I think the OP makes an excellent point about using digital images for instruction purposes, assuming of course that the groups in question actually mean that he'd have to do what he assumes he'd have to, in order to post instructions with pictures
If I need knowledge to further my use and enjoyment of analogue cameras, processing etc which is the example he gave then why have rules that frustrates this?
The OP might not then bother to do what he thinks he is forced to and the only sufferers are those of us who need that knowledge that the OP possesses.
I was a recipient of the very instruction he mentions, namely the conversion of a 220 P645N insert to a 120 insert.
Thanks for that GRHazelton.
What might make sense is a rule that says that in the galleries all scans should be from prints and not from neg scans which like the instruction example the OP gives, should be confined to issues about neg problems such those of the "what went wrong here?" type
Thanks for the response, Pentaxuser. I was somewhat dismayed at the apparent anger my innocent post aroused. Unless I'm mistaken digital images are used on this forum for the very sort of purposes I was discussing. I'd wager that a lot of the illustrations in the APUG's Classified section are digital, and so what? No one is judging them on their artistic merit. In like fashion, describing a contact printer box would best be done with a picture! And the same applies to countless other aspect of photography, both digital and analog.
It too often seems that we film users are becoming too insular. We should try to be more inclusive, perhaps.
BTW, glad the 645 insert conversion process was useful. I wish I could claim credit for it, but I happened across it on Pentaxforums.com, one of the finest fora on the web.
Two of the sites have just announced that NO DIGITAL IMAGES of any sort will be permitted, on pain being banned from the group. This implies that, for example, if I wish to explain and demonstrate how to convert a Pentax 645 film insert from 220 to 120, or vice versa, I have to shoot on increasingly expensive film, process it, and then scan the negative in order to do what could be done digitally in moments.
Since all images on the web are in digital form, how would anyone know your instructional images were shot on film and scanned or digital camera (unless you told them)? In this sort of application, the d camera can be said to be scanning the scene - or you could use a d camera to scan film images.
So what if the owner of the groups to go as pure as you can on the net? Not ten years ago that was the only way to do it. Except it or go alsewhere. I don't know if 35 mm film is allowed but you can use that to shoot. Buy some cheap shanghai film to shoot that kind of stuff. But again if that is to much of a hassle or to expensive for you (i wouldn't bother to be honest) then there are plenty groups that are not so strickt
I find this thread comical on this site considering how strict they are HERE that even scanning a negative for posting is considered not ok... And you must make a print and then scan the print...
I've even had someone yell at me telling me that I should send my chrome images to Australia to have them printed on paper by someone with ilfochrome / Cibichrome paper rather than scan the slide...
This is why it's pretty ironic of a thread... It had to be said... There are ridiculous forum rules everywhere, just do your best and if they bitch to hard, leave or ignore them, that's what I've learned to do...
It's pretty simple, really. Just demonstrate good-faith and abide by the charter of whatever group(s) you choose to participate in. Online or in person. And if the charter becomes modified in a way that rules out your participation, then move to another group with a charter that more closely aligns with your needs, or start your own group and set the charter yourself.
It's the price one pays to participate in groups. Any groups. From three people on a street corner to membership in world-wide organizations. Group membership always imposes trade-offs and constraints. But group membership is also never required.
Plus, it's not petty. Not even close. It's just the polite thing to do. Socially correct behavior. One wouldn't show up at a meeting of wine connoisseurs only to demand that they all include in their discussions the beer you like to drink, right? Nor would one try to "beat the rules" by pouring one's beer into a wine bottle. At least I hope not.
"They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."
— Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs