I found the 8 vs. 16 interesting and educational. Usually you can tell in the
first three
lines whether anyone has any actual information or not. Unlike most other
forums, here even
the arrogant flamers usually have some valid information to add. And there IS
new ground to
cover--recent new hardware like the Minolta 5400 and Epson 3200 give us a shot
at a level
of quality previously beyond most of our budgets, so there may well be new
issues to
discuss. And plummeting older drumscanner prices will probably lead to a few of
them coming
soon to a spare bedroom near you. That's a really different world--buying a
drumscanner
brings up whole new issues like fluid mounting, parts availability, and
probably alimony
too. So the list may not be what it was five years ago (wouldn't know, wasn't
here) but it
still definitely has a reason to exist.
Tony Sleep wrote:
> Alessandro Pardi wrote:
>
> > I fully agree. Tony, can you do or say anything about that? I'm really
> > starting to consider quitting, and that would be a pity, but I don't
> > think I could stand another 100 messages thread like the recent 8 vs. 16
> > bit...
>
> I've had a steady stream of complaints about the list, and they're becoming
> more numerous as participants have become increasingly exasperated with the
> deteriorating signal-to-noise ratio. Membership has declined by one-third
> in the last year; about 500 people have run away screaming. With this
> diminution of the gene pool, things have become ever more incestuous.
>
> Pleas for self-restraint and asking for personal wrangles to be taken
> off-list just haven't worked.
>
> I suspect the the original motivation for the list, the exploration of what
> was new territory 5yrs ago, is now obsolete. Film scanning is now
> sufficiently familiar, current hardware and software is now competent
> enough to have run out of big questions. All that's left is nit-picking
> angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin stuff, interspersed by axe-grinding.
>
> This is undoubtedly my lazy-arsed fault, or at least my responsibility. I
> no longer provide the stimulus of review material since the effort was
> wrecking my precarious freelance livelihood. I seldom contribute, since I'm
> bored with answering questions that have come up 20 times before and
> usually progress to a spiral of nit-picking vituperation. I haven't even
> shot any film for 6months. Scanning old film is something I am going to be
> doing for some years yet, but new material is easier and better produced
> on digital camera. E6 is already ebbing. Apart from a dwindling pool of
> film diehards and archivists, this is how it is going to be for most.
>
> I can now see no way to rescue this list from terminal decline except
> moderated posting, or at least zero-tolerance moderation. I simply don't
> have the time or energy for either, even if I did want to play policeman,
> which I don't.
>
> All I can suggest is ignoring/deleting posts you can't be bothered with, or
> killfiling contributors. Unfortunately that won't leave much useful
> content, for all the reasons given.
>
> I am considering closing the list entirely, as filmscanning is now just
> another tool in the box. As such, the Prodig list, or various other lists
> or forums, may support better-balanced debate.
>
> Regards
>
> Tony Sleep -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
