RFD: rec.photo.dslr

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.photo.dslr

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
worldwide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.dslr. This is not a
Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details
are below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups.

Newsgroup line:
rec.photo.dslr Discussion of DSLR camera systems and DSLR photography.

RATIONALE: rec.photo.dslr

The proposed newsgroup should be created because it will provide an open
forum for the exclusive discussion of DSLR camera systems and DSLR
photography.

(For the purposes of this newsgroup, DSLR will be defined as: any
digital camera that offers an interchangeable lens system)

DSLR photography is growing at an amazing rate. It is generally more
technically oriented than compact digital photography. It is time to
create a Big 8 newsgroup for DSLR enthusiasts. A Google web search on
"DSLR" brings up nearly half a million results.

Rec.photo.digital was created before the digital photography revolution
peaked. At that time, DSLR camera systems were not easily obtainable by
the average person. Due to advances in the past year alone by some of
the major camera manufacturers, a person can find DSLR camera equipment
for sale at almost every shopping mall, strip mall, or electronics store
on earth, at very reasonable prices. RPD was created to discuss all
general aspects of digital photography, including cameras, scanners,
printers, software, and other related topics. If passed, RPDSLR will
limit its discussion to DSLR (digital SLR) systems and DSLR photography.
The majority of digital camera owners use compact or "point and shoot"
digital cameras, and RPD is an excellent group for discussion of these
cameras.

Most of the current crop of DSLR camera systems share lenses and
accessories with their 35mm film counterparts made by the same
manufacturers. This has generated an enormous volume of crossposted
threads between rec.photo.equipment.35mm and RPD. Digital cameras are
off-topic in RPE35mm, and film cameras are off-topic in RPD. These
crossposted threads are off-topic in both newsgroups, and they eat up
lots of bandwidth. With the creation of rec.photo.dslr, these
crossposted threads would be greatly reduced. The 35mm crowd can get
back to pure 35mm equipment/photography discussion, and RPD can free of
film talk. These crossposted threads also perpetuate the never-ending
film vs. digital debate/flame-wars between these two newsgroups.

CHARTER: rec.photo.dslr

An open forum for the discussion of digital SLR camera systems. These
systems consist of:

-Digital SLR camera bodies
-Lenses for those cameras
-Any relevant accessories for those camera systems, including but not
limited to: external flash units, memory cards, microdrives, lens
filters/hoods, camera bags/cases, and DSLR camera/lens/accessory
maintenance.

For the purposes of this newsgroup, DSLR will be defined as: any digital
camera that offers an interchangeable lens system

Additional On-Topic Discussion:

-Photography techniques, as long as the discussion remains within the
context of DSLR photography
-Image post-processing, as long as the discussion remains within the
context of DSLR photography (usually RAW conversion issues)
-Discussion of digital rangefinder camera systems (technically not SLR
systems, but they meet our operative definition of DSLR if they offer
lens interchangeability)
-Posting of personal photo links/galleries, as long as the discussion
remains within the context of DSLR photography

What Is Considered Off-Topic:

-Discussion of film cameras
-Discussion of "point and shoot" or any other non-SLR digital cameras
including ZLR cameras
-Discussion of hybrid film/digital cameras
-Discussion of scanners
-Discussion of printers
-Posting of personal or commercial photo links/galleries not in the
context of digital SLR systems

What Is Considered Inappropriate:

-Crossposting to any other newsgroup

What Is Not Permitted:

-Discussions debating digital photography vs. film photography
-Flame wars (brand comparison threads will tolerated as long as they do
not degenerate into personal flames)
-Personal attacks
-Commercial advertisements
-Sale offerings (use rec.photo.marketplace.digital instead)
-Trade offerings (use rec.photo.marketplace.digital instead)
-Auction notices (use rec.photo.marketplace.digital instead)
-Posts from mail2news gateways and/or anonymous remailers
-Exchange and/or discussion of illegal software
-Binary file postings

END CHARTER.

PROCEDU

This is a request for discussion, not a call for votes. In this phase
of the process, any potential problems with the proposed newsgroup
should be raised and resolved. The discussion period will continue for
a minimum of 21 days (starting from when the first RFD for this proposal
is posted to news.announce.newgroups), after which a Call For Votes
(CFV) may be posted by a neutral vote taker if the discussion warrants
it. Please do not attempt to vote until this happens.

All discussion of this proposal should be posted to news.groups.

This RFD attempts to comply fully with the Usenet newsgroup creation
guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and "How
to Format and Submit a New Group Proposal". Please refer to these
documents (available in news.announce.newgroups) if you have any
questions about the process.

DISTRIBUTION:

This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups:

news.groups
news.announce.newgroups
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
rec.photo.digital

Proponent: Thaddeus Lip****z

"Thad" wrote in message
...
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
worldwide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.dslr. This is not a
Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details
are below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups.
snip

Looks good to me guys, although I think discussions of Sigmas should be
banned. They aren't real digital SLR cameras.

"Thad" wrote in message
...
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
worldwide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.dslr. This is not a
Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details
are below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups.
snip

Looks good to me guys, although I think discussions of Sigmas should be
banned. They aren't real digital SLR cameras.

ed wrote:

"Thad" wrote in message
...

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
worldwide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.dslr. This is not a
Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details
are below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups.
snip


Looks good to me guys, although I think discussions of Sigmas should be
banned. They aren't real digital SLR cameras.

