Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RG Forum-New Format  (Read 25704 times)
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« on: July 11, 2006, 03:55:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Has any of old RG Forum guys have visited the memory lane? A brand new format, absolutely confusing & just hate it. Now it costs only $15 to be a member. That's nice for all the guys/gals who forked over $25/$35 to be a "charter" mamber. I am glad I kept my money.
Logged
alfin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2006, 05:24:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Has any of old RG Forum guys have visited the memory lane? A brand new format, absolutely confusing & just hate it. Now it costs only $15 to be a member. That's nice for all the guys/gals who forked over $25/$35 to be a "charter" mamber. I am glad I kept my money.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70386\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sean, please do spread correct info! The $15 is a 3 month trial period. Also, the new look (which I think is quite cool by the way) can be "reset" to default.

BR/Lars
Logged

Lars Mollerstrom
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2006, 07:06:03 AM »
ReplyReply

That is rather strange. Originally the membership of the Forum was on the annual basis. On the current cover page it lists as $15. Than if you try to register after agreeing to terms AND giving up your name, e-mail.....usual standard info for registering still the info reads $15. So what you are saying is after registering when the billing portion comes, thats when the potential purchaser is told that $15 covers only 3 months or at the end of 3 months the membership expires?
   I still like the old Forum home page, as it quickly told you where you may want to go with the very next click...Canon, Nikon, Lighting and the infamous and now dead M.F..
  You are entitled to your opinion & so am I. But do study L.L Forum, that tells you why this IS the best.
Logged
ericevans
Guest
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2006, 09:27:37 PM »
ReplyReply

I think they are getting desperate . They are offering free lifetime membership if you make 30 or more posts a month . Some of the individual topics don't get 30 responses a month so I believe they are in trouble . I looked at the forums this week and out of 34 topic areas only 10 had a post made on that day , that is really sad considering what the forum once was . Let them die .
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2006, 10:54:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think they are getting desperate . They are offering free lifetime membership if you make 30 or more posts a month . Some of the individual topics don't get 30 responses a month so I believe they are in trouble . I looked at the forums this week and out of 34 topic areas only 10 had a post made on that day , that is really sad considering what the forum once was . Let them die .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed.  A forum is only as good as the membership that posts -- and they failed to listen to that membership.  It appears that was a disasterous mistake for them.

Cheers,
Logged

ericevans
Guest
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2006, 06:40:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I have traded a few e-mails with Drew and have told him that if he keeps it closed it will wither and die as evidenced by what we are seeing on there . Sadly I believe he is there to only make money . I have read his wedding forums as well and they seem to have a lack of posts compared to another wedding site I saw which was free . I would think about posting there again and even pay to help with the costs BUT ONLY if it opens back up the way it used to be and keep the moderators out of the way of good conversations .
Logged
ericevans
Guest
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2006, 06:59:48 AM »
ReplyReply

One more thing . http://www.prophotowedding.com/weddingforum/ Go to the link to their wedding forum and look at the discussions or the lack of discussions to be exact . They have around 250 people that can post according to the stats at the bottom of the page and look at the number of the posts they have had recently . Look at the stats on the prophoto forum and they have 1200+ users and no posts either . Look at the number of posts on the pro photo site and realize that most of the posts were made in the old days before they took over and look at how many more poeple were registered . Now look at the wedding forum and see the total number registered and the number of active and there is the reason both forums are going no where .
Logged
Ed Jack
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2006, 07:03:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Has any of old RG Forum guys have visited the memory lane? A brand new format, absolutely confusing & just hate it. Now it costs only $15 to be a member. That's nice for all the guys/gals who forked over $25/$35 to be a "charter" mamber. I am glad I kept my money.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70386\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
without being a kill-joy, I suspect that critisining other sites/forums on THIS FORUM might put Michael in an uncomfortable position. As MR doesn't moderate except in extreme situations, he might be too polite to pull this thread, but really I think we need to act responsibly instead?

