Where we go from here

Reading isn't the same as writing. I may want to contribute my two cents in spite of knowing that the OP has already made their choice.

sirs,

As to the original question, expanding themes such as how and what one actually does depict seems reasonable.
And the ancillaries to this process should also be discussed, not just the newest devices, but also such as is now and then in use even if produced years ago.

People who provide pictorial examples to discuss resolution should include enlargements of crucial elements (like mr. S from artaphot.ch uses to do on other fora) A system like that mr. Halgand seeks to enforce on his site: collections appareils.fr would be very useful. He wants posters talking about a specific photographic ddevice to put the name in square brackets in the title so that his software can sort everything and make it traceable afterwards.

Digressions should be welcomed if they bring deeper insight, Even if regugitating trivial issues like purchase of A versus B. However, repetitive slanging matches of the type "mine is best"- "no mine is best"- "how do you define "best",,etc." should be discouraged - In lieu of banning procedures, readers might distribute dunce caps so that the poster with say 5 of them might feel shamed into retiring. If not, a selectable mechanism rendeinhg such a poster invisible would relieve those who are bothered by the noise and a tally of how many have chosen to mute each culprit would serve as a guide to others

For my part i regularly browse several sites out of curiosity. Yesterday I found a slightly repetitive but very interesting piece on the internet archive where optical glass and quality control was debated while several net-myths about camera factories making their own glass- and the importance of exotic glass divorced from its role and preicse position was debunked. Yes, netsites as a form of textbook rather than a sales machine.

One advantage of this site as compared with the original is that one may skip to the end of a thread without becoming bogged down in adverts for other parts of the site.

summa summarum; continue as you are heading-

p.

If I got it right @TonyBeach was referring to the example of a typical "equipment purchase advice thread" rather than the OP here.

Very good points! I think quality is key, as well as some serious attempts at creating something unique and interesting, regardless of how 'trendy' it is. I‘m personally way more likely to register at a place online where I found relevant and well presented information on certain timeless topics, than a site which provides day-one reviews of the newest gear, but not much in terms of depth.

appareils.fr/ is for sale, the newest update in artaphot.ch/ is from 2011

I am not reactionary. I do NOT long for yesteryears or dwell in the past. I do not miss the odor of Dektol or my trusty old Speedgraphic. I can make do with fewer of the tinker toys that the manufacturers include in camers, but I can alwas shut them off.

Waht I do miss is some old-time literature- Photograhy Magazines and trade journals. Even the many consumer-based photography magazines had very informative and inspiring articles and editorials as well as ads and gear reports. There were lots of how-tos, behind-the-scenes articles about famous photographers, and as interesting pieces on newcomers to the professional and journalistic scene. There were do-it-yourself and make-it-yourself projects that were great for younger folks who could no necessity buy expensive accessories. There were workarounds for common issues. At one time the Journal of the Royal Photograhy Society contains lots of science and deep dives into technology. Publications like the Photo District News are gone or went online.

Journals published by professional photographers' associations and a few independent publishers also included technical and artistic content as well as, however, emphasized the business and promotional aspects of the craft. Overthe years, many magazines contained more ads than solid information and then they thinned out and finally disappeared. Many of the no-defunct magazines and current online tutorials, forums, and other photographically oriented media encourager fols to SPEND money rather than the possibility of MAKING money with their skills and equipment. Forme the acronym "GAS" implies digestive discomfort and motor fuel (Petrol)! Poisonous gas- inflammable gas- all not good!

Now everything photographic is online. Some sites are OK, some are not so much. and some are simply TERRIBLE, loaded with misinformation, unmitigated nonsense, and fruitless arguments. Peope wants to click on and get instant gratification. It seems that very few fokls want to read any more about things photograhic.

Many of the online forums and sites are inhabited by folks whose attitude is "been there, did that, and have the T-shirt"! Where are the fols who aspire to improve? Perhas a second career, the new kids on the block, the people who may aspire to become professional photogahers. So, they might click on a forum and are greeted by protracted gear arguments, all kinds of picayune philosophical debates, discouraging attitudes, and verbal mud-fights! And... politics- UGH!

Where are the people to encourage and help others- they are out there but seemingly, in short supply.

Getting back to the magazines- they had a table of contents so folks can select what read about, find their favorite columnists, or find some new that they are attracted to. This has a good selection of categories but soe is not specific enough to artist new mentees and keep the old ones interested.

Here are my suggestions- why not knock them around, see waht y'all think, and try for some changes?

Getting started in photography- articles, questions, and answers for newcomers to the craft.

Gearheads- Nothing but gear talk- trends, sales stats, rumors, waht's new, waht's old, clean debates, and opinions. If you actually suffer a bout with GAS- come here and work it out your OR in the U.S. and can buy Gas-X, and in the U.K try; Simethicone-Brand names: Wind-eze, WindSetlers, Infacol, Dentinox Colic Drops!

Wanny go pro?! The truth about the status of professional photogay today. waht is required, what is the mindset? How to pla and run a photogahy business. All the varios specialization an catagores. Education? Legalities. Contracts. Professional Organizations. Traditional categories like portraiture, weddings, and events commercial/product/food & beverage, and industrial. Architecture/interior/exterior/real estate, fashion, fine art, photojournalism/press.

Philosophy and etymology. Want to opine or debate on attitudes, motivations, and inspirations, take deep dives in to your or anyone else's psyche, and pick apart words and terms- this is the place!

Science and Technology- Heavy duty stuff- very deep dives into high-tech, optics, sensitometry, computer science, management, etc.

Tools and Techniques- Nut and bolts- straight talk about equipmet and applications.

Art and Aesthetics- Composition, color harmony, disharmony, monochromatic tonality, different style, and approaches.

Nostalgia- Wann tal about old-time stuff, equipm of the past, collectible camers as photographica, flash powder, obsolete processes, "the waywere were"? This is the section!

Complaint Department! "There ought to be a law" kind of thing. Scams, bad experiences with suppliers or dealers, too many prohibitions, entry fees, etc against photograhers. Statr you crusade here!

One more outrageous concept. Change the name. Reality check- DPR never came to its untimely demise and it no longer needs to be revived. The enter debacle was a massive blooper but it may have had a few good outcomes, like THIS new forum. Stat thig about NAMES- Who knows? "The Online Photograher's Workshop" "A Photogahers Place" ." The Photograhers' Compendium". " A Photogrhers' Community". Come 0n- y'all are creative- come up with something that does not appear as a clone or second best.

DPR is a gret forum, as formus go. I still post in two sections and the gang there is excellent. Competition is good and healthy and "NEW" is still oneof the most powerful words in advertising. So come up with a new twist on an old concept!

further to the comments above; ( ad hominem remarks are not particularly civilized) Stephan Koelliker still posts on MF lenses, while I do not know whether he has time to update his Artaphot site. and "collections appareils" seems to be in rude health and certainly not the same site as "apparails". My point, which may have escaped that commentator was not that one should visit those sites (although they are excellent) , rather that pictorial examples need a detailed view to enable conclusions AND that a rigorous method for writing subject matter with crucial info as to the maker of the device in question should be put between [ ] would make searches easier.

p.

You were quicker than me... I also wanted to mention that Stephan posts some really interesting and well made lens comparisons on mflenses, (which - in my opinion - is preferable anyway, because it's way easier to communicate, give feedback and additional infos about other samples of the same lenses etc. on a message board than on a personal website usually). I don't know the other site, but I'm sure you have good reasons for mentioning it.

All that being said, I didn't take the remark by @TimoK as a kind of attack on your credibility... I interpreted it as a humorous way of asking the question "... but where can we find those sources today?" or something to that effect. If that was indeed the case, I think it could have been worded differently, but I wouldn't have interpreted the "living in archives" line as an ad hominem attack, I guess... That's just my understanding and interpretation though - perhaps I'm wrong.

So, the owners of the site open up a thread to discuss the strategic direction of this site since DPR is staying open. And some people want to talk about thread vs flat views and other “important” strategic items. Ummmm, sure, Ok.

Guys who own this site: your efforts have been amazing to date. Take the site in whatever strategic direction you desire. Carve out the niche that you believe will make this site successful. Some will stay, some will leave, others will join, some will complain about the color of the home page. Regardless, move the site to what you wish or close it down as you desire. Your site, your rules.

