Where we go from here

My favorite is when a guy asks should he buy lens A or lens B, he gets advice, then comes on and announces he purchased lens B. For the next three days people keep coming on pouring heartfelt advice on which lens to choose, completely oblivious to the fact that he has already made his purchase. Now I am not sure if that is 100% the fault of threaded, or it's people that are just too damn lazy to read other people's words in attempt to make sure their own words are heard, but it is mega annoying.

I experienced that a fair bit on DPReview.

That was one of the problems on DPReview. The moderator decided who was not nice, most of the time based on which side of the debate one was on.

Same goes for being a stuck record. Depends on the side of the discussion one is on.

Nothing wrong with a bit of hostility. I'd start with some other stuff on this site first.

common sense is not so common 🤨

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -- Einstein.

You read the part where the OP made their choice, after that whatever you read that isn't from the OP is gratuitous.

Or perhaps of interest to future readers or others contemplating the same question.

Hi,

I greatly prefer to stay out of certain rabbit holes. Like this one where I have to scroll thru a bunch of chatter regarding threaded v flat view.

If we had threaded view here, I could read a post or two into the bunny tunnel and then avoid that entire area when there are new posts listed.

Most of the time, I read only the responses to the original post. And I don't usually follow down any of the branches of the tree. Those being responses to the responder.

As it it, there is too much having to ID, post by post, if said responses are to the OP or to someone else somewhere along the way.

And, right now, I'm somewhere along some tree branch and not responding to the OP. Just vaguely responding to...somewhere.

If it were up to me, there would be only threaded view and no flat option at all. It was almost that way long ago on DP Review. But Phil elected to keep both. And I can live with that.

Stan

Reading isn't the same as writing. I may want to contribute my two cents in spite of knowing that the OP has already made their choice.

sirs,

As to the original question, expanding themes such as how and what one actually does depict seems reasonable.
And the ancillaries to this process should also be discussed, not just the newest devices, but also such as is now and then in use even if produced years ago.

People who provide pictorial examples to discuss resolution should include enlargements of crucial elements (like mr. S from artaphot.ch uses to do on other fora) A system like that mr. Halgand seeks to enforce on his site: collections appareils.fr would be very useful. He wants posters talking about a specific photographic ddevice to put the name in square brackets in the title so that his software can sort everything and make it traceable afterwards.

Digressions should be welcomed if they bring deeper insight, Even if regugitating trivial issues like purchase of A versus B. However, repetitive slanging matches of the type "mine is best"- "no mine is best"- "how do you define "best",,etc." should be discouraged - In lieu of banning procedures, readers might distribute dunce caps so that the poster with say 5 of them might feel shamed into retiring. If not, a selectable mechanism rendeinhg such a poster invisible would relieve those who are bothered by the noise and a tally of how many have chosen to mute each culprit would serve as a guide to others

For my part i regularly browse several sites out of curiosity. Yesterday I found a slightly repetitive but very interesting piece on the internet archive where optical glass and quality control was debated while several net-myths about camera factories making their own glass- and the importance of exotic glass divorced from its role and preicse position was debunked. Yes, netsites as a form of textbook rather than a sales machine.

One advantage of this site as compared with the original is that one may skip to the end of a thread without becoming bogged down in adverts for other parts of the site.

summa summarum; continue as you are heading-

p.

If I got it right @TonyBeach was referring to the example of a typical "equipment purchase advice thread" rather than the OP here.

Very good points! I think quality is key, as well as some serious attempts at creating something unique and interesting, regardless of how 'trendy' it is. I‘m personally way more likely to register at a place online where I found relevant and well presented information on certain timeless topics, than a site which provides day-one reviews of the newest gear, but not much in terms of depth.

appareils.fr/ is for sale, the newest update in artaphot.ch/ is from 2011

I am not reactionary. I do NOT long for yesteryears or dwell in the past. I do not miss the odor of Dektol or my trusty old Speedgraphic. I can make do with fewer of the tinker toys that the manufacturers include in camers, but I can alwas shut them off.

Waht I do miss is some old-time literature- Photograhy Magazines and trade journals. Even the many consumer-based photography magazines had very informative and inspiring articles and editorials as well as ads and gear reports. There were lots of how-tos, behind-the-scenes articles about famous photographers, and as interesting pieces on newcomers to the professional and journalistic scene. There were do-it-yourself and make-it-yourself projects that were great for younger folks who could no necessity buy expensive accessories. There were workarounds for common issues. At one time the Journal of the Royal Photograhy Society contains lots of science and deep dives into technology. Publications like the Photo District News are gone or went online.

