Why do I post here? Locked

Started Mar 9, 2013 | Discussions
This thread is locked.
yvind Strm
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,130
Re: About fanboys
In reply to Usee, Mar 11, 2013

Uli, thank you so much

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Øyvind

HBowman
Senior MemberPosts: 1,180
Re: About a C
In reply to Richard Franiec, Mar 11, 2013

Richard Franiec wrote:

Laurence Matson wrote:

Øyvind,

... and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons, thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are); amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

Interesting,

Until now beta testing for Sigma with all perks (listed or not) were taboo on this forum.

Your confession begs for answers:

1. Who are the beta testers for Sigma and participate in this forum?

2. What are the criteria to become beta tester for Sigma?

3. How beta testers are compensated by Sigma?

4. List of suggestions to Sigma leading to improvement of product.

5. Are the "serious" users opinions more important than average user observations and wishes?

6. Was SD1 initial price influenced by beta testers opinions?

These are my initial questions. I guess that it wiill be more coming.

Cheers

Richard

Dear Richard ...

What Laurence said in your quote is right. This rely on some simple things such as altruism and abnegation, some principles who might be ignored by some over here.

Some may say that promoting SIGMA for free is stupid but ... SIGMA is not Nikon; SIGMA is SIGMA, Foveon is Foveon and the common story is unique. Some here, as well as Laurence or Carl Ryterfalk and some others, are passionate photographers who like sharing a technology they love.

First, you will not know how to be a beta testers nor how they are compensated or whatever. Forget about it.

Myself almost scarifiedtwo full years promoting and defending SIGMA DSLR and Lenses on French forums. Day after day, even holidays. It was in my blood. I get bashed, insulted, glorified ... this is a hard job. That ended in what ?? SIGMA France did not give a f$$k about what I did lol. (SIGMA France is stuck in time and Space, they are TOTALLY out of the real SIGMA spirit and traditions, compared to other country such as Germany or SIGMA UK, USA ...).

Being fully dedicated and successful in the use of a material and/or a brand drive you in the camp of "serious" users. And yes, a serious/professional (successful) user should be listened. So, to answer 5 I say yes. I say yes 100 times. Forums need more discipline and happy you I'm not moderator here ... Some heads might have been chopped long time ago ...

Some may hate the fact that there is some sort of leaders, even tough those leaders do not like this label. But, every community need one or more leaders and those leaders should be respected and defended.

So what ?? ppl contest the leaders, leaders fight each others ?? are we STUPID Monkeys ??

I don't think so.

Anyway, if I give some times of my life for SIGMA/Foveon, this is in the memory of Richard Merrill genius and the traditional honour and family spirit droved by SIGMA corporation Japan.

I do not do that to seek money or to grab recognition. I do that because when I think about it every morning, I feel well and sunny in my head, I feel touched by Richard's story. There is some dose of spirituality in this, yes. I'm French, after all.

On this forum we should be over material and brain fight ... we should be in the essence of photography and simplicity. Life is short, that coming from probably one of the youngest contributor of this little community.

"Dream on Hulyss !"

-- hide signature --
jrdigitalart
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,115
Re: About a C
In reply to HBowman, Mar 11, 2013

HBowman wrote:

. . . I'm French, after all.

Viva la French!

And I agree, Hulyss, Mr merrill was someone who can still inspire passion.

-- hide signature --

Sincere regards, Jim Roelofs
Cherish your privacy? Avoid (sp)iPhones.
You are welcome to visit my portfolio here:
http://www.pbase.com/jrdigitalart

Laurence Matson
Forum ProPosts: 11,249Gear list
Re: About a C
In reply to Richard Franiec, Mar 11, 2013

With all due respect, get serious. Were I a beta tester, I would be operating under an NDA, and I am sure you understand that one of the clauses in that would be non-disclosure terms. The same would apply for anyone, who was one in the past, since non-disclosure provisions usually extend beyond the end of any agreement. Nevertheless, I will interject below some things that I know, since they have nothing to do with an NDA, even if I were under one.

Richard Franiec wrote:

Laurence Matson wrote:

Øyvind,

... and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons, thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are); amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

Interesting,

Until now beta testing for Sigma with all perks (listed or not) were taboo on this forum.

Your confession begs for answers:

I made no confession. I just find it beyond belief that people are denigrated because someone has a petty issue with jealousy. I too have been at some of those dinners - one of the alleged perks. And so was absolutely every other user present at that show or event, without exception. And thanks were expressed by Sigma management to the Sigma users, no matter who they were and whether they used cameras or lenses or just a flash.

As Sandy mentioned, the so-called shoots are open to everyone, even if they do not use a Sigma camera. And these have taken place in many parts of the world, including Japan, Germany, France, UK, USA, and Switzerland. "Where two or three gather together . . . " is what the Yokefellows say. It is about fellowship and certainly not elitism.

I even participated in one in my home town hosted by Seng, because this is where Dick Merrill came from (and whose grave I visit more often than I can say; so am I also sliming up to Dick for perks?) And of course, I invited those who felt like it to come to the house, and they did.

1. Who are the beta testers for Sigma and participate in this forum?

I do not know.

2. What are the criteria to become beta tester for Sigma?

I have no idea.

3. How beta testers are compensated by Sigma?

I do not know.

4. List of suggestions to Sigma leading to improvement of product.

I know of several, but I will not list them specifically. Anyone, who has read my posts for any length of time, knows what they were.

5. Are the "serious" users opinions more important than average user observations and wishes?

Yes, to the extent that they are willing to give feedback freely and in a way that engineers can benefit from it. And I said nothing about "opinions;" there are more than enough of that to go around here. I am talking about having something important - of a contributory nature - to say.

6. Was SD1 initial price influenced by beta testers opinions?

You must be joking. You honestly think that if I knew anything I would discuss this on an open forum where there is at least a matching amount of indiscretion as there is discretion running rampant. The initial price of the SD1 was made public at photokina 2010. Other things happened at the launch. There has been a lot of speculation about this; it is up to senior management at Sigma to announce what they think is pertinent.

These are my initial questions. I guess that it wiill be more coming.

Fine.

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

richard stone
Senior MemberPosts: 1,617
Re: About fanboys
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 11, 2013

Monstrously overwrought drivel: Childish and naive, to be only slightly redundant. Ron is not a well person, which is easily seen in his posts, if you read them, which clearly you did not, as I would expect, as you were too busy composing your lecture, focused on your own ideas, not on the world around you, so you did not do actually do much observation.

However, what is highly amusing here is the idea that trolls have friends, and finding out who they are. The friends of trolls are of course the contrarians, people who take the other side of an argument "because someone should..." and to play at being "devil's advocate," as if that was not one of the dumbest and most annoying idea ever conceived. (Unless you wish to delude yourself by thinking this is some sort of pedagogical tool, and your are the parent or teacher lecturing to us children...) How charming.

Now, you might ask how I can say that Ron is not well and yet call him a troll, as if we should forgive him because he can't help it? Clearly "trolls" have all sorts of motivation for posting as they do, and if you had read Ron's posts you would have seen that he enjoyed annoying people and proposed to post on the Sigma forum until he was banned.

Ron knew exactly what he was doing, although we could propose that he did not know why. He liked taking on and disputing the accepted opinion and of course, when he posts in the Sigma forum who is he going to find there? People who own and use the Sigma cameras. And probably (generally) like them. So he wants to play at being the curmudgeon. Read what he posted.

To accept his opening paragraphs in his most recent post as sincere is naive. And self-righteous. The perfect word. (Or is it two?)

The trolls enjoy stirring things up, and by that they gain a certain satisfaction. Now, I do not propose to understand that feeling, because it is so utterly foreign to me, but I think that feeling is to some not-very-healthy extent shared by the contrarians, who frequently do not own or generally use the Sigma cameras. But again, arguing for the sake of arguing, which we so often see, is the essence of being a contrarian.

Don't you see that Ron was posting to enjoy himself? And his enjoyment was based on interacting with others in his own odd and mean-spirited way?

I proposed not interacting with Ron directly because it only seemed to wind him up.

And could I say that the idea of a "fanboy" is EXACTLY what Ron was all about, in the sense that Ron was talented at insults, and now you respond with your over-the top post and entitle it with an insult. As if even enjoying the equipment somehow makes you less likely of having a valuable opinion. But of course, how foolish is that when you put such a mindless title ("fanboy"???) post on a brand based gear forum?

Richard

Ps: Ron is an entertaining writer, with remarkable energy and hostility, although sad to say he cannot seem to coax any images from his Sigma cameras.

-- hide signature --
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,440Gear list
Re: About a C
In reply to Richard Franiec, Mar 11, 2013

Richard Franiec wrote:

Laurence Matson wrote:

Øyvind,

... and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons, thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are); amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

Interesting,

Until now beta testing for Sigma with all perks (listed or not) were taboo on this forum.

Your confession begs for answers:

1. Who are the beta testers for Sigma and participate in this forum?

Different cameras have had different beta testers.  I know that Kendell was a tester for the SD14.  The names of the others escape me at the moment.

2. What are the criteria to become beta tester for Sigma?

3. How beta testers are compensated by Sigma?

You'll have to ask them, but why does that matter?  I would guess that there was no compensation but that is pure conjecture on my part as I've never asked them (because it's none of my business).

4. List of suggestions to Sigma leading to improvement of product.

5. Are the "serious" users opinions more important than average user observations and wishes?

6. Was SD1 initial price influenced by beta testers opinions?

No way.  If, and I stress "if", they were to have had any influence, it would have resulted in a lower price, not an absurdly high price.

These are my initial questions. I guess that it wiill be more coming.

Cheers

Richard

-- hide signature --

My humble photo gallery: http://www.pete-the-greek.com

 Peter A. Stavrakoglou's gear list:Peter A. Stavrakoglou's gear list
Fujifilm X-S1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Sigma SD15 Canon EOS 7D Sigma SD1 Merrill +16 more
SandyF
Forum ProPosts: 14,875Gear list
Re: Nothing
In reply to Richard Franiec, Mar 11, 2013

Richard Franiec wrote:

SandyF wrote:

Richard Franiec wrote:

mroy wrote:

Richard Franiec wrote:

What do you know about him?

Why do you ask at all?

Because if bruised ego is a predominant factor in formulating the further opinion, such opinion does not count much.

ahhh, this works several ways too. "Bruised ego" or envy may account for some of the anti-Sigma negativity too, I've often thought, not just in reference to this thread. I remember people posting, asking, how to get their hands on 'early' aka beta cameras and/or software and/or be part of the 'testing' group or have photos hung at shows, etc etc.

FWIW, all anyone needs to do to be part of a Sigma 'shoot' is to attend! No club membership card needed. In fact at the last shoot, not everyone was using Sigma cameras.

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current)

added: and name-calling just because someone is perceived as an 'insider' (rhetorical question, inside what?) I do not appreciate being called by RonJG, "the butcher." I actually tried to be helpful to him, as I try to be to most people, when he first began posting under his new username, and was rebuffed. I

Sandy,

You are a good soul on this forum, always ready to help and give the advice. no one in the right mind would deny it.

Thank you for invitation for Sigma shoot. Maybe I'll see you all next year.

Cheers

Richard

Richard, thanks for the positive comment.

Another thought and perhaps an important distinction of terms:'beta testers' vs those who have had the opportunity occasionally over the years to use a camera model before worldwide public release.
Sigma Japan I'm sure has Japanese photographers and engineering teams who are indeed the "beta testers." No one here would probably recognize the names if we were to read them. Obviously some international photographers have produced the images for the Sigma brochures. Some of them post images on flickr too after release. Thinking of 'gris' the Japanese photography/art director.

As others have pointed out in this thread, an effort to obtain images from a new camera, say for printed display at an upcoming trade show, is quite different from rigorous "beta testing."
Some years ago the general public of Sigma users was given the opportunity several times to submit photos for consideration to be displayed at various trade shows, US, UK, Europe via a "call for images." This has not been the case for several years now.

When I happened to visit a particular trade show, totally out of personal interest in photography, I've made a point of documenting the images on display. They've been publicly posted on my archival pbase pages for years.

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current)

added: PMA galleries http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman/pma_200507&page=all

 SandyF's gear list:SandyF's gear list
Sigma DP2 Sigma DP1 Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sigma SD9 +5 more
yvind Strm
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,130
Re: About a C
In reply to Laurence Matson, Mar 12, 2013

Hello Laurence

I guess "Yes" would not be appropriate here....

Laurence Matson wrote:

Øyvind,

With all due respect, I think this is a bit over the top. I could just as easily sign on to "Splendid" and trump it with my own "Profilierungsneurose." There is something there.

I sometimes write long posts, I know. Maybe because I don't have those long english or funny german words in my vocabulary. I bet they could cover many of my sentences. From now on, I know I can just write "Profilierungsneurose", and everyone would know that this was about me, and not the behaviour of many fanboys here. Nice attempt on diversion.

BTW, isn't it a bit under the belt, to offer diagnosis on people? Oh, sorry, I forgot, it is perfectly allowed, when someone oppose the fanboys here. I must remember to add it to the list for use next time I think the fanboys step over the line. But, don't worry, I can take it. It just gives me the opportunity to write you a VERY LONG reply. If I have "profilierungsneurose", I have "profilierungsneurose".

Much of what you say has a grain of truth spiced with a dash of not-so-subtle and seemingly understated viperitude.

And all of it at such length begs the question: Why not just say: "Chill out, folks!"

I did think of that. I actually did write that at first also. But, then I saw the reply of Richard Stone, where he asked people to support RonJ, and then you know, the "profilierungsneurose" took over, and the post got longer and longer, as I recalled all the good people you and others have forced out over the years. And since it is so long since I adressed the bad behaviour of people here.

But the length - Biblical by forum standards - is something I think you really like, because it gives the impression that you have more merit in what you say than others could possibly have.

No, that is not intentional. I try to write understandable, but I do not use length to give impression that I have more merit. I try to make what I say to stand for it self. So I am afraid that your next argument falls apart.

Is there an english word for making an assumption, and then basing the arguments on that (wrong) assumption, as you repeatedly do?

This is blatantly untrue, again, with all due respect. You have not the slightest idea what others do in a holistic sense. You take a picture from here, blow it way up.

And now you have punctured it, so all problems goes away. As you say, it has a grain of truth.

First, through your labels: fanboys, wannabees, Richard Stones,

Are there more than one Stone? Sorry, couldn't resist.

Fanboys is a pretty accurate term. I am not so sure about wannabees. I have just observed that often rather new people joins the wolf pack, after the fanboys have set the uncivil tone. So , I thought it could be that they felt they would be easier accepted by the master fanboys.

BTW, what did you think about the new word I invented the other day? "Fanboying" - the act of excersizing fanboy activities.

'"serial comparers,"

I fail to notice I said that.

Sigmafia,

I give you that this word is stupid. Sorry. I wil refrain from using it again.

Carl's wife (which I assume you mean with "Linn"),

Yes, I bet you do. I THINK you are smart enough to understand that it was a typo. Of course I meant Lin (Evans), not Linn. (I assume you found it useful to pick on a typo). Linn is such a nice person - I have many good memories from hers and Carls wedding.

etc, and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons,

No, that's not right. There is no jealousy involved. I have participated in all the SUG meetings in my area (one :-), and I have by free will decided not to attend other arrangements in other regions.  Do you refer to that I once wrote to you and offered to become a beta tester?

thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are);

Again you make an assumption, and base your arguing on that assumption. A wrong assumption.

