Good sponsor idea. "When you're tired of working with a soft focus lens"
Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
I sort of enjoy this site and other forums on Internet because we don't have to even think about age, race, social class, income, sexual orientation, gender, religion, political affiliation, etc, etc, etc that in normal everyday life, someone often gets offended for whatever reasons. On this site, everyone is a photographer, and film enthusiast. That's all I need to know.
Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?
moose10101: literally 'taken away' I admit is a bit subjective here. But you must admit that when the baby was ready to exit the womb, it certainly SEEMED that way! Popular Photography and Shutterbug lost no time in 'unremembering' over one hundred years of analog.
David Goldfarb: It would be interesting and enticing to have an optional 'age' field on new memberships (as well as an addendum for existing ones). This could impart much.
And tkamiya, although the 'political correctness' part might be appealing to you and others, the net result of actually knowing how old newcomers are would be mighty informative towards understanding just how healthy analog really is. New blood does mean something here and I think that that posits political sensitivities as clearly subordinate. There is more to life than self-esteem, dear. - David Lyga
In my opinion the trend has been moving younger, but that doesn't mean they are young, more like middle aged. A noticeable share of introductions are from people "returning" to analog, or discovering after some time with other things. I think it is important to note that this information is merely a generalization. We have all sorts of participants. Trends have a way of being unreliable indicators, as many aren't recognized until they are in full swing. Other sorts of trends are sometimes other things than they appear. Also, the sample size here is very small, so an exogenic event, for example an instructor recommending APUG in class, can change the "trend" very discernibly.
Last edited by JBrunner; 03-30-2013 at 10:06 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I can't stop that cynical part of my brain thinking the increase in members are just people herding to try and grab the last piece of pie, so to speak.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
The problem with being cynical is that the world very often proves one right.
Originally Posted by batwister
I occasionally use the "spy" function to catch the drift of conversations on the forum. I am encouraged by the number of "new member introductions" that scroll by on a regular basis. And yes, reading the posts of new members it appears that the younger demographic is well represented.
That's about all the navel-gazing I'm up to today. It's too nice outside to be sitting here talking about taking photographs instead of actually doing it.
Tom, on Point Pelee, Canada
Ansel Adams had the Zone System... I'm working on the points
system. First I points it here, and then I points it there...
Does this BBS give the option for an anonymous poll embedded in a thread? That might be interesting.
I am a night person and really enjoy being online late. This board doesn't seem to get much activity after 11 p.m. EST in the U.S.
For an unscientific subjective opinion, using stereotypes (the universe revolves around the U.S., old people go to bed early, etc.), the dearth of late-nite posting would suggest most of us are well over 50
(Before I get flamed, that was a JOKE.)
Why spy? Just curious. I do similar just be opening and reading threads. What advantage is there to spy mode?
Originally Posted by Toffle
That's because those two publications (and others) exist to sell advertising and product reviews. They are hardly textbooks or historical documents.
Originally Posted by David Lyga
Yes. We had similar discussion back when there were only 30K, 40K, or 50K "members". The 63K+ number only means that number of individuals visited the site once and signed up. At any given time, there are probably only a couple of hundred folks who are actually active on the board. A few years ago, when we could access the member list, I did an analysis to see how many "members" had only ever posted once, or not at all. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was significantly high!
Originally Posted by JBrunner
All of the local photographers that I "met" through apug years ago, and still know and see, have for the most part stopped posting.* This is not a complaint, just an observation and statement of the situation. On the plus side, even though I can name dozens who have come and gone (and there are probably 1000's worldwide) almost all of these folks still shoot film, they just ran their course on apug.
My point is: we probably cannot accurately gauge the health of chemical photography based on apug. We wish we could, and this sort of discussion comes up periodically, but I don't think it will ever hold up statistically.
* just a couple of weeks ago, I was with a group of 11 local photographers, and when I mentioned apug, one remarked that I had really "stuck it out" here.
Last edited by David Brown; 03-30-2013 at 03:56 PM. Click to view previous post history.