Subject: Re: Nobody but us chickens
From: David Nebenzahl nobody@but.us.chickens
Date: 7/29/2003 3:18 PM Mountain Daylight Time
Message-id: <3F26E4A5.6030007@but.us.chickens>

On 7/29/2003 12:50 PM Largformat spake thus:

Steve, I hate to say it ('cause you seem to be turning into everyone's
favorite whipping boy here lately, which may not be entirely fair, but there
it is), but this is just another example showing how absolutely *clueless* you
come off about things like this newfangeled Internet stuff.

The reason it bounced is simple: it's a phony email address. Made up. Bogus.
Most people looking at it would immediately know that there cain't be no such
domain as "but.us.chickens".

As to why one would want to use such a phony email address when posting in a
newsgroup, I leave that to you as an extra-credit assignment.

I tried to send a private note to you. If you want to be cute and give a phony
e-mail address go for it. I am too simple for such obfuscation.

It is not reasonable to expect me to repeat the entire article in this
discussion group. I still believe that if people are sincerely interested in a
topic they should read the article. Then they can participate in the discussion
in an informed way. If I just give a summary then people will begin to question
the methods, I will answer, the next person will miss a post or two and repeat
the question or challenge the summary and this could go on endlessly. Reading
the article is still the best way to get the info.

If they are not interested then I do not understand the bitching that goes on
here.

steve simmons

Subject: Re: Nobody but us chickens
From: rmonagha@engr.smu.edu  (Bob Monaghan)
Date: 7/30/2003 2:19 PM Mountain Daylight Time
Message-id: <bg997l$d01$1@blaze.seas.smu.edu>

quoting steve " There is no way that a response on the discussion group
can be as detailed as the article." endquote

Quite the opposite. Most articles are rather short, primarily due to the
limitations of available content pages in any given magazine issue. That
limitation doesn't apply on a website, where you can have 500+ megabytes
of storage for a modest monthly fee (as I do on my ISP MF site).

So it is a trivial cost to provide more resources online such as data
files and additional images or content that could not be provided in the
original articles due to space limitations. You could easily reference
such resources in your responses, much as I do to my own web articles etc.

Naturally, this would substantially enhance the value of the magazine (and
a subscription) IMHO by providing these online supplements to articles.

I'd concentrate on what you do best, which is produce quality imagery and
artistic content, in the magazines. I'd shuffle off all the press releases
of new gear and lenses and all that to the website, with just minor
notices and links in the magazine itself.

Materials about testing procedures etc. which would be of interest to only
a minority of your readers could also be shuffled off to the website, but
in expanded detail beyond what you can afford to publish in a magazine.

Lots of photo magazines are using the internet to expand the range of
information and services (such as user forums, Q&A, photo critiques etc.)
they can provide past what the limitations of print magazines allow. It is
important to keep up with these developments and meet the expectations of
your readers and site visitors, if you want to remain competitive...

my $.02 ;-)  bobm
-- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We began enhancing our web site several issues ago by adding additional
material from several articles - tech info, sudio and lighting info, etc.

We've also posted several articles (Getting Started in Large Format, Film
Holder Choices, 4x5 cameras Priced less than 1200.00, etc) on the site as well.

The article on Acros film - in the magazine - has film development charts with
three developers and sample photos from the three developers. There is no way I
could provide all of this info in this discussion group. If I just posted a
summary then people would begin asking questions about info that was already in
the article, some people would either miss the question or the answer and
re-ask or criticize because they did not know what they'd missed in a previous
post, and the quagmire could go on forever (as this has). I simply suggested
that if people were interested they read the article so we could all discuss
the info from an informed level.

As for the info not being available to everyone (someone stated this) the info
is in a published document that is available to anyone who wants it. You could
buy the issue, go to the bookstore and read it, or go to the library and read
it..

If you are not interested in reading the article why come on and criticize me
for not providing a summary of something they can't be bothered to read?

steve simmons

<Snip> Maybe you all are forgetting,... there's also the issue of copyright,
if the magazine has not paid the author they are liable,
until full payment is made. Additionally unless the author agrees to this form of useage the
magazine is again liable for misuse.