Where we go from here

@bobn2,
Temporarily you should be able to inject that external page as an "Index" page..
... and that may solve some of my issues as well.

... and give you nice feedback if that's the way to go, without even spending 10 minutes to develop it NOW.

I agree with a lot of what you both have said, even though I'm very much interested in gear (albeit mostly old or experimental adapted lenses, something a vast majority of people in a forum like that won't share).

I'm convinced it's important that the editorial content on technical matters is well-researched, documented and particularly enjoy some of the threads here, where theoretical concepts are accompanied by sample shots, which provide an instant explanation of its usefulness. I'm personally way more likely to attempt learning something, if I know what I might need it for and seeing some images resembling what someone would actually like wo work on creating (that's where I would see people with a different unorthodox approach, but impressive photographic experience and versatility like @DonaldB come in, if able to get the communications up to a certain necessary standard...) often helps a lot.

The C&C thread @minniev has mentioned actually has a couple of people in it who (in my opinion) are really good at pointing towards the effective and interesting, as well as the probably flawed or unnecessary aspects of images and have a lot of experience in giving valuable feedback, without having to resort to mere niceties or ever risking to crush the enthusiasm of anyone joining the group. I've never participated in those long-running threads ad dpreview, but I feel like they provide something really unique and valuable to this place, if the people involved in it, feel like it's a fitting new home.

Another quick shoutout goes to @davidwien and @Digirame who (while currently still brand-specific) provide a friendly and very active photo-sharing thread, which is very approachable and welcoming to any newcomer, regardless of preference or skill-level.

I generally agree with @NCV though, that it's better to incentivize as many brand-agnostic discussion of actual photography as possible.

I'm also regularly impressed by the skill, generousity, perseverance and friendliness people like @JimKasson @IliahBorg and some others share their knowledge and experience with users here, often even with those who doubt and dispute what they say over and over. I feel like those people - true scientists, not afraid of being challenged, but also based in reality enough to not assume bad-intent or senseless trolling all of the time - can't be valued high enough.

One final addition, things like the camera history threads by @Maoby who not only is willing to share his incredible collection and knowledge with everyone here, but also tries to make it as entertaining and approachable as possible deserves a huge shoutout as well. Really fun stuff with lots of potential for editorial content.

I'm personally saddened to see that a vast majority of the people I interacted with on dpreview decided not to join, or at least not to contribute here, and while I have my suspicions what might be partly responsible for that, I have no intention of trying to call for a return to the (apparently deeply flawed) moderation practices and failures in the structural setup as "brand-havens" dpreview seems to have.

I certainly would prefer this place to be different and unique in the long run and am therefore both willing to give some leeway to the incredible admin team during the initial setup stage, we're currently in, as well as contribute myself actively in trying to make this a more interesting, welcoming, open-minded and creative place than any of the alternatives.

I recently started a thread, asking for people's inspirations/motivations in regards to their photography and it was great reading about very, very different sources, approaches and ideas. If you haven't already, please share some of your main driving forces as well, I'm sure we've barely scratched the surface...
dprevived.com/t/what-are-your-biggest-inspirationsmotivation-boosts/4292/

I hope that this kind of diversity in interests and ideas, combined with a significant amount of intermingling and interaction across brands, formats, scientific or artistic approaches or skill level will continue to be one of the core aspects of whatever dprevived will be in the future!

Just throwing a spoon into the ocean here....have you considered trying to merge with some other niche photo community? I know there's one for hasslebald and ultraviolent photography that have very knowledgeable people and rather small user bases. Finding a way to split hosting cost and bringing more users into one portal might be beneficial to all sides.

No need to ever apologize for a 'diversion' Alan. This is one of the strong points of this site. Diversions and discussions can take place without heavy handed, thoughtless moderation stifling free thinking...

As I have stated in othere threads, on this forum, "I am a nut and bolts" Knda guy. My feeling is that it this forum wants to be unique and outstanding the first step is to negate all the chaos, infighting, and blatant misinformation that plagues many otere forums. Construct a place where fols can have their quests answered, and problems solved, have a sincere, logical, and constructive conversation, and exchange ideas. Debits and differences of opinion are healthy as long as they are carried on with some sense of decorum and respect. Fols who insist or persist in name-calling, character assignation, and continual combative behavior should be warned and banned unless they curtail these negative attitudes.