Journals published by professional photographers' associations and a few independent publishers also included technical and artistic content as well as, however, emphasized the business and promotional aspects of the craft. Overthe years, many magazines contained more ads than solid information and then they thinned out and finally disappeared. Many of the no-defunct magazines and current online tutorials, forums, and other photographically oriented media encourager fols to SPEND money rather than the possibility of MAKING money with their skills and equipment. Forme the acronym "GAS" implies digestive discomfort and motor fuel (Petrol)! Poisonous gas- inflammable gas- all not good!

Now everything photographic is online. Some sites are OK, some are not so much. and some are simply TERRIBLE, loaded with misinformation, unmitigated nonsense, and fruitless arguments. Peope wants to click on and get instant gratification. It seems that very few fokls want to read any more about things photograhic.

Many of the online forums and sites are inhabited by folks whose attitude is "been there, did that, and have the T-shirt"! Where are the fols who aspire to improve? Perhas a second career, the new kids on the block, the people who may aspire to become professional photogahers. So, they might click on a forum and are greeted by protracted gear arguments, all kinds of picayune philosophical debates, discouraging attitudes, and verbal mud-fights! And... politics- UGH!

Where are the people to encourage and help others- they are out there but seemingly, in short supply.

Getting back to the magazines- they had a table of contents so folks can select what read about, find their favorite columnists, or find some new that they are attracted to. This has a good selection of categories but soe is not specific enough to artist new mentees and keep the old ones interested.

Here are my suggestions- why not knock them around, see waht y'all think, and try for some changes?

Getting started in photography- articles, questions, and answers for newcomers to the craft.

Gearheads- Nothing but gear talk- trends, sales stats, rumors, waht's new, waht's old, clean debates, and opinions. If you actually suffer a bout with GAS- come here and work it out your OR in the U.S. and can buy Gas-X, and in the U.K try; Simethicone-Brand names: Wind-eze, WindSetlers, Infacol, Dentinox Colic Drops!

Wanny go pro?! The truth about the status of professional photogay today. waht is required, what is the mindset? How to pla and run a photogahy business. All the varios specialization an catagores. Education? Legalities. Contracts. Professional Organizations. Traditional categories like portraiture, weddings, and events commercial/product/food & beverage, and industrial. Architecture/interior/exterior/real estate, fashion, fine art, photojournalism/press.

Philosophy and etymology. Want to opine or debate on attitudes, motivations, and inspirations, take deep dives in to your or anyone else's psyche, and pick apart words and terms- this is the place!

Science and Technology- Heavy duty stuff- very deep dives into high-tech, optics, sensitometry, computer science, management, etc.

Tools and Techniques- Nut and bolts- straight talk about equipmet and applications.

Art and Aesthetics- Composition, color harmony, disharmony, monochromatic tonality, different style, and approaches.

Nostalgia- Wann tal about old-time stuff, equipm of the past, collectible camers as photographica, flash powder, obsolete processes, "the waywere were"? This is the section!

Complaint Department! "There ought to be a law" kind of thing. Scams, bad experiences with suppliers or dealers, too many prohibitions, entry fees, etc against photograhers. Statr you crusade here!

One more outrageous concept. Change the name. Reality check- DPR never came to its untimely demise and it no longer needs to be revived. The enter debacle was a massive blooper but it may have had a few good outcomes, like THIS new forum. Stat thig about NAMES- Who knows? "The Online Photograher's Workshop" "A Photogahers Place" ." The Photograhers' Compendium". " A Photogrhers' Community". Come 0n- y'all are creative- come up with something that does not appear as a clone or second best.

DPR is a gret forum, as formus go. I still post in two sections and the gang there is excellent. Competition is good and healthy and "NEW" is still oneof the most powerful words in advertising. So come up with a new twist on an old concept!

further to the comments above; ( ad hominem remarks are not particularly civilized) Stephan Koelliker still posts on MF lenses, while I do not know whether he has time to update his Artaphot site. and "collections appareils" seems to be in rude health and certainly not the same site as "apparails". My point, which may have escaped that commentator was not that one should visit those sites (although they are excellent) , rather that pictorial examples need a detailed view to enable conclusions AND that a rigorous method for writing subject matter with crucial info as to the maker of the device in question should be put between [ ] would make searches easier.

p.