Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,811   Posts: 1,581,553   Online: 951
      
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 78
  1. #51
    Dave Wooten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Vegas/mysterious mohave co. az, Big Pine Key Fla.
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    2,718
    Images
    20
    Met a young lovely there in days gone by....if a body meet a body comin through the pampas...such sweet memories....not a bad thing at all.

  2. #52
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    Sorry: there is something I don't understand here.... what does Cortaderia selloana have to do with anything? I suppose you could make paper from it...

    So, I'm a little confused: please explain the "Pampas friends" reference.

    Cheers, Bob.

  3. #53
    Pastiche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    319
    I'm from Rio....
    and I print only FB.....

    if those Pampas muchachos like to print in FB as well...
    well then... they must know what they are doing...

    I'll take as manh Pampas Friends as I can find.... ;.)

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Jorge
    Awwww..poor baby, see what you did Don? You made him cry....LOL......
    I honestly thought I would come here to APUG to get away from all the childishness and tendentiousness of USENET and photo.net. I see that people here are just the same, it's just that they now have their own more narrowly defined group in which to operate. It's a shame really and I see my quest for a civilised group with open minds is still ongoing. Not that anyone here will care. You all seem to have found your niche and are happy operating within it, excluding or driving away anyone who doesn't fit the profile.

  5. #55
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,482
    Images
    20
    You know, I originally read that "pampas" reference as some obscure ethnic slur, but after a night's sleep and a cup of coffee I'm thinking, maybe it was just bad spelling for "pompous."
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  6. #56
    Struan Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    914
    I have a lot of friends in Pampers. Good photo models, but useless when it comes to money.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,599
    Images
    112
    The whole RC versus Fiber paper thing is similar in a way to the digital versus analog print thing. Expediancy versus longevity/quality. It seems that most people who sell their photos can be broken down into 2 major groups, those that want true archival durability for their prints and that last bit of quality, and are willing to go to the extra steps needed, and those who just care about their prints lasting long enough to satisfy a buyer and are not willing to go to the extra length to give their buyer that added benefit.

    Personally I don't see how using fiber prints is that much more inconvenient than using fiber. So big deal they have to wash longer and need to be toned, to me that is just a minor increase in my work load and having the piece of mind that my prints will long out live me is worth it to me as I don't view my life's work as being disposable. I have to say, and I could be very wrong, but the fact that someone would cut corners in their printing by using RC makes me wonder about the level of commitment that they have when they are printing and if they wash and fix their RC paper sufficiently to even have RC's maximum life expectancy.

    Some of us really care about our work, the quality of it, and whatever legacy we leave behind. There are those who handle their prints and mats with white gloves knowing that an invisible fingerprint on a print today will be a highly visible one in 20-30 years. I got into the glove habit when I assisted for Arnold Newman. He told me on the first day that if he ever saw me handle a print, a negative or even a magazine that had his work without gloves, I'd be fired on the spot.

    I feel that when someone buys your work they are inviting you into their life. They will hang your print in their home, they will see it everyday, their children may grow up with that print being a small part of their life. I know for some people just the act of buying the print was a small occasion. I know that when I buy art I am making in essence a lifetime commitment. To be fair I will live with that art longer than my dog, my heirs may end up with that art. You never know. So when I produce a print for sale or as a gift, I produce it with the intention that it can be passed down through generations. Aren't we all glad that Ansel Adams and Weston's prints were produced archivally? Can you imagine if they weren't and if their work started dissappearing before our eyes 30 years ago?

  8. #58
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
    You know, I originally read that "pampas" reference as some obscure ethnic slur, but after a night's sleep and a cup of coffee I'm thinking, maybe it was just bad spelling for "pompous."
    Good thinking: "pompous" would fit, and given that he could not even spell the thread title correctly... (just one entry in my bestseller: "Things That Irritate Me", see Volume 3, page 716)...

    aterlecki: very selective quote there. Read back and recall that Jorge's repost was in reply to ilfordrapid calling everyone on this forum a jackass and one in particular "pompous" (? actually "pampas" :rolleyes: ). You can hardly be amazed if someone takes a swipe back. You may also care to note that several people spoke up in favour of RC prints and that no one felt any need to attack them. It only got personal when ilfordrapid got personal: not before.


    Cheers, Bob.

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,599
    Images
    112
    Having read the whole "common man" sthick I can't help but smile. It just seems like reverse pretention to me. Like the rest of us who produce our prints with greater effort and expense and who may have the audacity to charge for that greater time and effort don't care about the "common man". I don't direct my work towards any particular audience, I charge what I charge for my prints because that is what I need to get paid for my work in order to be able to continue to do it.
    At the same time I do make my work available in a very accessible way to all, many of my images are widely available as posters.

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob F.
    Good thinking: "pompous" would fit, and given that he could not even spell the thread title correctly... (just one entry in my bestseller: "Things That Irritate Me", see Volume 3, page 716)...

    aterlecki: very selective quote there. Read back and recall that Jorge's repost was in reply to ilfordrapid calling everyone on this forum a jackass and one in particular "pompous" (? actually "pampas" :rolleyes: ). You can hardly be amazed if someone takes a swipe back. You may also care to note that several people spoke up in favour of RC prints and that no one felt any need to attack them. It only got personal when ilfordrapid got personal: not before.


    Cheers, Bob.
    Yes I could have picked many other quotes to demonstrate the general descent into ad hominem attacks, but while it was selective, it was also representative of the general malaise of proper argument in this day and age. Responding in kind hardly keeps you on the moral high ground and, as far as I'm concerned, you might as well just roll up your sleeves and try and beat the crap out of each other to try and win the argument. It simply becomes thuggery.

    From what I've seen in this thread people close their minds to proper debate, switch ground when they sense things are going against them, and prefer to take refuge in dogma and their own familarities to argue their point. If that should fail then attacking the person is the last resort and is really beneath contempt. Of course it's not just this thread. Politicital debate is the the paragon of this type of argumentation.

    I would happily debate my position endlessly as there are many things that are in this thread that deserve addressing but I would rather do so with people who are willing to entertain other opinions and alter their own positions as they become more informed by the vast knoweldge that is out there. That is how we progress as people. Insisting on holding a position based upon experience 20 years ago seems very strange to me and doesn't give me much hope for meaningful debate.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin