Page 4 of 5

Re: RIP

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 6:06 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Sal Santamaura
Andrew Plume wrote:...there are many members over on the 'LFPF' who have either indicated or said that they are pretty apprehensive of posting on that forum, because of a few regularly posting hot heads and semi-nutters on there who love nothing other than a quick sharp written skirmish, which often ends up in belittling the original poster. I've often stood back because I don't want to see my rear end get blown off, this forum has an opportunity for those to air their views on here without that happening...
Andrew, I can't agree with your use of the phrase "many members." There is a small number of LFPF members who, after making factually incorrect posts or violating the rules, get 'called out' by others in a polite, civil manner and don't like it. Then they go ballistic. The moderation team there has recently been expanded and announced that it will strictly enforce LFPF guidelines. Since then, things have calmed down to be a quite friendly place where photography views and information can be freely shared.

I have always found your forum very welcoming to this guest from across the pond and hope you all continue to thrive here. Conversely, the LFPF is a wonderful place for UK people to visit whenever they want to jump the pond in that direction. May both thrive and cross-pollinate our communities with the best of large format photography.

My best wishes to all for a happy holiday season and safe, prosperous new year.

Re: RIP

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 7:43 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
thanks Sal

I accept what you have said

regards

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:51 am Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Marizu
It always seemed to me that participation in this forum dropped when we expanded the number of sub-forums. There are probably some metrics to refute or support this hypothesis.
That expansion diluted the low posting rate across the sub-forums making some individual ones appear dead and removing much of the traffic from General Discussion so that looks dead, too.
I don't think that covering wet, dry and alt in a single forum with a small active membership is too much.

I have to admit, I do find the (US) Large Format Forum to be very friendly. There appears to be a broader spread of subject matter interest there, too.
In the UK, we seem to be romantic aspirational landscape oriented for the most part (technically strong, conventionally beautiful pictures). Changes like the loss of Velvia sheets will impact a community that celebrates that aesthetic.

There is a lot of good in this forum and there are a lot of nice participants.

Re: RIP

Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 7:34 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
Marizu wrote:It always seemed to me that participation in this forum dropped when we expanded the number of sub-forums. There are probably some metrics to refute or support this hypothesis.
That expansion diluted the low posting rate across the sub-forums making some individual ones appear dead and removing much of the traffic from General Discussion so that looks dead, too.
I don't think that covering wet, dry and alt in a single forum with a small active membership is too much.

I have to admit, I do find the (US) Large Format Forum to be very friendly. There appears to be a broader spread of subject matter interest there, too.
In the UK, we seem to be romantic aspirational landscape oriented for the most part (technically strong, conventionally beautiful pictures). Changes like the loss of Velvia sheets will impact a community that celebrates that aesthetic.

There is a lot of good in this forum and there are a lot of nice participants.

I agree, there is very much "....a broader spread of subject matter interest there, too..." AND yes, over here, we do seem to be verging towards being "romantic aspirational landscape oriented"................

anyhow there is the revamped Ektar to presumably pick up the slack from the loss of Velvia.......................??

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 12:45 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Charles Twist
I've been away for Christmas, so apologies for the silence. Most of what needed saying has been said however.

Ian Grant's addition to the US LF forum brought back many memories. We who run the forum, have tried to implement a couple suggestions. The most noticible is the splitting of the forums so that those who are allergic to colour film or - god help us - digital sensors can chat among themselves. Very clearly, there's been little pick-up and Marizu may well be right.

It so happens that much of the fresh discussion on this forum involves a small group of people. By necessity, they talk about what interests them. It may seem that the forum is biased towards them as a result, but really there is nothing to stop anyone from talking about anything LF-related from achromatic doublets made ca 1825 to the latest Symmar XL lenses.

It's a shame more meetings have not been publicised on here. Ian's at Ironbridge wasn't, so it's not surprising nobody turned up. I've tried encouraging people to give formal notice or create meetings, but most are too busy - with the notable exception of the south coast clique.

Why has the forum slowed down? Apart from the reasons mentioned (dwindling film supply and ever-improving sensors, poor weather, slow processing of new applicants (which is being sorted out as I write)), I want to add the poor economic climate which has forced me (and others who administer the forum) to tend to cash-generation rather than volunteer services or start new threads. Also there comes a point where one has acquired enough technical knowledge and must then tend to creating new art. The general perception is that this forum is about sharing methods and instruments (a common obstacle) rather than discussing the more personal aspects of one's personal artistic development. As Andrew says, we may need to hear more about that.

But it's not all bad - there's a new meeting in Keswick coming up. I hope Andrew, Vanman and Ian Grant will join us and share with us some of their findings.

Happy New Year!
Charles

Edit: I am quite mistaken. Ian's meeting appeared on this forum. My apologies for the oversight and any offence cause.

