Improving This Forum

[steve_rasmussen]

The three largest categories in this MF Forum are Hassy, P67 and Rollei. I for

one would like to see these three broken out as separate forums with their own

subcategories. Pentax 67 used to have its own forum separate from MF and it

seemed to work better than what we have today. One could pick a subcategory of

interest and search and read historical posts. Canon FD has its own forum, as

does Leica. They are not subparts of a 35mm forum. With 4000+ posts, I would

think Hassy would surely be a candidate for its own forum. Maybe the answer is

to break out all of the MF camera systems into their own forums and disband the

MF Forum?

[andrew booth]

It's my opinion that forums require a certain throughput / turnover of posts in order to attract discussion. Who would post a question to an unpopular forum - few people would be reading, and one would be unlikely to get a good answer.

 

Unfortunately I don't believe that MF postings and interest will upturn significantly. I think the posting frequency on the MF forum is OK - and I don't believe that it would be a great move to split the forum down into separate less popular ones.

 

What sub categories would you suggest - and what difficulty are you currently having in searching?

 

If current categories were further split to aid navigation of historical messages, someone would have to read each post and recategorise.

 

[i do have an interest in this subject, being moderator...]

[steve_rasmussen]

Andrew, whom is this forum serving? Whom is the customer here? It is surely the people who contribute text and gain knowledge. Let's ask them for their opinion.

[peteradownunder]

The forum has a great database about yesterday's equipment being used by an increasingly diminishing population of photographers. <p> The film/digital line in the sand has been drawn and the forum really doesn't offer very much for people like me who use MF cameras with digital backs. If I have a film or development question there are forums for that on PN with much more specific information.<p> Another fact is that most of yesterday's MF camera companies are now no longer in production. So you are getting more of the how do I fix this/what should I buy - CHEAP - type question from a forum client base with narrow interest. All this is fine but you are getting a diminishing circle of relevance happening.<p> The WNW threads work very well in the Leica Forum and bring together a lot of forum traffic with weekly photos of the week and such.<p> It all depends on what you think the purpose of the forum should be. As it is it is fine - but probably diminishing in future relevance and traffic and heading for the classic camera type collector/user scene.<p> Looking at the list of cameras and formats available for search is a credit to all the forum participants of the past who contributed their expertise.

[russ_britt3]

I would like to see a ban on always suggesting that all cameras be bought from KEH........it gets very old very fast. Talk about camera questions and problems etc., don`t always talk about the camera stores....at least keh. Its not the answer to every question.

Don`t really care if broken down by brand....but please stick to med format questions.....not scanner questions etc, put those questions in digital.

Maybe a medformat film forum?

[cpj]

Wait a minute here--this Forum and all the others have a provision for YOU the MEMBER to

carefully limit things to exactly what interests you. If you look at the top right of main

page of each Forum, you see a box marked "E-mail Alerts."

 

Instead of just checking off Item #1, go to Item #2 and enter the specific keywords that

must appear to generate an email to your account. I believe this will accomplish exactly

what Steve wants.

 

For instance, I only get email alerts when a post mentions the one of these words:

"Rollei, Rolleiflex Hasselblad Zeiss landscape transparency slide tripod" in their post.

 

I got Steve's because he used the word Rollei; I don't get all the garbage about Mamyias

and Pentax67's because I have no interest in it.

 

I've also owned Leicas for 45 years, so I have selected the words "M7 M8 Summicron

Summilux" as my KEYWORDS form the Leica Forum.

 

Although I've owned every single M-series ever built (usually two at a time) I don't have the

time or inclination to be answering somebody's question about why his recently purchased

M3 requires two strokes to advance the film.

 

By limiting my email alerts to four simple keywords, I only get posts with M7 or M8 in

them since those are the two Leicas I currently use plus the two primary lens classes. (I

supposed I should go back and add Elmarit and Telyt too since I also have the 21, 24 and

135.)

 

I've never owned a Leica SLR so I could care less about posts talking about prism problems

and dust. Thus I rarely get a Leica R post unless it mentions one of the lens keywords.

 

Use the tools availalble already and you won't have to be wading through all the stuff that

doesn't interest you.

[spanky]

What's wrong with KEH? I've been very pleased with the service gear I've purchased from them.

[dave_cheng1]

"The three largest categories in this MF Forum are Hassy, P67 and Rollei. I for one would like to see these three broken out as separate forums with their own subcategories. Pentax 67 used to have its own forum separate from MF and it seemed to work better than what we have today."

 

I totally agree. Pentax 67 forum was a much better forum by itself. After it was cominbed into MF forum there has never been any interesting threads or discussions any more. Participation is way down. I used to vist photo.net on a daily basis because Pentax 67 forum was interesting. I now sometimes visit photo.net only once a week and found little to read. I am one who really likes to see Pentax 67 be a separate forum by itself and be led by one who has truly contributed the most to it again. Steve, the Pentax 67 forum needs a leader like you again.

[akajohndoe]

I like having them all in one forum.

[akajohndoe]

And I seriously doubt there's a growing MF population ;)

[roseberry guitars]

I'm not entirely convinced that there is a "increasingly diminishing population of photographers" using medium format film cameras. All one has to do is follow a few on line auctions to see that these items are indeed selling to someone. Or try to find one at a camera store, swap meet or second hand store. They all cannot be in "antique" collections or the local land fill. But that is not really the topic of this posting.

 

I think one of the issues with this particular forum is the fact that the three largest categories of interest are Hassy, P67 and Rollei with a smattering of Mamiyas as a distant forth category. Those that choose not to own one of these may be a little hesitant to participate in a discussion with those that do for various reasons. One might be that the perception (be it right or wrong)that these cameras are the "cream of the crop", should be set apart and that all others are beneath discussion may have a dampening effect on would-be participants.

 

I shoot mainly Medium Format film and lots of it. However, I do not own any of the above mentioned camera brands. It's not that I have anything against any of them, at this time I just prefer what I have. But I read all the posts because I like learning about Hassy's, P67's and Rollei's and how others use them. I find I can learn a lot from the information posted and apply it to my own camera technique.

 

What would I have to say in a conversation with one that makes it clear that they are not interested in anything other than what is set in a few "Keywords" in their email alert? How could I share the special look to a photograph taken with a 1940's Tessar lens as presented by my Zeiss Ikon Ikonta 6X6? Or the hugh negative from a 6X9 folder? These are Medium Format and have something to offer that may be valuable as well.

 

I agree with the idea that a "show me" section like the Leica form has would be a step in improving this forum. This might let us all see what it is that we love about the cameras that we choose. It might open our eyes to possibilities we haven't thought of. I would never agree to an exclusive category for each brand name as some suggest. The world has that in religion and it's worked very well so far hasn't it?

[dave_cheng1]

Growing trend is a different matter. Combined in the MF forum there have been very few, or no Pentax 67 threads any more. A combined forum has no focus. A thread specific to something is forced to target all MF forum visitors. As a result you end up hearing more noise than real voice. People do not speak out any more if they do not face a more specific group of audiences. Why would you want to waste your time trying to tell someone who never used a Pentax 67 to make him believe hand holding a p67 is not a problem? Why would you want to waste time to tell those who's only camera is a digital camera how you can produce great images by shooting Portra 160VC or Velvia 50? Combined in the MF forum p67 discussions have been mostly dead, gone. So is photo.net to me. Recently I stopped visiting photo.net totally. One of the breaks was at least one month long. Pentax 67 was one of the best forum I've ever seen. It was unbelievably foolish when it was buried in the large combined MF forum.

[dave_cheng1]

If combined is better why not just one big photography forum for the entire photo.net? Why breaking down into two dozens?

[andrew booth]

<pre>Steve said:

> Andrew, whom is this forum serving? Whom is the customer here?

> It is surely the people who contribute text and gain knowledge.

> Let's ask them for their opinion.

</pre>

<p>That's what's happening in this thread, right? Is it OK with you if I give my opinion too?

<pre>

Dave said:

> I totally agree. Pentax 67 forum was a much better forum by itself.

</pre>

<p>You know, I don't myself know what happened with the P67 forum - certainly I had no involvement with its disappearance. The moderator behind it probably retired from maintaining it and it was dissolved.

<pre>

Dave said:

> If combined is better why not just one big photography

> forum for the entire photo.net? Why breaking down into two dozens?

</pre>

<p>I think we have between 4 and 10 new posts a day across the whole Medium Format forum - still a good number. I think that less would drive people away (you recognise this in your comments on P67 threads).

<p>

More than 20 new questions a day becomes difficult to follow. Take a look at the Canon forums on dpreview.com if you want to see what that's like.

[jean-louis llech]

Concerning photo stores, please do not forget that many people here don't live in the USA.<br>

It might be also useful to see, close to the member's name, the country from which he asks a question or answers.<br>

[q.g._de_bakker]

I think we should keep it as it is: a single 'unified' MF forum. It's easy enough, i feel, to select threads you'd want to open or ignore.<br><br>As i have made known in another thread, i too deplore that many threads lapse into "buy your stuff at retailer X" advertisements.<br>I can understand such a thing happening if (!) a thread was about a "where to buy" question, but that's seldom the case. (And even if: wouldn't that be something for the "Classifieds" section?).<br>So if there is any way (selfrestraint would be the obvious one) to turn this tide, and put an end to this entirely: please!

[fotografz]

I think Peter A is on to something.

 

If one of the purposes of a forum is to promote involvement and stimulus in a specific area

of photography, leading by example seems to be in order.

 

MF is an entity unto itself. Redardless of "brand" used, old or new, whether digital or film,

it shares the similarity of increased real

estate and the resulting end product. For me that has always meant "show and tell". Seeing

is believing.

 

Wouldn't more people that are curious about the MF experience be stimulated into

participation, and wouldn't more of us participate more IF it was about the MF image

rather than just the gear that got us there? Wouldn't a combination of such stimulation

further the cause of MF photography?

 

I'd love to see more work from folks here accompanied by stories of what was done, with

what, why and how. A sample image, a link to more, and a discussion where we share

experiences that are stimulated by that lead. Or is that counter to p.net's mandate?

 

IMO, p.net could benefit greatly if that approach stimulated more activity

and grew the UNIFIED MF forum membership.

[steve_levine]

I have to agree with Steve, the P67 forum was quite handy on it's own.

[fwstutterheim]

I agree with Andrew that a forum should have a certain number of posts per day. The number

of posts is fine as it is. Breaking up would result in forums with just one or two posts per

week. I would not be interested in such a forum. <p>Ferdi.

[mike dixon]

In the six months before being merged with the Medium Format forum, the Pentax 67 forum was averaging 3.27 new threads per week (less than one every other day). Maybe it was "handy," but it certainly wasn't active.,

[lauren_macintosh]

Remember the more band width required means some ones fees will go up:!

[paul ron]

If you are interested in seeing camera specific threads, then use the collumn on the right side to pick from instead of the general catagory of MF.

 

Getting tired of seeing newbies asking for advice leves you with the option to pass those threads. Remember when you were new here and asked the same stupid question that patiently got serious answers regardless of how many times they've been asked before?

 

Again an option is to pass up and stop bitching, because that is what gets old here. If you are unhappy, move on!

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

When I first joined this forum there was a long discussion on whether to have a "W/NW" option, and we (the Yes side) lost.

 

While we all share the "real estate" thing, as Marc points out, there is quite a disparity in types of machinery, esp. the viewing options. Among film cameras the MF group seems to have more ways of viewing & composing: waist level, rangefinder, SLR, TLR, 645, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, pano,and now digital backs, and I would think that that would produce some v-a-a-ary interesting threads. With the larger negatives the resolution would be a joy to behold.

[robbie_caswell]

Give them a forum if one of the 3.27 memebrs will moderate.

 

Imean... Couldn't we do without the Minox forum?

 

I'm with Marc... need more images.

 

Flickr has become my resource for images... pnet archives for questions and give and take.

[steve_rasmussen]

"You know, I don't myself know what happened with the P67 forum - certainly I had no involvement with its disappearance. The moderator behind it probably retired from maintaining it and it was dissolved."

 

The P67 Forum was in Phil Greenspun's LUSENET in the late '90s and he decided to bring it to Pnet due to technical issues with that forum. I was its moderator in 1997 and continued for 9 yrs until Phil decided to move it into the MF Forum. I was not longer needed as a moderator. Phil took a poll asking about moving the P67 Forum into MF and there was a lot of resistance to it, however it was still moved. My suggestion is more about the big three camera systems within MF, than P67. It's just an idea and I just wanted to see if there was a consensus among contributors.