There are so many photogahy specializations that are not departmentalized and maintained in their own sections. Gera is great but too many fols are preoccupied with equipment and pay little attention to art, technique, and creativity. Years ago, weh I first heard of DP Review, I chose it to be more of a "Consumers Report" for photogay equipment. That used to be the job of photography magazines- they had labs to detect equipment and report on it. There were ads, editorials, and how-tos but what was missing was reader participation. There may have been a few write-in columns but very limited and delayed. On forums, folks communicate in real-time and that is one great advngtage that can be overlooked and taken for granted.

Pehprs, assemble a crew of folks who really know what they are doing and put together an advisory board of volunteers to field more complex or advanced questions.

Actually, I have given my personal advice on this situation, but, of course, it is situation specific. That advice is that, next to missed focus, [undesirable] motion blur is one of the most destructive technical flaws to IQ. In other words, it's typically better to deal with the increased noise than the increased [undesirable] motion blur. However, a more shallow DOF is often more preferable to a more noisy photo once the noise exceeds a certain QT (Quality Threshold). So, it's often better to use a wider aperture with less noise than the desired aperture with more noise.

In short, my opinion is that one should typically prioritize in the following order: motion blur, noise, DOF. But, again, this is not merely my opinion, but also scene dependent and, of course, subject to a matter of degree. You'll note that I didn't mention anything about external lighting. That's because, for my photography, this is typically not an option, thus I don't use it, so I don't recommend it. However, if external lighting is not only possible, but practical, then, of course, that would be the primary consideration.

For me, noise rarely ruins a photo. However, that's because I usually don't even bother taking the shot if I feel that it will be ruined by noise and there's no way around it. But, noise often reduces the IQ of a photo, since it limits my processing options, and does, in my opinion, reduce the "success" of many of even my favorite photos. Other people probably don't care, though -- it's just that I'm so picky (I even edit photos at the pixel level all the time, just to make them as good as I can make them with the skills that I have).

But, again, we see that's all more than a sentence or two, and even then, it's not the answer people want to hear. So, well, whatever -- you get what you pay for. 😏

I raise ISO even in the studio so acidental light bouncing off my studio walls is controled and doesnt effect my key lights. this whole aspect of "i shoot at base iso" is just for the anal photographer 😁 oh, and i also use high iso so my studio strobes on low settings dont destroy my plastic transpericy gobos😜😎
and for the record ,i have invented this concept for my noir images. 😎

Limiting character counts and post per day for anyone but mods and paid users would go a long way in reducing worthless clusters of non-productive comments.

I'm guessing that what you mean is that you use higher ISO settings so the added light doesn't overwhelm the ambient lighting, which, of course, makes sense.

For scenes where motion is a non-issue and external lighting is not being used, using base ISO maximizes light on the sensor, thus minimizing noise / maximizing DR.

I don't do flash, so I'm not sure what those are, but it's surprising to me that they get hot enough to melt the plastic!

Just a technical criticism here: the outlining on the right portion of the man below the scarf is really distracting. I'd edit that a bit to make the transition more natural looking. Excellent photo, though! But, I like to pick nits. 😁

Have to disagree. "Pay to type" reeks of lameness. I'm not opposed to membership fees, although I think they, too, would be counterproductive, except for, say, access to image upload and selling on the Buy & Sell forum, like FM (Fred Miranda) does.

hot . shooting a 400watt studio strobe through a aluminium cone down to 40 dia every sec , it glows ive had to make and install fans into my lighting. the image i posted i go out and shoot a scene in the perspective i need for the shoot then i print the image on a 28x36 mm peice of transperency material in pigment inks. shoot the scene onto a solid white backdrop with me dressed up in costume ,i have smoke machines and a single flash to replicate the original street light and shoot my self in a single frame 😁😎 its very cool isnt it.

agree its a little sharp. but the lights are not diffused so very hard lines. never noticed it till you mentioned it. white backlight on black.

love this style of photography.

I'm not sure that talking about visual things such as composition is useful. Showing and looking at example images is better.
This is by Shibata_Zeshin.

The voice of reason. Both communities should be welcome here and, indeed, should mix as much (or as little) as they wish

What do you, me, or anyone else, need to post about photography some arbitrary number of times in one 24 hour period? Use your post wisely and spend the rest of your time taking pictures. I'm just tired of the nincompoopery already freely flowing, how it didn't take long to happen, and is of no value to anyone. I'm here to grow as a photographer, not read endless child like bickering and drama about another website, no matter how amusing it might be at times. I've got tons of other options for that.

I know we're human and we can disagree on things passionately but some of you are making me really wonder if you're not three kids in a rain coat.