Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Luminous Landscape Non-Commercial?  (Read 20539 times)
Hank
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2006, 06:51:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I have no problem with the wording.  

My problem starts with the act of posting the comments while Michael is offline for an extended period.  The timing of this is in very poor taste.  Such a stunt ranges somewhere between rude and underhanded in my book.  Michael has made his thinking quite clear in the past and would do so again if he was available.   A little scrolling, a little site searching, and his reasoning and explanations can be reviewed.  That's enough for now, and the questions should be saved till he's back.
Logged
Tonsil
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2006, 10:44:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't think Michael will be the least bit offended or nearly as up in temperature as some of you folk. I am sure he would just respond and try to clear up the original poster's query.

Secondly, Popnfresh raised a point that is valid, even if he has, perhaps, misunderstood the definition of non-commercial.

This industry is so dynamic at this point in it's history and people are spending lots of money on trying to get totally "photographic". Lots of people are getting winded, exhausted and frustrated by this...If we found out that Michael is quietly being funded or encouraged via the freebee to plug certain products etc., then, it would raise a large question as to the integrity of his revues. Wondering about the meaning of "non commercial" is a perfectly ok thing to do and a perfectly ok thing to post about. To default to calling the original poster a "troller" is, IMO, a short sighted statement.

If Epson or Colorbyte were tossing goodies this way and Michael was sitting back and accepting them with a mutual wink, it would cast serious credibility shadows over this whole thing. I am sure that he, Michael, has felt this type of pressure more than a few times. I am sure that he has to be VERY careful. It does make one wonder how strong the temptation can be, doesn't it? Stuff like this does happen and who's to say that Michael, being human and all, could not fall victim to this scenario? We are all frail and if you don't recognize it then you are kidding yourself.

And so what if Michael is unavailable? Do we all know this? I don't think it has anything to do with anything...the site is here, if you have a question..post it. Michael is a grown man and can probably handle this.
Logged
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2006, 01:26:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes, hot replies can only leade to further antagonism. On the other hand, the original post could be perceived as somewhat antagonistic in it's opening approach.

I have no problem with the viewpoint, but I am touchy about things being in their full context.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60358\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My opening statement was intended more as observation. To the extent it was a criticism, it was only so far as the description of the site is concerned and not a critique of Michael's integrity or the value of Luminous Landscape. Nor was it to suggest that commercialism is in any way a bad thing. There are many ways in which an enterprise can be commercial. Michael has found a happy medium where he can generate an income and not be beholden to advertisers. My hat's off to him. Not many sites can follow his model and survive.

The most interesting aspect of this thread has been the tendency of some people to shoot first and ask questions later. Internet forums often quickly degenerate into flamewars where thoughtful discussion is replaced by righteous indignation. This forum is no exception.
Logged
f2point8
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #23 on: March 25, 2006, 10:25:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think Luminous Landscape is an indispensible resource for serious fine art photographers. But I'm a little taken aback with Michael Reichmann's insistence that his site is "completely non-commercial". It seems to me that any site that sells DVDs, workshops and books is highly commercial. I think a better description is that LL doesn't accept advertising and therefore is not unduly pressured to lavish preferential treatment on sponsors. Whatever prejudices Mr Reichmann may have, and I think he has his as indeed I have mine, are personal and probably not the result of commercial relationships. That's not really the same as being non-commercial.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60223\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I got quite a good chuckle out of this thread. But this first post is the one that makes me laugh the most. You want to pay like a socialist and recieve like a capatilist. Well? Which way do you want it?
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4916



« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2006, 08:00:13 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm back, and have now read the thread.

I might agree that the wording I've used is not as precise as it could be, but then I'm a photographer and not a lawyer (shudder). Mea culpa.

Yes, I support this site (and my dinner table) by various commercial activities, selling the products that I produce, many of them with my business partner, Chris Sanderson. These are all products of "art", if you will, DVDs, prints, books, portfolios, workshops. They are the items of commerce associated with this otherwise non-commercial web site.

And once again, for the record –  I accept no money, products or other considerations – EVER – from any company in or associated with the photographic industry. I either buy, or receive on loan products that I review here. I will accept a discount from a manufacturer or dealer that has loaned me a product for testing, if I decide to buy a product that I have reviewed, but only after my review has been published.

I will keep software that is sent to me for review, because returning it is sort of meaningless, especially when the program is in the form of a download.