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:38 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
Charles, welcome back, a very constructive post

Ian's involvement on the US site, presumably you're referring to the 'feedback section' and something like this - http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ ... ve-threads - there has been some flak flying around on there, sorry Sal...................it's just a fact and does add some spice, at times

I very much hope that no one who looks at this forum considers that I'm promoting a bias towards my interests, Charles, I know that you do not feel that way (at all) you have rightly flagged this, all that I'm doing is to 'lob in some different stuff', simply because others may not have seen it AND I hope that others will add with their interests too regarding other people's work. As has been said recently, LF is a broad church and long may this continue

It's no surprise that as you say, the forum has slown down, we're still in semi-financial meltdown mode and quite rightly those who have posted regularly in the past have to deal with their own 'financials' first and this when there's spare time etc etc

'Instruments' in the form of, I guess Cameras, need to be shown on here - they're only boxes with two openings after all, no shame if one feels that their own are **a*, at all, it's the produced image after all AND we need to see more of member's work, critique isn't always required, just a desire to have it seen............imo.........

well Keswick's a decent drive from here, although there are others who live further away, I'll give it some thought, however I can't tolerate getting wet................well.............

regards

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:46 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
Andrew Plume wrote:
Sal Santamaura wrote:
Dave Tolcher wrote:...Joe...always understood the advantages of movements although I understand that the seen work appeared to limit that to tilt/rise/fall...
Leaving out what? Swing/shift [cross]? Those are hardly ever needed for landscape work.
yes, + 1

andrew

I've just 're-thought' this one Sal..................................

here's another consideration, an image which I've recently posted in another thread on here:-

http://www.andrewren.com/Summer_2009/21.html

it bucks the trend towards 'straight landscape' f64 'AA style stuff'

regards

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:06 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Charles Twist
Cough, splutter. You can't take a picture like that! It has to be all in focus, surely. :? :wink:
Maybe somebody else might be going through Oxon on the way to Keswick. Won't help with the rain that is bound to plague us... :cry: You could maybe put a message on the Keswick thread.
Charles

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:15 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
[quote="Charles Twist"]Cough, splutter. You can't take a picture like that! It has to be all in focus, surely. :? :wink:

yes, Charles, of course you can, you're merely teasing........................................... :roll:

one Paul Strand made some superb images in that area, of course his take on said rock was 'just as it was', i.e. as seen to his eye

regards

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:32 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Sal Santamaura
Andrew Plume wrote:...I've just 're-thought' this one Sal..................................

here's another consideration, an image which I've recently posted in another thread on here:-

http://www.andrewren.com/Summer_2009/21.html

it bucks the trend towards 'straight landscape' f64 'AA style stuff'...
I admit my comment was based on the traditional "straight landscape" approach where one's goal is to get everything in focus and as rectilinear as possible. The approach you've taken with that image didn't get close to entering my consciousness when writing the post. :)

I've never posted images on line or critiqued those of others who do. In all things aesthetic, from writing to music to painting/drawing/photography, it has always been my position that there is simply no "right" or "wrong," "good" or "bad." In the final analysis, it all comes down to "I like it" or "I don't like it." In my opinion, everything else is essentially gibberish. That's why forums tend to address nuts-and-bolts aspects of a medium rather than "art." With such content, there's at least a chance objective information can be exchanged. :D

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:50 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
Sal Santamaura wrote:
Andrew Plume wrote:...I've just 're-thought' this one Sal..................................

here's another consideration, an image which I've recently posted in another thread on here:-

http://www.andrewren.com/Summer_2009/21.html

it bucks the trend towards 'straight landscape' f64 'AA style stuff'...
I admit my comment was based on the traditional "straight landscape" approach where one's goal is to get everything in focus and as rectilinear as possible. The approach you've taken with that image didn't get close to entering my consciousness when writing the post. :)

I've never posted images on line or critiqued those of others who do. In all things aesthetic, from writing to music to painting/drawing/photography, it has always been my position that there is simply no "right" or "wrong," "good" or "bad." In the final analysis, it all comes down to "I like it" or "I don't like it." In my opinion, everything else is essentially gibberish. That's why forums tend to address nuts-and-bolts aspects of a medium rather than "art." With such content, there's at least a chance objective information can be exchanged. :D

exactly Sal

completely agree, actually it's not 'my image', wish it was though

regards

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:53 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Dave Tolcher
From what I remember Joe's Ebony had the swing capability removed as a custom modification now I think about it.

This sort of image I though was done in PS from a sharp image ? :lol: Clearly needed to use micro swing.....

Happy New Year

Dave

Re: RIP

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:40 am Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
Dave

.........although I haven't discussed the tech side of the image with Andrew Ren, who I've been in contact with in the past.......................

I'm pretty sure that there's nil Photoshop involvement here, it's simply the result of using the Canham swing effects to it's full capacity

aside from enjoying Andrew's work, we also have another factor in common, the use of the same 5 x 7 KBC model. When the bellows isn't restrited by using a short focal lens, the movements are almost excessive when compared to other View Cameras, particularly shift, for instance. I've produed very similar shots to Andrew's by playing around for as long as it takes and seeing the different effects that constantly appear on the ground glass by varying swing and shift at both ends

To me, the beauty of LF isn't just the larger neg, it's the abstract sense that can be achieved by choosing different movements

regards

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:47 am Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Andrew Plume
if anyone is interested, here's a link for the said 5 x 7 KBC:-

http://www.canhamcameras.com/4x5and5x7.htm

andrew

Re: RIP

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:14 am Etc/GMT-1+01:00
by Charles Twist
Andrew Plume wrote: To me, the beauty of LF isn't just the larger neg, it's the abstract sense that can be achieved by choosing different movements
Bang on! In fact, side shift enables off-centre perspective too - useful with lines disappearing in to the yonder.
For those using older lenses, they're also a convenient way of placing the sharpest part of the lens elsewhere than in the centre of the picture. Something not readily available with older cameras or newer lenses.

Best regards,
Charles