A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Do we still need rec.photo.digital?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 25th 09, 11:31 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).

It would make sense to restructure rec.photo.*

Why have a newsgroup dedicated to "DSLRs" since all SLRs are digital
these days.

Perhaps create a group rec.photo.film for all those who still use film
and rename the other rec.photo groups and/or change their charter.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
  #2  
Old January 25th 09, 12:45 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Chris H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,283
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

In message , Alfred Molon
writes
Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).


That's going to start the usual (one or three) suspects ranting that
film is making a comeback and it never went away and ti will long out
live digital and go on about needing a minimum of 60MP digital to
compete with film and film has better dynamic range any way... so THERE!
:-)

It would make sense to restructure rec.photo.*


Yes.

Why have a newsgroup dedicated to "DSLRs" since all SLRs are digital
these days.


Say "many" or you will get the film nuts screaming again if you say
"all"

Perhaps create a group rec.photo.film for all those who still use film
and rename the other rec.photo groups and/or change their charter.


Yes but it will die out in about 5 years.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



  #3  
Old January 25th 09, 03:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Allen[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 649
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

Alfred Molon wrote:
Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).

It would make sense to restructure rec.photo.*

Why have a newsgroup dedicated to "DSLRs" since all SLRs are digital
these days.

Perhaps create a group rec.photo.film for all those who still use film
and rename the other rec.photo groups and/or change their charter.

Rather than separating into groups based on film v. digital, I would
suggest dividing into rec.photo.digital and rec.photo.nutcases. This
would eliminate about 90 percent of the postings to r.p.d.
Allen
  #4  
Old January 25th 09, 04:16 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Chris H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,283
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

In message , Allen
writes
Alfred Molon wrote:
Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays
(except for a tiny minority who still uses film). It would make
sense to restructure rec.photo.*
Why have a newsgroup dedicated to "DSLRs" since all SLRs are digital
these days.
Perhaps create a group rec.photo.film for all those who still use
film and rename the other rec.photo groups and/or change their charter.

Rather than separating into groups based on film v. digital, I would
suggest dividing into rec.photo.digital and rec.photo.nutcases. This
would eliminate about 90 percent of the postings to r.p.d.
Allen

Betters still

rec.photo.God's.own.Nikon.Users
and
rec.photo.heratics.

:-)



--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



  #5  
Old January 25th 09, 06:08 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Don Stauffer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 237
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

Alfred Molon wrote:
Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).

It would make sense to restructure rec.photo.*

Why have a newsgroup dedicated to "DSLRs" since all SLRs are digital
these days.

Perhaps create a group rec.photo.film for all those who still use film
and rename the other rec.photo groups and/or change their charter.


Usenet is dying anyway. These groups are going to be dead in a few
years anyway. I also subscribed to the Yahoo group on DP, and while it
started kinda blah, this group is deteriorating fast anyway, so I am
spending more time on that Yahoo list.
  #6  
Old January 25th 09, 06:36 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Spamm Trappe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:45:08 +0000, Chris H wrote:
Alfred Molon writes

Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).


That's going to start the usual (one or three) suspects ranting
..................


Which is the usual result of a post like this.

What we do _not_ need are the trolls that slither around usenet.
  #7  
Old January 25th 09, 06:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Spamm Trappe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:08:24 -0600, Don Stauffer wrote:

Usenet is dying anyway.


Then please *LEAVE* , damnit!
  #8  
Old January 25th 09, 07:03 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Blinky the Shark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 827
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

Alfred Molon wrote:

Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).

It would make sense to restructure rec.photo.*

Why have a newsgroup dedicated to "DSLRs" since all SLRs are digital these
days.

Perhaps create a group rec.photo.film for all those who still use film and
rename the other rec.photo groups and/or change their charter.


Might want to consider that it's not as easy to create a new group in the
Big Eight hierarchies than in alt. I'm not encouraging a new alt group;
just mentioning that rec groups aren't done on a whim.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups -
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

  #9  
Old January 25th 09, 09:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

In article .net,
Blinky the Shark says...

Might want to consider that it's not as easy to create a new group in the
Big Eight hierarchies than in alt. I'm not encouraging a new alt group;
just mentioning that rec groups aren't done on a whim.


I don't know... But they managed to create four subgroups of
rec.photo.digital of which only one got enough traffic.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
  #10  
Old January 26th 09, 03:55 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Atheist Chaplain[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 926
Default Do we still need rec.photo.digital?

"Spamm Trappe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:45:08 +0000, Chris H wrote:
Alfred Molon writes

Since for practical purposes all photography is digital nowadays (except
for a tiny minority who still uses film).


That's going to start the usual (one or three) suspects ranting
..................


Which is the usual result of a post like this.

What we do _not_ need are the trolls that slither around usenet.


does that mean you will be leaving ??

--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ." Gandhi

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"rec.photo.digital.txt" and "rec.photo.digital.dat" Filter Data Updatedand Posted SMS 斯蒂文• 夏 Digital Photography 0 December 7th 07 09:29 PM
Snapfish - Digital Photo Printing and Free Online Photo Sharing Starlord Film & Labs 1 November 13th 06 06:12 PM
Photo editor software to easily blend digital photo onto another image(landscape picture etc) [email protected] Digital Photography 1 May 24th 06 11:55 AM
goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? Woodchuck Bill Digital Photography 80 October 31st 04 12:50 AM
Digital Photography RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr vs rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? Lionel Digital Photography 28 September 17th 04 01:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.