Can the Sports section get it's own talk area?

[Sauk]

I see a ton of stuff being moved to other areas that deal with sports because it talks about lighting, or other general ideas. But in the end they are still about sports. Can we have a sub forum for the sports section in order to actually talk about sports and techniques without having them moved and lost in other forums?

I think it would greatly help out people and without a doubt lose important discussions because they were moved to other parts of the forum most never read.

Thanks

[royv]

+1 :D

[cdifoto]

It didn't work out for weddings. Sports are no different.

[topher04r1]

i like the idea .. !

[namasste]

Agreed, great idea Matt.

[Sauk]

weddings are very different then sports. It like I said allows us sports people a place to post questions about lighting, processing, etc... in the sports area where sports people visit the most. If you notice once posts are moved out of the sports forum they are lost and no one replies in the threads anymore.

Now again I am sure we won't get one, but to me it is at least worth asking for :D

[Cadwell]

Explain why (subject matter and technique aside) sports photography is different from wedding photography or indeed any other photographic discipline. Explain why sports photography should be treated preferentially over the other disciplines within POTN?

As has already been noted, this was tried for weddings and didn't work out... why would sports or indeed any other subject be different?

[namasste]

Explain why (subject matter and technique aside) sports photography is different from wedding photography or indeed any other photographic discipline. Explain why sports photography should be treated preferentially over the other disciplines within POTN?

As has already been noted, this was tried for weddings and didn't work out... why would sports or indeed any other subject be different?

whoa Glenn, I don't think Matt is suggesting it's really different in terms of subject or technique. His point is simply that there are lighting issues and whatnot that are germain to sports (like other types of photography as well). When those threads are moved to more general areas, the posts are often lost to those who have the most input to offer. If we can't get a subforum, could we at least suggest not moving posts around unless competely off topic?

[cdifoto]

whoa Glenn, I don't think Matt is suggesting it's really different in terms of subject or technique. His point is simply that there are lighting issues and whatnot that are germain to sports (like other types of photography as well). When those threads are moved to more general areas, the posts are often lost to those who have the most input to offer. If we can't get a subforum, could we at least suggest not moving posts around unless competely off topic?

Same argument was made for weddings.

[namasste]

Same argument was made for weddings.


for those of us who haven't been here as long, could someone give some background on why sports related (or wedding related) posts need to be moved? I understand the whole issue with another subforum but what about moving posts?

[tommykjensen]

for those of us who haven't been here as long, could someone give some background on why sports related (or wedding related) posts need to be moved? I understand the whole issue with another subforum but what about moving posts?

The sports forum and birds and nature&animals etc are forums for sharing photos. For discussions about technique, ligthing etc we have talk about photography etc

[Cadwell]

for those of us who haven't been here as long, could someone give some background on why sports related (or wedding related) posts need to be moved? I understand the whole issue with another subforum but what about moving posts?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/announcement.php?f=30

Second post.

[namasste]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/announcement.php?f=30

Second post.

thanks for that. I don't completely agree but that's okay too, afterall, it's not my show here. Thanks for educating me with that link.

[AdamLewis]

I just wish the stuff would stop being moved from the sports section. I dont have time to peruse through 20 different subforums so I stick to EOS, EF, and Sports. I know I could help people if they had questions, but as soon as someone posts something thats not a picture, Im sure theres about 50 people who have nothing better to do that are reporting the post and get a moderator to move it. People ask sports questions in the sports forum because thats where a lot of people hang out.

[Skip Souza]

If a thread is started in a photo sharing forum that does not share photos you may rest assured that it will be moved to a more appropriate non photo sharing forum. I don't know what else to say.

[cdifoto]

I don't know what else to say.

I do! I do! And here it is:

Not finding, reading, and/or responding to all the threads pertaining to sports photography will not kill you.

[AdamLewis]

If a thread is started in a photo sharing forum that does not share photos you may rest assured that it will be moved to a more appropriate non photo sharing forum. I don't know what else to say.

Haha believe me. Im very aware of this.

[primoz]

Personally I would prefer such thing too, but I know it just won't work. Business section is perfect sample of this. 90% of posts in business section have completely no business aspect. Questions like "what kinda pocket camera do you pros suggest me to buy?" are not really business questions.
And no matter how much I would wish for separate sport section (not photo sharing section), I just know it wouldn't work. I still agree sport shooting is different then wedding shooting, which is different then birds shooting, and each field has it's own issues with technique, lightning, equipment etc., and to be honest, I'm not interested in reading about weddings. But don't take me wrong, because I don't mean anything bad with this. I don't think shooting sport is more then shooting wedding or vice versa. Shooting sport is my job, and I'm just not interested in shooting weddings, that's it. Just personal taste, nothing more.:)

[bacchanal]

Part of the problem is that the level of discussion is simply much better in the photo sharing forums than it is in the "Talk about Photography" forums. "Talk about Photography" threads tend to get a large amount of irrelevant posts from people who may not understand the specific circumstances that the OP is facing. I know the idea is to route the discussion to the technique forums, but imo it just isn't really working effectively. It seems that the current solution is more effective at eliminating forum traffic than merging it.

There was a thread in the performing arts section awhile back in which the OP and others posted images, but because much of the discussion was about technique, the thread was moved. Still, other similar threads remain in the performing arts section. It seems to just depend on the whim of the mods where a thread will end up.

[bacchanal]

I do! I do! And here it is:

Not finding, reading, and/or responding to all the threads pertaining to sports photography will not kill you.

This doesn't address the entire problem. Low light to a sports shooter is different than low light to a concert shooter or a wedding shooter. It's annoying to have to filter advice (or to get bad advice) from people who don't understand a specific shooting environment.

Also, there is no lighting technique forum, and very little lighting discussion goes on in "Talk about photography". There doesn't seem to be a problem with discussing technique in the equipment forums, but technique can't be discussed in the photo sharing forums. Is there a logical reason for this?

[cdifoto]

This doesn't address the entire problem. Low light to a sports shooter is different than low light to a concert shooter or a wedding shooter. It's annoying to have to filter advice (or to get bad advice) from people who don't understand a specific shooting environment.

My response was to Adam saying he doesn't have time to go looking for certain threads.

I beg to differ about the low light sports vs low light weddings. Same technicals apply.

Can't use flash in a wedding ceremony? No? Ok let's try a fast aperture lens with good AF capabilities. IS can help for some parts but don't count on it completely because movement of the bride's head can become blurred if you push it too far. Can't use flash at a basketball game? No? Ok let's try a fast aperture lens with good AF capabilities. IS won't be of much use for the action but it can help a little bit with crowd and environment captures in general.

See the parallels?

Also, there is no lighting technique forum, and very little lighting discussion goes on in "Talk about photography".

Yes there is. It's called "Small Flash & Studio Lighting."

There doesn't seem to be a problem with discussing technique in the equipment forums, but technique can't be discussed in the photo sharing forums. Is there a logical reason for this?

As far as I see it, yes. Sharing photos and discussing photos is one thing. Discussing the proper equipment to do certain things (or certain things you can do with certain equipment) is another.

Low light shooting is low light shooting whether it's a wedding or a sport or a person duct taped to a chair.

Flash photography is flash photography.

Post-processing is post-processing.

[CyberDyneSystems]

We are actually discussing a way to solve this, using other solutions.

We do want to maintain the separation of Image sharing forum vs. Discussion forums. One of THE MOST repeated requests re Image forums, concerns how fast an image forum is moving, and how quickly some threads with zero replies/views may drop off the front page.
If we add in pages of discussion in the share forums not related to shared images or critique, we will exacerbate these concerns and complaints.

As mentioned we experimented with "all in one forum" once already and it did not work out well with POTNs structure and atmosphere.

One idea being considered instead of one "Talk about photography" perhaps by adding subforums to "Talk about photography"

[CyberDyneSystems]

This doesn't address the entire problem. Low light to a sports shooter is different than low light to a concert shooter or a wedding shooter. It's annoying to have to filter advice (or to get bad advice) from people who don't understand a specific shooting environment.

Also, there is no lighting technique forum, and very little lighting discussion goes on in "Talk about photography". There doesn't seem to be a problem with discussing technique in the equipment forums, but technique can't be discussed in the photo sharing forums. Is there a logical reason for this?

I think there is a tendency to over think all this, with the categorization. Maybe it serves to make a point to do so, but it does not help the forum or it's users any, so I can't say I like it much.

As mentioned above there is a forum to talk about lighting, and there are forums to discuss all of what you have mentioned, they just don't happen to be in the Image sharing forums, and they may not all be divied up into little pizza slices or arranged in the particular fashion that every user would do there own sock drawer.

It has to work for 100,000 people, and this forum really is set up to satisfy that as best possible. When we try to accommodate certain specific needs vs. the needs of the whole forum, we end up backtracking as it is the wrong direction to go in.

[namasste]

I beg to differ about the low light sports vs low light weddings. Same technicals apply.

Low light shooting is low light shooting whether it's a wedding or a sport or a person duct taped to a chair.

Flash photography is flash photography.



While there are some parallels (key word some) this isn't entirely true. Great example is dragging the shutter for a low light wedding portrait. Great technique to use and very effective when done right. Give that a shot in a HS gym for a basketball game and I don't think your results are going to sell to many parents. Both low light situations where creative use of ss, ISO, aperture and flash come into play yet in very different ways.

[CyberDyneSystems]

And why does it kill the sports photographer to discuss there specific needs in a forum where a Birder or Portrait photographer may do the same? Do you get kudees?

This is the part I simply can't understand :)

Guys. You don't need an entire lighting sandbox all to yourself, it's that simple.

[namasste]

Guys. You don't need an entire lighting sandbox all to yourself, it's that simple.

fair enough and your previous responses were well put also since they give solid reasoning behind the decision to do things this way. my last response was to point out that some of the "arguments" being made prior were just that since they are not entirely true statements and I think the poster knows that.

[cdifoto]

While there are some parallels (key word some) this isn't entirely true. Great example is dragging the shutter for a low light wedding portrait. Great technique to use and very effective when done right. Give that a shot in a HS gym for a basketball game and I don't think your results are going to sell to many parents. Both low light situations where creative use of ss, ISO, aperture and flash come into play yet in very different ways.

Both of those techniques (dragging the shutter vs shooting at sync or HSS) can and would both be discussed together in Small Flash & Studio Lighting since it's usage of flash.

Photography is really about learning as much as possible and figuring out how to apply that knowledge when and where it's best. It's not about being told how to shoot a certain thing and then going out and producing the same images everyone else produces.

It'd be a shame to go into a Sports section for advice and only be told one way to shoot a certain sport. Learn as much as you can and apply what you need when you need it AND don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone and try something new.

Same goes for processing. I learn a lot of things that I can apply to different scenarios. Someone might write up a tutorial on how they sharpened a macro of a flower and I think "oh awesome...I can use that for BRIDAL BOUQUETS!" If I only ever hung out in the wedding section and saw how people are sharpening general people photos (you don't typically sharpen people as much as you do static objects), and that tutorial was in the "macro talk" section that I would never visit due to lack of interest in macros, I may never have found out about that technique.

I see it as centralizing the knowledge and specializing the results.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Personally I would prefer such thing too, but I know it just won't work. Business section is perfect sample of this. 90% of posts in business section have completely no business aspect. Questions like "what kinda pocket camera do you pros suggest me to buy?" are not really business questions.

I don't see that in the business section right now. One thread was moved today as it was about gear/lenses, but the rest seem on topic to me.

You can always help us out by reporting OT threads in the business section. They will be moved to the proper forum.

[AdamLewis]

My response was to Adam saying he doesn't have time to go looking for certain threads.

I beg to differ about the low light sports vs low light weddings. Same technicals apply.

Can't use flash in a wedding ceremony? No? Ok let's try a fast aperture lens with good AF capabilities. IS can help for some parts but don't count on it completely because movement of the bride's head can become blurred if you push it too far. Can't use flash at a basketball game? No? Ok let's try a fast aperture lens with good AF capabilities. IS won't be of much use for the action but it can help a little bit with crowd and environment captures in general.

See the parallels?



Yes there is. It's called "Small Flash & Studio Lighting."



As far as I see it, yes. Sharing photos and discussing photos is one thing. Discussing the proper equipment to do certain things (or certain things you can do with certain equipment) is another.

Low light shooting is low light shooting whether it's a wedding or a sport or a person duct taped to a chair.

Flash photography is flash photography.

Post-processing is post-processing.

Your "parallels" are hardly anything that puts sports anywhere close to weddings aside from they both use a camera. In sports you have to deal with cropping very tight, all images must be super sharp, you have to control noise, you must maintain a fast shutter speed, you must get quality action in your pictures (this normally involves faces and pucks/balls/clubs/fists), you must know how to properly crop tight, you must know how to use AI Servo, you must know how to use long lenses, you must know how to make do in the very worst of weather...Do I need to continue?

Sounds sooo much like wedding photography, right? :rolleyes:

[cdifoto]

fair enough and your previous responses were well put also since they give solid reasoning behind the decision to do things this way. my last response was to point out that some of the "arguments" being made prior were just that since they are not entirely true statements and I think the poster knows that.

Your misunderstanding of my statements does not make them false.