Huh? Which part is wrong - the digital or the SLR?

Gary Eickmeier

"Gary Eickmeier" wrote:
ed wrote:
"Thad" wrote:

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
worldwide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.dslr. This is not a
Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details
are below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups.

Looks good to me guys, although I think discussions of Sigmas should be
banned. They aren't real digital SLR cameras.

Huh? Which part is wrong - the digital or the SLR?

Neither. It's the "camera" part that's problematic.

David J. Littleboy

Tokyo, Japan

"Thad" wrote in message ...
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.photo.dslr

My first thought about this proposal was about some possible
negative consequences. Specifically:

1. It might fragment the digital photo usenet
population, requiring a person to follow multiple
groups in order to keep up.

2. It might take most of the photographic experts
and professionals out of rec.photo.digital. As a
result, the amateur photographers and enthusiasts
in rec.photo.digital might be getting less knowledgeable
advice than they are getting now.

However there are also significant advantages:

1. The existing rec.photo.digital has grown very
large and it's getting difficult to keep up with it.
Given the increasing popularity of both usenet
and digital photography, that problem is likely to
get worse over time. So more specialized groups
can keep the traffic in each to more manageable
levels.

2. The more sophisticated photographers may
benefit from a group with more technical emphasis.
It may be easier for them to ask and answer
complicated questions without getting them lost
in the soup of other stuff.


Usenet group success is a social phenomenon.
You just can't tell from a group's charter what will
actually appeal to people. rec.photo.digital and
rec.photo.equipment.35mm are huge. And on
the other hand, rec.photo.equipment and
rec.photo.advanced are virtually ignored.

On balance, I see no reason not to start the group.
People will vote with their feet, (or their keyboards)
one way or another.

"Thad" wrote in message ...
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.photo.dslr

My first thought about this proposal was about some possible
negative consequences. Specifically:

1. It might fragment the digital photo usenet
population, requiring a person to follow multiple
groups in order to keep up.

2. It might take most of the photographic experts
and professionals out of rec.photo.digital. As a
result, the amateur photographers and enthusiasts
in rec.photo.digital might be getting less knowledgeable
advice than they are getting now.

However there are also significant advantages:

1. The existing rec.photo.digital has grown very
large and it's getting difficult to keep up with it.
Given the increasing popularity of both usenet
and digital photography, that problem is likely to
get worse over time. So more specialized groups
can keep the traffic in each to more manageable
levels.

2. The more sophisticated photographers may
benefit from a group with more technical emphasis.
It may be easier for them to ask and answer
complicated questions without getting them lost
in the soup of other stuff.


Usenet group success is a social phenomenon.
You just can't tell from a group's charter what will
actually appeal to people. rec.photo.digital and
rec.photo.equipment.35mm are huge. And on
the other hand, rec.photo.equipment and
rec.photo.advanced are virtually ignored.

On balance, I see no reason not to start the group.
People will vote with their feet, (or their keyboards)
one way or another.

[note to Alan Meyer: you made two mistakes in setting up the crosspost
list. 1) you tried to post to news.announce.newgroups, which would
have been rejected and your message would never have been seen.
2) Happily, you misspelled news.announce.newgroups (not newSgroups).
Nice cancellation of mistakes. Crossposts modified accordingly...
I hope.]

In news.groups Alan Meyer wrote:
"Thad" wrote in message ...
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.photo.dslr

My first thought about this proposal was about some possible
negative consequences. Specifically:

1. It might fragment the digital photo usenet
population, requiring a person to follow multiple
groups in order to keep up.

It will fragment it to some degree. But the general RPD group will
still have it's purposes, which should be well enough delineated
that any queries that don't belong to the specialized group will
still be posted and read there. The general group should still
end up being the "base of operations".

2. It might take most of the photographic experts
and professionals out of rec.photo.digital. As a
result, the amateur photographers and enthusiasts
in rec.photo.digital might be getting less knowledgeable
advice than they are getting now.

That could happen. But it would be mitigated by the fact that
there are still topics not allowed for discussion in the
specialized groups and allowed in the general group. Better
yet, the split-off groups (and expect more to come if
the volume is so high) are often just a way to make the reading
everything easier, not necessarily to isolate readers. The
volume would be the same (more, actually), but it's easier to
follow threads and topics this way. At least, that's the
hope.

ru

--
My standard proposals rant:
Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic
is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup.
Usenet popularity is the primary consideration.

Kibo informs me that stated that:
[Possible exodus of experts from RPD]

That could happen. But it would be mitigated by the fact that
there are still topics not allowed for discussion in the
specialized groups and allowed in the general group. Better
yet, the split-off groups (and expect more to come if
the volume is so high) are often just a way to make the reading
everything easier, not necessarily to isolate readers.

Exactly.
I think that many people (myself included), would 'move house' to the
DSLR group, but would continue to read RPD for non-DSLR topics.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

I noticed that Message-ID: from
Alan Meyer contained the following:

Usenet group success is a social phenomenon.
You just can't tell from a group's charter what will
actually appeal to people. rec.photo.digital and
rec.photo.equipment.35mm are huge. And on
the other hand, rec.photo.equipment and
rec.photo.advanced are virtually ignored.

It seems to me(having given it further thought) that a group to discuss

The main problem here is that rec.photo.digital should have been
rec.photo.equipment.digital

The question is, does one correct the mistake or make it worse?

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/