I do not know how many hours I have spent on this forum helping people mastering their Sigmas, and compiling my SD14 compendium. So I am not alien to aid Sigma, for free. And since I did not do it to make anyone jealous, I do think I can understand that neither did, or do, any of the ones you refer to above.

amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Yes, I must admit that there is something that have amazed me. How can a marketing department (at Sigma) still embrace their "serious" peoples, when thy can watch how they can insults, belittel (or in other way behave uncivil), either other Sigma customers or even potentional Sigma customers, who are labeled Trolls if they dare asking a critical (no, let me correct, an assumed critical) question, about a Sigma camera (which they do not have, since they havn't provided a picture of a glas of water). Oh, that was a long sentence. Can you read it , Laurence?

Don't they read this forum?

As for your judgment of who is civil and who is not, I agree that a good tone is preferable, but I also think that sly humor, direct statements, and even brutal honesty also have their place. Pollyanna has just as little place here as does Attila the Hun, and by his own account, Ron is far closer to the latter.

What really killed your grade though is your placing yourself on some pedestal as the final arbiter of the good photograph.

I did try to read what I wrote again, but can't really find support for what you claim.

I am glad you enjoyed it.That last long paragraph addressed to Ron goes beyond the ridiculous and ends at the faux-sublime. You have an opinion about what makes a great picture and provide it - when you have the time.

Do I sense a snide attack here? An old thread, perhaps?

But it is only your opinion, and sometimes wrong in the eyes of others, who have every right to be just as correct or wrong as you.

Have you been searching old posts? Or something you have stored from the past to use at the right moment? Beacuse I see nowhere in this post that I have claimed to have the "correct" view of a picture.

Finally, your long list of characters reads like an Irish dramatis personae after a collective supping off the end of the Guinness pipeline before they have a group slash all over the pitch.

I am glad you enjoyed it. I didn't know it was that good.

Next time I point out uncivil behaviour, I will include your unprecented tactic of using the length of the post in the arguments.

And if I manage to decipher the Irish thing properly, maybe there is something to include there too. Who knows

Here's my question to you: How much time do you actually spend off this forum constructively communicating with other members in an attempt to clean up some of the mess you perceive being here?

Sorry, I haven't kept track of that. There has been some PMs and mails over the years. And, if memory doesn't fail me, you started to behave better after some mail exchange with me - or was it just a coincidence? Others I have found is beyond reach.

Nuff said for now. I am very interested to hear Ron's take on what you wrote.

I bet you are.

yvind Strm wrote:

RonJG wrote:

I would seriously like to better understand the Sigma cameras I own, (SD1M, SD15 and DP2M). I have problems with all three of them with weird and inconsistent colours, weird and inconsistent exposure and strange jaggies and purple/green splotches in shadow detail.

I'm told I'm either mad or just stirring up trouble with I ask questions or am told that there is nothing wrong with my gear, that all the problems are either in my head or my fault.

The "help" I have received here has either been non existent or has been of such patronising quality it was immediately dismissed.

This forum is NOT a terribly helpful place to be if you fall out with the SigMafia, or if one of the SigMafia decides you are not worthy. One step out of line and the dog pack is released. Pretty disgusting behaviour I must say.

Anyhoo - I'm certainly no quitter and I will continue to try to get these Sigma things working at something approaching an acceptable level.

I will also continue to offer honest and open oipinion on posted pictures and I will continue challenging those persons I feel are being less than open or honest with their comments. If honest comments are not received at Sigma headquarters, problems will never be fixed. The 12 years or so of the purple/green splotches is testament to that.

Go your damndest, Sigmafia. I ain't leaving voluntarily.

Ron

I am sorry that I have missed your request for help. There ARE several helpful people here. I will do whatever I can to help. Please link to previous requests or write a new list. Even several member of the "sigmafia" are helpful - if you do not insult their cameras or Sigma, and when they not are busy with:

  1. defending against imaginary trolls
  2. scanning a posters history to find out if he has a Sigma
  3. scanning a posters history to find quotas to use against him
  4. denying that a problem exist, unless they have seen it themself (to be fair, only a few falls into this category)
  5. monitoring if one of their friends (or heroes) are beeing critisized
  6. managing their huge Ignore list
  7. feeding a posters post into a very advanced algorythm to match him against all previous persons that is disliked in this forum (which is an even huger list), and share among them
  8. mending their hurt feelings when someone critisize their camera or Sigma (oh, I have alraedy said that once)
  9. pulling out Richard Stone as last line of defence. Sorry, Richard - you wondered who would step out in defence of RonJ. That comment might have made some to refrain from doing so - which I have no doubt was the intention (and a new low, even from you) - but, sorry, not me. Oh, I must say, not so much in defence of RonJ, but against the behaviour of you and other fanboys. I would not accuse any of you fanboys beeing only 13 or so, but its not always easy to see that from your and others posts. Your language is of course too sophisticated, but the attacks are not.

And then there is the wannabees. Relativly new to the forum, they jump in, in defence (no, sorry, join the attack) of the master "fanboys".

There are also some hidden aspects in this forum, that is invisible to newcomers, but may explain some of the strange things happening here. Firstly, many of the oldtimers meet in person. On PMA - with tours (with equipment form Sigma), and dinners (sponosred by Sigma). Some may even be found behind the counters at Sigmas stand, helping Sigma demonstrating. So, maybe some are defending priviledges in addition to camera/Sigma?

Next thing is Beta testers. Several people here are betatesters for Sigma. Would you find it reasonable to expect that they agreed on faults they did not find when testing?

Dunno why I write this - I don't know how many times I have tried to get people to behave better here. I claim that the fanboy approach of to many here, is harming Sigma. For every poster there are many, many lurkers. People are attracted to Sigma, comes here to see if Sigma has a good community - and what do they find? A bunch of uncivil people that jumps in unison on anyone differing in views about their camera or Sigma. Does it scare some from buying Sigma cameras? I am sure it has.

The Sigmafia/fanboy behaviour of this forum may drive out some unwanted individuals (and yes, that has been done successfully many times over the years) and regain the illusion of a cosy place. To me, it is the fanboys, Sigmafia or whatever name appropriate that spoils almost ALL the spoiled discussions here, by far to often responding in an uncivil way. The favorite excuse is that there has been so many trolls coming here over the years, so people have a low tolerance.

I have used Sigma for several years now (oh, I havn't shown a picture of a glass of water yet, so Linn probably do not believe it). From the very launch of my camera (the SD14) the forum flooded with faults. Over the coming years I collected tips and tricks, and turned it into a compendium for new users. (Temporarely unavailible)

My take is - let's get everything on the table. If a persons unit doesn't show the same behaviour, good for you - but do not deny problems other have. Only if everything is out in the open, workarounds can be found (or not), and Sigma can be notified and make a fix. Sigma cameras is different, quirks are numerous, Sigmas SW qualities is inferior to most others makers and unit variation is present. I thought I could use the SD14 for professional jobs, but had to postpone my plans for returning to pro jobs for several years.

But in the end, one must decide if the potentionally superb results makes it worth the endless frustrations of the camera. I can't risk using my SD14 to earn money, so I go for a Nikon D800E, which I consider closest to getting Sigmas microcontrast. And possibly a DP2M.

Ron, a few words of advice to you too.

If someone posts a picture, and do not especially ask for feedback, a good advice is to wait a little, till the usual Ahhs, and Ohhs has come, and the author do not prostests to getting positive feedback, then I can step in, either to challenge the responders to why they think it is a good image, or offering a rather extensive comment about the picture. I always say what I mean, but I try to do it in a constructive way. But, some people do ONLY want pats on their back, which they unfortunately get from friends and alike. SO you can still be honest, but I too think you came off to direct in your first post.

With that said, the responses from Linn and others was far worse.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Øyvind

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Øyvind

yvind Strm
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,130
Re: About fanboys
In reply to richard stone, Mar 12, 2013

richard stone wrote:

Monstrously overwrought drivel: Childish and naive, to be only slightly redundant.

Good one! Did you invent it yourself?

Ron is not a well person, which is easily seen in his posts, if you read them, which clearly you did not, as I would expect, as you were too busy composing your lecture, focused on your own ideas, not on the world around you, so you did not do actually do much observation.

Hmm, you use the same tactics as Laurence. Making assumptions, and basing arguments on them, even if they are wrong. That does not hold in court. Maybe I should start calling you Laurence?

