Maybe we should donate to Tuan's LF Site

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous Equipment' started by David Hall, Feb 26, 2003.

  1. David Hall

    David Hall Member

    Messages:
    470
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Location:
    South Pasade
    We have had some really informative threads here in the past few weeks. Les's split grade printing thread, the threads on pyro and Azo, the thread on cool tricks. Night photography. Jorge's and thilo's thread on testing.

    I notice that Tuan's LF site doesn't evolve as fast as it once did. Maybe we should re-write or at least edit some of these and offer them to him, maybe in exchange for a link (or more prominent link if there already is one). What do you think?

    dgh
     
  2. Eric Rose

    Eric Rose Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,421
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Location:
    Calgary AB,
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Sounds like a great idea. The wealth of information on this site is staggering. And none of the crap you have to wade thru on other prominent photo websites that will remain nameless.
     
  3. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,943
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I would guess that would depend on whether Tuan wants it and whether the contributors to these particular threads are interested in contributing, and whether Sean and Tuan want to do that sort of collaboration. I think it could be a good thing.
     
  4. Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,532
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    David, when we first started I e mailed Tuan and we have a link exchange with his site, is on the front page. As to the LF forum Tuan started there is some kind of hassle going with photo.net as to the archives, who should keep them etc. As I understand, Tuan got screwed and photo.net does not want the LF forum to move once more, IOW they sort of stole the forum under the "well Philip Greenspun was hosting it so we are keeping it" then there was supposed to be a "vote" by the members to see if they wanted the LF forum to stay at PN or move back under Tuans control, but then BM and PN backed out. In the end I think Tuan has gotten discouraged and they have let the forum die.
    After almost a couple of years I doubt pretty much the forum will move from pn and that there will be any further development for the LF forum.

    Since we have a link exchange with him I think it would be redundant to have the threads archived and posted in his site. His is more of an information site where the contribuitions are in the form of "articles" or reports, our is more of a free exchange Q&A type of site and I dont see them coupling well enoguh to warrant the effort on both parts.
    Personally I think Tuan is great and certainly would love to colaborate with him on any project, I just dont think this one is the one. OTOH I have no objection of having anyhting I have written reposted in his site.
     
  5. David Hall

    David Hall Member

    Messages:
    470
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Location:
    South Pasade
    Jorge,

    You make a good point. I know that his site is just about the first thing to come up when you do any kind of search for LF in Google or Yahoo and the other search engines, and it there is a lot of information there. But I see that our format is pretty significantly different. I know about the P.N history and I can imagine how discouraged he must be. It's terrible.

    dgh
     
  6. Dave Mueller

    Dave Mueller Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Location:
    Chalk Hill,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Can we stop whining about photo.net?

    The forums are a reflection of the moderators and the people who post questions and replies. What server they're on or who pays the bills is irrelevant and does not affect the quality of the information.

    The apparent "reduction in quality" of the LF forum is because it has a wider audience. It's true that it is a result of being integrated into photo.net, but the same thing would have happened if the photo.net link directed users to the old Usenet server.

    I'm not sticking up for any site, just getting tired of all the whining. I've read all of the posts about the move on Tuan's site and photo.net. I read photo.net, APUG, F32, Usefilm and the Ilford site daily. Different characters, but a lot of the same information (and a lot of it already exists in the photo.net archives). All of them are good resources if you are smart enough to skip the stuff that you don't care about. Some of the attitudes are unbelievable.

    Dave
     
  7. bmac

    bmac Member

    Messages:
    2,156
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Why not just reformat the stuff here and post it under APUG content in the link portal?
     
  8. Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,532
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dave Mueller @ Mar 7 2003, 01:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Can we stop whining about photo.net?

    The forums are a reflection of the moderators and the people who post questions and replies. What server they're on or who pays the bills is irrelevant and does not affect the quality of the information.

    The apparent &quot;reduction in quality&quot; of the LF forum is because it has a wider audience. It's true that it is a result of being integrated into photo.net, but the same thing would have happened if the photo.net link directed users to the old Usenet server.

    I'm not sticking up for any site, just getting tired of all the whining. I've read all of the posts about the move on Tuan's site and photo.net. I read photo.net, APUG, F32, Usefilm and the Ilford site daily. Different characters, but a lot of the same information (and a lot of it already exists in the photo.net archives). All of them are good resources if you are smart enough to skip the stuff that you don't care about. Some of the attitudes are unbelievable.

    Dave </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
    Nobody is whining about PN. A member asked if some of the APUG forum content can be "donated" to Tuan's LF forum. As things stand I dont thing this is feasible.

    Where did you read about photo.net on this thread that was not as historical reference?

    As far as I am concerned, and I think is the feeling many members on this forum have I could not care less what pn does, nor do I think people are "whining" on this thread!
     
  9. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,943
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    One thing to be clear about is that the LF Forum, which Tuan started and was ported to photo.net, is really a different thing from Tuan's LF page, largeformatphotography.info. I think the original suggestion was to collaborate with Tuan on his LF page, which has nothing to do with photo.net. As to the suggestion, I think that's entirely up to Tuan. He's maintaining the page quite well, and if he wants to solicit submissions, it is up to him as editor to do so.
     
  10. Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,532
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Right David. The other thing is that Tuan and Björn have started another LF forum, but so far it is in the "testing" stage and has been for quite a long time.
    So to make it clear, APUG content would be hard to "incorporate" into Tuan's LF page and Tuan's LF forum seems to be dying. So either way at the time I dont think this is a workeable project. Plus I agree with David, Tuan as the editor of the LF page should be one to solicit content if he does desire.