What is this forum supposed to be about?

That's an interesting point indeed, Tom.

As coming from STF and just upgrading to A65 my logical forum leap has been to Sony SRLTalk. But I was really expecting more interest in Photography by itself than so specialized tech-geek-talk, that if also useful, mostly have little or even nothing to do with achieving a good shot.

I believe my cameras are for shooting... but I'm probably wrong , and probably I'd better start to talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

So, it's not a bad idea at all, Tom.
Txs4C&C
-- aaanouel



Truth is a pathless land.
The dead past darkens the ever living present.

Corrections and critics are more than very welcome, desirables.

I think this forum is about what Sony SLR users want it to be about. Largely I agree with you that it's probably more technology-oriented than wow, look at our new kitten.

But that's not to say I don't think people should post their kittens. Well, maybe not kittens, but certainly photographs of various subjects. Personally, I'm newish to Sony stills, having moved from Canon via a temporary Nex 5N to my A77, but have used Sony pro video gear. If I see an interesting photograph here, technically, I would possibly want to ask the user what lens? What settings? I'm researching lenses right now, and want to be impressed by shots taken with my short-listed lenses.

But I also want to see people post hey, if you click that, adjust this, set that, then you get better landscapes, so I can try and learn for myself.

But I'm not sure it's our duty here to advise people to crop differently or use the rule of thirds and so on.

You soon realise what this forum is all about by observing which type of posts get multiple responses. That indicates it has appealed to many forum users.

Post something here that gets zilch or very little response, and it doesn't take a lot of savvy to tell you that that's not what users here want to see or read about, and consequently you don't do it again.

So in some way the content on this forum is self-governing.

Disclaimer: it ain't always necessarily so, there's always the exception, thank goodness.

--
Don't forget to smell the roses.

aaanouel said:

There are race drivers and motor experts, by apart, but you almost never will find a motor fan that is a good race driver, nor a good luthier being an excellent violin performer.

I personally came her for learning from violinists and have found more luthiers, but there's enough space for both: those who enjoy technical aspects and for the ones who prefer to shoot, share and learn how to.

Click to expand...

For advice on general photography and techniques there are non brand specific forums for that on this very web site.

In the brand specific forums you will find some good photo taking advice but you will also find many who are more interested in the hardware, how to use and get the most out of it, and the technical quality of the photo viewed at 100% than how to take an aesthetically pleasing photo. The information you get here can help greatly in getting the most out of your camera.

Because of the technical nature of this forum you find people here who are on completely opposite sides of the fence arguing with each other despite the fact they have little in common. Neither are right or wrong but just have different interests.
--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/63683676@N07/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

aaanouel said:

I believe my cameras are for shooting... but I'm probably wrong , and probably I'd better start to talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

I can't figure you out. You mix sensible, positive, and appreciative statements with what appear to be sarcastic insults. Do you mean to be rude? If not, you might be better understood and accepted if you avoid statements like this.

This is honestly meant as a friendly observation. I hope it is received as such by all.

I think you are correct in suggesting a balanced approach between the art of photography and the technology of the camera equipment. The ultimate objective in using a camera is a good final image, with "image" ranging from a snapshot to a work of art. Even snap shooters might like to know how to get better snapshots under challenging conditions, and knowing the camera goes a long way toward that goal. They might post their photos with the hope of learning what settings they need to change to improve the image quality, but there is nothing wrong with also commenting on things like composition to help make that snapshot a better photograph. Others may post truly amazing images that demonstrate both skill in the art of photography and great technological savvy on everything from the camera to computer post-processing. Any posted image that catches my attention for any number of reasons (subject matter, composition, focus, sharpness, color, detail, action, mood, lighting, etc, etc) gives me confidence in my equipment and a personal goal to aspire to in developing my technique.

Broadly stated, I think the primary purpose of any forum is education. And even in the bickering and name calling that goes on in this forum I sometimes find little gems of information that I was not aware of before, and these help me to understand more about my camera and about photography.

Perhaps while thinking of what the forum should be about we can also mention what it should not be about -- insults, name calling, and disrespectful comments in general. There are enough ways to tell someone they are wrong, or that you disagree with an opinion, that don't require these kinds of remarks. The forum membership is very broad in age, experience, education, and technical and artistic knowledge, and this should be shared positively to the greatest extent with courtesy in a congenial environment.