However, what is highly amusing here is the idea that trolls have friends, and finding out who they are. The friends of trolls are of course the contrarians, people who take the other side of an argument "because someone should..."

Yes, sometimes someone should stand up. A troll seldom does much harm, and can be safely ignored. But what you and your friends does is not harmless. One thing is that it in the long run hurts Sigma. But it also represent such a disrespect for dissident views and for humans. And that on a camera. How CAN you defend the tone of the posts you write to other human beings? And you talk about beeing childish? No, btw, it can't be childish. It is too mean.

I have followed this forum for a number of years now, and I really have a hard time to recall any of your contributions as beeing anything else than vicious attacks on someone that has already been attacked by some others here. Did you ever step in to offer help?

and to play at being "devil's advocate," as if that was not one of the dumbest and most annoying idea ever conceived.

I do not know about the "devils advocate" thing, but I understand that you feel annoyed when someone challenge your way at interacting with others.

(Unless you wish to delude yourself by thinking this is some sort of pedagogical tool, and your are the parent or teacher lecturing to us children...) How charming.

Your insight amazes me. Wait, first you said I am childish. Now you are the child. You need to have consistency when you proceed. Well, in the real world it's never to too late admitting a mistake.

Now, you might ask how I can say that Ron is not well

No, I had no intention of asking.

and yet call him a troll, as if we should forgive him because he can't help it? Clearly "trolls" have all sorts of motivation for posting as they do, and if you had read Ron's posts you would have seen that he enjoyed annoying people and proposed to post on the Sigma forum until he was banned.

Reading your post could also suggest that you enjoy annoying people. Maybe just one at the time, but anyway.

Ron knew exactly what he was doing, although we could propose that he did not know why. He liked taking on and disputing the accepted opinion and of course, when he posts in the Sigma forum who is he going to find there? People who own and use the Sigma cameras. And probably (generally) like them.

So much that civil behaviour is secondary.

So he wants to play at being the curmudgeon. Read what he posted.

To accept his opening paragraphs in his most recent post as sincere is naive. And self-righteous. The perfect word. (Or is it two?)

The trolls enjoy stirring things up, and by that they gain a certain satisfaction. Now, I do not propose to understand that feeling, because it is so utterly foreign to me,

Aha, that makes it more clear. The difference between the trolls and you is that the trolls gain a certain satisfaction, but you do not when you stirr up things.

but I think that feeling is to some not-very-healthy extent shared by the contrarians,

Again, you assume that the reason people oppose your inhuman form of communication is contrarian. I think better of people than that. I can only speak for my self; I prefere not to see things stirred up. I prefer reasonable threads, where people talk in a respectful way, even if one disagree. I hate the threads where you and your fanboy friends jumps at people, for no other reason that their view differ, or they come off too strongly or whatever. It gives me NO gain of certain satisfaction to adress you this way, but it will certainly give me a lot of satisfaction if the forum were spared for the post on the level you and other fanboys produce.

who frequently do not own or generally use the Sigma cameras. But again, arguing for the sake of arguing, which we so often see, is the essence of being a contrarian.

I can't really vote for contrarians, as I do not think there are many of them around. But in case anyone should count me as one, I do at least have a SD14. Yes, I know I haven't posted a glass of water, so Lin Evans will probably not believe me.

Don't you see that Ron was posting to enjoy himself? And his enjoyment was based on interacting with others in his own odd and mean-spirited way?

No, I can't see that. But I can imagine that you can. I often find your posts mean-spirited.

I proposed not interacting with Ron directly because it only seemed to wind him up.

And could I say that the idea of a "fanboy" is EXACTLY what Ron was all about, in the sense that Ron was talented at insults, and now you respond with your over-the top post and entitle it with an insult.

That one was complicated - but that is expected, I am just a child. Do you mean that I also am a Fanboy, since I have insulted you. SO Ron is both a troll and a fanboy. Okay.

As if even enjoying the equipment somehow makes you less likely of having a valuable opinion.

It doesn't. But enjoying the equipment doesn't authorize bullying others. Thats where you have misunderstood something.

But of course, how foolish is that when you put such a mindless title ("fanboy"???) post on a brand based gear forum?

Oh, I am so sorry I made a title that made you uncomfortable. But, since when did your concern for talking about brands start? All you do is to talk negativly about people.

Ps: Ron is an entertaining writer, with remarkable energy and hostility, although sad to say he cannot seem to coax any images from his Sigma cameras.

You are really mean to others.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

Not very kind regards
Øyvind

Laurence Matson
Forum ProPosts: 11,249Gear list
Re: About a C
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 12, 2013

yvind Strm wrote:

BTW, isn't it a bit under the belt, to offer diagnosis on people?

And you did not? In spades?

as I recalled all the good people you and others have forced out over the years. And since it is so long since I adressed the bad behaviour of people here.

This is complete nonsense. You obviously have no idea about why good people leave here.

I try to write understandable, but I do not use length to give impression that I have more merit.

Sorry, but I do not believe you.

This is blatantly untrue, again, with all due respect. You have not the slightest idea what others do in a holistic sense. You take a picture from here, blow it way up.

And now you have punctured it, so all problems goes away. As you say, it has a grain of truth.

Deflection does not mean that you understand what others do.

Fanboys is a pretty accurate term.

To your way of thinking. Just for your information, Michihiro Yamaki called them "evangelists." This was later picked up by Popular Photography in an editorial about the Sigma Users Group. I think he is more accurate with that term than you are with fanboys, which is widely seen as pejorative.

I am not so sure about wannabees. I have just observed that often rather new people joins the wolf pack, after the fanboys have set the uncivil tone. So, I thought it could be that they felt they would be easier accepted by the master fanboys.

Nonsense. And you consider yourself a model of civility?

'"serial comparers,"

I fail to notice I said that.

People who spend time looking up past postings.

etc, and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons,

No, that's not right. There is no jealousy involved.

Sorry, but your language betrays you in that post.

thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are);

Again you make an assumption, and base your arguing on that assumption. A wrong assumption.

Nonsense

I do not know how many hours I have spent on this forum helping people mastering their Sigmas, and compiling my SD14 compendium. So I am not alien to aid Sigma, for free. And since I did not do it to make anyone jealous, I do think I can understand that neither did, or do, any of the ones you refer to above.

Great. I even read it and (perhaps?) corrected it. I cannot remember. I did it for someone.

amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Yes, I must admit that there is something that have amazed me. How can a marketing department (at Sigma) still embrace their "serious" peoples, when thy can watch how they can insults, belittel (or in other way behave uncivil), either other Sigma customers or even potentional Sigma customers, who are labeled Trolls if they dare asking a critical (no, let me correct, an assumed critical) question, about a Sigma camera (which they do not have, since they havn't provided a picture of a glas of water). Oh, that was a long sentence. Can you read it , Laurence?

Don't they read this forum?

They certainly do. And they can separate the chaff from the wheat, believe it or not. The general consensus is that 95% of what is written here is technically incorrect, just as an aside. The general tone they are mature enough to recognize as pretty standard on Internet forums. (See Bowman's post elsewhere.)

What really killed your grade though is your placing yourself on some pedestal as the final arbiter of the good photograph.

I did try to read what I wrote again, but can't really find support for what you claim.

See one of the follow-up posts that you answered. Not a tough search even for you.

I am glad you enjoyed it.That last long paragraph addressed to Ron goes beyond the ridiculous and ends at the faux-sublime. You have an opinion about what makes a great picture and provide it - when you have the time.

Do I sense a snide attack here? An old thread, perhaps?

No, an honest opinion. You post an offer to help others with criticism and then run out of time. And what you tell them is somewhere between fluff and nonsense with a few good points mixed in. If that is good enough for you, fine. As I said:

But it is only your opinion, and sometimes wrong in the eyes of others, who have every right to be just as correct or wrong as you.

Have you been searching old posts? Or something you have stored from the past to use at the right moment? Beacuse I see nowhere in this post that I have claimed to have the "correct" view of a picture.

