The way this Board is run

[Lynne Evans]

Andrew

I accept that I over-stepped the mark with Lynne, so I apologise for that.

I think Charles has spoken for me on this. (and I use a Wista if you feel one's choice of camera is a worthwhile source of insult)

Ian

from one of the Norther Clique

In case you didn't read Charles's final post on the 'Board at risk' thread, for the past 5 years I have been posting from Somerset, relocating to Cumbria at the beginning of September this year. I am flattered however to be considered a Northerner, even though they cannot understand a word I say.

Lynne

[dave_whatever]

Just out of interest have any forum members actually complained about size of images and speed of use? I have a suspicion that the old adage concerning "people with slow internet" is largely a thing of the past.

[Charles Twist]

Speaking as a member, I have no problems with upload times (but then I am geared up so I can use FTP a lot). However, I do have a problem with pictures that are too big for my screen. When a photo is attached that is wider than my screen, I get scroll bars so I can scurry along the surface - not ideal, but I get the picture, so to speak. Sometimes I might copy and paste it in to a programme where I can see the whole thing. When a photo is linked in from another site, if it's too big for my screen width, I simply cannot see it all (unless I follow the link up). The solutions are (i) I put up with it because I have a 17" monitor; (ii) I complain loudly to the OP; or (iii) I complain loudly to the people in charge of the software. So far I have followed (i), but if others have a similar problem, it might be worth (i) giving me the right solution or (ii) complaining.
Regards,
Charles
PS didn't Henry VIII say something about northerners being as ill behaved as their dogs?

[IanG]

DJ etc

The Forum software shows a last update date as 2007, that may be that its and old version 2x with some updates rather than being the latest version 3.09. Maybe you do need to look at alternatives.

The bandwidth issue needs addressing lame excuses of it being free etc don't make sense, maybe it's time to just bite the bullet and pay for hosting. At the moment this is a Mickey Mouse forum and needs to change direction to become a more valuabe and meaningful UK resource.

In recent months the board has been changing thank goodness from being a "Hug an Ebony" group to much wider cross section of the real world including those using historic cameras and processes. But to get thingsoverall up to a higher level we need some MAJOR improvements in the software and hosting and the way it's administored.

Remember that many more UK LF users post per day on the US based LFPF.info forum than post here in a week, and then ask whether you want that to change.

It's not a quick fix that's needed it's a major rethink then a rebuild from the ground up. There needs to be input from more committed people.

Ian

[IanG]

Ian

from one of the Norther Clique

In case you didn't read Charles's final post on the 'Board at risk' thread, for the past 5 years I have been posting from Somerset, relocating to Cumbria at the beginning of September this year. I am flattered however to be considered a Northerner, even though they cannot understand a word I say.

Lynne

Sorry Lynne & apologies, I never saw the rest of the thread before it was deleted. By necessity there's a lot of broad assumptions in many statements on these topics.

Ian

[Nigels]

OK, I'm just going to make my one comment.

I don't think the software engine running the UKLFPG matters one little bit. What matters is that it facilitates the bringing together of a comminity of like-minded individuals. We should be grateful that someone or a handful of someones give of their time to keep the cogs turning for the benefit of all of the rest of us. You know who you are and thank you for your time.

Another valuable part of the cummunity is the gatherings that we have. Through this forum we have had some opportunities to actually meet our fellow LFers and benefit from all the interaction that meeting provides. I have been on five of the main workshop meets and thank those who have organised these.

Remember, this forum is a community of real people, not a piece of software with words in it.

UKLFPG is my home page and will remain so into the foreseeable future.

OK, thats all from me on this subject.

[IanG]

It does matter when the way the site's mrun is adversely affecting it's potential.

Ian

OK, I'm just going to make my one comment.

I don't think the software engine running the UKLFPG matters one little bit. What matters is that it facilitates the bringing together of a comminity of like-minded individuals. We should be grateful that someone or a handful of someones give of their time to keep the cogs turning for the benefit of all of the rest of us. You know who you are and thank you for your time.

Another valuable part of the cummunity is the gatherings that we have. Through this forum we have had some opportunities to actually meet our fellow LFers and benefit from all the interaction that meeting provides. I have been on five of the main workshop meets and thank those who have organised these.

