Productive discussion on classic cameras

Cliff, you old curmudgeon, who told you to shut up this time?

Ha,

Dan you better save your expertise and comments to answer one of these kids questions, or you may be called unproductive.

Which posting did I miss Cliff that got your feathers all ruffled?

Probably this: http://photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00Q15j.

Cliff, I asked the kid a question and he deleted my post. So much for the younger generation.

Cliff, Hi! I am a 70 year young kid. I am still learning about Classic Cameras. I have a lot to learn though I started long ago in my college days on the Fed2. I suppose that would qualify me for admission to this class! May I suggest that you could start the Seminar discussions with the best aspects of the Classic Cameras of different types and their limitations. I don't mean that in comparison with the digicams, but only among the Classic Cameras. The typology and their potentials would be a good starting point, I think. It is difficult to raise questions in the beginning of the seminar, especially on what would I [we] like to know; of course, it would be almost everything there is to know. Possibly in the second round you could discuss the Postwar and Post 1960 development of the Japanese Cameras, lenses etc. I am looking forward to it. Thank you.

Thank you Cliff for pursuing this. I am interested as I am one of those who posted after the initial warning from the moderator and before he closed it down. It was also my first ever forum posting, and I am wondering how such an innocuous thread could have violated photo.net policy. My point was that some modern cameras (film or digital) are complicated to use, and that those who find this off-putting have the option of using older, (classic) cameras which can be less confusing to operate while still producing excellent results. The rest of the thread was mainly photo buffs suggesting reasons for their preferences. That it was productive is shown by at least one posting stating that dissatisfaction with digital proved to be a stepping stone towards the poster discovering film and a deeper appreciation of the craft of photography. My (serious) question to the moderator is this: was it merely implied criticism of site sponsor's wares that triggered the shutdown? Because I'm scratching my head here.

there is a "generation gap" It is sad to see film use fading away and the manufacturing or Mechanical Cameras stopping ( ir is it stopped entirely) I read here yesterday that a Wal-mart employee said the film processing will be shut down in 2 years. I read before that supermarkets have already eliminated "send out processing"

In many ways Mecanical cameras and film are pretty foolproof. and the Images created will last for many many years. Knowing the way prople think and do things, the images created by digital photography will not last nearly as long. Cd's And DVD's fade away. Electronic devices, unless made with Mil_spec. quality, will inevitably fail. I seriously doubt that any digital camera will last 30-50 years. But mechanical cameras do. and still produce images that are superior tho all but the most expensive digicams. It's a case of a "Mature Technology" being better than an "immature & developing technolgy"

I will not, unless there is some miracle, be here in 50 more years. and since i am not a soothsayer, I have no idea what form photography or whatever they will call it will take in 2059.

Right now digital photography is the 126. 110, advantix of this time. it is for the masses, True it is a great improvement over these older and discarded technologies,

Some say the Bad drives the Good out. Maybe that is true. Maybe I just LIKE mechanical cameras. Maybe I am just Old-Fashioned. But that , in itself, is not a bad thing.

I'm almost afraid to repeat anything on here anymore. But the fact is, that is the way things are learned. Through repetition. If I am training someone is in my darkroom, I use four steps of repetition, and don't move on to the next step until the last is correct.

First I tell them how to do something, while I show them how to do it.

Second: They tell me how to do something, while I do it for them.

Third: They tell me what they are doing, while they are doing it.

Fourth: They just show me how to do it, and now I know they have learned.

Without saying the same things over and over there is no learning. I believe this is what was refered to as nonproductive. If I just told someone how to do something, and they did it right then. At a later time, there would be no recall of how to do it, since there was no learning by repetition. Some people become bored hearing the same things over and over again, which simply means they are not ready and willing to learn. Any teachers of any kind out there that wish to confirm what I have just said ?