I did not try to make an ad hominem attack. I am sorry if I made.
@simplejoy found my point. But it is better not to put anything between lines in foreign language. I edited my post.

since the remarks about "living in an archive". because of referring to sites (mistakenly) believed to be defunct, have disappeared, I cease to believe that it was intended as a slight and hope that this debate will continue to concentrate on the substance of how to run a forum.

p.

I certainly appreciate the time and effort as well as the finances that the founders of this new site have invested in this site. I did not mean my suggestions as "telling them waht to do"! I was given the impression, in direct communication with them, that they are looking for editorial concepts and ideas to differentiate this site from the original DPR forums.

Eventually, the ownership and management will make THEIR decisions but, they are wise to analyze the potential market and subscribers. Businesses, corporations, professional associations, retailers, and service companies spend lots of time and money to gather statistics, garner ratings, find out if the clients are satisfied, or not, and are constantly feeling out their marketplace.

Common sense is the collection of what's been learned about nature and people and by the age of 18.

It's not as quotable as Einstein but is more broadly applicable.

There is no need to define hostility. Any adult has, by definition, lived through childhood and puberty. Children are naturally cruel. Teens have mastered socialization skills well enough to elevate cruelty to a team sport.

I'm not saying every child is cruel or that every teen is a member of a group that uses cruelty as an instrument of power. But we've all seen it. Many of us have been personally guilty of cruelty towards others at least once or twice. It probably left a bad taste in one's mouth - bad enough to recognize that's not the person you want to be. But I doubt any of us is a virgin in this matter.

Moderation is done by a team for a reason. A team has a leader for a reason. If a team member strays, other members help nudge that person back on the correct path. If the behavior continues, the team leader gets involved in the nudging. If the behavior persists, the team member is dropped.

That sends an important message to the remaining team members. One, their efforts are supported by leadership. Two, no one person is so critical to the success of the team that they can't be dropped for failing to comport themselves according to the mission and values of the team.

There's no need for a definition of what hostility is. We know it when we see it...because we've seen it, been the target of it, or the deployer of it.

Personally, I believe the line is crossed when a member addresses their criticism at a person as opposed to the argument. When that line is crossed - when the negativity gets personal - that's when moderation is needed.

Of course, that's not the only manner in which a person can intentionally disrupt a discussion. The person who repeatedly & persistently gets involved in discussions to stir the pot and sew the seeds of frustration amongst others - trolling - doesn't insult others and may not even actually engage in the discussion other than to disagree.

The troll doesn't argue from a position of logic. They're disagreement isn't founded on a rational understanding of a fact or concept. Nor is their participation triggered by a recognition that someone has misrepresnted a fact or or misunderstood a concept.

The troll simply disagrees. They contribute gibberish - nothing of value - to the discussion. They ignore rational commentary made in response to their gibberish. They persistently disagree simply for the pleasure of watching others agonize over their irrationality, and refusal to acknowledge facts or logic.

The troll's objective is to be a metasticized cancer in a thread. They've succeeded when the majority of content added to the thread is in response to their gibberish. These posts do nothing to further an understanding of the central topic. The thread now exists solely to feed the engorged ego of the troll. All attention is focused on them and their (arguably benign) antagonism.

We have members who are trolls in this forum. They've been active from day one and have worked hard to transform the site into a stagnant swamp. They can be recognized by their thread-derailing comments that end up in the dumpster.

I just hope the dumpster area isn't too little, too late.

No, we don't need a definition of hostility. We need a membership and moderation team that's empowered to nudge a person back in line when their criticisms are directed at people. We need a leadership team that will not tolerate trolling. We also need a leadership team that will nudge a moderator back in line when they step in where moderation isn't needed.

Not sure telling the owners to do whatever they want in regards to strategic direction adds any more to the conversation than discussing flat view vs threaded. But yeah....."important".

What I would like to see is the magazine part of the site:
- state of the trade / trends,
- news,
- articles on masters and masterpieces,
- reviews,
- letters to the editor / opinions,
- tests,
- how-tos (techniques, DIY),
- tips and tricks,
- theory,
- buy / sell.