Re: [Leica] LUG Critique - listen up!

["Bill Larsen" <ohlen@lightspeed.net>]

Paul Chefurka writes:


>On Sun, 15 Aug 1999 16:05:09 -0400 (EDT), Ktuckphoto@aol.com wrote:
>
>>I'm new to the site but I'm a little surprised at several things:
>> 1. The unending prattle about cars (who cars--they are just expensive
camera cases).
>
>Sounds to me like you're new here.  We get off topic a fair bit.  It's
>like a family - we chat about all kinds of stuff.  BTW , what's your
>favorite Scotch?


This list has been getting off-topic quite a bit.  And posters have been
reiterating things that were discussed a couple of years ago.  The list is
busily degenerating into a AOL chat line.  It has been like a family insofar
as you could usually trust the advice you get.  With exceptions, this does not
appear to be the case anymore.  As to Scotch, it appears that many of the
posts made lately have been made after the poster has slurped a bit too much
Scotch.

>
>> 2.  The vehemence of debate over eye glasses
>See above


That is no answer, Paul.  It is symptomatic of how this list has become a chat
line.  We are also being reduced to ethno-centric debates which could quickly
blow up in our faces.

>> 3.  The lack of substantive material concerning Leica Rangefinder Cameras.
>You are definitely new here, aintcha?  Stick around, there's lots of
>talk about Ms and SMs on this list  - patience, grasshopper, patience.


There used to be a lot of talk about rangefinder cameras (which is the charter
of the list --- not Leica in general).  Unfortunately, to my perception some
of the really knowledgeable people were driven from the list or choose to no
longer post to the list (they appear to be willing to post privately, though).
The replies now posted have less credibility than they did in the past.  Often
they are flat a**** wrong.  Now you get opinion from people that have never
seen the item in question much less used it.

>
>>One more thing
>>baffles me:  How can individuals who are smart enough to appreciate a fine
>>piece of gear such as an M camera possible to their digital imaging on PC
>>---windows computers.  That's like putting a Nikkor 43-86 mm zoom lense on
>>your M6 and wondering why your photos aren't sharp.  Like putting a Hundai
>>four cylinder engine in your BMW M5 and wondering why there's no
acceleration.
>
>Well, there are a couple of ways to look at Leica M pictures.  One is
>"I have the best lenses in the world and nothing shall stand between
>their magnificence and my final output".  The other is "Look at this
>great picture.  I would hate to entrust it to the tender mercies of a
>commercial lab - after all, I know what it's supposed to look like.
>And seeing as how I live in an apartment with scant room for an Omega
>D4, but I already have this computer..."  Have you ever seen the
>output from a decent scanner and an Epson Photo 750?  I have, and
>frankly, I don't care if I ever smell acetic acid again (except on a
>salad, of course).


Paul, you might want to subscribe to the Contax-G list.  They are just as
off-topic as the LUG, but their experts on scanning and computers state their
real life qualifications.  Plus their posters have not answered with "one
worders" such as "bark."

So why do I remain on this list?  What is the value of one good idea?  We
still have people with some sense such as Ted Grant.  I personally have seen
the work of Gary and Tina.  That generates thought such as "I can do that ...
I need to learn that ... what a great concept ... and jeez...don't do that."
In the 2-1/2 years I have been on the list, I have followed the advice of list
members as regards to how to integrate the M system and R system ... the
differences ... when to use one and when to use the other ... where to get
service on one's camera without eating your lunch.  It has been a valuable and
enlightening experience.  I hope that it returns to that type of status.
'Nuff said ... other than I would hate to think that new subscribers think the
list has always been what it appears to have become.

Bill Larsen