2nd RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr (was: rec.photo.dslr)

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.photo.digital.slr

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

Newsgroup line:
rec.photo.digital.slr Digital SLR (single lens reflex) camera systems.

Significant CHANGES from previous RFD:

-Change of name from rec.photo.dslr to rec.photo.digital.slr
-Changes in "rationale" section
-Removed previous operative definition of digital SLR
-Added additional proponent: Alan Browne

RATIONALE: rec.photo.digital.slr

The proposed newsgroup should be created because it will provide an open
forum for the discussion of digital SLR (single lens reflex) camera
systems, separate from film cameras and non-SLR digital cameras.

Digital SLR 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 digital SLR enthusiasts.

Rec.photo.digital was created before the digital photography revolution
peaked. At that time, digital SLR camera systems were not easily
obtainable by the average person, due to high cost and limited
availability. Due to advances in the past year alone by some of the
major camera manufacturers, a person can find digital SLR 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, rec.photo.digital.slr will limit its scope of inclusion 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 newsgroup for discussion of these cameras.

Many 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 substantial 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 a
considerable amount of bandwidth. With the creation of
rec.photo.digital.slr, these crossposted threads would be substantially
reduced. The 35mm crowd can get back to pure 35mm equipment/photography
discussion, and RPD can be free of film talk.

CHARTER: rec.photo.digital.slr

An open forum for the discussion of digital SLR (single lens reflex)
camera systems.

These systems consist of:

-Digital SLR camera bodies with mounts for detachable lenses
-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, DSLR camera/lens/accessory
maintenance, tripods and monopods.

All postings made to this group should conform to existing Usenet
guidelines (see news.announce.newusers for guideline documents).

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
-Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, as long as the
discussion remains within the context of DSLR photography
-Discussion of digital rangefinder camera systems (technically not SLR
systems, but they are on-topic if they offer lens interchangeability)

What Is Considered Off-Topic:

-Discussion of pure film cameras (hybrid film-digital permitted)
-Discussion of "point and shoot" or any other non-SLR digital cameras
(digital rangefinders are the only permitted exception)
-Discussion cameras with non-detachable lenses, such as ZLR (zoom lens
reflex) 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 except where there is good reason
to do so (even then, crossposting should be limited to within the
rec.photo.* hierarchy)

What Is Not Permitted:

-Discussions debating digital photography vs. film photography
-Posts from mail2news gateways and/or anonymous remailers
-Flame wars (brand comparison threads will tolerated as long as they do
not degenerate into personal flames)
-Exchange and/or discussion of illegal software
-Personal attacks
-Binary postings (i.e. non text postings)
-Commercial advertisements:

This group explicitly prohibits the posting of advertisements of any
kind, whether personal, private or commercial, as well as all other
promotional material, whether or not it is in any way related to
photography.

Auction announcements (e-bay and others) are prohibited. Use
rec.photo.marketplace.digital instead.

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
Proponent: Alan Browne

"Thad" wrote in message
...
CHARTER: rec.photo.digital.slr

An open forum for the discussion of digital SLR (single lens reflex)
camera systems.

These systems consist of:

-Digital SLR camera bodies with mounts for detachable lenses
-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, DSLR camera/lens/accessory
maintenance, tripods and monopods.


-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
-Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, as long as the
discussion remains within the context of DSLR photography
-Discussion of digital rangefinder camera systems (technically not
SLR
systems, but they are on-topic if they offer lens
interchangeability)

What Is Considered Off-Topic:

-Discussion of pure film cameras (hybrid film-digital permitted)
-Discussion of "point and shoot" or any other non-SLR digital
cameras
(digital rangefinders are the only permitted exception)
-Discussion cameras with non-detachable lenses, such as ZLR (zoom
lens
reflex) cameras

This last seems to make the purpose of the group more restrictive than
its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.
..
I wonder why discussion of electronic viewfinder cameras is apparently
excluded and, anyway, what's so sacred about using a mirror instead of
more
modern electronics?


--
James V. Silverton
Potomac, Maryland, USA

James Silverton wrote:
"Thad" wrote in message
...

This last seems to make the purpose of the group more restrictive than
its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.

The name was *extensively* hashed over in news.groups as well as your
point, and many others. It's not as simple as choosing any name that
seems direct; it has to fit in the hierarchy of the Big 8 groups, as well.

Anyone truly interested will find every plausible - and some
implausible- name variation and suggestion posted in the last vew dasys
in news.groups.

--
John McWilliams

James Silverton wrote:
This last seems to make the purpose of the group more
restrictive than its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or
rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.

The rpd.slr intent is to gather those discussions that revolve
around interchangeable lens cameras. SLR is not the perfect
thing to call it, but by consensus the best thing to call it.
As John says, this has been thrashed out over the past few days
at news.groups , and that is the best place to get the answers.

I wonder why discussion of electronic viewfinder cameras is
apparently excluded and, anyway, what's so sacred about using a
mirror instead of more modern electronics?

Not so much that they are 'excluded' as not 'included'.

The naming also allows a future breakout of a group for such
cameras (say as a part of rpd.p+s, or rpd.zlr or some such) but
that is not part of the current effort.

Not that it is relevant at this point, but you cannot critically
focus and see the detail neccesary with an EVF for many subjects
including macro and wide aperture portraiture. Yes you can zoom
and pan the EVF image, but that is not a practical way to work.
Optical viewfinders offer superb resolution and clarity v. EVF's.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

James Silverton wrote:
This last seems to make the purpose of the group more
restrictive than its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or
rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.

The rpd.slr intent is to gather those discussions that revolve
around interchangeable lens cameras. SLR is not the perfect
thing to call it, but by consensus the best thing to call it.
As John says, this has been thrashed out over the past few days
at news.groups , and that is the best place to get the answers.

I wonder why discussion of electronic viewfinder cameras is
apparently excluded and, anyway, what's so sacred about using a
mirror instead of more modern electronics?

Not so much that they are 'excluded' as not 'included'.

The naming also allows a future breakout of a group for such
cameras (say as a part of rpd.p+s, or rpd.zlr or some such) but
that is not part of the current effort.

Not that it is relevant at this point, but you cannot critically
focus and see the detail neccesary with an EVF for many subjects
including macro and wide aperture portraiture. Yes you can zoom
and pan the EVF image, but that is not a practical way to work.
Optical viewfinders offer superb resolution and clarity v. EVF's.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

"James Silverton" wrote in message
...
I wonder why discussion of electronic viewfinder cameras is apparently
excluded and, anyway, what's so sacred about using a mirror instead of
more
modern electronics?

See any DSLRs on the market with EVFs?

Well when there is, i'm sure r.p.d.slr will discuss them. Until then the
point is moot, no?

--
Martin Francis http://www.sixbysix.co.uk
"Go not to Usenet for counsel, for it will say both no, and yes, and
no, and yes...."

"James Silverton" wrote in message
...
I wonder why discussion of electronic viewfinder cameras is apparently
excluded and, anyway, what's so sacred about using a mirror instead of
more
modern electronics?

See any DSLRs on the market with EVFs?

Well when there is, i'm sure r.p.d.slr will discuss them. Until then the
point is moot, no?

--
Martin Francis http://www.sixbysix.co.uk
"Go not to Usenet for counsel, for it will say both no, and yes, and
no, and yes...."

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
news:4M3_c.365969$%_6.317572@attbi_s01...
James Silverton wrote:
"Thad" wrote in message
...

This last seems to make the purpose of the group more restrictive
than
its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or
rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.

The name was *extensively* hashed over in news.groups as well as
your
point, and many others. It's not as simple as choosing any name that
seems direct; it has to fit in the hierarchy of the Big 8 groups, as
well.

Anyone truly interested will find every plausible - and some
implausible- name variation and suggestion posted in the last vew
dasys
in news.groups.

--
John McWilliams

Thanks for the explanation! I'm afraid I did not follow the
news.groups postings but "slr" strikes me as an inaccurate and
misleading name that might have been dreamed up by politicians (g).

Jim.

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
news:4M3_c.365969$%_6.317572@attbi_s01...
James Silverton wrote:
"Thad" wrote in message
...

This last seems to make the purpose of the group more restrictive
than
its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or
rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.

The name was *extensively* hashed over in news.groups as well as
your
point, and many others. It's not as simple as choosing any name that
seems direct; it has to fit in the hierarchy of the Big 8 groups, as
well.

Anyone truly interested will find every plausible - and some
implausible- name variation and suggestion posted in the last vew
dasys
in news.groups.

--
John McWilliams

Thanks for the explanation! I'm afraid I did not follow the
news.groups postings but "slr" strikes me as an inaccurate and
misleading name that might have been dreamed up by politicians (g).

Jim.

You are right....but its not a big deal. I shoot an Oly E-10. Technically
its not a DSLR....but that is not going to make me stay away. The users will
define the real purpose of the group. My guess is that it will evolve as a
place for Pros and advanced users. What will stay behind is the armatures
who want to know how big a pixel is and what camera has the best digital
zoom.


"James Silverton" wrote in message
...

"John McWilliams" wrote in message
news:4M3_c.365969$%_6.317572@attbi_s01...
James Silverton wrote:
"Thad" wrote in message
...

This last seems to make the purpose of the group more restrictive
than
its name. IMHO, a correct name like
rec.photo.digital.interchangeable.lens or
rec.photo.digital.multilens
should be used.

The name was *extensively* hashed over in news.groups as well as
your
point, and many others. It's not as simple as choosing any name that
seems direct; it has to fit in the hierarchy of the Big 8 groups, as
well.

Anyone truly interested will find every plausible - and some
implausible- name variation and suggestion posted in the last vew
dasys
in news.groups.

--
John McWilliams

Thanks for the explanation! I'm afraid I did not follow the
news.groups postings but "slr" strikes me as an inaccurate and
misleading name that might have been dreamed up by politicians (g).

Jim.