No. It was referenced in a follow-up posting that you answered. Don't be daft.

Finally, your long list of characters reads like an Irish dramatis personae after a collective supping off the end of the Guinness pipeline before they have a group slash all over the pitch.

I am glad you enjoyed it. I didn't know it was that good.

Domodossola-Brig

Next time I point out uncivil behaviour, I will include your unprecented tactic of using the length of the post in the arguments.

And if I manage to decipher the Irish thing properly, maybe there is something to include there too. Who knows

Here's my question to you: How much time do you actually spend off this forum constructively communicating with other members in an attempt to clean up some of the mess you perceive being here?

Sorry, I haven't kept track of that. There has been some PMs and mails over the years. And, if memory doesn't fail me, you started to behave better after some mail exchange with me - or was it just a coincidence? Others I have found is beyond reach.

You honestly are deluded enough to think that you will change my behavior? I think it is great that you send out some PMs and a few e-mails. As I said, others have invested a lot more than that. And that is generally what you feel necessary to put down.

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

Gary Dean Mercer Clark
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,247Gear list
Re: wow.
In reply to Roland Karlsson, Mar 12, 2013

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Gary Dean Mercer Clark wrote:

You can't judge another person until you've walked a mile in their shoes-

I have never understood this one. OK - its good to learn about a person before judging him. But, what has that to do with walking in his shoes?

You can try.... but the shoes will never fit!----2013 Gary Dean Mercer Clark

This I understand even less. Why should the shoes not fit? If they fit or not is only dependent on we having the same foot size.

But .... I think I agree in principle. Too many do too fast judgements of people. And in a forum where the actual communication is strongly crippled, you should avoid judging people until after a loooooooong time.

LOL--it is a play on the old American Indian proverb: You can't judge another until you walk a mile in his moccasins.    It means, that unless you've experienced what that person has experienced--that you can't make judgement on him.   My addition of no matter how you try--the shoe will never fit---is actually the correct quote I made originally. LOL.

"You can't judge another person until you've walked a mile in his shoes---No matter how hard you try--the shoes will NEVER fit"-- Gary Dean Mercer Clark

That is the corrected quote. LOL

 Gary Dean Mercer Clark's gear list:Gary Dean Mercer Clark's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A77 Sony a77 II Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +7 more
Lin Evans
Forum ProPosts: 15,819Gear list
A Few Quotes....
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 12, 2013

From one of the people you are ostensibly defending:

Been there. Done that. Got nothing but "It's something you/re doing" or some patronizing nonsense which I dismissed immediately.\

don't. I defend myself against lies and attack.

Difficult to talk up to most of these people.

admit to having something of a short fuse when it comes to responding to people who attack, are dishonest or who are technically incompetent.

When they lie, I'll call them on it.

Hahahahahahahah. Check the girl's face.

Hahahahahahaha.

infantile nonsense noted.

Given your quite advanced years, you should have grown out of this type of behaviour many decades ago.

You have no idea, do you. Driven by your hatred and nastiness is your lot.

The rule is, silly old man, there is NO debate. There is honest comment and there is yours. Get it?

Hahahahahahahahaha.

You posted an image I commented on it You cracked up and acted like a quean(sic)
Your pack dogs backed you up - none of whom dared suggest the image was technically bad
You then suggest there could be some faults with the image because of blah blah blah
NOW, Mister - Just who has the problem with comprehension. Infantile

Leave the clever stuff to those who are better able to handle it.

My opening comment ONLY dealt with the image, ergo, you either cannot understand the written word or you are a liar. I'm beginning to think both apply.

I don't like liars, Stone. There are many who post here who do nothing BUT lie. You are one of the best of them. But one should expect that from one of your profession. I employ two of your type, Stone, so I am familiar with your tactics.

Follow that up with more of your hatered, lies and filth, Stone. I fully expect it.

I'm sure the mods. will break this up sooner or later

No they won't. I've asked them to do so, but when it's me under attack, everything is OK with them. I'm a tad sick of the religious/ethnic overtones in some of the attack I face.

To survive you must suck up to the SigMafia members, you must fall about the place praising EVERY photograph they post, you must NEVER be critical of anything Sigma/Foveon, you must pay allegiance to the Godfather, aka Gelner and his Lieutenant "The Butcher, aka Fleischman.

This is NOT a forum which welcomes open and honest debate nor is it a forum which welcomes any but total Sigma/Foveon zealots.

Yep. With the insults, attack, hatred and filth introduced by Evans, Reolofs and Stone. I, unfortunately get to carry the blame for this thread's degeneration. These people can never take responsibility for their own actions.

Do you really think I care a fig about what these people think of me? Talk about the lunatics running the asylum.

His work leaves your efforts for dead.
Deal with it.

I trash people who are bullies and are dishonest.
Deal with it.

I have put Matson on the ignore list. He's just too, too nasty and full of himself to have any credibility.

You are obviously blind - either that or you simply cannot see. Or do not want to see.
I've long held you to be a dishonest person. You prove it each and every time you post diatribes such as the above. Now - back under your stone, Stone.

A good review, ruined by Gelner's constant whining and distortions.

If you go the other way, and uprez the sigma image to D800 size, the Sigma image falls to bits, making Sigma's claim of this 30mp equivalence a nonsense.

More empty words from the king of hatred and rhetoric, actually.

You've missed the point I made. I'm not going to take this to your level.
Question - Are you on the Sigma payroll?

Heaping praise on some very mediocre snapshots, which as BW have not even been properly processed? Well done.

You're rapt by these images? Seriously? And you wonder why I refuse to post sample photos.

None of that explains why the Sigma images are so small when compared to the D800 images. Nor does it explain why the Sigma images are processed at 180 dpi.
Is there a way to get the images to 300 dpi?

Raist3d
Forum ProPosts: 33,350Gear list
A few suggestions...
In reply to RonJG, Mar 12, 2013

Post more of what you want to see. Post your questions, something that comes from your experience and if someone else doesn't like- their problem

The sigmafia doesn't own dpreview nor can limit your right to post. They are actually pretty powerless. post and wait for those who really have an interest in working the pros and cons of the camera as the tool it is to achieve what you want to achieve photographically.

When I first started to post a while back I was tood that shooting high iso was just bad form, bad photography, just bad (good thing I knew way better by then) and that of course who needs high iso.  I was also shown "good high iso bight examples of street night life" with iso 400 with the camera capturing statues on a tripod- As you know- how its done.  Those statues sure have life!

Now thar the new spp is doing better in b&w at higher iso with the new sensor, you see a few exploring photographs that would have been next to impossible to take another way.  Just chuckle and move forward.

Share your photos and what you are trying to do in good faith. You will eventually get someone else not screaming foveon "is perfect for the real artist" with some real advice working with the pros and the cons.

Just my two cents.

-- hide signature --

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

yvind Strm
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,130
Re: About a C
In reply to Laurence Matson, Mar 12, 2013

Laurence Matson wrote:

yvind Strm wrote:

BTW, isn't it a bit under the belt, to offer diagnosis on people?

And you did not? In spades?

as I recalled all the good people you and others have forced out over the years. And since it is so long since I adressed the bad behaviour of people here.

This is complete nonsense. You obviously have no idea about why good people leave here.

No? But I do know that if you and the other loyalists refrained from attacking people coming here, this would be a much better place.

I try to write understandable, but I do not use length to give impression that I have more merit.

Sorry, but I do not believe you.

Ok, understandable, as it would tore away the foundation for your arguments.

This is blatantly untrue, again, with all due respect. You have not the slightest idea what others do in a holistic sense. You take a picture from here, blow it way up.

And now you have punctured it, so all problems goes away. As you say, it has a grain of truth.

Deflection does not mean that you understand what others do.

Fanboys is a pretty accurate term.

To your way of thinking. Just for your information, Michihiro Yamaki called them "evangelists." This was later picked up by Popular Photography in an editorial about the Sigma Users Group. I think he is more accurate with that term than you are with fanboys, which is widely seen as pejorative.