Some very good comments... and I say +1 (or Like, or star, or thumbs up, or ...) to that. I know I slip up but I try to keep these thoughts in mind.

brian14478 said:

cropped j-peg minolta 100-2004.5





..i think though at f5 along the focal length, focus/nonfocus(hyperfocus) acheives more than enough 'centralization' of the subject(chico)also the a100 at 10mps though very lighly cropped if at all the image will start to show its pixel peeping limitations.the lens is a minolta 100-200mm f4.5constant aperature and is very sharp wide open at all focal lenths.the minimum focusing distance is annoyingly long on the lens.other than that it is a solid semi fast built about bulletproof accucurate quite fast reliable having excellent color charachterics lens that can be had on e-bay or amazon for the very low price of $79.95 or even less..thanks ,brian this picture was the first shot from the first day we let him run on his own..the ten others..'not so good"

Click to expand...

LOL. Nice one.

altendky said:

aaanouel said:

I believe my cameras are for shooting... but I'm probably wrong , and probably I'd better start to talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

I can't figure you out. You mix sensible, positive, and appreciative statements with what appear to be sarcastic insults. Do you mean to be rude? If not, you might be better understood and accepted if you avoid statements like this.

This is honestly meant as a friendly observation. I hope it is received as such by all.

Click to expand...

If you can't figure him out, why are you assuming he means to be rude?. That's not a friendly observation, that's a personal attack. Your lack of understandings is not a good reason for personal attack and start of a childish fight.

We should respect people, even those with different ideas and interests, even if we can't figure it out. But nobody should use personal attacks, and aggressions to score points.

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Everybody should be able to present his ideas without the fear of personal attack. Please respect other people, even if you don't agree with them.

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

aaanouel said:

I believe my cameras are for shooting... but I'm probably wrong , and probably I'd better start to talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

I can't figure you out. You mix sensible, positive, and appreciative statements with what appear to be sarcastic insults. Do you mean to be rude? If not, you might be better understood and accepted if you avoid statements like this.

This is honestly meant as a friendly observation. I hope it is received as such by all.

Click to expand...

If you can't figure him out, why are you assuming he means to be rude?.

Click to expand...

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

what appear to be sarcastic insults

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Sam_Oslo said:

Sam_Oslo said:

Do you mean to be rude?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I did not assume, I meant to express that in my eyes the quoted line sounded sarcastic and insulting. I understand that I may be misinterpreting it, though I suspect others could interpret similarly. I merely wanted to provide feedback to aaanouel that what was written here (and in various other comments this weekend) are either unecessarily rude, or could at least be interpreted that way. In case someone misunderstood my purpose (as you seem to have, perhaps you haven't, but you SeeM to have) I ended it with:

Sam_Oslo said:

Sam_Oslo said:

This is honestly meant as a friendly observation. I hope it is received as such by all.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Sam_Oslo said:

That's not a friendly observation, that's a personal attack. Your lack of understandings is not a good reason for personal attack and start of a childish fight.

Click to expand...

I did not attack, I shared how the comment came across to me even suggesting myself that I may not have understood the intent.

Sam_Oslo said:

We should respect people, even those with different ideas and interests, even if we can't figure it out. But nobody should use personal attacks, and aggressions to score points.

Click to expand...

I agree, but I do not understand how I attacked aaanouel. I did not even say he was being insulting but rather said that it sounded that way to me and that I was worried I was misinterpreting the statements.

Sam_Oslo said:

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Click to expand...

I'm lost. Are you still assuming that I was attacking aaanouel?

Sam_Oslo said:

Everybody should be able to present his ideas without the fear of personal attack. Please respect other people, even if you don't agree with them.

Click to expand...

I didn't even disagree with aaanouel. Please try re-reading the quote from aaanouel and my reply to it. I did not mean to attack aaanouel, nor do I believe I did.

While the only reason I come here is the tech talk... that's not to say that I don't smile when I run across pics like this. :] Thanks for sharing.

altendky said:

altendky said:

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Click to expand...

I'm lost. Are you still assuming that I was attacking aaanouel?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you have been personal attacking. You still haven't said anything to dismiss his point. I hope you can answer it, this time.

Is your cameras for shooting... or you talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.?

EDIT: Maybe I have to spell it out. You attacked the person to dismiss his point. That's a cheap tricks for scoring point, but it creates a aggressive atmosphere. Ypu need to attack the point, with logical reasoning.

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

Sam_Oslo said:

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Click to expand...

I'm lost. Are you still assuming that I was attacking aaanouel?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you have been personal attacking, by attacking him.

Click to expand...

How did I attack him? I said that the what he wrote sounded like a sarcastic insult to me, but that I was concerned that I (and perhaps others) were misinterpreting the intent. Sometimes people write one thing and others interpret it differently. Sometimes the author doesn't realize this. My intent was to suggest that perhaps this is what was happening and to let aaanouel know of this potential issue.

Regardless, I have clearly failed to express myself to you. You still seem to believe I was attacking aaanouel instead of trying to be helpful. Other than directly stating this, what else can I do to clarify myself?

Sam_Oslo said:

You still haven't said anything to dismiss his point. I hope you can answer it this time.

Is your cameras for shooting... or you talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.? Answer this please.

Click to expand...

Actually, the quote is:

aaanouel said:

I believe my cameras are for shooting... but I'm probably wrong, and probably I'd better start to talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

First aaanouel states the belief that cameras are for shooting, but then follows this with a contrary statement that, to me, sounds sarcastic and like a put down to those that have been talking about tech in this online forum.

My interpretation of this statement is that aanouel was suggesting that we tech-talkers are silly and wasting our time because the purpose of cameras is to take pictures. Well sure, the cameras are for taking pictures but this is a forum and it is for talking. Of course, it is a camera forum so perhaps it is for talking about shooting?

My point is still that I was not challenging any statement aaanouel was making. Nor was I attacking. I saw something written that could, from my perspective, be easily misinterpreted. I asked for clarification of intent.

Again I will point out that I have clearly failed to express myself to you. Instead of continuing to accuse me of attacking aaanouel, which I sincerely did NoT mean to do, could you instead try to understand what I intended to express? Please? Perhaps you do understand my intent but feel my words were poorly chosen. In that case, you could offer some alternative way in which I should have expressed myself?

altendky said:

Again I will point out that I have clearly failed to express myself to you. Instead of continuing to accuse me of attacking aaanouel, which I sincerely did NoT mean to do, could you instead try to understand what I intended to express? Please? Perhaps you do understand my intent but feel my words were poorly chosen. In that case, you could offer some alternative way in which I should have expressed myself?

Click to expand...

I wrote an EDIT to my last post, but maybe it was too late. I can explain more.

Everybody (including you and aaanouel) has a right to criticize and dismiss others ideas with logical reasoning. But you can't dismiss his ideas by asking if he is trying to be rude, or similar personal attacks. That's a cheap tricks that won't dismiss his ideas.

He likes his cameras for shooting, and from that point of view, he is criticizing you for talking in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

If you don't agree with him, you have the right to dismiss his point by logical arguments. Attacking him by calling him "rude" is a personal attack that will only create aggression, but it won't approve your approach for talking in circles about camera on a computer to be happy.

You need either to get out and shooting, or explain how you can be happy by talking in circles about camera on a computer to be happy.

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

Sam_Oslo said:

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Click to expand...

I'm lost. Are you still assuming that I was attacking aaanouel?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you have been personal attacking. You still haven't said anything to dismiss his point. I hope you can answer it, this time.

Is your cameras for shooting... or you talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.?

EDIT: Maybe I have to spell it out. You attacked the person to dismiss his point. That's a cheap tricks for scoring point, but it creates a aggressive atmosphere. Ypu need to attack the point, with logical reasoning.

Click to expand...

Are you not doing the same thing, because it kinda sounds like you are........

Ive been here almost 7 years... This is a Photography forum.. the sign says This is a place to talk about Sony SLRs, and the assumption is also the final product.. that being the photographs that these cameras produce.... Ive never seen an official description of what these forums are all about. Ive never read from any official source that this is a gear only forum.

For me I enjoy seeing photographs from around the world using all types of techniques and under all types of conditions. The Photographs offer some insight into the way the shot was developed. A discussion on a photograph can also produce some healthy discussion on the post processing efforts of the OP. It also gives us a glimpse into the life and world of someone half way around the world.

I don't think this forum is suppose to be anything specific.. in this case I use this forum to discuss Sony cameras and accessories, discuss and comment on photographs produced by these cameras, try to offer some helpful comments, and encourage new people into the world of photography, and when given the opportunity...poke my finger in the eye of those who want to disrupt the fun that can be had here sharing thoughts photos and ideas.
--
Bill aka EO

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

Again I will point out that I have clearly failed to express myself to you. Instead of continuing to accuse me of attacking aaanouel, which I sincerely did NoT mean to do, could you instead try to understand what I intended to express? Please? Perhaps you do understand my intent but feel my words were poorly chosen. In that case, you could offer some alternative way in which I should have expressed myself?

Click to expand...

I wrote an EDIT to my last post, but maybe it was too late. I can explain more.

Everybody (including you and aaanouel) has a right to criticize and dismiss others ideas with logical reasoning. But you can't dismiss his ideas by asking if he is trying to be rude, or similar personal attacks. That's a cheap tricks that won't dismiss his ideas.

Click to expand...

I was making no attempt to dismiss aaanouel's ideas in that post. I have addressed the tech vs. photography question in other messages.

Sam_Oslo said:

He likes his cameras for shooting, and from that point of view, he is criticizing you for talking in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

And the way it was written fits, I believe, into the realm of sarcasm. Sarcasm is hardly an 'appropriate' or 'polite' way to discuss things especially in a forum where so much context (tone of voice, body language, etc.) are lost. Given that I am aware of how easy it is to misinterpret someone's intent online, I asked for clarification of intent so I could judge based on that rather than what could simply have been miscommunication.

Sam_Oslo said:

If you don't agree with him, you have the right to dismiss his point by logical arguments.

Click to expand...

See above.

Sam_Oslo said:

Attacking him by calling him "rude" is a personal attack that will only create aggression, but it won't approve your approach for talking in circles about camera on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

I did not call him rude, I asked if he meant to be rude.

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

Do you mean to be rude?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Sam_Oslo said:

You need either to get out and shooting, or explain how you can be happy by talking in circles about camera on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

No, I do not need to follow your orders. Anyways, I already did both this weekend. sigh Please go back and read what I wrote. To help out, here it is:

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

aaanouel said:

I believe my cameras are for shooting... but I'm probably wrong , and probably I'd better start to talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.

Click to expand...

I can't figure you out. You mix sensible, positive, and appreciative statements with what appear to be sarcastic insults. Do you mean to be rude? If not, you might be better understood and accepted if you avoid statements like this.

This is honestly meant as a friendly observation. I hope it is received as such by all.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Perhaps I should instead have said:

If not, you might be better understood and accepted if you avoided sarcasm in situations such as this forum where body language and tone of voice are lost.

Otherwise, I stand by my original wording for now and maintain that I did not attack aaanouel.

Tom2572 said:

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

Tom2572 said:

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Click to expand...

I'm lost. Are you still assuming that I was attacking aaanouel?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you have been personal attacking. You still haven't said anything to dismiss his point. I hope you can answer it, this time.

Is your cameras for shooting... or you talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.?

EDIT: Maybe I have to spell it out. You attacked the person to dismiss his point. That's a cheap tricks for scoring point, but it creates a aggressive atmosphere. Ypu need to attack the point, with logical reasoning.

Click to expand...

Are you not doing the same thing, because it kinda sounds like you are........

Click to expand...

I'm attacking his point, but in a harsher way than I would usually like to do.

Because I don't like people who start childish fights with personal attacks. I believe a few of them can desultory a whole forum, easily.

Maybe he didn't know it was a personal attacking by calling him rude, but he was starting a childish fight, anyways. Now I have been harsh and direct enough for him to know, so lets hope it doesn't repeat.

Sam_Oslo said:

Tom2572 said:

Sam_Oslo said:

altendky said:

Sam_Oslo said:

Don't attack the person, attack the point. Personal attacks creates aggressive atomosfare that nobody likes or wants.

Click to expand...

I'm lost. Are you still assuming that I was attacking aaanouel?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you have been personal attacking. You still haven't said anything to dismiss his point. I hope you can answer it, this time.

Is your cameras for shooting... or you talk in circles about them on a computer to be happy.?

EDIT: Maybe I have to spell it out. You attacked the person to dismiss his point. That's a cheap tricks for scoring point, but it creates a aggressive atmosphere. Ypu need to attack the point, with logical reasoning.

Click to expand...

Are you not doing the same thing, because it kinda sounds like you are........

Click to expand...

I'm attacking his point, but in a harsher way than I would usually like to do.

Because I don't like people who start childish fights with personal attacks. I believe a few of them can desultory a whole forum, easily.

Maybe he didn't know it was a personal attacking by calling him rude, but he was starting a childish fight, anyways.

Click to expand...

I did not call anybody rude. I have stated this many times and no evidence has been provided to show that I did.

Sam_Oslo said:

Now I have been harsh and direct enough for him to know, so lets hope it doesn't repeat.

Click to expand...

Take a look at all my other posts. I do not attack people. aaanouel is the one who wrote what can reasonably be interpreted as a sarcastic insult at those who partake in the tech-talk. Perhaps it was not the intent of the author and I asked for clarification of that. That does not constitute an attack. I'm still not even accusing anyone of attacking anyone else. This is all a pile of misunderstanding that has been blown way out of proportion.

altendky said:

Take a look at all my other posts. I do not attack people. aaanouel is the one who wrote what can reasonably be interpreted as a sarcastic insult at those who partake in the tech-talk. Perhaps it was not the intent of the author and I asked for clarification of that. That does not constitute an attack. I'm still not even accusing anyone of attacking anyone else. This is all a pile of misunderstanding that has been blown way out of proportion.

Click to expand...

This is not a misunderstanding. It's about the difference between a constructive discussion for learning and coming to common understanding, and taking in circles with cheap tricks for scoring cheap points.

He doesn't like your ideas, and he has all right to criticize them, that's not an insult. You need to learn the difference between attacking the person and attacking the point.