[cdifoto]

Your "parallels" are hardly anything that puts sports anywhere close to weddings aside from they both use a camera. In sports you have to deal with cropping very tight, all images must be super sharp, you have to control noise, you must maintain a fast shutter speed, you must get quality action in your pictures (this normally involves faces and pucks/balls/clubs/fists), you must know how to properly crop tight, you must know how to use AI Servo, you must know how to use long lenses, you must know how to make do in the very worst of weather...Do I need to continue?

Sounds sooo much like wedding photography, right? :rolleyes:

Seems you've never shot a wedding. I use a lot of sports technique for weddings.

[AdamLewis]

Not finding, reading, and/or responding to all the threads pertaining to sports photography will not kill you.

Such a solid argument! .. only not ..

So now youre saying you advocate a setup that gives less traffic to people looking for questions?

[Permagrin]

One idea being considered instead of one "Talk about photography" perhaps by adding subforums to "Talk about photography"

This sounds like a great idea.

The one thing I've noticed is that while the principles of lighting (for example) may be the same, the application seems to be different in every venue. (I'm just learning lighting and just when I think I understand a new obstacle arises).

While I think that there's an inherent danger for isolationism to happen in subforums, I also think that if the chat threads are kept in chat and the actual questions concerning issues are addressed in those subforums, this could be a real benefit to the knowledge base.

[namasste]

Both of those techniques (dragging the shutter vs shooting at sync or HSS) can and would both be discussed together in Small Flash & Studio Lighting since it's usage of flash.

Photography is really about learning as much as possible and figuring out how to apply that knowledge when and where it's best. It's not about being told how to shoot a certain thing and then going out and producing the same images everyone else produces.

It'd be a shame to go into a Sports section for advice and only be told one way to shoot a certain sport. Learn as much as you can and apply what you need when you need it AND don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone and try something new.

Same goes for processing. I learn a lot of things that I can apply to different scenarios. Someone might write up a tutorial on how they sharpened a macro of a flower and I think "oh awesome...I can use that for BRIDAL BOUQUETS!" If I only ever hung out in the wedding section and saw how people are sharpening general people photos (you don't typically sharpen people as much as you do static objects), and that tutorial was in the "macro talk" section that I would never visit due to lack of interest in macros, I may never have found out about that technique.

I see it as centralizing the knowledge and specializing the results.

okay, on all of that I completely agree and you really do bring up some great points that, if applied, will help keep everyone from getting stagnant. Bottom line, there are pros and cons to both povs but I appreciate your last comments very much.

[cdifoto]

Such a solid argument! .. only not ..

So now youre saying you advocate a setup that gives less traffic to people looking for questions?

Please don't put words into my mouth.

[AdamLewis]

Both of those techniques (dragging the shutter vs shooting at sync or HSS) can and would both be discussed together in Small Flash & Studio Lighting since it's usage of flash.

Photography is really about learning as much as possible and figuring out how to apply that knowledge when and where it's best. It's not about being told how to shoot a certain thing and then going out and producing the same images everyone else produces.

It'd be a shame to go into a Sports section for advice and only be told one way to shoot a certain sport. Learn as much as you can and apply what you need when you need it AND don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone and try something new.

Same goes for processing. I learn a lot of things that I can apply to different scenarios. Someone might write up a tutorial on how they sharpened a macro of a flower and I think "oh awesome...I can use that for BRIDAL BOUQUETS!" If I only ever hung out in the wedding section and saw how people are sharpening general people photos (you don't typically sharpen people as much as you do static objects), and that tutorial was in the "macro talk" section that I would never visit due to lack of interest in macros, I may never have found out about that technique.

I see it as centralizing the knowledge and specializing the results.

#1 Youre never going to use HSS in sports. If there was a sports section to read, this is something you (and some other people) may have known.
#2 Flash setup in a studio is NOTHING like strobe setup in an arena. Yes youre using lights...but youre probably not using a great number of wireless devices.

Ill agree that there is a core of photography that is all the same, but if there werent different things to different types of photography, first we wouldnt have "types" to begin with and secondly why are there already subforums for displaying different types of photography?

You mentioning processing is pretty funny since there actually IS a subforum for processing all by itself...

[Jon]

Your "parallels" are hardly anything that puts sports anywhere close to weddings aside from they both use a camera. In sports you have to deal with cropping very tight, all images must be super sharp, you have to control noise, you must maintain a fast shutter speed, you must get quality action in your pictures (this normally involves faces and pucks/balls/clubs/fists), you must know how to properly crop tight, you must know how to use AI Servo, you must know how to use long lenses, you must know how to make do in the very worst of weather...Do I need to continue?

Sounds sooo much like wedding photography, right? :rolleyes:I see one point with even limited validity. Normally, one doesn't see brawls in the reception, although there may be fast dancing. Cropping, sharpness, motion-stopping, AI-Servo where the subject's moving, and long lenses can all come into play, and weddings, like sports, tend to go on regardless of the weather. But if you persist in isolating yourself from other aspects of photography, you'll never learn what they can teach you.

[AdamLewis]

Please don't put words into my mouth.

Youre the one that said it.

[AdamLewis]

I see one point with even limited validity. Normally, one doesn't see brawls in the reception, although there may be fast dancing. Cropping, sharpness, motion-stopping, AI-Servo where the subject's moving, and long lenses can all come into play, and weddings, like sports, tend to go on regardless of the weather.

Hah. So youre shooting weddings with 400s? You know how to use a 500 from one end of the pitch because you shoot weddings?

And Im sure a bride is gonna be happy with super tight crops of everything. "Were we in a church? I cant tell...all I can see are faces". You have to worry so much about background and choosing the right f-stop in weddings where you dont (for the most part) in sports.

[CyberDyneSystems]

... there are pros and cons to both povs ...

I agree here 100%,. and this is indeed a good Bottom line too,..

We don't meant to sound as if we are dismissing the ideas without thought, the reality is we are thinking about stuff like this all the time,. and if ever we sound dismissive, 99% of the time it's because we've been down that road and are looking for a better solution.

[cdifoto]

Hah. So youre shooting weddings with 400s? You know how to use a 500 from one end of the pitch because you shoot weddings?

And Im sure a bride is gonna be happy with super tight crops of everything. "Were we in a church? I cant tell...all I can see are faces". You have to worry so much about background and choosing the right f-stop in weddings where you dont (for the most part) in sports.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You close your mind to new ideas and this is what happens. Twisting someone's words doesn't help either. You should stop doing that. Not once did I ever say I shoot everything tight with a 500mm lens. Not once did I say shooting weddings means I can shoot any sport on the planet.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hah. So youre shooting weddings with 400s? You know how to use a 500 from one end of the pitch because you shoot weddings?

And Im sure a bride is gonna be happy with super tight crops of everything. "Were we in a church? I cant tell...all I can see are faces". You have to worry so much about background and choosing the right f-stop in weddings where you dont (for the most part) in sports.

For example, I use a 500 all day long, I use it on fast moving subjects and I use it many times with flash.
I never shoot sports. I'm telling you yes, I can respond to a question on how to use a 500mm for shooting sports. I can tell you how to use your flash with it too.

And I would never assume I would find this sort of question being asked in an Image sharing forum.

[Permagrin]

You know, sarcasm aside, the book world really has quite a trade in specialized photography books. Teaching the tricks of the particular area is what people want to know. When I buy a book on photography I have something in particular in mind...so I don't buy a generalized book...I go to the section I want (lighting or wedding or photoshop help).

I don't know that it would hurt things to have some specialized areas. While everyone is using cameras and lenses (true) the technique for panning a race car is something that I'd never use in a wedding :lol: There are tricks of the trade that would be a valuable resource if one could easily locate them.

Again, I wholly understand about the isolation issue and Pekka & the mods have to decide if the good of the issue would out weigh the possible problems it would cause (having just had to deal with months of wedding forum problems).

But really, if this is something that the sports photographers want, present good reasons as to why it's needed.

Personally I think that some subsections could be a valuable asset to the community. It's become so big around here. It really is hard to find what you are looking for. Even in search, there is so much to weed through. If a search of a subforum (or the like) narrowed it down, it would be very helpful.

[cdifoto]

the technique for panning a race car is something that I'd never use in a wedding :lol:

Why not? I have. Makes interesting photos!

[AdamLewis]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You close your mind to new ideas and this is what happens. Twisting someone's words doesn't help either. You should stop doing that. Not once did I ever say I shoot everything tight with a 500mm lens. Not once did I say shooting weddings means I can shoot any sport on the planet.

Im not twisting words or putting any words in anyones mouth. Youre saying that you can learn alot about your particular school of photography just by looking at other ones. I agree with that for a large part, but theres also another part that is specific to only that type of shooting. The fact that you admit that shooting weddings, doesnt mean you can shoot sports only strengthens the idea of having a sports (or wedding!) subforum.

[Permagrin]

Why not? I have. Makes interesting photos!

:lol: I'll remember that :lol:

[cdifoto]

Im not twisting words or putting any words in anyones mouth. Youre saying that you can learn alot about your particular school of photography just by looking at other ones. I agree with that for a large part, but theres also another part that is specific to only that type of shooting. The fact that you admit that shooting weddings, doesnt mean you can shoot sports only strengthens the idea of having a sports (or wedding!) subforum.

More words twisting again. I never even said there shouldn't be subsections. I'm only presenting what I think are the reasons for not having them and the reasons I like not having a bunch of specialized categories.

I won't be feeding you anything else to chew up and spit back out in a convoluted manner.

[cdifoto]

:lol: I'll remember that :lol:

Seriously. It's harder because you really have to stop down to get a sloooooow shutter speed but it can be kinda cool if/when you nail it. Of course "kinda cool" is subjective. You might hate it. :p :)

[bacchanal]

My example about the lighting forum wasn't to say that there wasn't one, but to point out that it was one place where discussing technique is allowed although it is not in the "Sharing Knowhow" section.

I guess I see the point about discussion threads sending photo posts down the list too quickly in the photo sharing sections. But you have to admit...non interesting photo posts may have something to do with that as well.

And yeah...low light is low light cdi...but if I post in a general forum, then I have to define low light any time I want to discuss it. If I post in the performing arts forum, people know exactly what I'm talking about. Shooting a concert at 1/40 f/1.4 ISO3200 does not equal shooting bball at 1/500 f/3.5 ISO800.

My problem is just that I feel like I have learned very little from the "Talk about Photography" forum where many of the technique threads get moved to...and where those threads tend to die or stray off topic once moved. I've learned a great deal from the technique threads and discussion going on in the various photo sharing sections. This is my experience with the forums, right or wrong. Maybe a restructuring of the "sharing knowhow" area of the forum will change all that, but somehow I imagine the mods will just be moving threads indefinitely.

[primoz]

Don't take me wrong now :) I'm not really complaining. If you guys would be paid to do this, then I would be complaining, but now... I think we can all be grateful for time you guys spend doing this, and if things are not perfect, they just aren't, so what :) Life is never perfect anyway :)

[Pekka]

I am very careful in adding any forums. This dilemma has been with us a long time and maybe we should do something about it.

As Jake said we have an idea where each share forum would have corresponding discussion forum. This would work out so that in each share forum is a subforum acting as a link to subforum in Talk About Photography (which IMHO should be renamed to something more appropriate) like this:

Share section:

People
subforum: People Photography Talk (click --> *)
Performing Arts
subforum: Performing Arts Photography Talk (click --> **)
Weddings and Other Family Events
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Photography Talk (click --> ***)
Glamour & Nude
subforum: Glamour & Nude Photography Talk (click --> ***)
etc...
etc...


The actual forums are in "Sharing Knowhow" section:


Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk
subforum: People Talk *
subforum: Performing Arts Talk **
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Talk ***
subforum: Glamour & Nude Talk ****
subforum: Sports Talk
subforum: Motorsports Talk
subforum: Birds Talk
subforum: Nature & Animals Talk
subforum: Macro Talk
subforum: Transportation Talk
subforum: Urban Life Talk
subforum: Travel & Landscapes Talk
subforum: Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk


If this would be done, these "Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk" subforums would have preferably very specific discussions in that area of interest and not general threads like "is 70-200 a good lense for indoor use?" which should still go to (and would be moved to) "Canon EF and EF-S Lenses" forum.

One question is, do all share forums need a discussion forum? Consistency is of course cool, but I'd rather not have forums floating here with 100 posts a year.

This have not been decided in full yet, so please discuss it. Mods will have the final say of course :)

[namasste]

Share section:

Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk
subforum: People Talk *
subforum: Performing Arts Talk **
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Talk ***
subforum: Glamour & Nude Talk ****
subforum: Sports Talk
subforum: Motorsports Talk
subforum: Birds Talk
subforum: Nature & Animals Talk
subforum: Macro Talk
subforum: Transportation Talk
subforum: Urban Life Talk
subforum: Travel & Landscapes Talk
subforum: Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk




I personally think that the above section would possibly appease everyone as images would not fall off the photo sharing sections as fast yet there would be specific places to discuss specific things (or to look for a thread if it were moved). Just my two cents but I like it.

[Karl C]

I am very careful in adding any forums. This dilemma has been with us a long time and maybe we should do something about it.

As Jake said we have an idea where each share forum would have corresponding discussion forum. This would work out so that in each share forum is a subforum acting as a link to subforum in Talk About Photography (which IMHO should be renamed to something more appropriate) like this:

Share section:

People
subforum: People Photography Talk (click --> *)
Performing Arts
subforum: Performing Arts Photography Talk (click --> **)
Weddings and Other Family Events
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Photography Talk (click --> ***)
Glamour & Nude
subforum: Glamour & Nude Photography Talk (click --> ***)
etc...
etc...


The actual forums are in "Sharing Knowhow" section:


Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk
subforum: People Talk *
subforum: Performing Arts Talk **
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Talk ***
subforum: Glamour & Nude Talk ****
subforum: Sports Talk
subforum: Motorsports Talk
subforum: Birds Talk
subforum: Nature & Animals Talk
subforum: Macro Talk
subforum: Transportation Talk
subforum: Urban Life Talk
subforum: Travel & Landscapes Talk
subforum: Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk


If this would be done, these "Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk" subforums would have preferably very specific discussions in that area of interest and not general threads like "is 70-200 a good lense for indoor use?" which should still go to (and would be moved to) "Canon EF and EF-S Lenses" forum.

One question is, do all share forums need a discussion forum? Consistency is of course cool, but I'd rather not have forums floating here with 100 posts a year.

This have not been decided in full yet, so please discuss it. Mods will have the final say of course :)

This gets my vote for practicality.

[Permagrin]

This gets my vote for practicality.

mine too. It makes so much sense. Keeps the gear info in the gear section, chat in the chat section but leaves an opening for specialized help/discussion for techniques, hints or problems.

[jgogums]

Pekka-
I think it is a great idea. I never liked the idea of hunting for information on specific type of photography in a general repository. It's just counter intuitive to me. It has nothing to do with not caring or thinking one type of photography is better than another. It's simple organization and time management for me. You want to ask a question about sports photography...it's natural to ask in a area frequented by those that share the same specific interest. You want to share a photo of sporting event...post it in the Sports photo sharing section.
As always...this is your house and I think most everyone appreciates the hard work and money if must take to run it.
I just generally never agreed with the argument that people are closed minded and limiting themselves and (somehow the forum at large) if they want a separate venue to discuss a specific type of photography.

[jseivert]

The sports forum and birds and nature&animals etc are forums for sharing photos. For discussions about technique, ligthing etc we have talk about photography etc

I'll agree with this. Once conversation turns into "how'd you do this" or "why is this too dark", it should go to the proper equipment/techniques forum. There is a wealth of knowledge there that may not spend much time in a the original sharing forum and thus not be able to help. And the answers may help others with the same problems.

[Moppie]

#1 Youre never going to use HSS in sports. If there was a sports section to read, this is something you (and some other people) may have known.
#2 Flash setup in a studio is NOTHING like strobe setup in an arena. Yes youre using lights...but youre probably not using a great number of wireless devices.

Ill agree that there is a core of photography that is all the same, but if there werent different things to different types of photography, first we wouldnt have "types" to begin with and secondly why are there already subforums for displaying different types of photography?

You mentioning processing is pretty funny since there actually IS a subforum for processing all by itself...

Hah. So youre shooting weddings with 400s? You know how to use a 500 from one end of the pitch because you shoot weddings?

And Im sure a bride is gonna be happy with super tight crops of everything. "Were we in a church? I cant tell...all I can see are faces". You have to worry so much about background and choosing the right f-stop in weddings where you dont (for the most part) in sports.



I've used HSS to shoot sports, works very well.
I've also used it to shoot a wedding, where, wait for it, I also had some nice tight crops of the grooms.

The background in a sports photo is often the difference between a good shot, and pile of crap. Watching the background is often as important as watching the action.
No one is going to buy a picture of little johny playing soccer if there is distracting background, and and no team owner will buy a photo of thier race car if the competeing teams sponsorship signs are on the track in the back ground.

I am very careful in adding any forums. This dilemma has been with us a long time and maybe we should do something about it.

As Jake said we have an idea where each share forum would have corresponding discussion forum. This would work out so that in each share forum is a subforum acting as a link to subforum in Talk About Photography (which IMHO should be renamed to something more appropriate) like this:

Share section:

People
subforum: People Photography Talk (click --> *)
Performing Arts
subforum: Performing Arts Photography Talk (click --> **)
Weddings and Other Family Events
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Photography Talk (click --> ***)
Glamour & Nude
subforum: Glamour & Nude Photography Talk (click --> ***)
etc...
etc...


The actual forums are in "Sharing Knowhow" section:


Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk
subforum: People Talk *
subforum: Performing Arts Talk **
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Talk ***
subforum: Glamour & Nude Talk ****
subforum: Sports Talk
subforum: Motorsports Talk
subforum: Birds Talk
subforum: Nature & Animals Talk
subforum: Macro Talk
subforum: Transportation Talk
subforum: Urban Life Talk
subforum: Travel & Landscapes Talk
subforum: Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk


If this would be done, these "Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk" subforums would have preferably very specific discussions in that area of interest and not general threads like "is 70-200 a good lense for indoor use?" which should still go to (and would be moved to) "Canon EF and EF-S Lenses" forum.

One question is, do all share forums need a discussion forum? Consistency is of course cool, but I'd rather not have forums floating here with 100 posts a year.

This have not been decided in full yet, so please discuss it. Mods will have the final say of course :)



Interesting idea, but just to add a counter point based on my own experiance modering a forum with over 1000 sub forums.

Having lots of sub forums for technical chat tends to seperate people into thier own little sub-groups.
All the birders hang out in the birding forum, all the sports people hang out in the sports forum etc. These little sub groups then fester and smoulder, and think they are all better than anyone else, and before you know it you might have the photographic equivilant of my Honda is better than your Chevy, which trust me, is messy.

Instead I think we still need a general, non-subject specific talk about photography forum, and if it gets to busy (and it could get busier) then maybe look at breaking it down into subforums, but ones that deal with style, or technique rather than subject matter.

:cool:

[RobKirkwood]

Have I woken up today in some alternate universe? I cannot believe I am reading this, and the changes Pekka is now suggesting.
Having lots of sub forums for technical chat tends to seperate people into thier own little sub-groups.
All the birders hang out in the birding forum, all the sports people hang out in the sports forum etc. These little sub groups then fester and smoulder, and think they are all better than anyone else, and before you know it you might have the photographic equivilant of my Honda is better than your Chevy, which trust me, is messy.This is EXACTLY the criticism that was levelled against the previous (very useful) wedding forum ...members who frequented there asked for what Pekka is now suggesting, it was refused, and the old forum was broken up.

If this unbelievable U-turn goes ahead, will you be tracking down the couple of hundred wedding photographers who were driven away last autumn so you can apologise to them?

Rob

[Pekka]

What I wrote is one of the plans - we have not decided anything yet. It just might be that nothing will happen :)


If this unbelievable U-turn goes ahead, will you be tracking down the couple of hundred wedding photographers who were driven away last autumn so you can apologise to them?

We have not driven anyone away.

[cdifoto]

We have not driven anyone away.

I agree. Forum changes were made and they decided not to roll with it. They're free to come back if they wish.