Remember, this forum is a community of real people, not a piece of software with words in it.

UKLFPG is my home page and will remain so into the foreseeable future.

OK, thats all from me on this subject.

[Sal Santamaura]

...But to get thingsoverall up to a higher level we need some MAJOR improvements in the software and hosting and the way it's administored...

As a regular visitor but occasional poster from across the pond, I've been biting my tongue while reading this thread. Your quoted statement pushed me to respond.

Abuse of the "N" word (need) is rampant worldwide. There are very few real needs. An on-line forum with the software, hosting and administration of this one is certainly not being held back as a result. The US LF Forum in its first (LUSENET) incarnation had a small fraction of the functionality available here. That didn't stop it from being extremely valuable. In my opinion, adding images failed to increase the level of discourse one bit. In the end, all anyone can say about a picture is "I like it" or "I don't like it." How they communicate those sentiments varies from direct statements to elaborate 'artspeak' constructions, but they're all just opinions. Solid, objective contributions from members are what create value in a forum, not bells and whistles.

As for the threat that a competing UK forum will be started if this one isn't run more to the liking of some who complain, my response would be similar to what I think the rest of Canada should say to Quebec separatists and the rest of the US should say to Texas secessionists. "Goodbye. Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

The founders, administrators and moderators of this forum are to be commended. Keep up your good work!

[DJ]

The Forum software shows a last update date as 2007, that may be that its and old version 2x with some updates rather than being the latest version 3.09.

Sorry Ian but I'm afraid you're jumping to conclusions about what version of software the board is running. If you're referring to the list of dates accompanying the copyright message at the bottom of the screen, this is in no way indicative of what version of software is running the forum, it is static and part of the "theme" that we use for the site which defines the colours and such. As I have said, we are running the very latest release of the software, I should know, I installed it.

Maybe you do need to look at alternatives.

I don't see we would need to, the current software performs very well and meets all our needs and is very well supported. Your only complaint with it seems to be that you (mistakenly) believe it to be "out of date" and therefore it must be broken somehow and "holding us back".

The bandwidth issue needs addressing lame excuses of it being free etc don't make sense, maybe it's time to just bite the bullet and pay for hosting.

The bandwidth issue is hardly a "lame excuse", it is a very real factor in hosting considerations. Just because you can now get a cheap high speed link to your home does not mean hosting costs have similarly diminished. As has been stated, the hosting we use for this board was granted to us for nothing by a relatively small hosting company of limited means, and it is shared with many paying customers, abusing it would hardly be polite since we pay nothing.

As it stands, when board is moved to the new server this will become less of an issue. Having said that, hosting images is not this site's primary purpose, we're not trying to be an image hosting site, we're a forum, so if you're expecting us to turn into the new Flickr or a free gallery site so you can post all your photos online, you're going to be disappointed, there are plenty of services out there who do that already. And as Joanna has stated, externally linked images can be inserted into any post, and there will be a limited amount of space available for users of the forum to post images and files into to attach to their posts, just how much this will be is yet to be determined, it will not be less than we currently enjoy, and any "guidelines" about image posting will be reviewed when the move is complete.

At the moment this is a Mickey Mouse forum and needs to change direction to become a more valuabe and meaningful UK resource.

What a lovely well considered contribution, thank you for that. I think you'll find that most members here already find this site to be a valuable and meaningful UK resource.

In recent months the board has been changing thank goodness from being a "Hug an Ebony" group to much wider cross section of the real world including those using historic cameras and processes.

The fact that many board members own Ebony cameras is likely, I suspect that they are reputedly exceptional cameras. That there's always been a humorous rivalry between the "woodies" and the "tinnies" is viewed as a bit of harmless fun, certainly not to be taken seriously, as you seem to have done.

But to get thinhs up to ahigher level we need some MAJOR improvements in the softaere and hosting

Again, you seem to be voicing a very loud and vociferous opinion about something you know very little about other than some assumptions on your part.

Remember that many more UK LF users post per day on the US based LFPF.info forum than post here in a week, and then ask whether you want that to change.

Oh the humanity! How dare they? We'll jump to it and crush them like the bugs they are! Oh wait. We're just an internet forum where people with a similar interest can meet up and help each other. As has been stated, we're not competing with anybody.

I think you need to lighten up a little Ian.

[Dave Tolcher]

I think you need to go back to the 'constitution' of the original board and what its culture/ethos was. It remains true to it today IMHO which is a low key, valuable resource which has never taken itself too seriously and has been a pleasant comfortable experience to use and place to be. There has been no aggro, been run by nearly invisible dedicated enthusiasts for the benefit of the growing population. Yes its been quiet at times but when you have a question or need an opinion or just want to chew the fat then you always get a response and a sensible dialogue. It will never be the resource that the LF Forum is (does it need to be ?) for no other reason that we dont have the user base in the UK for an island mentality forum. If I want the sort of resource that Ian/Adrian (my interpretation) are suggesting then why not just use the LF Forum run out of the US - I never feel unwelcome because I am a brit.

The real issue that exists now is that its become an 'us & them' debate of exactly the type that we havent had on this forum before with veiled insults being thrown in all directions. I suggest most of the user base dont want this and its the fastest way to destroy what has happily existed for a decade or so. Inflammatory comments about 'ebony huggers', northern cliques etc really dont help a sensible dialogue and force me to reach a conclusion on where I sit. These debates have gone on too long. I am totally happy with the way that the current 'management' team run the board and I dont want to see their work implicitly devalued or questioned. I throw my support unequivocally behind them and the decisions that they make. This isnt a democracy, it is what it is, if Joanna, Charles & team want to make changes then they can and I will either live with them or leave as is my privelege. I suggest that anyone for whom the forum doesnt meet their needs always has the same option. Its not a public debate.

[Joanna Carter]

The Forum software shows a last update date as 2007, that may be that its and old version 2x with some updates rather than being the latest version 3.09.

I don't know where you are looking for your information but, as DJ said, we are running the latest version 3.0.9, which was released on July 12th 2011; see this link http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopi ... &t=2134142

Now, I would like to clarify how the UKLFPG came about and the original remit for and current status of the forum.

The UKLFPG was conceived at a workshop run by Paul Owen, in 2005. Subsequent to that, a few of us decided to create a web site where people could share pictures they had taken on the workshops and a forum where people could get to know each other, let people know if they were planning a day's get together and ask and answer each others' questions.

The UKLFPG always has been and still is, first and foremost, a gathering of friends; nothing more nothing less.

We can never hope to compete with the LFPF and have no intention of trying. There is no point duplicating perfectly excellent resources simply to say that we have a UK version of things that are available.

May I suggest that, what is needed is not "super-whizzy" board software; after all, we are not exactly overloading the capabilities of phpBB.

There really is no need to increase the data storage capabilities of the server/software as we have always preferred that people find their own hosting for their pictures and link to that, rather than having to go to the expense of paying for increased hosting charges, just so that we can allow attachments.

There are several hosting sites, such as Flickr, PhotoBucket, etc that are totally free to use and which allow people to, not only post their images so that people in the UKLFPG forums can see them but, also, that they can link to the same picture from other places.

I would suggest that, what is needed, is not changes to the forum but, maybe, more effort to the web site. Maybe an index to available existing resource; plus articles and galleries by members, etc. Do you have any skills in that direction?

Those of us who are "holding the baby" are limited in time and expertise and would value discussion with people, like yourself, who have ideas, rather than have "it's no good" or "make it better" thrown at us. If you have ideas, other than simply replacing the forum software, like how to put together a web site resource, then please stop slagging us off in the public forums and let's get together and see what we can work on together.

If you really want to see the UKLFPG move forwards, please put your past misconceptions behind you and start talking with us, not at us

[Charles Twist]

It does matter when the way the site's run is adversely affecting it's potential.

Two issues here:

(i) we're driving a Ferrari to go to the shops. We could go a lot quicker, but we need more staff to clear the road. If you want to implement an improvement which meets with public demand, then let us know. This leads to the next point .

(ii) Is the board resting on its laurels or have we reached that stage of wisdom called contentment? You would like a lot more from this site than many of the folk who have posted so far. You're good at complaining, but so far I am seeing no suggestions on what your ambitions consist of (other than the cosmetic issue of the copyright not conforming to the version number - I am sure DJ'll have a natural explantion - and the issue of the typeface which only 3 people out of 715 object to - making it very low priority indeed).