Here I will give you right. "Evangelists" IS much better. I will try to use that.

I am not so sure about wannabees. I have just observed that often rather new people joins the wolf pack, after the fanboys have set the uncivil tone. So, I thought it could be that they felt they would be easier accepted by the master fanboys.

Nonsense. And you consider yourself a model of civility?

No, not at all. I do make mistakes, and comes off wrongly or too strong. But I do try to correct and appologize if I step over the line.

'"serial comparers,"

I fail to notice I said that.

People who spend time looking up past postings.

Aha. Absolutely.

etc, and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons,

No, that's not right. There is no jealousy involved.

Sorry, but your language betrays you in that post.

Well, you must be right then. I'm just not sure what I am jealous about.

thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are);


Again you make an assumption, and base your arguing on that assumption. A wrong assumption.

Nonsense

I do not know how many hours I have spent on this forum helping people mastering their Sigmas, and compiling my SD14 compendium. So I am not alien to aid Sigma, for free. And since I did not do it to make anyone jealous, I do think I can understand that neither did, or do, any of the ones you refer to above.

Great. I even read it and (perhaps?) corrected it. I cannot remember. I did it for someone.

Actually, you are right. You did proof it for me, and corrected a lot of my bad english.

amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Yes, I must admit that there is something that have amazed me. How can a marketing department (at Sigma) still embrace their "serious" peoples, when thy can watch how they can insults, belittel (or in other way behave uncivil), either other Sigma customers or even potentional Sigma customers, who are labeled Trolls if they dare asking a critical (no, let me correct, an assumed critical) question, about a Sigma camera (which they do not have, since they havn't provided a picture of a glas of water). Oh, that was a long sentence. Can you read it , Laurence?

Don't they read this forum?

They certainly do. And they can separate the chaff from the wheat, believe it or not. The general consensus is that 95% of what is written here is technically incorrect, just as an aside. The general tone they are mature enough to recognize as pretty standard on Internet forums. (See Bowman's post elsewhere.)

Thanks for clarifying that. I am still amazed.

What really killed your grade though is your placing yourself on some pedestal as the final arbiter of the good photograph.

I did try to read what I wrote again, but can't really find support for what you claim.

See one of the follow-up posts that you answered. Not a tough search even for you.

I cannot recall that I have claimed that I have the only possible view on what a good photograph is. But I do think that using my approach, for many photographers, will result in better pictures. Others have other approaches, which is perfectly fine.

But I recall those post I wrote about that was very long posts. But that was before you told me that posts should not be so long.

I am glad you enjoyed it.That last long paragraph addressed to Ron goes beyond the ridiculous and ends at the faux-sublime. You have an opinion about what makes a great picture and provide it - when you have the time.

Do I sense a snide attack here? An old thread, perhaps?

No, an honest opinion. You post an offer to help others with criticism and then run out of time. And what you tell them is somewhere between fluff and nonsense with a few good points mixed in. If that is good enough for you, fine. As I said:

So, you admit to just a tiny bit of "serail comparring" by yourself. And obviously storing things as ammunition for totally unrelated attacks. Is this also something you guys share between you in off forum conversations?

But it is only your opinion, and sometimes wrong in the eyes of others, who have every right to be just as correct or wrong as you.

Have you been searching old posts? Or something you have stored from the past to use at the right moment? Beacuse I see nowhere in this post that I have claimed to have the "correct" view of a picture.

No. It was referenced in a follow-up posting that you answered. Don't be daft.

Finally, your long list of characters reads like an Irish dramatis personae after a collective supping off the end of the Guinness pipeline before they have a group slash all over the pitch.

I am glad you enjoyed it. I didn't know it was that good.

Domodossola-Brig

I hope this isn't wasted on the readers. I don't know that expression.

Next time I point out uncivil behaviour, I will include your unprecented tactic of using the length of the post in the arguments.

And if I manage to decipher the Irish thing properly, maybe there is something to include there too. Who knows

Here's my question to you: How much time do you actually spend off this forum constructively communicating with other members in an attempt to clean up some of the mess you perceive being here?

Sorry, I haven't kept track of that. There has been some PMs and mails over the years. And, if memory doesn't fail me, you started to behave better after some mail exchange with me - or was it just a coincidence? Others I have found is beyond reach.

You honestly are deluded enough to think that you will change my behavior? I think it is great that you send out some PMs and a few e-mails. As I said, others have invested a lot more than that. And that is generally what you feel necessary to put down.

Oh, so it was just a coincidence, then. I just observed that you have behaved better in the last years.

Isn't there a contradiction somewhere, in wanting me to spend more time off forum, to clean up some of the mess, and saying that I can't change your behaviour? I guess I would just waste my time.

It is great to know that you and your likes spend lots of time communicating off forum. I never doubted that. Is that where the wolf pack attacks are planned? And analysing and discussion about a possible return of previous expells? Because I cannot imagine that this vast amount of off forum communication has any intent on calming things down. On the contrary, I think it is about planning how to get rid off those voicing different views, so order and family cosiness can be restored. Why not create a facebbok page, where only the loyals are admitted and can praise Sigma cameras?

And why did you even ask? Since you have diagnosed me having "profilierungsneurose", I cannot be expected to hide away my views in emails or PMs?

Enough nonsense. As you said, I can't change your behaviour.

And with your arguing, you just prove my point on how the Evangelists treat dissidents.

If you excuse me, I must prepare for Richard Stones next attack.

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

--
Kind regards
Øyvind

Laurence Matson
Forum ProPosts: 11,249Gear list
Re: About a C
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 12, 2013

yvind Strm wrote:

Laurence Matson wrote:

yvind Strm wrote:

BTW, isn't it a bit under the belt, to offer diagnosis on people?

And you did not? In spades?

as I recalled all the good people you and others have forced out over the years. And since it is so long since I adressed the bad behaviour of people here.

This is complete nonsense. You obviously have no idea about why good people leave here.

No? But I do know that if you and the other loyalists refrained from attacking people coming here, this would be a much better place.

Ditto

I try to write understandable, but I do not use length to give impression that I have more merit.

Sorry, but I do not believe you.

Ok, understandable, as it would tore away the foundation for your arguments.

Still do not believe you. It is in your language, where you cannot hide it.

This is blatantly untrue, again, with all due respect. You have not the slightest idea what others do in a holistic sense. You take a picture from here, blow it way up.

And now you have punctured it, so all problems goes away. As you say, it has a grain of truth.

Deflection does not mean that you understand what others do.

Fanboys is a pretty accurate term.

To your way of thinking. Just for your information, Michihiro Yamaki called them "evangelists." This was later picked up by Popular Photography in an editorial about the Sigma Users Group. I think he is more accurate with that term than you are with fanboys, which is widely seen as pejorative.

Here I will give you right. "Evangelists" IS much better. I will try to use that.

Actually, give credit to Michihiro.

I am not so sure about wannabees. I have just observed that often rather new people joins the wolf pack, after the fanboys have set the uncivil tone. So, I thought it could be that they felt they would be easier accepted by the master fanboys.

Nonsense. And you consider yourself a model of civility?

No, not at all. I do make mistakes, and comes off wrongly or too strong. But I do try to correct and appologize if I step over the line.

Then why demand that everyone else has to be the model of civility so that they are not driven away. Do you think your drivel keeps them here. Some perhaps, and that's fine.

'"serial comparers,"

I fail to notice I said that.

People who spend time looking up past postings.

Aha. Absolutely.

As you do too, btw.

etc, and then have the gall to denigrate other things - meetings, trade shows, shoots, beta testing, personal contacts, dinners, tours - for what appears to be simple jealousy reasons,

No, that's not right. There is no jealousy involved.

Sorry, but your language betrays you in that post.

Well, you must be right then. I'm just not sure what I am jealous about.

Then reread the middle of your long sermon.

thereby ignoring the fact that many people here have dedicated considerable resources in terms of time and money to making this effort on the part of Foveon and Sigma somewhat successful. And for the most part, those people doing this, did not do it to make you or anyone else jealous (as you clearly are);


Again you make an assumption, and base your arguing on that assumption. A wrong assumption.