[Sauk]

I am very careful in adding any forums. This dilemma has been with us a long time and maybe we should do something about it.

As Jake said we have an idea where each share forum would have corresponding discussion forum. This would work out so that in each share forum is a subforum acting as a link to subforum in Talk About Photography (which IMHO should be renamed to something more appropriate) like this:

Share section:

People
subforum: People Photography Talk (click --> *)
Performing Arts
subforum: Performing Arts Photography Talk (click --> **)
Weddings and Other Family Events
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Photography Talk (click --> ***)
Glamour & Nude
subforum: Glamour & Nude Photography Talk (click --> ***)
etc...
etc...


The actual forums are in "Sharing Knowhow" section:


Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk
subforum: People Talk *
subforum: Performing Arts Talk **
subforum: Weddings and Other Family Events Talk ***
subforum: Glamour & Nude Talk ****
subforum: Sports Talk
subforum: Motorsports Talk
subforum: Birds Talk
subforum: Nature & Animals Talk
subforum: Macro Talk
subforum: Transportation Talk
subforum: Urban Life Talk
subforum: Travel & Landscapes Talk
subforum: Still Life, B/W & Experimental Talk


If this would be done, these "Photographic Skills and Techniques Talk" subforums would have preferably very specific discussions in that area of interest and not general threads like "is 70-200 a good lense for indoor use?" which should still go to (and would be moved to) "Canon EF and EF-S Lenses" forum.

One question is, do all share forums need a discussion forum? Consistency is of course cool, but I'd rather not have forums floating here with 100 posts a year.

This have not been decided in full yet, so please discuss it. Mods will have the final say of course :)


I really do like this idea. Again my only complaint was that once a thread was moved it was hard to find, other forums do not respond to a question like a sports forum would and there for would be lost on page 10.

The sports community is one of the most helpful I believe on this forum and when posts are moved your taking away one of the greatest resources a sports photographer has, other sports photographers.

I really do want to thank the mods/owners for taking the time to even discuss this issue. I did not think it would cause such a stir and that was not my intention.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Have I woken up today in some alternate universe? I cannot believe I am reading this, and the changes Pekka is now suggesting.
This is EXACTLY the criticism that was levelled against the previous (very useful) wedding forum ...members who frequented there asked for what Pekka is now suggesting, it was refused, and the old forum was broken up.

If this unbelievable U-turn goes ahead, will you be tracking down the couple of hundred wedding photographers who were driven away last autumn so you can apologise to them?

Rob

So, since some small percentage of wedding shooters did not like one the forums changes and marched out in protest, POTN should never make another change to the forum structure again no matter how many people ask for it?

[gheesom]

of course you can make changes, it is odd that changes that you told us were never going to happen and that for even requesting it the wedding togs obviously thought they were better than everyone else, now sports section have requested it (and rightly so) it seems to be happening
this stinks of dual standards!
It could of course be that you have realised that you were wrong in your handling of the whole wedding section situation??? who knows.

[gheesom]

I agree. Forum changes were made and they decided not to roll with it. They're free to come back if they wish.

Not all are, some were banned for voicing their disagreement.

[namasste]

So, since some small percentage of wedding shooters did not like one the forums changes and marched out in protest, POTN should never make another change to the forum structure again no matter how many people ask for it?

good point. as relevant is why anyone who doesn't regularly participate in the sports forum really cares what happens in the sports forum. seems like many of the negative comments are from folks that generally don't post much to the sports section anyway.

[cdifoto]

Not all are, some were banned for voicing their disagreement.

Nobody got banned for simply voicing a disagreement. You're mistaken about that and apparently other things as well.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Look guys, if this going to turn into yet another wedding forum pissing contest the thread will be locked. This type of reaction is again exactly what triggered the changes to the Wedding forum, and now it's resurfacting here will only serve to reinforce to us that we did the right thing.
If you want POTN to not have subforums, then by all means, pick some more fights with POTN here in this thread, and force the discussion to be locked.
Prove us right again, we like to be proven right.


If however, you see some possibility for some changes to POTN that you might think would be beneficial, then put away the flame thrower and BACK THE IDEA! Don't stand here fighting it if you want it? I mean c'mon, what is your goal?

Miring the discussion in your vendetta will not help, I can assure you of that.

[cdifoto]

Sorry 'bout that.

[belmondo]

Not all are, some were banned for voicing their disagreement.That is insanity. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

PM sent.

[Karl C]

of course you can make changes, it is odd that changes that you told us were never going to happen and that for even requesting it the wedding togs obviously thought they were better than everyone else, now sports section have requested it (and rightly so) it seems to be happening
this stinks of dual standards!
It could of course be that you have realised that you were wrong in your handling of the whole wedding section situation??? who knows.

Bitter? Party of one?

Your table is ready!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Bobster]

I agree. Forum changes were made and they decided not to roll with it. They're free to come back if they wish.
no their not, they've been banned...

[cdifoto]

no their not, they've been banned...

...

Look guys, if this going to turn into yet another wedding forum pissing contest the thread will be locked. This type of reaction is again exactly what triggered the changes to the Wedding forum, and now it's resurfacting here will only serve to reinforce to us that we did the right thing.
If you want POTN to not have subforums, then by all means, pick some more fights with POTN here in this thread, and force the discussion to be locked.
Prove us right again, we like to be proven right.


If however, you see some possibility for some changes to POTN that you might think would be beneficial, then put away the flame thrower and BACK THE IDEA! Don't stand here fighting it if you want it? I mean c'mon, what is your goal?

Miring the discussion in your vendetta will not help, I can assure you of that.

[belmondo]

no their not, they've been banned...

Unless you are certain of your facts, you shouldn't make statements of this nature. You might believe this to be the case, but it's not. Without going into any detail, one member asked to have his account deleted when we didn't acquiesce to his demands. Nobody was banned as a result of the forum realignment, and all are free to return.

Clearly there are people with vested interests in trying to distort the facts for their purposes. You are being complicit with them by spreading this sort of information. Please get your facts straight and allow this discussion to continue.

[::John::]

I agree with what Moppie said.

There are comments made from time to time that would indicate that the moderators here are very busy - nearly doubling the number of fora is only going to add to their workload.

[primoz]

One question is, do all share forums need a discussion forum? Consistency is of course cool, but I'd rather not have forums floating here with 100 posts a year.
I don't know if all need it. But it's not really all that hard to make new one, if there's enough interest, or delete old one, if there's no interest. It doesn't need to be completely decided on beginning already.
There can be sport, wedding, and bird forum for example, and later on, if there will be interest for travel & landscape, you just add that one. People can easily adapt to few changes now and then :)
As far as comments about grouping people to different groups goes... with 50.000 member, I think "grouping" is not all that bad :) And personally I still have no idea why sport shooter should feel we are any better then wedding shooter are, or vice versa. If I'm not interested in wedding shooting, it doesn't mean I'm anything better, nor that shooting sport is some higher level activity then shooting wedding... grouping or no grouping.

[Sauk]

if there is too much work add more mods :)

Hell I wish I was a wedding photog :) Not like they make chump change lol

[Moppie]

The sports community



Is it really a sports community? Seperate from the rest of POTN?
Part of what makes POTN so great, IMO is the ablity to share knowledge and ideas accross all types of photography because we are all one community.


There is clearly some demand, and possibly a need for more subforums, but rather try and create subforums that create community devisions and isolate the knowledge base, I think some effort needs to be put towards the idea of more community based subforums that still allow for the discussion of more subject specific topics.

For example, we have technical forums, so how about creative forums as well?
We have a technical lighting forum, what about a creative lighting forum to go with it?
The technical forum can hold discussions on how to make the lights work, cords, adaptors etc needed, and what lights to buy, while the creative forum can hold discussions on how to set the lights up, how to achive special effects, etc.

Photography is after all a creative and a technical discipline.

[narlus]

Having lots of sub forums for technical chat tends to seperate people into thier own little sub-groups.
All the birders hang out in the birding forum, all the sports people hang out in the sports forum etc. These little sub groups then fester and smoulder, and think they are all better than anyone else, and before you know it you might have the photographic equivilant of my Honda is better than your Chevy, which trust me, is messy.

i think that happens anyway. i don't check the 'talk about photography' all that much, and since it's a free-for-all, there could be highly salient topics to me that get bumped and buried fast. maybe i should use the search function more.

pekka, i think this is a very good idea to have sub-forums. there are a lot of specifics to my area of interest (music photography) which don't translate the same to general photography, CDI's opinions notwithstanding.

[Pekka]

Is it really a sports community? Seperate from the rest of POTN?
Part of what makes POTN so great, IMO is the ablity to share knowledge and ideas accross all types of photography because we are all one community.


There is clearly some demand, and possibly a need for more subforums, but rather try and create subforums that create community devisions and isolate the knowledge base, I think some effort needs to be put towards the idea of more community based subforums that still allow for the discussion of more subject specific topics.

For example, we have technical forums, so how about creative forums as well?
We have a technical lighting forum, what about a creative lighting forum to go with it?
The technical forum can hold discussions on how to make the lights work, cords, adaptors etc needed, and what lights to buy, while the creative forum can hold discussions on how to set the lights up, how to achive special effects, etc.

Photography is after all a creative and a technical discipline.

You have good points.

The big question is are separate "interest groups" good for the community, and sadly wedding forum demonstrated lots of negative energy and territorial quarreling etc.

I have give this more thought and we have discussed in mod forum and I'm pretty sure my above structure suggestion will not happen as it was laid out.

[neil_r]

It may just be me but the way see it is, it's Pekka's house so he can arrange the furniture however he likes.

[Permagrin]

You have good points.

The big question is are separate "interest groups" good for the community, and sadly wedding forum demonstrated lots of negative energy and territorial quarreling etc.

I have give this more thought and we have discussed in mod forum and I'm pretty sure my above structure suggestion will not happen as it is laid out.

Pekka, the bottom line here is that you (and the mods) have made POTN accessible and informative and it's a pleasant place to gain info as well as visit with other photographers. I'm sure that whatever is in the works will be useful. Thanks for listening to alternate options, even though I know this is about the sports section, it appears to affect other sections so it is of great interest to me how it pans out.

[primoz]

Moppie, maybe it's just me, and others think different, but personally I'm not for separate sports forum because of "sports community". Personally I would wish for separate sport forum just because it's easier to find stuff I'm interested in it. If I would be searching for some thing regarding sport shooting, I could search only through related posts not through all posts. That's only reason why I hope Pekka and rest of gang might consider this as good idea.

[Sauk]

Yeah maybe we are not using the correct terms or something. I don't think this would divide the community, but rather put specific talk in the correct area so people in those type of professions can best help out the OP or make suggestions.

When people post about lighting it is sports specific in the sports forum, has nothing to do with portrait (unless team stuff) or weddings, etc...

Anyways i do hope that one day we will get something as I hate having posts moved and lost in page 50 of that forum because people with sports backgrounds don't know where it went or care to visit other places on the board.

[condyk]

As a few scattered homes become a village, then a town then a city then administering the needs of people changes and one way is that sub communities develop. Really it is all about how they are managed. One can can communities that don't collaborate and join up wiuth their wider communities and communities that do. I like the idea of a specific Mod or Mods to manage the community side of thing within each sub-community. part of their role is to encourage newbies and image sharing and a sense of distinctiveness within a larger whole. Wow, this glue is powerful stuff :-) Hey, ya can almost see who the ideal Mods would be in any potential sub forum, these are the guys and gals who are the supportive experts.

[Moppie]

Moppie, maybe it's just me, and others think different, but personally I'm not for separate sports forum because of "sports community". .......



Yes, but your an enlightened minority Primoz :)

I used to believe the same things, and still belive in the ideal that they convey.
But the reality is as soon as you create sub groups in a comminity there is a large number of people who start to identify very strongly with that group, and express that as a belief they are better, thier ideals are the best, and they will defend them even to the point of acting hostile towards another group.


Look at as making the forums into a smaller version of the world we live in.
We are all human (photographers) we all share similar needs and wants, and can all offer each other advice on many things based on our own expeirances.
Yet we do not operate as one global community of humanity. Instead we are devided into little groups (sports, weddings, birds etc) and some of those little groups gett on well together, and some don't.

Some people are able to look past such things as national and ethnic boundries, but the current state of the world would indicate quite strongly that the majority of people can't.
Saddly this also translates into much more finite parts of our lives, including internet forums.

[condyk]

Some people are able to look past such things as national and ethnic boundries, but the current state of the world would indicate quite strongly that the majority of people can't.
Saddly this also translates into much more finite parts of our lives, including internet forums.

i dunno ... most people are pretty Ok according to my experience of all sorts of types in all sorts of countries and towns and villages and such. mainly it is the politicians who screw us all around and then we manifest the consiquences of their naughtiness and selfishness. I think most forum members are fine too, even me. i think the Mods are fine and not bad leaders but actually good selfless ones. i would trust things would be cool and when not they would deal with things in interest of all.

[neil_r]

Where does right or wrong come into this. This is a privately owned web forum that costs nothing to use or be a member of. The owner can do whatever he likes with it, be it restructure the groups, change the name or even close it down.

There is only one arbiter of right or wrong in this particular scenario and that is the owner of the forum. The only choice that we, the people who use the forum have, is to either appreciate what we have and participate or decide that the place does not suit us and go away. Tis as simple as that.

[John_B]

Pekka, AthleticsPhotog and Moppie,
After reading these 6 pages I thought I would just throw my opinion in ;)
I agree 100% with what Moppie said:
Having lots of sub forums for technical chat tends to seperate people into thier own little sub-groups.
All the birders hang out in the birding forum, all the sports people hang out in the sports forum etc. These little sub groups then fester and smoulder, and think they are all better than anyone else, and before you know it you might have the photographic equivilant of my Honda is better than your Chevy, which trust me, is messy.
If photographers want to chat about one topic they obviously can like they do in this example XTI/400D Users Chat (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=387099) which is inside the Canon EOS Digital Cameras Forum (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
Instead of having a different EOS forum for each type of camera. Someone with an XTi doesn't have the same buttons and switches as someone with a 1 series and yet they can still share the same forum. So why do people need a special place to question/chat about sports, weddings, macro etc..? ???

Then reality comes to mind, Hello... this is a great forum that is provided to its users with no cost. Hello... but thats awful darn nice of Pekka to deal with the forum software/network for us, that many seem to complain about.
Lets keep that in mind ;)

[neil_r]

Hey my innocuous post has been modded out, but as the post pretty much said it's Pekka's place he can do what he wants I guess I can't complain :-)

[::John::]

Hey my innocuous post has been modded out, but as the post pretty much said it's Pekka's place he can do what he wants I guess I can't complain :-)

This one?

It may just be me but the way see it is, it's Pekka's house so he can arrange the furniture however he likes.

[neil_r]

no, a far more eloquent one, in response to a rather inflammatory statement, which I made the mistake of quoting before my response.

[belmondo]

no, a far more eloquent one, in response to a rather inflammatory statement, which I made the mistake of quoting before my response.

It was a wonderful post, Neil. I think it was deleted for the comment you made about abusing your cat with a fork. I'm guessing that was deemed totally inappropriate.

[CyberDyneSystems]

:lol:

Better? Quote removed..(along with the part about the cat and the fork) and post restored :)

[neil_r]

II think it was deleted for the comment you made about abusing your cat with a fork. I'm guessing that was deemed totally inappropriate.

See, if only we had a dedicated forum for "feline fork abuse" I wouldn't keep getting into trouble

<<< EDIT - Just noticed thanks CDS >>

[CyberDyneSystems]

<<< EDIT - Just noticed thanks CDS >>

'twould be a shame to erase such poetry from the world..

[Karl C]

See, if only we had a dedicated forum for "feline fork abuse" I wouldn't keep getting into trouble

You have issues surrounding "feline fork abuse"??

:lol:

[belmondo]

You have issues surrounding "feline fork abuse"??

:lol:Is that a sport? Do we need a subforum for it?

[Moppie]

Instead of having a different EOS forum for each type of camera. Someone with an XTi doesn't have the same buttons and switches as someone with a 1 series and yet they can still share the same forum. So why do people need a special place to question/chat about sports, weddings, macro etc..? ???



Absolutly! And an excellent example.

The properties of light don't change because your subject is holding a baseball bat or a bouquet of flowers :)
Nor do the properties of the fork change, if your stabbing it into a cat, or a rodent.

[Permagrin]

Absolutly! And an excellent example.

The properties of light don't change because your subject is holding a baseball bat or a bouquet of flowers :)

In all honesty, you don't think you'd use the light differently in these situations? I think the application of the skills we learn could be very different (however, I've never shot baseball so I don't know...I'm just asking) :)

[Moppie]

In all honesty, you don't think you'd use the light differently in these situations?

Absolutly, but havn't you ever wanted to see a romantic shot of a baseball player?

[Jon]

In all honesty, you don't think you'd use the light differently in these situations? I think the application of the skills we learn could be very different (however, I've never shot baseball so I don't know...I'm just asking) :)Ask Riley, or Liza. Both shoot sports; Liza's gone on to and Riley's embarking on, weddings. For that matter, Lisa - ask yourself. You shoot Bif, landscapes, and now are also embarking on weddings. Are you using natural light differently? Flash outdoors? I think the photographer's style has as much as, if not more to do with differences than the subject matter does.

[Karl C]

Is that a sport? Do we need a subforum for it?

Due to the inherently high risk of being burned at the stake by cat lovers, I respectfully decline to provide an answer.

[Permagrin]

Ask Riley, or Liza. Both shoot sports; Liza's gone on to and Riley's embarking on, weddings. For that matter, Lisa - ask yourself. You shoot Bif, landscapes, and now are also embarking on weddings. Are you using natural light differently? Flash outdoors? I think the photographer's style has as much as, if not more to do with differences than the subject matter does.

that's a good point. I am learning how to use flash outside in birding and Riley would probably have some good pointers for sports should I move in that direction.

FWIW, I'm okay with whatever happens around here. :)

[gheesom]

That is insanity. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

PM sent.

PM replied to, and I could try and I would succeed ;)

[Woolburr]

Regardless of what some would like to believe, photography has a fairly large overlap when it comes to techniques and tactics. The bottom line is that photography is all about capturing and recording the light in the most pleasing fashion. Perhaps a tools, tips and techniques forum would serve the purpose. If the threads were properly titled, it would be fairly simple to sort out a question about bird photography as opposed to one about shooting a basketball game or a wedding.

[belmondo]

PM replied to, and I could try and I would succeed ;)Please dont'.:lol: There's confusion enough about what happened.

[ibdb]

Regardless of what some would like to believe, photography has a fairly large overlap when it comes to techniques and tactics. The bottom line is that photography is all about capturing and recording the light in the most pleasing fashion. Perhaps a tools, tips and techniques forum would serve the purpose. If the threads were properly titled, it would be fairly simple to sort out a question about bird photography as opposed to one about shooting a basketball game or a wedding.
I tend to agree with Wool -- but I also see a problem with that approach. The "if threads were properly titled" part seems to be a big stumbling block in the marketplace, and I can see the same sort of problem here. Maybe the sort of flags that were mentioned as a possible fix to that issue would also be useful here.

That said, I wouldn't favor anything that would splinter the forum. Based on recent experiences, seeing what we have in common seems to be a better way to serve everyone than focusing on what makes us different. There is much to be gained from seeing how other photographers approach similar and dissimilar situations.

Those who argue that they can't be bothered to check more than one subcategory of the board don't earn much sympathy from me. If someone is interested in more than one type of photography, as many of us are, subforums under each existing share would significantly increase the number of places we'd have to look for information. In many cases, current protests noted, much of that information will be common across genres.

[In2Photos]

I wonder if there is a way to mark a thread with soemthing like a keyword. So if someone starts a thread about sports they choose sports as the keyword. Then have the search function allow to search for those keywords. I realize that this could be done in the title of the thread, but if we had to choose a keyword from a predefined list after clicking submit for the new thread or something.

Anyway, just random thoughts coming out of my head. Carry on. :)