There are exceptions. From time to time I work as a consultant, and in this capacity receive payment for my services. This is usually associated with product design consultation. I also do alpha and beta testing of some products, but this is always gratis. Sometimes these products turn out poorly, and I say so. Long time readers will easily recognize which ones these are.

I also will let companies buy me a beer, or a meal when I'm at trade shows or meetings. I also accept T shirts and pens as gifts. I'm a cheap date.

Michael
« Last Edit: March 26, 2006, 08:04:08 AM by michael » Logged
Krug
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2006, 10:58:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I only just joined a couple of days ago but I am almost wondering what I have got into !
"Storm in a teacup" comes to mind.
I have already spent some hours on what I would have to say is one of the most seriously informative sites I have come across.
Let us not spoil it by bickering please and, Michael, for goodness sake keep up the good work - we need a serious site like this too much to not emphasise its value and importance.
When i was bringing up my teenagers I had a catchphrase " Please operate brain before mouth" it is not a bad maxim and saves a lot of hurt feelings and subsequent regrets.
Logged
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2007, 03:32:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm back, and have now read the thread.

I might agree that the wording I've used is not as precise as it could be, but then I'm a photographer and not a lawyer (shudder). Mea culpa.

Yes, I support this site (and my dinner table) by various commercial activities, selling the products that I produce, many of them with my business partner, Chris Sanderson. These are all products of "art", if you will, DVDs, prints, books, portfolios, workshops. They are the items of commerce associated with this otherwise non-commercial web site.

And once again, for the record –  I accept no money, products or other considerations – EVER – from any company in or associated with the photographic industry. I either buy, or receive on loan products that I review here. I will accept a discount from a manufacturer or dealer that has loaned me a product for testing, if I decide to buy a product that I have reviewed, but only after my review has been published.

I will keep software that is sent to me for review, because returning it is sort of meaningless, especially when the program is in the form of a download.

There are exceptions. From time to time I work as a consultant, and in this capacity receive payment for my services. This is usually associated with product design consultation. I also do alpha and beta testing of some products, but this is always gratis. Sometimes these products turn out poorly, and I say so. Long time readers will easily recognize which ones these are.

I also will let companies buy me a beer, or a meal when I'm at trade shows or meetings. I also accept T shirts and pens as gifts. I'm a cheap date.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61039\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I realized that I never read the last few posts of this thread I started a year ago, so I thought I'd look it up and see where it went. I appreciate you taking the time to weigh in on the debate, and I want you to know that the only reason I took the time to engage in this discussion is because I think LL is a wonderful resource which I want to succeed.

I appreciate that you're not a lawyer. Neither am I, for that matter. I'm a high school English teacher. I suppose that's why language and words are important to me and why, when I encounter words being misused, it kind of gets under my skin. If you were a student of mine and submitted your website for a critique I would feel compelled to point out a few things.

1. according to the dictionary, "commercial", when used as an adjective, means "concerned with or engaged in business". LL is clearly a business. It engages in commerce. Therefore, LL is commercial (this statement is not pejorative).

2. I would argue that LL is not free of advertising. I counted 6 banner ads on the home page alone, albeit for your own products. Advertising, whether it's for your products or paid for by someone else to sell their products, is still advertising. Rather than calling LL ad-free, it would be more accurate to say that LL is free of third party advertising.

3. Finally, I would question the need to bring up the whole "non-commercial" and "no commercial advertisements" thing in the first place. Anyone encountering your website for the first time can see inside of a minute or two that the only selling going on is for your stuff. Whether the language you're using to make your point about advertising is accurate or not, it is belaboring the obvious. It would be like hanging a sign on Steven Hawking that says "I'm smarter than you are." Yeah, we get that.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2007, 03:46:04 AM by popnfresh » Logged
cyberworldsinc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 12, 2007, 08:03:00 AM »
ReplyReply

<deleted by poster>
« Last Edit: April 13, 2007, 08:11:16 AM by cyberworldsinc » Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #28 on: April 12, 2007, 09:49:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Oh dear, another thread where the last word is all!

It matters not a jot how people interpret Michael's original written words on the commercial or otherwise nature of this site because a few minutes in the company of Lu-La says all that needs saying; the site is his and he is free to plug his wares as much as he likes and, in that context, it is amazing that he shows such restraint.

Neither do I think that the original poster should have refrained from posting his comment/question; I don't think Michael would much care either way, he's a big boy.

On the other hand, perhaps Michael might find the time both to write a little more and also to take a more active part in discussions/threads. That he doesn't jump in and end threads more often is surprising, but then, that's part of having a broader sense of reality and knowing that all people are far from the same. So, in all, a damn good site (which is why I bother to post despite a computer that sometimes dies before I have finished and forces me to rewrite) and one where I have picked up a lot of good advice and new information.

Ciao - Rob C
Logged

Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1920



« Reply #29 on: April 12, 2007, 10:25:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"This site receives no commercial advertising. It currently has more than 2,500 freely accessible pages containing articles, tutorials, product reviews and photographs. The site is not affiliated with or beholden to any company or organization. You can choose to support it by buying LL Video Journal subscriptions and back issues, LL books, or joining workshops."
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60365\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Michael - hire that man!
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2007, 02:52:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"This site receives no commercial advertising. It currently has more than 2,500 freely accessible pages containing articles, tutorials, product reviews and photographs. The site is not affiliated with or beholden to any company or organization. You can choose to support it by buying LL Video Journal subscriptions and back issues, LL books, or joining workshops."

Michael - hire that man!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112029\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not bad. I would re-write the first sentence to read "This site sells no advertising space to others." That would do it. But I still think it isn't necessary to bring up commerciality anyway. For example, dpreview.com does sell ad space and yet I don't think anyone seriously questions the editorial integrity of Phil Askey. Rather than trying to hammer on  a point that's evident to anyone who checks out this site, I think it's better to drop it altogether. But if Micheal insists on hammering, at least he can be concise.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2007, 03:01:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
*chomp*
For example, dpreview.com does sell ad space and yet I don't think anyone seriously questions the editorial integrity of Phil Askey.
*chomp*

Read Askey's posts in the dpreview forum.  People sure do question his integrity.  And he takes it very seriously.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4916



« Reply #32 on: April 12, 2007, 03:12:08 PM »
ReplyReply

And with that, I bid you all goodnight.

Michael
Logged
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #33 on: April 12, 2007, 03:14:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Read Askey's posts in the dpreview forum.  People sure do question his integrity.  And he takes it very seriously.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112076\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A few may question it, but they're a tiny minority. There's always a few in any crowd. 99.9% would agree that Phil's an honest guy, as is Michael.
Logged
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 729


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #34 on: April 12, 2007, 04:27:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Why are we even bothering with this post?  The more we add to it the larger in life it gets.  I don't care what it's called - I like this site and everything it has brought me.
Logged

Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1123



WWW
« Reply #35 on: April 12, 2007, 05:15:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I am (inter alia) a lawyer.  I'm highly commercial     Spare a thought for us poor lawyers.

Quentin
« Last Edit: April 12, 2007, 05:16:30 PM by Quentin » Logged

Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013
cyberworldsinc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #36 on: April 12, 2007, 07:30:10 PM »
ReplyReply

<deleted by poster>
« Last Edit: April 13, 2007, 08:11:38 AM by cyberworldsinc » Logged

larryg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 468



WWW
« Reply #37 on: April 13, 2007, 08:23:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My opening statement was intended more as observation. To the extent it was a criticism, it was only so far as the description of the site is concerned and not a critique of Michael's integrity or the value of Luminous Landscape. Nor was it to suggest that commercialism is in any way a bad thing. There are many ways in which an enterprise can be commercial. Michael has found a happy medium where he can generate an income and not be beholden to advertisers. My hat's off to him. Not many sites can follow his model and survive.

The most interesting aspect of this thread has been the tendency of some people to shoot first and ask questions later. Internet forums often quickly degenerate into flamewars where thoughtful discussion is replaced by righteous indignation. This forum is no exception.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60452\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


This topic has been hashed over in the past.   Do you enjoy/benefit from the LL site. If not then go elsewhere  If so  enjoy.  No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy anything.  

I personally could care less if it was commercial/non-commercial  done by aliens (the out in space kind) or whatever.

There certainly must be more important issues related to photography to discuss
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #38 on: April 13, 2007, 08:53:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am (inter alia) a lawyer.  I'm highly commercial     Spare a thought for us poor lawyers.

Quentin
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112106\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quentin

I'm sparing one, I'm sparing one, but how will you pay me?

Ciao - Rob C
« Last Edit: April 13, 2007, 08:54:02 AM by Rob C » Logged

popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #39 on: April 13, 2007, 02:36:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
There certainly must be more important issues related to photography to discuss
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112195\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Except this happens to be the forum intended specifically for discussing site issues, not photography.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2007, 02:36:57 PM by popnfresh » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad