> Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of
> them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas,
> including actual practice - are still around.
Flattery will get you everywhere you smooth talker you; but on these sorts
of lists flattery will only get you in trouble. :-) First, I make no claims
to being a guru of any sort. I have just been around for a while and been on
many lists; thus, I am at best a compendium of the things that I picked up
for being on all these lists for a while from others wiht not training,
technical knowledge, and expertise than I.
> But I want to remember that this list belongs to Tony, and he has
> done a superior job of maintaining it.
Second you are right it is Tony's list; and he is the one who has to decide
if he wants to continue it, if he wants to expand its focus and how?
> What do you think? Can it be done and be useful? I think so, but
> ultimately, I am not the one doing it.
I think that the traffic on the list has dwindled for a number of reasons.
(1). Tony has given other interests and concerns of his priority over the
list, which he has every right to do but which may have resulted in some
neglect of list housekeeping operations. (2). Tony has had problems with
servers and ISPs during the course of the list's history, which has resulted
in the list being down or having problems on ocassion withthe consequence
that subscribers may have thought that the list had gone defunct. (3). The
amount of film scanning has decreased as more and more photographers have
turned to digital cameras which has resulted in fewer persons being
attracted to a group dedicated to the topic of film scanning alone. (4).
Finally, many of the older subscribers to the list may have burned out or
gotten tied of answering the same old qustions over and over, responding to
the same old requests for information or problems over and over, or engaging
in intermurial food fights which other list members (usually newcomers to
the list) who regard the list not as an online community but as a technical
assistance businesslike forum where everything needs to be on topic and fit
their conception of what they thought the group was or should provide them.
Keeping this in mind, I think that the group might survive if it expands it
focus to include capturing images using both scanners and digital cameras;
but expanding it to other areas of imaging that take place later in the
wrokflow might make for to broad and unfocused a group, which would result
in too diverse a subscriber base leading to much complaining and
dissatisfaction. There are plenty of generic and specialty lists on the
internet that cover those aspects of imaging and little need for another.
However, if one were to expand the subject matter covered by the list to
include capturing and digitalizing images with film scanners and digital
camera, I would think that one would want to change the name to reflect the
new scope of the list. I have no favorites when it comes to names for the
newly expanded list. But wahtever scope and name is selected by Tony, the
list will have to be promoted by Tony and subscribers alike on other related
and tangential lists so that others will know about the change in the list's
name and scope as well as about the existence of the list if one expects to
generate new subscribers and expand the subscriber base.
filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk wrote:
> Laurie,
>
> Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would
> have it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing.
> We don't have to duplicate Phil Askey, but I would love to know what
> actual experience is with different digital cameras - is the canon
> Mark II really that good, on one hand. At the other end, is there a
> realistic alternative to Epson 2200 or 4000? What if one is willing
> to give up a little, then is there something (I doubt it, but...).
>
> I read statements that there are software packages that are superior
> - especially faster - than Photoshop, really?
>
> How about just "Digital Imaging"? Or "Digital Imaging Techniques"?
> Perhaps to broad, but many of the discussions here were that broad
> just 6 months ago.
>
> But I want to remember that this list belongs to Tony, and he has
> done a superior job of maintaining it. He has to be willing to have
> this change take place. If it is done well, it is conceivable that
> the list will mushroom and while I am willing to help in any way, I
> am in California...
>
> People who handle lists, like this one, well, are not common. I've
> been on and left other lists, they become time consuming without
> informing. The only other one I've stayed with is the Yahoo Yamaha
> FJ list. It too is well maintained and has drawn some real gurus -
> that is what makes it work.
>
> Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of
> them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas,
> including actual practice - are still around.
>
> What do you think? Can it be done and be useful? I think so, but
> ultimately, I am not the one doing it.
>
>
> -- Brad
>
>> "Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
>> safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in
>> broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly
>> proclaiming ... wow, what a ride!" F.French
>
>
>
>
> On 8/9/04 15:28, "Laurie Solomon" <laurie@advancenet.net> wrote:
>
> Maybe, the name of the group should be changed to Image Capturing and
>> Digitalization Techniques. :-)
>>
>> filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk wrote:
>>> I, for one, would hate to see this list go by the wayside. It has
>>> helped me make choices in a evolution of scanners and, as far as I
>>> know, scanners are still improving. Many of the members on this
>>> list, and they're too numerous to name, have been of invaluable
>>> assistance to me.
>>>
>>> I agree with Brad in that widening the the topic to be inclusive to
>>> digital photography. While I now use a digital camera regularly, I
>>> still shoot medium format film and all the image printing and
>>> distribution is in digital form. Other lists that are peculiar to a
>>> manufacturer are very limited in information and narrow in scope.
>>> Filmscanners has been by far the best information source I have
>>> found. I even ran across an old Bush & Millimaki customer who also
>>> lives in my home town of Huntsville, Alabama.
>>>
>>> I know that quite literally thousands of individuals have been
>>> informed and assisted from this list. I will do all I can to help
>>> revive this list, Tony, from my area - just say the word.
>>>
>>> Please, keep up the good work,
>>>
>>> Jim Sims
>>>
>>> Brad Davis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tony,
>>>>
>>>> First, below is a note from Ed Lusby. I don't know what to make of
>>>> his difficulties communicating, but I thought sending it along to
>>>> you might be useful.
>>>>
>>>> Below Ed's note is something I wrote to John Mahany after he so
>>>> kindly sent me the info re: cleaning an SS4000. I hate to see this
>>>> list die, it has been too good to just let it disappear -
>>>> especially when much of the expertise that is here (o0r was here)
>>>> applies all along the process of digital photography. Other lists
>>>> that are supposed to deal with various topics are usually too
>>>> limited - either to a certain manufacturer, or software vendor, or
>>>> the material they deal with lacks the depth that I know I need.
>>>> The people here are the only ones I've found that consistently
>>>> know the answers, and more. Laurie seems to be a treasure in
>>>> himself, and there are several others who are as good and in some
>>>> cases better. My suggestion is to widen the topic and then try to
>>>> revive the list. I would be willing to help by shilling for the
>>>> list on other venues.
>>>>
>>>> Hope we can keep it going.
>>>>
>>>> Brad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Brad,
>>>> I haven't been able to post to filmscanners recently because my
>>>> return email address was refused. There is nothing wrong with the
>>>> return address, so I'm not sure what the problem is. I've also
>>>> tried to contact Tony Sleep (the "owner" of filmscanners) but that
>>>> message is also returned. Would you please forward this to
>>>> filmscanners for me? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> I share your concerns about the group, Brad, and I certainly agree
>>>> that the expertise here is unparalleled. I have been astounded at
>>>> the responses from the experts on the list regarding the amount of
>>>> time that these people have taken to help others. I believe that is
>>>> part of the problem, however. Sooner or later you just can't keep
>>>> doing it. New blood needs to take over, but it takes years to learn
>>>> what the professionals on this list know.
>>>>
>>>> Widening the scope of filmscanners is not a bad idea, but that is
>>>> up to Tony Sleep. I really miss the Epson inkjet group and would
>>>> like that area added as well. I'd like to hear from Tony
>>>> concerning his view of filmscanners and what he would like to do
>>>> with it.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wish we could rejuvenate the list, I learned more here as relates
>>>> to all aspects of digital imaging including Photoshop processing
>>>> and printing than I have found anywhere. The level of
>>>> intelligence here has been several orders of magnitude above any
>>>> other imaging list I¹ve been on.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps if the list were generalized to ³digital image creation²,
>>>> letting it grow to include discussions of various software from
>>>> Lasersoft and Vuescan through various programs like PS (I saw a
>>>> note elsewhere that asserted that a Lasersoft product is better
>>>> than PS I think that was what was claimed) through specific
>>>> printing programs.
>>>>
>>>> There is too much knowledge represented by Laurie, Art, David
>>>> Littleboy and many others (I even come up with some useful stuff
>>>> now and then) to just let it go. I know that other lists exist,
>>>> but the chaff is often so thick, and the wheat so sparse that I
>>>> despair. That wasn¹t true here, even when the arguments re: dMax
>>>> and # of bytes were going on. Even discussions of equipment I
>>>> will never own (probably), like the Minolta scanners, were useful.
>>>>
>>>> Is something like this worth proposing further? Or am I missing
>>>> something and it would be best to just let ³Scanners² die? It is my
>>>> hope that by talking with a few folks, I might refine my idea and
>>>> have a better chance of selling to whoever (I don¹t even know who
>>>> runs this list I can be oblivious on occasion).
>>>>
>>>> Who should this suggestion go to, and how might it be modified to
>>>> improve its chances of succeeding, first in being tried, and
>>>> second in practice?
>>>>
>>>> If you think this useful to post to the list, please feel free to
>>>> do so with any modifications you think are useful. My goal is to
>>>> find a way to get this going again, I¹m aware that I would feel the
>>>> loss of a tremendous resource if this list went away..
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again for the info re: Polaroid. I¹ve observed the cut off
>>>> on the left of the histogram has been creeping up but I¹ve never
>>>> cleaned the unit and I¹ve had it at least 5 years. I¹ve also had
>>>> other difficulties in separating highlights that appeared separable
>>>> on the negative. I can imagine how dirt could affect that too.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>>> -------------- Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk,
>>> with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe
>>> filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
>>> Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/04
>> ---
>> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
>> Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/04
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>> ----------
>> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
>> filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate)
>> in the message title or body
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
> filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate)
> in the message title or body
>
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
> Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/04
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
