Productive discussion on classic cameras

To the young people, that think our comments are so unproductive you need close down our discussions, here is

your turn to tell us what is important to you.

 

You are the very people we are trying to reach out to, to help, and pass on knowledge we have gained through

the years, so it is not lost or forgotten.

 

Please tell us what would be interesting to you. The old guys out here can pass on volumes of information, that

has never been written down, but you can't ask questions after we are dead. So enjoy and absorb all you can

from us old folks. Most of all , ask us questions, because once we are gone, the unpublished book is closed,

never to be opened again.

 

You have the floor. What would you like to know about classic cameras ?

Cliff, you old curmudgeon, who told you to shut up this time?

Ha,

 

Dan you better save your expertise and comments to answer one of these kids questions, or you may be called unproductive.

Which posting did I miss Cliff that got your feathers all ruffled?

Probably this: http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00Q15j.

Cliff, I asked the kid a question and he deleted my post. So much for the younger generation.

Cliff, Hi! I am a 70 year young kid. I am still learning about Classic Cameras. I have a lot to learn though I started long ago in my college days on the Fed2. I suppose that would qualify me for admission to this class! May I suggest that you could start the Seminar discussions with the best aspects of the Classic Cameras of different types and their limitations. I don't mean that in comparison with the digicams, but only among the Classic Cameras. The typology and their potentials would be a good starting point, I think. It is difficult to raise questions in the beginning of the seminar, especially on what would I [we] like to know; of course, it would be almost everything there is to know. Possibly in the second round you could discuss the Postwar and Post 1960 development of the Japanese Cameras, lenses etc. I am looking forward to it. Thank you.

Thank you Cliff for pursuing this. I am interested as I am one of those who posted after the initial warning from the moderator and before he closed it down. It was also my first ever forum posting, and I am wondering how such an innocuous thread could have violated photo.net policy.

My point was that some modern cameras (film or digital) are complicated to use, and that those who find this off-putting have the option of using older, (classic) cameras which can be less confusing to operate while still producing excellent results. The rest of the thread was mainly photo buffs suggesting reasons for their preferences. That it was productive is shown by at least one posting stating that dissatisfaction with digital proved to be a stepping stone towards the poster discovering film and a deeper appreciation of the craft of photography.

My (serious) question to the moderator is this: was it merely implied criticism of site sponsor's wares that triggered the shutdown? Because I'm scratching my head here.

there is a "generation gap"

It is sad to see film use fading away and the manufacturing or Mechanical Cameras stopping

( ir is it stopped entirely)

I read here yesterday that a Wal-mart employee said the film processing will be shut down in 2 years.

I read before that supermarkets have already eliminated "send out processing"

 

In many ways Mecanical cameras and film are pretty foolproof.

and the Images created will last for many many years.

Knowing the way prople think and do things, the images created by digital photography will not last nearly as long.

Cd's And DVD's fade away. Electronic devices, unless made with Mil_spec. quality, will inevitably fail.

I seriously doubt that any digital camera will last 30-50 years.

But mechanical cameras do. and still produce images that are superior tho all but the most expensive digicams. It's a case of a "Mature Technology" being better than an "immature & developing technolgy"

 

I will not, unless there is some miracle, be here in 50 more years.

and since i am not a soothsayer, I have no idea what form photography or whatever they will call it

will take in 2059.

 

Right now digital photography is the 126. 110, advantix of this time.

it is for the masses, True it is a great improvement over these older and discarded technologies,

 

Some say the Bad drives the Good out. Maybe that is true.

Maybe I just LIKE mechanical cameras. Maybe I am just Old-Fashioned.

But that , in itself, is not a bad thing.

I'm almost afraid to repeat anything on here anymore. But the fact is, that is the way things are learned. Through repetition. If I am training someone is in my darkroom, I use four steps of repetition, and don't move on to the next step until the last is correct.

 

First I tell them how to do something, while I show them how to do it.

 

Second: They tell me how to do something, while I do it for them.

 

Third: They tell me what they are doing, while they are doing it.

 

Fourth: They just show me how to do it, and now I know they have learned.

 

Without saying the same things over and over there is no learning. I believe this is what was refered to as nonproductive. If I just told someone how to do something, and they did it right then. At a later time, there would be no recall of how to do it, since there was no learning by repetition. Some people become bored hearing the same things over and over again, which simply means they are not ready and willing to learn. Any teachers of any kind out there that wish to confirm what I have just said ?

I haven't posted on this forum for a while but I do visit every chance I get. My whole reason for joining PN and keeping my membership fees up to date was/is because of this forum. I have a strong interest in classic film cameras but I do enjoy my digital SLR as well. I am aware of the limitations/strengths of each and strive to work with those limitations rather than fight them. As that line from the movie goes "A MAN'S got to know the limitations of his camera"...or something like that.

 

Cliff, I have always admired your knowledge and respected your input. I agree that one needs to repeat something many times to learn. I teach martial arts and we have a saying in our dojo "Do one thing 100 times and you know it, do one thing 1000 times and you understand it, do one thing 10,000 times and it is you." Or another variation I often tell my students "I am not afraid of the 10,000 kicks you've practiced one time but I'm very afraid of the one kick you've practiced 10,000 times." I also agree with your last statement "Some people become bored hearing the same things over and over again, which simply means they are not ready and willing to learn." This is very true in my experience but again I turn to my martial arts life "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear." One cannot force learning.

 

That being said I do feel that sometimes we can fall into a trap with the frequent discussions that begin with "Which is the better...Contax or Leica, Fed or Zorki...or what ever..." Those kinds of discussions can be "unproductive" for me because I don't believe in "Best or Better" only "Different". BUT, as others may find these very useful I certainly would not advocate shutting them down, I would just prefer not participate if I could help it. As a teacher I will never tell my students this or that is better. It is what works for me, nothing more and what works for me may not work for you. When it comes to photography (as well as most things in life), what is 6 inches behind the camera that is the most important. I have seen some amazing photos taken with plastic toy cameras.

 

An interesting trend I have noticed in another forum (a mostly digitally inspired forum BTW) that I frequent these days, is the large number of "young people" just discovering film. People who have never had any experience with photography other than through the digital medium. They are thursting for information and knowledge but have no real idea where to turn. Those poeple need the "Old Timers" like the generous folks here. That knowledge and experience is invaluable to them and as well to those of us that grew up on film. When a question comes up concerning film I most often direct them to search here, this is where much of the real knowledge and experience is to be found.

Scot,

Thank you for your well thought out responce. As you have observed, the many new film "Students" do show up here and of course requires repeating some things that have been posted before. I also, do not believe that photography is an either/or proposition, but rather like all things in life, must be a balance. I really don't know why conflict ends up here though, since this is a pre-1970 forum, when no digital or computers existed in the main stream of life. There is an entire WWW to find digital information. There are some of us here that are tring to share some information about film, glass plates, tintype, old cameras and lenses, etc. (whatever was out there pre-70) that is not easy to find everywhere. We just want to help, especially the young, people getting into these mediums, so all is not lost in the future.

Let me take a sceond to address everyone elses comments.

 

Dan,

You are aparently only allowed to answer his questions, not ask any, or you might get the boot.

 

Subbarayan,

I like your idea, but it would probably be best done as a presentation with follow up comments, rather than in a

forum setting like this. What do you think?

 

Mark,

*I'm scratching my head also. But for the sake of the new guys I'll put up with it to try to help at least a few of the

guys. You are correct about the simple film cameras that were made producing some incredable images. Huge

menu systems are complicated, hard to see in most cases, and downright dangerous in others, like cell phones

when driving or car radios now. You need to pull off the road to scroll through all the stuff that's in there. I love

technology, but it is overdone in many places.

 

Walter,

There has always been a generation gap as a result of hormones. Soon after stabilazation, they grow out of that

phase and reality kicks in. There is a newborn thirst for "Roots" Some people, more than others, go all out to

learn as much of their own personal history as well as of subjects that interest them, like classic cameras and

antique photography. That's where we come in, to help those who want to learn.

Excellent thread, but its a shame that it was necessary to start it. Keep up the good work

>>Since, however, this thread has now turned to a critique of Photo.net policy, which is in violation of the Terms of Use, the discussion will now be closed.<<

 

Does anyone know where this "no policy critique" is? I've e-mailed to the moderator in question, and I hope that he can help me find it, since I could not locate it (maybe I just missed it) in the Terms of Use.

I see where the new post by Johan started just about an hour ago has been pulled. Wonder who did that. I also just did a quick review of the Term and Conditions, and did not see this verbage. Does anyone know if the Moderators make Josh aware of the circumstances involved when they close or pull a thread off the forum?

Read Josh's finale to Johan's post.

Greg, don't want to sound stupid, but where would I be able to view that at? The whole thread has been pulled.

Never mind. Found it.

That thread appears to be gone... was some sort of explanation given, which has also been deleted along with the thread?

Patrick, a thread from here was moved to the site feedback forum. It has been closed, but with a detailed response from site admin.

Folks, go to the bottom of this page. Click on terms of use. Read them closely.

 

I've done the exercise, don't see how any of the discussions we're discussing violated them. I'd appreciate it if someone who reads English better than I do would explain the terms of use and how to avoid violating them to me. I normally resent being spoken to in baby talk, but this time it would be welcome.

I could have sworn I posted in this thread. I thought it was a fairly level-headed one, without specific criticism of the moderators of the group. Just general commentary on some moderation trends.

 

I wish that there was some kind of placeholder that said "posting from person X deleted" so that we at least knew something was removed...

Allan,

 

You're not going crazy. You did post here about moderation trends. Kind of spooky isn't it.

Cliff, I am glad that you are taking this seriously. From the response on this thread there are many others too

who would contribute seriously. I think it would be a great project if you could organize a series of

threads/discussions in this forum or a special forum if PN would accommodate that. The resources are enormous

from the many contributors to PN. Each can even provide photo documentation and examples what their special

camera make looks like inside out, its dis-assembly and repair/maintenance routines, etc. They can also provide

examples of the pictures taken with each of these classic cameras and how they approached them. At the end or in

several stages you [we] can compile and edit the discussions into e-books or even printed volumes.

There has been no detailed documentation of this kind. The only books I have seen are those of Ed Romney and

Thomas Tomosy. Myles Upton's is more detailed on the Exakta and goes step by step, but only on repair. Kyphoto

has some discussions and papers. Romney and Tomosy take a lot of things for granted from the learner. They also

had volume contraints. The resources you can command far exceed anything that has been put together and published

till now.

 

About a couple of years ago I knew nothing about what was inside the camera. Simply the cost of repairs and the

absence of repairmen induced me to look inside. I groped and rebuilt a few Exaktas and Prakticas. But my

enthusiasm to get them working and make pictures carried me off from documenting my own effort. I wish I had

photographed every stage of the dis-assembly and rebuild that I went through including the many mistakes.

 

You are very right about the teaching and learning. It requires a lot of repetition, getting used to and

documenting the effort for reference material. One needs at least a minimal reference library to be good at

anything. It is really unfortunate that the camera industry despite a host of inventions and innovations has not

documented its own achievements and placed them in the public domain. I think you have a life-time opportunity

here to fill that void, at least from the consumer product point of view.

 

Please do give it some serious thought and a try. I am sure you will get a lot of cooperation from the members of

PN. I am willing to do whatever I can with my small abilities, even for compiling editing etc. All the best to you.