I am actually in favour of progress and see no reason not to evolve. I agree with others that there is no need to duplicate resources though, so we need be clear what is needed. So far I am seeing the need for people to ask questions, organise UK-based meetings and trade kit - which this forum does well (if those who don't own modern field cameras, don't participate, then the conversation will turn to modern field cameras. That's nothing to do with administration and all to do with public whim.). I don't see the need to be another Flickr. So what do we add?

Go on Ian, I am calling your bluff. Give us your manifesto or hold your peace.
Regards,
Charles

[Emmanuel Bigler]

There really is no need to increase the data storage capabilities of the server/software as we have always preferred that people find their own hosting for their pictures and link to that, rather than having to go to the expense of paying for increased hosting charges, just so that we can allow attachments.

If I dare to add my continental point of view, what Joanna says is a close description of the policy that we follow on the French MF-LF forum http://www.galerie-photo.info
So far the private owner of the galerie-photo web sites, Henri Peyre, has managed to find sufficient funding without any pop-up advertising screens jumping to your face while posting a message to the forum.
And posting images is even more restrictive than here, since only text URL pointers (active links, though) are allowed. Dura lex, sed lex, so only pure text is allowed!
Even our Sacred Texts of the Middle Ages had, at least, one or two images at the beginning of each chapter!
Not even a single embedded image allowed inside a discussion!! And no image-smileys allowed ! That's hard

And when Charles says ...
So far I am seeing the need for people to ask questions, organise UK-based meetings and trade kit - which this forum does well
.. I could translate it word-to-word into what we are currently trying to do across the Channel on the French galerie-photo web sites.
Letting people meet together in the real world is definitely something that makes a difference with any other kind of photo-oriented forum, where worldwide-based people hidden behind pseudonyms have little, or no chance of ever meeting in real life. (a true paradox when you see the success of web sites dedicated to help people meet together in real life )

The "problem" with large format cameras and top-quality images (that you eventually print or display on a real, material support, face-to-face with friends), is that you cannot emulate this with Internet exchanges not mentioning the manual sensitivity of a focusing knob or a tilt control, something that desperately refuses to travel through a web link ...
And, above all imaging considerations, on our side of the Channel, you'll never be able emulate the chablis or pessac-léognan sessions that go with our meetings in real life !

[IanG]

There's a need for change and complacency from one or two admin/moderators and their answers reflect thus.

Very small changes would have huge benefits and people bury their heads in Morecambe or is it Southport sands instead. It's time criticisms were listened to and acted on instaed of poosting lame exuses.

This site has improved immensely in the past 6-9 months it's no longer Ebony biased, historic processes and cameras can now be discussed, it's becone national instead of Nothern biased, and has Internatyional members as well.

Simple actions are needed, free up some bandwith show non clique members images appoint new moderators, revamp the non forum part of the site.

I think a major problem is that some of the moderators/admin are only half involved in photography, they shoot film then scan then use Photoshop. and they don't have full commitment top thespirit of LF photogrtaphy. That balance needs to change.

Ian

[joolsb]

There's a need for change

Is there? Shall we put this to a popular vote?

Very small changes would have huge benefits

So what are the changes and what are the benefits? Convince us (or at least try...)

Simple actions are needed, free up some bandwith show non clique members images appoint new moderators, revamp the non forum part of the site.

Well, the non-forum part does seem a little neglected, I'll give you that. New moderators? Why? And who? Surely not yourself?

I think a major problem is that some of the moderators/admin are only half involved in photography, they shoot film then scan then use Photoshop. and they don't have full commitment top thespirit of LF photogrtaphy. That balance needs to change.

Actually, in the 21st century where most of us live, the majority 'shoot film then scan then use Photoshop'. The minority of LF photographers who still use a wet darkroom do so because that's what they enjoy. Nothing wrong with that. But shouldn't moderators reflect the majority view? Or would you prefer they open themselves up to even more accusations of being part of a clique?

To be frank, I'm getting increasingly irritated by this discussion. So far all people are doing is defending positions with nothing positive being discussed. Either make some positive suggestions showing clear benefits or accept that the status quo isn't set to change anytime soon.