Nonsense

I do not know how many hours I have spent on this forum helping people mastering their Sigmas, and compiling my SD14 compendium. So I am not alien to aid Sigma, for free. And since I did not do it to make anyone jealous, I do think I can understand that neither did, or do, any of the ones you refer to above.

Great. I even read it and (perhaps?) corrected it. I cannot remember. I did it for someone.

Actually, you are right. You did proof it for me, and corrected a lot of my bad english.

amazing as the concept may seem to you, Sigma and Foveon actually reach out to users they can identify as serious people, who might have something important for them to hear.

Yes, I must admit that there is something that have amazed me. How can a marketing department (at Sigma) still embrace their "serious" peoples, when thy can watch how they can insults, belittel (or in other way behave uncivil), either other Sigma customers or even potentional Sigma customers, who are labeled Trolls if they dare asking a critical (no, let me correct, an assumed critical) question, about a Sigma camera (which they do not have, since they havn't provided a picture of a glas of water). Oh, that was a long sentence. Can you read it , Laurence?

Don't they read this forum?

They certainly do. And they can separate the chaff from the wheat, believe it or not. The general consensus is that 95% of what is written here is technically incorrect, just as an aside. The general tone they are mature enough to recognize as pretty standard on Internet forums. (See Bowman's post elsewhere.)

Thanks for clarifying that. I am still amazed.

Perhaps they are interested in their product and not buying soap boxes.

What really killed your grade though is your placing yourself on some pedestal as the final arbiter of the good photograph.

I did try to read what I wrote again, but can't really find support for what you claim.

See one of the follow-up posts that you answered. Not a tough search even for you.

I cannot recall that I have claimed that I have the only possible view on what a good photograph is. But I do think that using my approach, for many photographers, will result in better pictures. Others have other approaches, which is perfectly fine.

But I recall those post I wrote about that was very long posts. But that was before you told me that posts should not be so long.

Sure has that tone about it:

"I do have some experience in jurying and commenting on images.

I cannot guarantee that the critique will get you high placements in challenges here, because of the "uneducated" voter corps. But it might make you able to see for you self what shortcomings your picture have, and be better suited to do better.

So post your pictures here, and I will comment them."

You get to help folks be successful with challenges. Sounds pretty good to me. And you double down in this tread with a new role as moral arbiter.

I am glad you enjoyed it.That last long paragraph addressed to Ron goes beyond the ridiculous and ends at the faux-sublime. You have an opinion about what makes a great picture and provide it - when you have the time.

Do I sense a snide attack here? An old thread, perhaps?

No, an honest opinion. You post an offer to help others with criticism and then run out of time. And what you tell them is somewhere between fluff and nonsense with a few good points mixed in. If that is good enough for you, fine. As I said:

So, you admit to just a tiny bit of "serail comparring" by yourself. And obviously storing things as ammunition for totally unrelated attacks. Is this also something you guys share between you in off forum conversations?

Excuse me! Are you completely out to lunch? Read the post right above this one:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/51019596

But it is only your opinion, and sometimes wrong in the eyes of others, who have every right to be just as correct or wrong as you.

Have you been searching old posts? Or something you have stored from the past to use at the right moment? Beacuse I see nowhere in this post that I have claimed to have the "correct" view of a picture.

No. It was referenced in a follow-up posting that you answered. Don't be daft.

Finally, your long list of characters reads like an Irish dramatis personae after a collective supping off the end of the Guinness pipeline before they have a group slash all over the pitch.

I am glad you enjoyed it. I didn't know it was that good.

Domodossola-Brig

I hope this isn't wasted on the readers. I don't know that expression.

Do a little research. Not to worry; this would be in the Internet and not in those forbidden treasures on this site.

Next time I point out uncivil behaviour, I will include your unprecented tactic of using the length of the post in the arguments.

And if I manage to decipher the Irish thing properly, maybe there is something to include there too. Who knows

Here's my question to you: How much time do you actually spend off this forum constructively communicating with other members in an attempt to clean up some of the mess you perceive being here?

Sorry, I haven't kept track of that. There has been some PMs and mails over the years. And, if memory doesn't fail me, you started to behave better after some mail exchange with me - or was it just a coincidence? Others I have found is beyond reach.

You honestly are deluded enough to think that you will change my behavior? I think it is great that you send out some PMs and a few e-mails. As I said, others have invested a lot more than that. And that is generally what you feel necessary to put down.

Oh, so it was just a coincidence, then. I just observed that you have behaved better in the last years.

That's what I mean by delusional.

Isn't there a contradiction somewhere, in wanting me to spend more time off forum, to clean up some of the mess, and saying that I can't change your behaviour? I guess I would just waste my time.

I suspect that your reasons for staying off the forum might be found somewhere else. Again, reread your postings on why you did not provide critique.

It is great to know that you and your likes spend lots of time communicating off forum. I never doubted that. Is that where the wolf pack attacks are planned?

Complete nonsense. Your smileys are disingenuous at best.

And analysing and discussion about a possible return of previous expells? Because I cannot imagine that this vast amount of off forum communication has any intent on calming things down. On the contrary, I think it is about planning how to get rid off those voicing different views, so order and family cosiness can be restored.

Your truly are delusional.

Why not create a facebbok page, where only the loyals are admitted and can praise Sigma cameras?

There already is one of those, but I have never known of anyone being turned away.

And why did you even ask? Since you have diagnosed me having "profilierungsneurose", I cannot be expected to hide away my views in emails or PMs?

Enough nonsense. As you said, I can't change your behaviour.

Did I ask you to?

And with your arguing, you just prove my point on how the Evangelists treat dissidents.

Nonsense.

If you excuse me, I must prepare for Richard Stones next attack.

I thought there was only one Stone.

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

yvind Strm
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,130
Re: A Few Quotes....
In reply to Lin Evans, Mar 12, 2013

Lin, I do agree that many of this statements are way over the line, and as such I do not defend them. But you can't take them out of context like that. Where are the insults that led to those comments? Maybe not directly, but through repeated attacks.

RonJs comments were not like that in the beginning. Neither was any other posters that came here first time.

Often a poster comes here, and may have an unfortunate wording. And this is where it goes wrong - if there is any chance that it is a troll, he is jumped at. Especially if he has a low post count. RonJ is not the first this has happened for.

I think the first thread RonJ started is worth taking a look at. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50529614

I find it rather typical of what happens when someone comes to the forum with a statement or question, that may or may not be a troll post.

Luckily, in that thread, it is a majority of helpful people, that don’t jump at him. But several does, with support from others.

This is the general rule – the new posters are attacked first, and not only by one. In some instances, the OP has managed to remain calm, but often the attacks results in a angered person, which responds in kind. And then the spiral starts. And in the end "proves" that he was just another "troll". I would say "created" by the attackers. Almost always. Sadly, this seems like standard procedure.

In that specific thread, 9 persons attacked (or voiced support for the attackers). If those 9 had managed to shut up, and let the 14 people that DID try to help (or acknowledge the helping attempt) do their thing, the thread would be an educational one to read for newcomers, and RonJs impression, and subsequent reactions would been different.

To make the picture somewhat more complete, 2 of the 9 later appologized for the initial assumption of him being a troll.

I must also stress that in that particular thread, you (Lin) did try to help, and so did DaSigmaGuy, D Cox, Gary Mercer, SigmaChrome, Dan Daniel, Johan Borg, Atom14, Idiliic, Mike earussi, Ceistinne, Laurence Matson ( a very, very good answer), dMillier, mroy, Charles2 and Gunther Borgermeister. (Hope I didn't leave out any helpful contributor)

Those posters (including yours) is excellent examples of how we SHOULD respond to anyone, regardless of how they phrase their claims or questions.

Lin Evans wrote:

From one of the people you are ostensibly defending:

Been there. Done that. Got nothing but "It's something you/re doing" or some patronizing nonsense which I dismissed immediately.\

don't. I defend myself against lies and attack.

Difficult to talk up to most of these people.

admit to having something of a short fuse when it comes to responding to people who attack, are dishonest or who are technically incompetent.

When they lie, I'll call them on it.

Hahahahahahahah. Check the girl's face.

Hahahahahahaha.

infantile nonsense noted.

Given your quite advanced years, you should have grown out of this type of behaviour many decades ago.

You have no idea, do you. Driven by your hatred and nastiness is your lot.

The rule is, silly old man, there is NO debate. There is honest comment and there is yours. Get it?

Hahahahahahahahaha.

You posted an image I commented on it You cracked up and acted like a quean(sic)
Your pack dogs backed you up - none of whom dared suggest the image was technically bad
You then suggest there could be some faults with the image because of blah blah blah
NOW, Mister - Just who has the problem with comprehension. Infantile

Leave the clever stuff to those who are better able to handle it.

My opening comment ONLY dealt with the image, ergo, you either cannot understand the written word or you are a liar. I'm beginning to think both apply.

I don't like liars, Stone. There are many who post here who do nothing BUT lie. You are one of the best of them. But one should expect that from one of your profession. I employ two of your type, Stone, so I am familiar with your tactics.

Follow that up with more of your hatered, lies and filth, Stone. I fully expect it.

I'm sure the mods. will break this up sooner or later

No they won't. I've asked them to do so, but when it's me under attack, everything is OK with them. I'm a tad sick of the religious/ethnic overtones in some of the attack I face.

To survive you must suck up to the SigMafia members, you must fall about the place praising EVERY photograph they post, you must NEVER be critical of anything Sigma/Foveon, you must pay allegiance to the Godfather, aka Gelner and his Lieutenant "The Butcher, aka Fleischman.

This is NOT a forum which welcomes open and honest debate nor is it a forum which welcomes any but total Sigma/Foveon zealots.

Yep. With the insults, attack, hatred and filth introduced by Evans, Reolofs and Stone. I, unfortunately get to carry the blame for this thread's degeneration. These people can never take responsibility for their own actions.

Do you really think I care a fig about what these people think of me? Talk about the lunatics running the asylum.

His work leaves your efforts for dead.
Deal with it.

I trash people who are bullies and are dishonest.
Deal with it.

I have put Matson on the ignore list. He's just too, too nasty and full of himself to have any credibility.

You are obviously blind - either that or you simply cannot see. Or do not want to see.
I've long held you to be a dishonest person. You prove it each and every time you post diatribes such as the above. Now - back under your stone, Stone.

A good review, ruined by Gelner's constant whining and distortions.

If you go the other way, and uprez the sigma image to D800 size, the Sigma image falls to bits, making Sigma's claim of this 30mp equivalence a nonsense.

More empty words from the king of hatred and rhetoric, actually.

You've missed the point I made. I'm not going to take this to your level.
Question - Are you on the Sigma payroll?

Heaping praise on some very mediocre snapshots, which as BW have not even been properly processed? Well done.

You're rapt by these images? Seriously? And you wonder why I refuse to post sample photos.

None of that explains why the Sigma images are so small when compared to the D800 images. Nor does it explain why the Sigma images are processed at 180 dpi.
Is there a way to get the images to 300 dpi?

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Øyvind

unknown member
(unknown member)
How stupid do you think
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 12, 2013

the people on this forum are?

yvind Strm wrote:

Lin, I do agree that many of this statements are way over the line, and as such I do not defend them. But you can't take them out of context like that. Where are the insults that led to those comments? Maybe not directly, but through repeated attacks.

RonJs comments were not like that in the beginning. Neither was any other posters that came here first time.

Often a poster comes here, and may have an unfortunate wording. And this is where it goes wrong - if there is any chance that it is a troll, he is jumped at. Especially if he has a low post count. RonJ is not the first this has happened for.

I think the first thread RonJ started is worth taking a look at. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50529614

I find it rather typical of what happens when someone comes to the forum with a statement or question, that may or may not be a troll post.

Luckily, in that thread, it is a majority of helpful people, that don’t jump at him. But several does, with support from others.

This is the general rule – the new posters are attacked first, and not only by one. In some instances, the OP has managed to remain calm, but often the attacks results in a angered person, which responds in kind. And then the spiral starts. And in the end "proves" that he was just another "troll". I would say "created" by the attackers. Almost always. Sadly, this seems like standard procedure.

The first post of that guy is actually worth a look at:

'Have I been ripped off?

Just bought an SD1M and am disappointed with image size.

I was informed that the image size from the SD1M was 46mp. That cannot be because when I take a jpg and display it to fill my 27" screen, it is at 77% enlargment

Nikon D800 at full screen is only 34% enlargement.

I also noticed the Sigma images are only 180 dpi whereas the Nikon ones are 300 dpi.

Am I doing something wrong here or is the advertising duff?'

And you take him serious?

3 months ago

Please continue with your ill-advised posts - the more the merrier.

John Siward
Regular MemberPosts: 215
Begging the question....
In reply to Laurence Matson, Mar 12, 2013

Laurence Matson wrote:

[snip]

And all of it at such length begs the question: Why not just say: "Chill out, folks!"

[snip]

It may raise the question, but it certainly doesn't beg the question:

http://begthequestion.info/

J.

Laurence Matson
Forum ProPosts: 11,249Gear list
Re: A Few Quotes....
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 12, 2013

yvind Strm wrote:

Lin, I do agree that many of this statements are way over the line, and as such I do not defend them. But you can't take them out of context like that. Where are the insults that led to those comments? Maybe not directly, but through repeated attacks.

Break one of your own rules and do a little research.

RonJs comments were not like that in the beginning. Neither was any other posters that came here first time.

Ditto

Often a poster comes here, and may have an unfortunate wording. And this is where it goes wrong - if there is any chance that it is a troll, he is jumped at. Especially if he has a low post count. RonJ is not the first this has happened for.

I think the first thread RonJ started is worth taking a look at. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50529614

Actually, you are wrong again. This was his first post, as far as I can tell:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/8162942

I find it rather typical of what happens when someone comes to the forum with a statement or question, that may or may not be a troll post.

Look at some of the later stuff but pre-December 23, 2012, when the previous persona was banned.

Luckily, in that thread, it is a majority of helpful people, that don’t jump at him. But several does, with support from others.

You weren't there to keep things in balance.

This is the general rule – the new posters are attacked first, and not only by one. In some instances, the OP has managed to remain calm, but often the attacks results in a angered person, which responds in kind. And then the spiral starts. And in the end "proves" that he was just another "troll". I would say "created" by the attackers. Almost always. Sadly, this seems like standard procedure.

Nonsense. You are making up scenarios to match your pov.

In that specific thread, 9 persons attacked (or voiced support for the attackers). If those 9 had managed to shut up, and let the 14 people that DID try to help (or acknowledge the helping attempt) do their thing, the thread would be an educational one to read for newcomers, and RonJs impression, and subsequent reactions would been different.

As you can upon self-reflection, it is hard for some people to shut up. Pot calling the kettle black here.

To make the picture somewhat more complete, 2 of the 9 later appologized for the initial assumption of him being a troll.

Swell.

I must also stress that in that particular thread, you (Lin) did try to help, and so did DaSigmaGuy, D Cox, Gary Mercer, SigmaChrome, Dan Daniel, Johan Borg, Atom14, Idiliic, Mike earussi, Ceistinne, Laurence Matson ( a very, very good answer), dMillier, mroy, Charles2 and Gunther Borgermeister. (Hope I didn't leave out any helpful contributor)

Those posters (including yours) is excellent examples of how we SHOULD respond to anyone, regardless of how they phrase their claims or questions.

I am very appreciative of your approval. WOW.

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
"The fact of being reported multiplies the apparent extent of any deplorable development by five- to tenfold" (or any figure the reader would care to supply).
Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

Forgottenbutnotgone
Regular MemberPosts: 192
Re: About fanboys
In reply to yvind Strm, Mar 12, 2013

Amen.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads