Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2015-12-13 by roark.paul@...
While I'm at it, let me express my annoyance with the LuLa monetization program. I don't have a problem with a company asking people to pay for content so that they can afford to develop better content. However, to ask contributors to a forum to pay for providing free information to others is over the top.
I am abandoning LuLa and I urge others to do the same.
Paul
2015-12-13 by jeff.grant@...
2015-12-13 by jsservices2001@...
2015-12-13 by Paul Roark
Have you posted a response without paying? I was blocked. My old ID and PW no longer existed.
No, the forum will continue to be free.
2015-12-13 by jeff.grant@...
2015-12-14 by Paul Roark
I just mofified a post, no problems.
2015-12-14 by homershannon@...
2015-12-14 by David Kachel
2015-12-14 by David Kachel
2015-12-14 by Elliot Puritz
I agree Homer, and very well stated. Might I extend the implications of your thoughts a bit? Persons who provide detailed free advice on this and other threads have been criticized for directing readers to their individual sites and services which supply such guidance at nominal cost. The reality is that some photographers need to have such funds in order to pay bills. There surely needs to be a realistic understanding that everyone is not wealthy enough to spend hours dispensing free advice and guidance to all with questions. All the more reason to sincerely thank those that have the means and time to provide information without the need for remuneration. Elliot Posted by: homershannon@... _____ <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/conversations/messages/108729;_ylc=X3oDMTJydmVpYnBwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM3MDIzMTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Nzg1ODM2BG1zZ0lkAzEwODcyOQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNycGx5BHN0aW1lAzE0NTAxMDExNzk-?act=reply&messageNum=108729> Reply via web post • <mailto:homershannon@...?subject=Re%3A%20OT%20-%20Luminous%20Landscape> Reply to sender • <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20OT%20-%20Luminous%20Landscape> Reply to group • <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbGtpcGdpBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM3MDIzMTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Nzg1ODM2BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQ1MDEwMTE3OQ--> Start a New Topic • <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/conversations/topics/108723;_ylc=X3oDMTM4c2FwcWFzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM3MDIzMTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Nzg1ODM2BG1zZ0lkAzEwODcyOQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzE0NTAxMDExNzkEdHBjSWQDMTA4NzIz> Messages in this topic (7) Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJlanJpdGJoBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzM3MDIzMTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Nzg1ODM2BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1MDEwMTE3OQ--> Visit Your Group <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJkZGtiaHZrBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzM3MDIzMTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Nzg1ODM2BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxNDUwMTAxMTc5> Yahoo! Groups • <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> Privacy • <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe • <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> Terms of Use . <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=3702311/grpspId=1705785836/msgId=108729/stime=1450101179> <http://y.analytics.yahoo.com/fpc.pl?ywarid=515FB27823A7407E&a=10001310322279&js=no&resp=img>
2015-12-14 by Elliot Puritz
Hi David: I hope all is well on your end! Allow me to extend the discussion concerning free information and the internet. Your position is well argued but perhaps not completely nuanced. If those with useful information cannot recover the costs of dispensing such advice then their contributions will by necessity cease. There will be a loss of information that might otherwise have been valuable and important. Another approach would be to allow "the marketplace" to decide which information is worth paying for, and which information is not. I think we might agree that valuable information is indeed "worth" paying for. However, how does one actually assign a value to information? I would argue that the marketplace is the gateway that allows free choice. As a corollary: You and others who allow free access to valuable and in-depth information are to be admired and sincerely thanked. However, as you state: "Web sites that need income to keep them alive is true and perfectly acceptable". Furthermore, in my view those individuals ( via individual web sites ) who find the need to affix a cost to pay for their time and for computers, software, printing paper, inks, etc., used to research issues that will be discussed and clarified via the internet should be able to recover such fixed costs. Once again: The "market" will decide which individuals and services offering advice and information are worth supporting. Elliot
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 9:33 AM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: OT - Luminous Landscape Homer, The logical conclusion of your point of view is that every web site will charge a monthly fee (you said both monthly and yearly; which one is it?). Think of all the web sites you visit for photographic information. Do you really want to be cut off from all that if you can't pay every last one of them?! And how often do you use each web site? You will probably never get close to receiving a $12 value from most. Look at your bookmarks! What if every single one of them has to be paid every month or year, or your library card is revoked? Is that really what you want? The internet IS the new library. The whole idea of the internet is freely available information. You're talking about making the internet useless and unavailable, to all but the well off. It is especially troublesome that a photographer would be supporting this wrong idea. Photography is where it is today BECAUSE of the free exchange of information among photographers, or do you forget that Kodak and Ilford, while producing great products, also slammed the door on individual innovation for over a hundred years? Alternative methods are currently thriving AND progressing, because of the free exchange of information ON THE INTERNET! Hasn't the existing in-your-face, forced, aggressive advertising already soured the experience enough? Do you really want a coin slot installed in your computer? That web sites need income to keep them alive is true and perfectly acceptable. Fees to get access, or forced takeover of a page by advertisers are not. David Kachel ___________________ Artist-Photographer Fine B&W Photographs WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com EMAIL: david@... PO Box 1093 Bisbee, AZ 85603 (520) 366-4181 The Internet has caused people to think that everything should be free, but it's not free to create or maintain. Paying for what you get is a much more natural state of affairs and, in the long run, will benefit all of those who do any kind of content creation - and that would include every photographer.
2015-12-14 by Paul Roark
Hi David:
I hope all is well on your end!
Allow me to extend the discussion concerning free information and the internet.
Your position is well argued but perhaps not completely nuanced. If those with useful information cannot recover the costs of dispensing such advice then their contributions will by necessity cease. There will be a loss of information that might otherwise have been valuable and important.
Another approach would be to allow "the marketplace" to decide which information is worth paying for, and which information is not.
I think we might agree that valuable information is indeed "worth" paying for. However, how does one actually assign a value to information? I would argue that the marketplace is the gateway that allows free choice.
As a corollary: You and others who allow free access to valuable and in-depth information are to be admired and sincerely thanked. However, as you state: "Web sites that need income to keep them alive is true and perfectly acceptable".
Furthermore, in my view those individuals ( via individual web sites ) who find the need to affix a cost to pay for their time and for computers, software, printing paper, inks, etc., used to research issues that will be discussed and clarified via the internet should be able to recover such fixed costs. Once again: The "market" will decide which individuals and services offering advice and information are worth supporting.
Elliot
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 9:33 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: OT - Luminous Landscape
Homer,
The logical conclusion of your point of view is that every web site will charge a monthly fee (you said both monthly and yearly; which one is it?).
Think of all the web sites you visit for photographic information. Do you really want to be cut off from all that if you can’t pay every last one of them?!
And how often do you use each web site? You will probably never get close to receiving a $12 value from most.
Look at your bookmarks! What if every single one of them has to be paid every month or year, or your library card is revoked? Is that really what you want? The internet IS the new library.
The whole idea of the internet is freely available information. You’re talking about making the internet useless and unavailable, to all but the well off.
It is especially troublesome that a photographer would be supporting this wrong idea. Photography is where it is today BECAUSE of the free exchange of information among photographers, or do you forget that Kodak and Ilford, while producing great products, also slammed the door on individual innovation for over a hundred years? Alternative methods are currently thriving AND progressing, because of the free exchange of information ON THE INTERNET!
Hasn’t the existing in-your-face, forced, aggressive advertising already soured the experience enough? Do you really want a coin slot installed in your computer?
That web sites need income to keep them alive is true and perfectly acceptable. Fees to get access, or forced takeover of a page by advertisers are not.
David Kachel
___________________
Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs
PO Box 1093
Bisbee, AZ 85603
The Internet has caused people to think that everything should be free, but it's not free to create or maintain. Paying for what you get is a much more natural state of affairs and, in the long run, will benefit all of those who do any kind of content creation - and that would include every photographer.
2015-12-14 by Seth Rossman
On 12/14/2015 9:32 AM, David Kachel david@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] wrote: Do you really want a coin slot installed > in your computer? > David Kachel > If it came with a long arm, and when I pull it I have a chance of three cherries popping up for $350,000!!
2015-12-14 by Seth Rossman
I totally agree with Paul. (Regardless of what my signature below says LOL) -- If I agreed with you both of us would be wrong.
2015-12-14 by brian_downunda@...
2015-12-15 by Paul Roark
Regarding the Lula Forum, they said from the outset that the forum would be outside the paywall. That seems to be how it is, so I don't know what happened to Paul R's access. Perhaps just a glitch.
In deciding to keep the forum outside the paywall, I wonder if the Lula duo were mindful of what happened to the old Rob Galbraith forums, which died rather quickly when it was sold and the new owner started charging.
But the Rob Galbraith forums are a good example of the challenges of a site that becomes a victim of its own success. What do you do when the time and costs of maintaining a site become too great, simply because it's so good that it';s too popular? Some survive by advertising, or worse, by selling user tracking information. Clearly the internet would die if everyone started charging, which is clearly not going to happen, but it would be a tragedy if major sites ceased to operate under the burden of success.
I haven't signed up yet. I may. I have read the occasional article. It's a pain that I no longer can. That's life.
2015-12-15 by David Kachel
2015-12-15 by David Kachel
Uh-oh! Time to go to a meeting, Seth! ;-) David Kachel ___________________ Artist-Photographer Fine B&W Photographs WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com EMAIL: david@... PO Box 1093 Bisbee, AZ 85603 (520) 366-4181 On 12/14/15, 9:07 AM, "Seth Rossman seth@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]" <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>If it came with a long arm, and when I pull it I have a chance of three >cherries popping up for $350,000!! >
2015-12-15 by David Kachel
I haven't signed up yet. I may. I have read the occasional article. It's a pain that I no longer can. That's life.
2015-12-15 by Elliot Puritz
Hi David: Certainly interesting issues that have many possible responses-actually, too many for the current thread. One hopes that two "older timers" might have an opportunity to meet over some libations and discuss the questions that you have raised. I doubt if either of us have all the answers. Stay well and best for the holidays. Elliot
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 7:15 PM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: OT - Luminous Landscape Elliot , Hi. I don't have a problem with anyone making an income or just recovering costs on their web sites, but this periodic fee or no access plan has already proven itself a loser. Photographers definitely do not like the "I have a secret and you have to pay to hear it" approach. It is like a certain individual I have been having an on and off dispute with recently who "has a secret" and won't reveal it under any circumstances but a $1000 workshop setting, $2000 with expenses. Only the well off have access to that knowledge. Definitely not the custom in photography for the last century or so. If you make your information freely available, people will STILL sign up for your workshops and STILL buy your books. In fact, all of those areas will be greatly enhanced. Ansel Adams proved this approach correct a long time ago. You don't have to be a secret keeper to make a living. You just have to know how to do it right. Fee based web sites are absolutely NOT the right way to deal with the internet. People don't like it, won't go to your web site and won't buy anything you have to offer. Millions of web site owners have proven this the hard way. The internet is a means of making your reputation so that people will be interested in your product. The only reason Adobe is getting away with it (maybe) is that they have a captive audience. Photoshop is a must have tool and what Adobe is doing is really quite low. If they weren't the only game in town, I believe their bottom line would be in considerable pain right now. They wouldn't tell us if it was. David Kachel ___________________ Artist-Photographer Fine B&W Photographs WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com EMAIL: david@... PO Box 1093 Bisbee, AZ 85603 (520) 366-4181
2015-12-15 by David Kachel
2015-12-15 by homershannon@...
2015-12-15 by Tony Sleep
On 15/12/2015 00:40, David Kachel david@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] wrote: > The unwritten laws of the internet say you don\ufffdt charge for information. Sleight of hand is how we got there. Everybody pays, through taxation for the salaries of the academics who were the early providers of information. Latterly everybody pays as a cost factored into advertisers goods and services. A vast majority can see no reason to pay for pictures, either. That's why the profession is the walking dead. Journalism as a whole is dying. Why pay for newspapers when their content is aggregated and available for free? Past a certain point, creative endeavour becomes expensive to sustain. If money isn't available, it stops happening. Only the independently wealthy can pursue excellence without inhibition, the rest must concentrate on the day job. This isn't good for media quality or inclusiveness of varied viewpoints. It's especially not good for creatives in less wealthy economies. Unless we are careful, we shall end up unwittingly in an echo chamber of self-affirming viewpoints. There is another consequence, of 'free' c/o indirect revenue from ads and sponsorship too. That what value there is, is harvested and kept by aggregators like Google, FB, whose monopolistic indispensability is increasingly woven into everyone's personal and business lives. With this proposition, all you can do is withdraw and be a hermit. Back when you actually paid to view magazine and newspapers, if they displeased you, if the quality fell, you voted with your wallet. You no longer have that option in this realm of let's-pretend-it's-free. Personally I wouldn't subscribe to LL because I've not seen much content there that has impressed me. But, the existing model, of entitlement to pro-bono, of covert advertiser agendas and sponsorship by PR axegrinders, isn't going anywhere healthy. It's reminiscent of C20th fishing, when the pursuit of cheap fish led to ever bigger boats and more efficient harvesting. And then one day, the fish were nearly gone. Creative work is an ecosystem. No-one is looking at how sustainable it is, except creatives - the small fry at the bottom of the food chain, that everyone feeds off. -- Regards Tony Sleep --
2015-12-15 by Paul Roark
Well this has turned into a lively conversation and that is always good!
I'm sure Paul Roark has some experience with trying to earn a few dollars from a web site. He has certainly given away many of the best techniques for producing outstanding black and white prints. Yes, his site does request a donation, which I have done from time to time - though I'd confess I've donated far less than what his information is really worth. Does voluntary contribution actually cover a significant portion of the site's costs?If Paul charged $10 per PDF download, I'd say it was a good value, but I wouldn't know that unless I read and tried the processes he describes first. For $100 I'd probably never read one. Monetizing the web is still in its infancy and its going to take another ten years before we settle on better models. Ask the newspaper publishers - they're still scratching their heads.Homer
2015-12-16 by Joseph Meyerson
2015-12-16 by brian_downunda@...