 posts in 4 years. Not sure why he feels he can talk like an expert on the dynamics here. I'm not paying attention to Vuk anymore.
     
  202. vuk - i wasnt aware there were invalid photo techniques when good photos emerge. do
    you feel important now, "bad boy?"
     
  203. it seems the poseur avant-garde stay up as late and have me out-numbered, yet still manage to shoot only at their own feet.
     
  204. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Easier to insult than explain how you know what I own, isn't it?
     
  205. More on the record: Yeah, that Eric dude thinks violating The Rule of Thirds is a valid
    photographic technique as well. Shameful.
     
  206. Jeff Lu , mar 01, 2005; 01:25 a.m.
    : "vuk - i wasnt aware there were invalid photo techniques"

    you have obviously misunderstood my postings. i said nothing like that.

    vuk.
     
  207. boys.
    <br><br>
    i keep getting e-mail from your feet begging for mercy.
    <br><br>
    vuk.
     
  208. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

  209. I want the addy for those little guys. I want a yellow guy shooting flames from his mouth
     
  210. Vuk, your attempt at street photography was just awesome I
    must say. Brought me to tears, those guys leaning out looking
    into the darkness. How profound it was, an earth shattering
    moment for me; it's been burned into my consciousness from
    the first moment I saw it.
     
  211. ray.
    <br><br>
    i have confessed outright on this forum (in fact, as recently as a couple of weeks ago) that i am a terrible street photgrapher. no argument there.
    <br><br>
    vuk.
     
  212. ...but maybe if i cropped to 5% there would be something goth-teen-cool-verygrainy in there. must shave my head and dig out the black turtle-neck first...
     
  213. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

  214. I see we stayed pretty much on topic in this thread. Ah....what was the topic again??? Good night all.
     
  215. Yet another magnificent thread on the mighty Leica forum. Peace, love, Leicas.......
     
  216. ray.

    my apologies. had another look and realised i missed the link to your home-page and assumed falsely...

    you have some excellent pictures and your street stuff is definitely way above my street stuff. not being sarcastic, i really mean it.

    cheers,
    vuk.

    p.s. i am not defending all leica users (or rather, owners), just the point of a leica forum. even thought you hate it, there is a point.
     
  217. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    "you have some excellent pictures and your street stuff is definitely way above my street stuff."

    And if Ray wasn't better than yours Vuk? You'd carry on being terd? The judgment of ones photos against yours, and the immediate assumption that they are not, is no reason to be an insulting pain in the butt.
     
  218. eric.
    <br><br>
    that last post makes it quite clear you are merely trying to stir up trouble.
    <br><br>
    maybe it's best to be modest. i obviously have a lot to learn about street photography; for you, getting the initial framing right seems to be a challenge. no need to get nasty about these things. even helmut newton could learn a lesson or two from some of us.
    <br><br>
    vuk.
     
  219. ray.
    <br><br>
    i also wasn't being disingenuous about the portrait (mom-pic). it is quite good and only a merely inches away from being brilliant. wording of that last post to you needs much more reworking (an unfortunate side-effect was opening the door for the ny-gy-sy-boys).
    <br><br>
    vuk.
     
  220. you'd figure a russian-irish-asian would have a bit of a clue that pedestrian english rules of pronunciation weren't universal ;-)
     
  221. Sorry Vuk, English is my sixth language after Gaelic, Russian, Cantonese, Mandarin and
    (imperfect, but improving) Idiot. Anyway, your name certainly rhymes with the word in
    question for anybody residing in certain parts of England.
     
  222. why not have a new temporary forum called Slugfest?
    it would primarily be for Film vs Digital or Digital vs Film rants but could cover some of the sparring we are seeing here now.
    the only catch would be that to comment and participate, one would need to adopt a new and demeaning pseudonym just for that forum. something along the lines of "fluffy" "bozo" or "weenie." that way things would be kept in perspective.
    just a thought (~_-)
     
  223. Does anyone know whether there is a filter option to "Mark this person an UNinteresting?" If so, a lot of problems could be solved and this thread could be used by all to make the "UNinteresting" determination.
     
  224. "Those who are more into equipment ownership and Al worship stay here. Others, who are more into shooting and crafting photographs, know where to go. Easy and everyone is happy."

    These sorts of reductive and silly statements serve nothing but the ego of the writer.

    I'd be happy if we kept the variety of the forum, but with more tolerance and less abuse. No one has to read equipment posts, nor do they have to read Al's posts and they certainly don't have to react to them with invective. Yet, they are available for those that do want to read them and get into dialogue.

    Peter A, you're one of the few people I remember posting pictures of his new equipment - Contax 645 and lenses, Leica R and lenses and a big red car if I remember rightly. Wouldn't you say this was a bit beside the point of photography?

    As Rob says there's often hero worship on these forums and on this one, some seem to have focused on Al and his T-shirts and some on Grant. I don't much care for heros myself, but I do appreciate friendliness and civility.
     
  225. Robert said: "These sorts of reductive and silly statements serve nothing but the ego of the
    writer."

    It's not a silly statement nor is it reductive - just a solution to a problem, which is working
    out very nice, BTW. Surely, Robert, you must have something better to do than track me
    down on everything I post.
     
  226. EricM

    EricM Planet Eric

    "I'd be happy if we kept the variety of the forum, but with more tolerance and less abuse. No one has to read equipment posts, nor do they have to read Al's posts and they certainly don't have to react to them with invective. Yet, they are available for those that do want to read them and get into dialogue."

    Exactly. Room for everyone. We all have mouses and scroll bars.

    But a bit late and the momentum is going great so far over in the S&D. Please join in everyone...Leave past indifferences at the door and have a fresh start.
     
  227. This thread is now longer than the one accompanying Kirk Tuck's M6 review. What a bunch of ranters and ravers we are!
     
  228. Sorry Peter if I confused the car with the motorbike. I simply wanted to point out that most of us can go off the subject of photography sometimes. It seems ok to me. This forum used to regularly go off into all sorts of political tangents until it was tidied up. That was also ok. The worse thing I find is mean-spirited unfriendliness and mobbing of individuals.
     
  229. Hear, hear!

    I first checked into this forum when it had but two posts. Tony Rowlett had created it, and in the course of the following year, moderated it to the point where it had become far and away, the best Leica forum on the internet.

    Let's help him and the forum get back to that state.
     

Share This Page