who are hybrids?

[jd callow]

Good Day All,
Now that the holidays are all but over it is time to work toward building out hybridphoto.

How would you organize the forum?

To get the ball rolling I have created a list of major categories with subcategories and or likely subjects indented underneath. Please feel free to creat your own list, or edit this one as you see fit.

Capture

• Film
  
• Scanner
  
• Scan Back/DSLR/DP&S
  
• Created on the Computer
  
• Video Capture
  
• ???

Process

• Calibration, Profiling, Curves and Techniques
  
• Software
  
• Systems
  
• ???

Output and Prints

• Inkjet
  
• Digital RA4
  
• Digital Negatives
  
• Carbon
  
• Contact Prints PT/PD, POP, AZO, Etc…
  
• Enlargements
  
• Screen, Video and Projection
  
• ????

Aesthetics and Philosophy

• Images
  
• Artists
  
• Concepts, Ideas, and Projects
  
• ???

Member Functions

• Print Exchanges
  
• Meet-ups
  
• ???

Workshops and resources

• Workshops
  
• Books
  
• Websites
  
• ????

General

• Lounge
  
• Introduce Yourself
• ???

[Les McLean]

In my opinion the only way to significantly increase the traffic in the forum would be to open it to all digital matters. So long as it is limited to Hybrid subjects there is very little interest to photographers not interested in the Alternative Processes.

[jd callow]

Les,
I don't disagree that if this site were only limited to imaging in any form that the potential pool to draw from would be immense. That site might yet come, but it will not be here.

I think the site has a large enough scope to be viable. The site does not have to get as large as APUG (17k and growing) to be a success. As it is the only people posting are those who do alt process with a digital step. This is not where the site ends.

Most every photographer I know who shoots film has an interest in getting his scans to look good, or his output (be it for the web, inkjet or digital RA4) to look good. Many who shoot digital have an interest in getting good output on traditional media. The one thing the folks who have joined and the folks I've mentioned have in common is that they have a higher concern for quality.

Finally this thread and my current efforts are not about increasing the site's membership - yet, but about making the site fit the needs of the membership and the site's mission.

[gr82bart]

OK so what's the purpose of the site?

• Is it to be like Photo.net, the Photo Forum, Photo Takers, Photo Forum, ePhotoZine or Club Snap or Use Film - a generalist site?
• I don't think is it to be like a product specific site like Nikonians, Ilford Cafe?
• Or like a format specific sites like ToyCamera.com or the Medium Format Forum or the Large Format Forum?
• Is it to compete against a process or technique specific site like the Alternative Photography Forum, f295 or APUG.org?
• Definitely not a genre type forums like Glamour 1 (glamour photography), Community Zoe (nudes), Luminous Landscapes (landscapes), Macro.org (macro) ?
• It won't be geography based like the Canadian Photographers Network ?
• Is it going to digital specific like DPForums, PhotoZO, Fred Miranda, BytePhoto or Passions for Pixels?
• Or is it going to be a combo like Digital Wedding Chat or Photography on the Net?
• Will it be geared to the Amateur or the Professional ?
• Maybe it will be action specific like DPChallenge?

Couple of thoughts:

1. Digital Negatives - this uniqueness will eventually attract more traffic - not a lot, but more as people consider this technique
2. Output - we have folks who are extremely knowledgeable about the various output techniques from inkjets to Lambdas and the various paper products. I think this too is a uniqueness that will attract attention, as there is very little talk about that other than your household inkjet printer.
3. Scanning - virtually no one talks about scanning in depth. I say we seize this opportunity.

Also, I'd say we forget about camera digital capture. We can't compete there from the above posts. We can have a place for it, but I'd say we have to focus on what's missing in the internet today.

Anyway, to be successful not necessarily big, this place has to fill a void. Just my thoughts.

Regards, Art.

[bob carnie]

I would like to think this site is about sharing ideas and the vehicle for film traditionalists to make a smooth transition to a working platform within the digital world , without the bullshit baffels brains that can go on in an environment where one person knows one ounce more knowlege and is suddenly a printing expert. Or an environment that is dictated by the manufacturers of digital devices.
I like the fact that this site is slowly gathering members from outside sources that can help smooth out my own transition problems of working in digital.
I would really like to see someone from within this group who really knows PS start a basic learning description of how PS uses traditional and modern approches to creating an image that is intended to be a beautiful final print


1. Best way to capture when using a digital camera.
2. Best way to process the file for printing.
3. The different ways to control contrast using PS
4. How to read a histogram and why one should know this
5. Do I use Curves , Levels, Brightness/Contrast, and why
6. How does Colour Correction work, is it the same as a colour enlarger
7. How does one accent colours in an image
8. How does one accent a subject with dodging and burning tools
9. How does one dust bust properly.
10. What is to be expected when your file goes from your moniter to print

These last 10 items are things that concern me when I print either on an enlarger or on a digital printer. I am sure the list is endless.

The only real satisfaction that I get from photography, is to see a print that I make put in a frame and hung on a wall for viewing.Therefore I would like to learn as many tricks from other printers on this forum to apply to my own work.

[dmr]

Personally, I think your proposed build-out looks great.

It covers the obvious topics, and gives room for expansion.

If an area gets very low traffic over a long period, it can be rolled up into something more general.

If an area gets dominated by one particular topic, that can be spun off into a new (sub)forum.

One thing I did notice is that there are no brand-specific forums (fora?) for anything. That's a Good Thing!

Overall I think it's a good plan.

[Ray Heath]

Les,
I don't disagree that if this site were only limited to imaging in any form that the potential pool to draw from would be immense. That site might yet come, but it will not be here.

I think the site has a large enough scope to be viable. The site does not have to get as large as APUG (17k and growing) to be a success. As it is the only people posting are those who do alt process with a digital step. This is not where the site ends.

Most every photographer I know who shoots film has an interest in getting his scans to look good, or his output (be it for the web, inkjet or digital RA4) to look good. Many who shoot digital have an interest in getting good output on traditional media. The one thing the folks who have joined and the folks I've mentioned have in common is that they have a higher concern for quality.

Finally this thread and my current efforts are not about increasing the site's membership - yet, but about making the site fit the needs of the membership and the site's mission.

g'day jd

i'm sorry to say i found this, and others of yours, post to be confusing

does this site only allow 'hybrid' work/discussions etc or does it allow any digital/hybrid/print making/imaging

i think you firstly need to set rules and guidelines for the site

so what is the site's "mission"?

[jd callow]

Ray,
Hybrid is "where digital imaging in traditional photography merge." This statement can be found under the logo on the top left of all pages.

I'm sorry if my post are confusing and I'm especially interested in how the forum organization might better meet the intent of the site.

[Ray Heath]

so jd, an inkjet print of an image captured by a digital camera would be ok here because it meets the analogue criteria of being a physical entity i.e. it is a print rather than a screen image or a computer file

[jd callow]

No ray it wouldn't. And again I'm sorry that you don't seem to get it.