Having said that, the downfall of ROB's site/forums (which WAS the real strength) is disappointing. Not all hte good posters there persisted over here, or  least are too busy doing photogrpahy to talk about it    

I love Uwe's site over at outback digital too, and the omni blog sites are where some of our more talented peers exibit!  

Ed
Logged
pwgphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2006, 08:09:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I would not know about the new format since I have not visited the site since the days after the take over and fight to keep it open to the public.  I think that may be the case for a lot of old posters there.  There are too many sites that give out good info for free and have great people posting for them to have done what was done to the RG forum.
Logged
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2006, 09:48:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an unquenching thirst to improve myself. All the fights are really H2O under the bridge, but like any consumer, I just don't believe the quantity & quality of informations dispensed is high enough to justify that forum to be anything but free. Please, no offense directed to fine loyal (in this day loyal is indeed a rare word) members who do respond graciously. It is darn shame, as technology is getting more complex & is changing more frequently, so as a consumer we need to rely on more unbiased opinions, clarifications, corrections & amplifications.
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2006, 11:40:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Personally, I feel sorry for forum administrators and owners.

Free is fine... but it all then comes down to who and how carries out the maintenance of said site and how do they get supported?

Michael sells videos -- and how many of us subscribe or even purchase a special one or one of Michael's books?

Uwe (outbackphoto) sells e-books -- and how many of us buy them?

Photo.net asks for donations -- and how many of us give them?

Not many, I suspect...

Rob Galbraith was *NOT* making any money off the forums, they were eating up large amounts of his time resources (and I suspect some of his financial resources) and so he decided he needed to sell them.  Now enters the new owner -- who *PAID* RG for it -- wanting to keep them alive and so thinks, "I'll just charge a small fee to help recoup my costs and support the site, surely everybody will understand."  Well, it is obvious we didn't understand.  

How come we didn't?  I agree they did not market their concept very well at all, nor did they enter into it gently, but the simple answer is it boiled down to propriety -- we all felt it was *OUR* site, not the new owners.  Heck, he's a wedding photographer for crying out loud...  

Shame on us.
Logged

James Russell
Guest
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2006, 01:55:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Personally, I feel sorry for forum administrators and owners.

Free is fine... but it all then comes down to who and how carries out the maintenance of said site and how do they get supported?

Michael sells videos -- and how many of us subscribe or even purchase a special one or one of Michael's books?

Uwe (outbackphoto) sells e-books -- and how many of us buy them?

Photo.net asks for donations -- and how many of us give them?

Not many, I suspect...

Rob Galbraith was *NOT* making any money off the forums, they were eating up large amounts of his time resources (and I suspect some of his financial resources) and so he decided he needed to sell them.  Now enters the new owner -- who *PAID* RG for it -- wanting to keep them alive and so thinks, "I'll just charge a small fee to help recoup my costs and support the site, surely everybody will understand."  Well, it is obvious we didn't understand. 

How come we didn't?  I agree they did not market their concept very well at all, nor did they enter into it gently, but the simple answer is it boiled down to propriety -- we all felt it was *OUR* site, not the new owners.  Heck, he's a wedding photographer for crying out loud... 

Shame on us.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71012\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree

JR
Logged
ericevans
Guest
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2006, 03:16:13 PM »
ReplyReply

"Well, it is obvious we didn't understand. "

I don't think that is the problem . Drew came in like a storm trooper and closed it up until you pay . Look at both of his forums where there are topics that have not had a post for weeks . His business model does not work if you want a active forum with information flowing . All the change of ownership has done is to put money in a few peoples pockets and there is nothing wrong with that but the forum has lost all relevance . If the forum would open back up and make it to where poeple could help support it I think it may start moving again . I am a member of several forums where I pay a fee to post but it is of my own free will and those who want or can pay do so . The forums that have adopted this model are active and filled with information and the owner makes enough to pay for the site . If you are running a forum only for profit it is not going very far . "Members: 30,307, Active Members: 1,398 " All these people and still no active posting going on . I think Drew is the one that does not understand .
« Last Edit: July 18, 2006, 03:22:17 PM by ericevans » Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 18, 2006, 04:29:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I see both sides here but I do believe that if they would have made the site free for a short time and even state upfront that there would be a nominal charge implemented over time, there may have been more folks willing to join or remain on that forum. It surely would have influenced me.  I do pay for photo.net and several other sites that I frequent.  From the standpoint of Rob or anyone else not making any money to maintain the site, I am not so sure.  There were plenty of advertisements on RGs site.  Granted there was a lot of other information besides the forums, but the traffic to the site is clearly increased with the forum and I suspect the money paid for advertising is directly related to the traffic.   Whether or not it is cost effective considering the time and effort is a matter of choice for  the webmaster.

Nonetheless, in the end I am disappointed about the whole turn of events. There was a lot of good information being presented on that forum that is sadly missed. Mark

Quote
"Well, it is obvious we didn't understand. "

I don't think that is the problem . Drew came in like a storm trooper and closed it up until you pay . Look at both of his forums where there are topics that have not had a post for weeks . His business model does not work if you want a active forum with information flowing . All the change of ownership has done is to put money in a few peoples pockets and there is nothing wrong with that but the forum has lost all relevance . If the forum would open back up and make it to where poeple could help support it I think it may start moving again . I am a member of several forums where I pay a fee to post but it is of my own free will and those who want or can pay do so . The forums that have adopted this model are active and filled with information and the owner makes enough to pay for the site . If you are running a forum only for profit it is not going very far . "Members: 30,307, Active Members: 1,398 " All these people and still no active posting going on . I think Drew is the one that does not understand .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71039\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #14 on: July 18, 2006, 11:00:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Nonetheless, in the end I am disappointed about the whole turn of events. There was a lot of good information being presented on that forum that is sadly missed. Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71047\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back I think RG and even Drew underestimated the value of the information that was given freely.

I remember a year or so ago RG featured some guy that had made the transition from film to digital and wrote this whole article like the guy invented the process.  This isn't a knock on the person they featured, but it seemed odd to me to feature someone that had never posted on the forum, while they had people actively giving free and useful information that had amazing resumes.  

I made mention of this to RG and never got a response, which wasn't that unusual.

It was also amazing to me that RG had this wealth of talent that was obviously willing to share, but RG and Company had no inclination to try to capitalize on it, much less even give it anything other than censorship.

Later when Drew took control I don't think he had a complete history of the forums and I would imagine was given some pretty one sided accounts of how things worked and the history of the site.

in a way, it's a shame that someone didn't pick up on this and capitalize on this resource, because in my experience I have never seen any open public discussion that had so much real information backed up  with real life experience.

The photographers that brought substance to that forum are a different breed than most of the self promoters we see in my industry.  

They are working photographers that spend their time shooting and improving their art and business skills and have little time for the one hand clapping style of self promotion that seems to have permeated not only the profession of photography, but life in general.

The fact that they were willing to share openly and freely was a more a testament to their character than to any form of ego or financial self interest.

They are  Pulitzer prize winners, well respected professionals with studios and expereince world wide.  Many of them were some of the ealiest adopters of digital capture and their imagery is seen daily on a global stage.  

I personally know many of these people and I can assure you their character, humor, talent, accomplishments and unselfish attitude is something that is rare in our society and it is a shame that it was under appreciated.

JR
Logged
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2006, 02:52:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks JR for your thoughts. I always enjoyed your input at RG. I daily (actually more than once a day) would check whether you or MT had any new posts. I for one definately learned a lot from your, MT & other regulars' input. I do remember the article you are referring to. It was on RG mainpage for a long time. I always thought it was an real old article, which was regurgitated to fill the space as it certainly did not illuminated anything new, I thought it belonged to history channel.
    I hope you will post often & drag MT over here too. Thanks.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2006, 02:54:26 PM by SeanBK » Logged
stevenrk
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2006, 09:12:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back I think RG and even Drew underestimated the value of the information that was given freely.

...

in a way, it's a shame that someone didn't pick up on this and capitalize on this resource, because in my experience I have never seen any open public discussion that had so much real information backed up  with real life experience.

The photographers that brought substance to that forum are a different breed than most of the self promoters we see in my industry. 

They are working photographers that spend their time shooting and improving their art and business skills and have little time for the one hand clapping style of self promotion that seems to have permeated not only the profession of photography, but life in general.

The fact that they were willing to share openly and freely was a more a testament to their character than to any form of ego or financial self interest.

They are  Pulitzer prize winners, well respected professionals with studios and expereince world wide.  Many of them were some of the ealiest adopters of digital capture and their imagery is seen daily on a global stage. 

I personally know many of these people and I can assure you their character, humor, talent, accomplishments and unselfish attitude is something that is rare in our society and it is a shame that it was under appreciated.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71086\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

James, all true, but I have to ask why you and others have chosen to stay silent and not start the conversation going in another forum.  There are a number of existing and new forums where your voices would be welcome and your combined experience, insight and good cheer would quickly create a new RG at its best.  This site, the new OpenPhotography and new D64 forums come immediately to mind.

Fair enough that some previous and currrent owners don't get it -- and are unlikely ever to get it.  But why has that meant that you have all taken your marbles and refused to start a new game?  One explanation I've heard is that the key posters on RG's MF have started up a closed site for themselves.  If so, then you have as little sense of the value of inviting in outside and less experienced people who love the medium, as RG did of appreciating the stunning expertise, combined wisdom and willingness to share that you and your colleagues showed.

Steven Kinberg
Logged
Eric Zepeda
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2006, 02:16:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If so, then you have as little sense of the value of inviting in outside and less experienced people who love the medium, as RG did of appreciating the stunning expertise, combined wisdom and willingness to share that you and your colleagues showed.

Steven Kinberg
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71384\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not so sure about this. I still feel RG and MS blundered massively in recognising what a special place RGMF was(as JR said above), and I can't blame the contributors for taking their dialogue private.

What I am sure of is that we can learn from this experience. MR gives us a very free hand here, as evidenced by this discussion. RGMF wasn't built in a day, and every day I see  here a little more info and traffic. I now own a P25, and have observations and experience that I'm willing to share with others, as well as learn from their experiences in an open exchange. I'll always miss RGMF, but we can continue on with that spirit in mind.
Logged

mcrepsej
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2006, 03:13:02 PM »
ReplyReply

This is my first post at this forum.

I have read all your comments and all I can say, is that I realy mis RG forum.

The RG forum Mediumformat was the first site to open to get new or shared member to member information.

If my english was better I would have written a lot more.

McRepsej ..... a P45 owner ;-)
Denmark
« Last Edit: July 21, 2006, 03:21:31 PM by mcrepsej » Logged
stevenrk
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2006, 04:28:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm not so sure about this. I still feel RG and MS blundered massively in recognising what a special place RGMF was(as JR said above), and I can't blame the contributors for taking their dialogue private.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71413\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not suggesting blame.  I agree entirely with the points JR is making about the value of the contributors to RG and about the failure to recognize that value by RG (I'll leave discussion of the new owners to someone else, but it's been said above).  And RG had every right to say "I've had enough, I'm done," just like JR and his colleagues have every right to say "enough of this public stuff, let's just talk amongst ourselves."  But I do feel strongly that the value of public participation, inquiry, points of view, new perspectives, different angles has real value, and to the extent that the RG MF group have taken their marbles and aren't playing in public any more because RG was nasty to them, they're missing something as significant to them as RG missed.  Just my view.

As to participation in this or other forums, other than dropping in and making a comment or two about the past, there has not been on this or the other forums like OpenPhotography any kind of real return.  And it could start up in about a day if the right voices decided to try again to share their views and insights on a public forum.  Fair enough if they don't want to, but too bad for all, including them.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad