OT: Rumour Control

[JonathanRyan]

This is the post I never wanted to make.

But I got an email update to this thread which contained a couple of inaccuracies which I wanted to clear up. I've put it in a new thread to avoid clogging that one up with what will be a long post....

He isn't posting anything on TP any more, he's had enough of being attacked by certain people, but I'm sure he will welcome anyone who wants to join his lighting workshop

That very sad that he's decided to do that, I hope it's not because I asked him not to post about the workshops!

As I understand it, he had pretty well decided that he didn't need the hassle of people attacking him on the forum and (completely falsely) accusing him of advertising for Lencarta, then your very clear request not to make that type of post added to his reasons not to continue.

My suggestion to him to NOT post such threads was to help stop the snide remarks that he was getting, so we lost 2 solid contributers to this part of forum - great.

Kind of. Obviously I was getting sick of every single lighting thread becoming a hopeless battle about who gets paid by whom and how cheap junk from eBay is almost certainly the same as any other brand. In fact, checking back, my last post on this site was just over a month ago when I said "seriously, I'm sick of this".

I then got wrapped up in a pretty heavy shooting week and didn't think much more about it. 4 days later I got a PM from a moderator. I wouldn't normally quote private correspondence but since it's already been referred to it's probably fair game.

can you please refrain from posting in a way that could be construed as advertising

That's a fair request. But I have 3 issues with it.

1. It's clear to me that anything can be construed as anything. If I remark on the lovely weather we're having then some people could take that as an advert for an outdoor photography workshop.

2. It's a lot more complicated than you think. Like many professional photographers, I have business relationships with many companies. Some of these are overt and can easily be declared in a 200 character sig that people don't read. Most are a lot more subtle. Take this picture from my last location shoot for example.

Let's work left to right.

Obviously that's a Lencarta folding stripbox. I love them and believe they are more useful for me than any comparable product at their price point. Occasionally the firm gives me money and that doesn't stop me saying stuff like
It's powered by an EID500 - I don' currently have a formal business relationship with Strobeam but I've never hidden my appreciation of their products. We're in talks
Lastolite tri-grip used as a diffuser. Dead handy piece of kit. If you're only packing one reflector then take this. AFAIK Lastolite have never yet given me money or free kit. Though it's possible. I really can't remember.
Model is Amber Foston who first modelled for me on a Lencarta training course - great model. You'd be well advised to book her if you're in Kent. Or you could come along to one of the courses. So I'm her pimp now.
Hair by Toni&Guy. Anybody who has ever met me will know they don't give me free haircuts. But their hair styling is pretty good.
Makeup by Emily Rose. She helps me out now and again on portfolio shoots for free. I've recommended her to several clients and she's been hired as a direct result of that on at least 3 occasions.
Gown is the gorgeous Esther by Madeline Isaac-James - designer is a personal friend and has also put a lot of business my way. Borrowed at very short notice from their Ashford boutique where they have my promotional cards and recommend me.
Cali Sunbounce. Only the second time I've used one but very impressed by these despite their high cost. I'm speaking at a conference next month and I believe they are sponsoring it. I'll be on the scrounge for freebies.
Some of the sensitive kit was lugged into the wood in a Hardigg Storm case. IMO better than a Peli. They gave it me free a few years ago. Largely I believe so I'd tell people how good they are.

So….9 companies involved and I have a business relationship with 7 of them. So I could never post a picture like that (or one of the finals in case people asked)

3. I don't honestly see why the fact that I occasionally get paid by Lencarta for specific tasks gives me fewer "rights" than any other forum member. Anybody is free to leave a review or mention that they have used and approve certain kit. But I'm asked not to say anything at all that may be construed as advertising. I know a little about studio lights. I'm actually planning to sell some Elinchroms. If somebody asks if Elys are any good (and they are) how could I possibly answer? So I'm not able to post on that thread.

A while ago, another lighting company known to this site asked me to sign an NDA restricting what I could say about their products in relation to others. There were (of course) benefits for me in signing - but I refused to be restricted in that way and never signed. There is certainly nothing in any contract I have with any supplier that requires me to praise their products or prohibits me from criticising them. People who have actually been on my courses or who have read some of the posts I've made here probably know this. Those who haven't may not.

But…..as I've said before, this isn't my forum and I'm not a moderator of it. I'm a guest here like everyone else. If I'm faced with a rule I don't like then I have 2 options: accept it or leave. Since I didn't see any way of complying with the request that wouldn't cause further problems I took the second option.

 

[Michael Sewell]

Hi Jonathan,

This highlights the problems for any professional on the forum, and whilst I also make use of a number of manufacturers equipment, there are those I like and will certainly help promote, and those I think are "lacking" and will say so.

I've noticed an increase in "flak" regarding who uses what, paid for by whom and for who's benefit. I'm seriously going to have to consider the context of everything I type and how it may be interpreted. Do I really have the time for that, and is it going to cripple my input to the forum.
The few tutorials I've posted in the "Copy me lighting technique" threads could still be interpreted as pimping threads, as I mention the brands used, and I earn money from the work.
I'm going to have to sit back and have a serious think about this.

 

[Matt]

you really should have just replied to my PM and discussed it further, but seeing as you decided to do it here...

The problem as you well know is that there is a small group of people who see the presense of lencarta as unholy, and that Garry or you posting about lencarta is advertising as you both contract to them on occasion. My request was to not post threads such as the 'this is what happens when someone else set ups the lights'(sic) - the thread started with

So yesterday I was running a training course for Lencarta. I don't shoot much on these courses, more sort of wave my arms and tease people.

you could have started that thread with

Yesterday I was hosting a training course
Yesterday was one of my traning days
Yesterday was another training day

all of those ways of starting dont mention Lencarta and would have set the thread off nicely for people to ask you questions - you could have posted it without the obvious Lencarta link. Garry then backed up the post with links to the next training days, this really didnt help the course of the thread. In hindsite we should have removed Garrys post, that would have helped.

1. It's clear to me that anything can be construed as anything. If I remark on the lovely weather we're having then some people could take that as an advert for an outdoor photography workshop.

Thats just silly though isnt it, nobody is that picky, this is a very specific topic that people were getting upset about.

2. It's a lot more complicated than you think. Like many professional photographers, I have business relationships with many companies. Some of these are overt and can easily be declared in a 200 character sig that people don't read. Most are a lot more subtle. Take this picture from my last location shoot for example.

*snip*
Let's work left to right.
So….9 companies involved and I have a business relationship with 7 of them. So I could never post a picture like that (or one of the finals in case people asked)

actually no, its easy, you say ' I did this training course' then if people ask questions about the image and how you've done it then thats different. By saying 'Running a training course for Lencarta' you're starting off on the back foot.

3. I don't honestly see why the fact that I occasionally get paid by Lencarta for specific tasks gives me fewer "rights" than any other forum member. Anybody is free to leave a review or mention that they have used and approve certain kit. But I'm asked not to say anything at all that may be construed as advertising. I know a little about studio lights. I'm actually planning to sell some Elinchroms. If somebody asks if Elys are any good (and they are) how could I possibly answer? So I'm not able to post on that thread.

You need to apply some common sense. I use several forums and answer questions on particular products that I manufacture, and have never once fallen foul of the rules on those forum because I know what the boundaries are. Do you honestly not see that you posting what you did, then Garry following up straight after looks like tag team advertising?

But…..as I've said before, this isn't my forum and I'm not a moderator of it. I'm a guest here like everyone else. If I'm faced with a rule I don't like then I have 2 options: accept it or leave. Since I didn't see any way of complying with the request that wouldn't cause further problems I took the second option

You've taken my request to the far extreme. You should have replied to my PM and opened a dialogue rather than assuming that all you say is an advert.

Everyone knows you work on occasion with lencarta, its in your signature, all Im asking is for a little commen sense to be applied when posting about your activities - I really didnt see that it was that much of a problem to do.

 

[Matt]

Hi Jonathan,

This highlights the problems for any professional on the forum, and whilst I also make use of a number of manufacturers equipment, there are those I like and will certainly help promote, and those I think are "lacking" and will say so.

I've noticed an increase in "flak" regarding who uses what, paid for by whom and for who's benefit. I'm seriously going to have to consider the context of everything I type and how it may be interpreted. Do I really have the time for that, and is it going to cripple my input to the forum.
The few tutorials I've posted in the "Copy me lighting technique" threads could still be interpreted as pimping threads, as I mention the brands used, and I earn money from the work.
I'm going to have to sit back and have a serious think about this.

I dont think you quite understand what the problem is. If Jonathon was mentioning any other brands, no-one would bat an eyelid, its because he mentioned Lencarta and then Garry followed up. Go and read the thread in question and you'll see what i mean.

there is an undercurrent toward Lencarta, and unfortunately Jonathon got caught up in the crossfire. I simply asked him to be more careful in what he posts - I didnt edit or remove his posts, nor have I done that with any of them.. You need to go and talk to the people who were getting on his case in that thread and see why they choose to pick on lencarta. There is absolutely no need for you to modify your posting style or limit your contributions to the forum.

 

[arad85]

By saying 'Running a training course for Lencarta' you're starting off on the back foot.

I read that thread from the start and interpreted this as being up front. Rather than saying "I ran this training course" and then 3 posts down say "oh, we were using Lencarta lights" when someone asked, I thought it got the association with Jonathans well known business links out of the way quickly. The cynic in me would have been much more offended with the indirect third post semi-advertising Lencarta. And no, I don't even know Jonathan nor do I own any Lencarta products...

Just shows how people take and view things differently doesn't it

 

[ShawWellPete]

I read that thread from the start and interpreted this as being up front. Rather than saying "I ran this training course" and then 3 posts down say "oh, we were using Lencarta lights" when someone asked, I thought it got the association with Jonathans well known business links out of the way quickly.

:shrug:

 

[Michael Sewell]

I dont think you quite understand what the problem is. If Jonathon was mentioning any other brands, no-one would bat an eyelid, its because he mentioned Lencarta and then Garry followed up. Go and read the thread in question and you'll see what i mean.

there is an undercurrent toward Lencarta, and unfortunately Jonathon got caught up in the crossfire. I simply asked him to be more careful in what he posts - I didnt edit or remove his posts, nor have I done that with any of them.. You need to go and talk to the people who were getting on his case in that thread and see why they choose to pick on lencarta. There is absolutely no need for you to modify your posting style or limit your contributions to the forum.

Hi Matty,

Actually, I do understand
I had followed that thread from the outset, and yes, I can see the "tag team" inference being pounced on by the few you've allured to previously. I'm also aware of the ongoing brand war yadda yadda yadda

My reason for sitting back and thinking (A little early for it at the moment!) is the fact that as a pro, I really don't want to fall into the same trap that Jonathan has trodden in. Your advice to Jonathan regarding his choice of words certainly clarifies the problem from the forums side and it is that sort of thing I will have to be mindful of.
As you said, a bland statement that invites questions cannot really cause offence, and opens up the discussion further.

As I shoot the Wedding Brochure images for a number of hotel chains, including the Hilton, Lavendar and Marriott groups, I'm mindful not to offend any of them by pushing any of their competitors too openly. I think it's a fair assumption to say something similar should be applied to my writing here. To push is one thing, but to be asked is entirely different.

Oddly enough, it was the other thread that influenced my decision to provide a link to the explanation of how a particular look was achieved at a shoot that had been mentioned by Garry two weeks earlier, rather than type it into the actual thread.

It was also to feature in the "Copy me lighting technique" thread, once I get ten minutes free

Anyway, in summary, forethought with regard to posts is far better than fire fighting or hindsight.
And no pimping

lol, sorry, couldn't resist

 

[Matt]

I read that thread from the start and interpreted this as being up front. Rather than saying "I ran this training course" and then 3 posts down say "oh, we were using Lencarta lights" when someone asked, I thought it got the association with Jonathans well known business links out of the way quickly. The cynic in me would have been much more offended with the indirect third post semi-advertising Lencarta. And no, I don't even know Jonathan nor do I own any Lencarta products...

Just shows how people take and view things differently doesn't it

I think if it was any other brand, there would not have been a problem at all. Forums are all about inviting discussion, sometimes leading posts can generate a huge amount of discussion. Personally I think not mentioning the brand would have stopped the replies that followed, that was the problem, the badgering that Jonathon has gotten from certain quarters.

Michael, yes, you understand where im coming from, thank you.. I'll nick that To push is one thing, but to be asked is entirely different if you dont mind, that sums it up perfectly.

 

[Michael Sewell]

Michael, yes, you understand where im coming from, thank you.. I'll nick that To push is one thing, but to be asked is entirely different if you dont mind, that sums it up perfectly.

Seeing as it's you, I'll waiver the royalties

 

[srichards]

A simple disclaimer with 'other brands of lighting equipment are available' would solve the issue wouldn't it?

 

[Michael Sewell]

A simple disclaimer with 'other brands of lighting equipment are available' would solve the issue wouldn't it?

Possibly not with some of the dedicated souls manning the ak-ak guns

Worth bearing in mind though

 

[Garry Edwards]

My own take on this is that photography is possibly the only subject that attracts this level of accusations of pimping, and the only one too where people actually care about the equipment that's being used. My guess is that this is probably because a lot of people care too much about the equipment and not enough about the knowledge needed to get the best from it, and because the whole thing is subjective, with some people raving about shots that I personally would send straight to trash, and some people failing to appreciate shots that are extremely well done. My own hobby is shooting and the people who take part in the various shooting sports don't give a damn about which make of gun, cartridge, welly boot or earplugs other people use - people are judged on whether they hit the target or not, nothing else matters simply because it isn't subjective - it's people who influence results and everyone can see that, unlike photography where although again it's the people who get the results, it's easier perhaps for other people to blame their equipment for their own lack of results.

Photography is my career. I'm not interested in equipment for its own sake, all I'm interested in is whether or not it's the right tool for the job. I will happily use any equipment of any make, as long as it does the job for me, and people who have been to my studio have seen that for themselves.

As far as forums are concerned, I always try to answer questions honestly. Sometimes that involves saying that a particular piece of equipment is junk (most of the stuff sold on Fleabay) and sometimes it involves recommending a specific item by Bowens, Elincrom, Lencarta, Profoto etc (note the strict alphabetical sequence) but I do sometimes lose patience when it's clear that some people think that I'm knocking the junk just so that I can promote Lencarta - which is never true. And for some reason I never seem to get slated for suggesting one of the other makes as a solution, the critics only jump in if I mention Lencarta.

So why do I bother? Good question!
I don't need this forum and neither does Lencarta. I don't need Lencarta and they don't need me, we all managed perfectly well before we met each other and can manage perfectly well without each other.

Whether Jonathan continues to post on this forum or not, I'm sure he will continue to be paid for Lencarta for running the monthly lighting workshops. He never has and never will be paid for promoting particular products, and he is perfectly free to recommend products made by other firms too - why can't some of the readers on this forum understand the principle of professional integrity?

I don't have any issues with the forum, just with some of the people who post on here, who seem to have convinced themselves that they are fighting against a mythical conspiracy that exists only in their imagination. People who do this end up driving away useful members who don't want to read their twaddle, and sometimes end up driving themselves away too.

Professionals seem to occupy a strange place in photography. In just about any other field, professionals are accepted as experts in their own right, but when it comes to photography they seem to fall into one of two very different camps - either they can do no wrong because they have a fan following or they can do no right because they're 'lucky' enough to get paid for what they do and are perceived to have the best equipment etc. In reality, photography professionals are just like everyone else, some are excellent at certain things, some are pretty poor at everything, some are successful and some barely manage to scrape a living. But nearly all are people who can be trusted to give honest opinions about the equipment they use, who can be trusted to disclose any vested interests that they may happen to have (and all pros benefit from gifts, long term equipment loans etc so all of us are likely to be accused of having vested interests). And just about everyone has some speciality or another, so is likely to be better at some things and worse at others than some other people - but they are all likely to have a lot of knowledge that they can share with others on forums, so it's a great pity when good people are driven away from forums because of accusations and suspicions.

A simple disclaimer with 'other brands of lighting equipment are available' would solve the issue wouldn't it?

Why is that necessary and how would it help? Everyone knows that other brands of light are available - and why should a professional in any field need to cover himself in this way?

Garry then backed up the post with links to the next training days, this really didnt help the course of the thread. In hindsite we should have removed Garrys post, that would have helped.

Yes Matty, there was a reference there to future Lencarta lighting workshops, but my post also contained info that I thought was useful

The number of times I've read rubbish on t'internet and in books about setting a hairlight say half a stop more than the overall lighting, when in the real world it depends on
1. The effect you want to achieve
2. The type/quality of the hair - is it in good condition? Natural blonde or suicide blond? afro? There can be 5 stops difference between afro and natural blond in terms of the amount of power needed...

You can delete anything that you might think could possibly lead to someone asking a possible question about a perceived ulterior motive, but you'll end up with a forum reminiscent of a political party broadcast, that contains nothing of any real use, nothing that can be trusted and that excludes everyone with any personality.

 

[ChrisMClark]

My own take on this is that photography is possibly the only subject that attracts this level of accusations of pimping, and the only one too where people actually care about the equipment that's being used...

I understand your thinking Garry, but it's by no means an issue esclusive to photography. I'm a professional musician, and there are gear-tarts aplenty in this field. I know many other drummers who flatly refuse to accept there are any other viable alternatives to Pearl (I'm a DW & Premier man myself ) and do their best to beat down on every other manufacturer. The same is true of many other musicians. I am, however, very fortunate not to have to work with any of those people, and in my experience it's often the pro's that don't really give a rat's arse about the name on their Cornet, whether it be Besson, Jupiter or Smith-Watkins, but rather are interested in how well it works. I've seen you mention other brands before Garry, and whilst I'll admit you're not the first to jump in with suggestions for other brands, you don't mind putting it 'out there'.

I really fail to see what everyone gets so ****ed off about. I bang on and on about how much I love my Lastolite Lumen8s, nobody cares, nobody complains that I must be on Lastolite's payroll (although I hope to be this time next year ) . Why can't we all just get along?

 

[Garry Edwards]

I understand your thinking Garry, but it's by no means an issue esclusive to photography. I'm a professional musician, and there are gear-tarts aplenty in this field. I know many other drummers who flatly refuse to accept there are any other viable alternatives to Pearl (I'm a DW & Premier man myself ) and do their best to beat down on every other manufacturer. The same is true of many other musicians..

Yes, but again the quality of music is subjective, just like photography. Personally, I think that 'Men of Harlech' sung by a good Welsh male voice choir constitutes good music but you may not agree

The point I'm trying to make is that pros such as Jonathan should never be attacked on forums because they express honest opinions. There is simply no justification for it.

 

[Matt]

The point I'm trying to make is that pros such as Jonathan should never be attacked on forums because they express honest opinions. There is simply no justification for it.

Quite right. Sadly some people are out to cause problems. I was trying to help Jonathon but he didnt take it that way.

 

[Matt]

You can delete anything that you might think could possibly lead to someone asking a possible question about a perceived ulterior motive, but you'll end up with a forum reminiscent of a political party broadcast, that contains nothing of any real use, nothing that can be trusted and that excludes everyone with any personality.

We won't do that though. We only delete what we think crosses the line. The thread referenced to still contains both posts as posted, no editing has taken place as I don't think there was any need to do so. I COULD have stopped a lot of the snide remarks in that thread by removing your post but didn't, even after the event.

Now that we've all made our points I think this is done. You'll notice no comments from any of the people who cause the bother. I think maybe it's best to just ignore them and get on with it, just think about it a little before posting and you can't go wrong!

 

[ChrisMClark]

Personally, I think that 'Men of Harlech' sung by a good Welsh male voice choir constitutes good music but you may not agree

I think that constitutes torture A nice fully scored instrumental arrangement is a different matter And if you've never been fortunate enough to see a massed band playing 'Sons of the Brave' on the hoof then you've missed out

I'm staying out of this now, I think I've misunderstood it all slightly, and I'm in too good a mood. Easter Leave baby!

Incidentally, I'll be using my Lumen8s (AKA the best flashes in the world ) this week as I shoot my mother's entire dancing school. 3 full days of screaming kids....did I do something terrible in a past life?

 

[itsdavedotnet]

Sad that Jonathan's leaving - I'm not aware of ANY time that I've ever felt that he's come even close to the line between normal posting, and advertising. Garry has occasionally (not slating you, just saying...it's happened), and these have been deleted or edited by the powers that be, as and when appropriate. Jonathan's ALWAYS come across purely as keen to help and good at what he does, and he's always come across as professional enough to never be needlessly or shamelessly plugging ANYTHING.

With Jonathan, it was always clear that he was just a freelancer doing your workshops and working at focus, and no more.

So John, come back, it was reassuring to see an active and involved wedding photographer who saw weddings and portraits as just the start of what they could do

 

[HoppyUK]

We won't do that though. We only delete what we think crosses the line. The thread referenced to still contains both posts as posted, no editing has taken place as I don't think there was any need to do so. I COULD have stopped a lot of the snide remarks in that thread by removing your post but didn't, even after the event.

Now that we've all made our points I think this is done. You'll notice no comments from any of the people who cause the bother. I think maybe it's best to just ignore them and get on with it, just think about it a little before posting and you can't go wrong!

I don't know if that includes me, I have only just seen this, but since I posted on the thread referred to here, I suspect it does.

I have no objection to either Jonathan or Garry posting anything at all, I just think it's important for everyone, including newcomers and those who browse here, to know where posters are coming from. That's not questioning their intergrity or honesty for a moment, it's just transparency. And I think that's important in business. If nobody has anything to hide, and by all accounts they do not, then where's the problem?

If anyone has a business interest in something they're posting about, that should be made clear. Jonathan and Garry do have an interest, and I don't think it is always clear. I can live with that, I'm not moderating this site and I have to say that I think Matty and co do a damn good job. You can't please everyone all the time, but I do think that the airing that this subject has been given this time around, has been beneficial.

So Jonathan has been quiet for a while. Well, that's his decision. We have also lost other good posters from the other side of the fence, like Kris, because of this issue. Also his decision.

You're still stuck with me though And for the record, in the last week I have refrained from posting on five threads where I think I could have said something helpful (nothing to do with Lencarata or lighting) but would have ended up promoting in some small way the magazines that I write for. So I didn't. Easy really.

 

[Garry Edwards]

If anyone has a business interest in something they're posting about, that should be made clear. Jonathan and Garry do have an interest, and I don't think it is always clear.

With respect, that isn't right.
Jonathan doesn't have an interest, other than that he runs a few of the Lencarta lighting workshops. He gets paid for that of course, but he doesn't get paid for promoting them and has no need to promote them. He is paid for his time and expertise, and the amount of his payment is fixed so he has no financial reason to do anything that results in bookings for them.
And his signature clearly states that he runs them on behalf of Lencarta, so that's the transparency taken care of.

I am much more heavily involved with Lencarta, but again I gain no financial benefit from filling up these lighting workshops or from increasing any other sales. I do have a very small shareholding but have never derived any financial benefit from it, so again I don't have a financial interest. And again, my signature clearly states my involvement, and because my signature doesn't appear on every post, TP added "Lencarta customer services" under "Advertiser" so again, that's the transparency taken care of.

 

[Matt]

I don't know if that includes me, I have only just seen this, but since I posted on the thread referred to here, I suspect it does.

I have no objection to either Jonathan or Garry posting anything at all, I just think it's important for everyone, including newcomers and those who browse here, to know where posters are coming from. That's not questioning their intergrity or honesty for a moment, it's just transparency. And I think that's important in business. If nobody has anything to hide, and by all accounts they do not, then where's the problem?

If anyone has a business interest in something they're posting about, that should be made clear. Jonathan and Garry do have an interest, and I don't think it is always clear. I can live with that, I'm not moderating this site and I have to say that I think Matty and co do a damn good job. You can't please everyone all the time, but I do think that the airing that this subject has been given this time around, has been beneficial.

So Jonathan has been quiet for a while. Well, that's his decision. We have also lost other good posters from the other side of the fence, like Kris, because of this issue. Also his decision.

You're still stuck with me though And for the record, in the last week I have refrained from posting on five threads where I think I could have said something helpful (nothing to do with Lencarata or lighting) but would have ended up promoting in some small way the magazines that I write for. So I didn't. Easy really.

I didnt mean you, but as youre here, you can take the blame

Jonathon has added to his signature that he does lighting courses for lencarta, and we added to Garrys, im not sure that we can really do anything else to make members aware of it.

For the record, you can mention the magazine you write for, you get paid to write as a freelancer or on salary, you dont collect monies for each sale (or do you )

 

[HoppyUK]

With respect, that isn't right.
Jonathan doesn't have an interest, other than that he runs a few of the Lencarta lighting workshops. He gets paid for that of course, but he doesn't get paid for promoting them and has no need to promote them. He is paid for his time and expertise, and the amount of his payment is fixed so he has no financial reason to do anything that results in bookings for them.
And his signature clearly states that he runs them on behalf of Lencarta, so that's the transparency taken care of.

I am much more heavily involved with Lencarta, but again I gain no financial benefit from filling up these lighting workshops or from increasing any other sales. I do have a very small shareholding but have never derived any financial benefit from it, so again I don't have a financial interest. And again, my signature clearly states my involvement, and because my signature doesn't appear on every post, TP added "Lencarta customer services" under "Advertiser" so again, that's the transparency taken care of.

What isn't right? That you and Jonathan have an interest, or that it isn't clear?

And with respect to you, on the interest, that obviously is right; and on the clarity bit, that is open to opinion. It has been improved, but it seems to me that the simplest solution would be for you to post about Lencarta business under your other 'Lencarta' user name that already exists.

I didnt mean you, but as youre here, you can take the blame

Jonathon has added to his signature that he does lighting courses for lencarta, and we added to Garrys, im not sure that we can really do anything else to make members aware of it.

For the record, you can mention the magazine you write for, you get paid to write as a freelancer or on salary, you dont collect monies for each sale (or do you )

Happy to take the, erm, credit Matty And thanks for listening and doing what you can. Can't ask for more than that really

 

[Garry Edwards]

What isn't right? That you and Jonathan have an interest, or that it isn't clear?

And with respect to you, on the interest, that obviously is right; and on the clarity bit, that is open to opinion. It has been improved, but it seems to me that the simplest solution would be for you to post about Lencarta business under your other 'Lencarta' user name that already exists.



Happy to take the, erm, credit Matty And thanks for listening and doing what you can. Can't ask for more than that really

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this Richard - you're entitled to your views and I'm entitled to mine.
I maintain that I have no vested interest whatever. Lencarta pay me a fixed sum to carry out various tasks for them, I repeat I am not in any way expected to promote their goods or services, and gain no financial benefit from doing so. Jonathan is paid on the same basis - a fixed amount for the work that he does, which normally amounts to 1 day per month, hosting the lighting workshops. Again, he is not expected to promote anything on behalf of the Company. Lencarta is one of his clients, just as they are one of mine.

As for clarity, I don't believe that it could be any more clear than it already is. I believe that your own involvement with printed media may have led you to believe that the practice that is invariably followed with printed media, which includes 'Advertiser's Announcement' or similar whenever an advertorial is published, should apply to forums too. I disagree, because there is a very real possibility that a lot of the people who go into W.H. Smiths and buy a copy of a photography magazine would be totally unaware of my involvement with a specific manufacturer simply because they are not regular readers of that title, but in contrast people who read this forum are very likely to be aware of my involvement, and even if they are not, they only have to read my signature for that involvement to be obvious to them.

And why don't I

post about Lencarta business under your other 'Lencarta' user name that already exists.

? Because I don't have another user name. The Lencarta user name belongs to Lencarta, not to me, which means that it is ONLY used specifically to advertise Lencarta products. I can't use it without obtaining prior permission, and as my stats show that, on average, I make 2.88 posts per day, it would be impractical to get prior permission from the Company to use their username 2.88 times every day - as well as unnecessary.

Personally, I think the whole thing has become very silly and very personal. Any member seems to be welcome to praise or condemn any product, provided (I presume) that the admins don't feel that there is an ulterior motive. I don't have any kind of problem with that, what I do have a problem with is that when someone like Jonathan or myself makes any kind of comment that involves the suitability of a piece of equipment for a specific purpose, someone usually jumps in and either complains or makes an unpleasant comment.

 

[HoppyUK]

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this Richard - you're entitled to your views and I'm entitled to mine.
I maintain that I have no vested interest whatever. Lencarta pay me a fixed sum to carry out various tasks for them, I repeat I am not in any way expected to promote their goods or services, and gain no financial benefit from doing so. Jonathan is paid on the same basis - a fixed amount for the work that he does, which normally amounts to 1 day per month, hosting the lighting workshops. Again, he is not expected to promote anything on behalf of the Company. Lencarta is one of his clients, just as they are one of mine.

As for clarity, I don't believe that it could be any more clear than it already is. I believe that your own involvement with printed media may have led you to believe that the practice that is invariably followed with printed media, which includes 'Advertiser's Announcement' or similar whenever an advertorial is published, should apply to forums too. I disagree, because there is a very real possibility that a lot of the people who go into W.H. Smiths and buy a copy of a photography magazine would be totally unaware of my involvement with a specific manufacturer simply because they are not regular readers of that title, but in contrast people who read this forum are very likely to be aware of my involvement, and even if they are not, they only have to read my signature for that involvement to be obvious to them.

And why don't I ? Because I don't have another user name. The Lencarta user name belongs to Lencarta, not to me, which means that it is ONLY used specifically to advertise Lencarta products. I can't use it without obtaining prior permission, and as my stats show that, on average, I make 2.88 posts per day, it would be impractical to get prior permission from the Company to use their username 2.88 times every day - as well as unnecessary.

Personally, I think the whole thing has become very silly and very personal. Any member seems to be welcome to praise or condemn any product, provided (I presume) that the admins don't feel that there is an ulterior motive. I don't have any kind of problem with that, what I do have a problem with is that when someone like Jonathan or myself makes any kind of comment that involves the suitability of a piece of equipment for a specific purpose, someone usually jumps in and either complains or makes an unpleasant comment.

Just speaking for myself here, I would just like to make it clear that anything I have said is absolutey not personal. I have nothing against you Garry at all, and when we spoke recently I think I said that Jonathan was a pretty good chap too.

And strange though it may sound in the context of all this, I don't have anything against Lencarta either. I have always said nice things about them, and will continue to do so.

The only point that I, at least, want to make, is one of transparency. Nothing more. Not particularly what is said, or by whom, about brand X or Y, but the context and the interest that may be behind it. As a point of principle and of good practise.

I also don't want to make a problem out of something that isn't a problem. I think that Lencarta has overstepped the mark from time to time - some people agree with me, others don't. That's fine, but either way I hope it's behind us now.

 

[Michael Sewell]

Bear in mind, it's not how we perceive our own actions or inaction that is important, but how they are perceived by others.

 

[Byker28i]

Jonathan

Since you mentioned that picture. As a 'normal' photographer, I'd have no idea of the brands of kit in that picture but I would however learn lots from the setup. To that looks like the use of a stripbox and two reflectors (one golden?).

Now maybe to the pedantics (and as we know there's lots of them on the internet) they'd identify the kit, but does that mean you have to in an initial post? Sure if someone asks what you used and why that shouldn't be an issue.

Incidentally - why the stripbox as against a square softbox? Does it restrict light to just the bride and dress?

Personally it'll be a shame to lose professional people showing their results and setups.

p.s. hope you didn't trample too many bluebells

 

[JonathanRyan]

You see, this is exactly why I never wanted to write this thread.

Yes, I could have had a long chat with Matty about boundaries and sensible ways of phrasing things, reviewed this every time I forged a new business relationship and looked over my shoulder at every post and still have upset people who couldn't read declarations of interest....or I could just choose not to post.

Simple life for me.

To end on a positive note....

@Byker....

Stripbox because roughly it's the shape of the thing I want to light. So light goes all over model and not so much elsewhere. I've also pulled back the outer diffuser from the top so slightly more light goes on her face than her body (that effect is hardly noticeable on the pull back at web res)

The Lastolite reflector is being used as a diffuser. There was far too much sun on the dress to record detail and Jo is flagging some of it for me. I deliberately left the slash of light. The fact that it looks like a heart in some images is a happy accident.

The Cali Sunbounce is being used with a silver panel instead of my usual zebra/sunfire because (1) it's not mine and Ian only has silver or white (2) shadows are kind of blue and so is silver so it looks more natural in a deeply wooded area. One of those occasions where it's better to capture a fairly neutral scene and warm it up in post of you want.

The sunbounce is far better then the Latolite for this because it's much more rigid and doesn't flop in the breeze.

No we didn't trample bluebells - each shooting position had carefully planned access routes (one way in/one way out) to avoid damage and of course preserve the scene for the pictures.

You can see more including the BTS video here. http://peoplebyryan.com/weddings/among-the-bluebells

Bye.

 

[Yardbent]

so yet another loss from TP

I joined TP to learn - and a bit of fun
if a ''Pro'' assists me in this, on the forum, I dont give a toss who he works for...

yes I read the original post - ALL the participants on the lighting courses learnt a lot
so where the hell is the harm..........:shrug:

and I dont really care for your replies - all the ''holier-than-thou'' brigade are once again spoiling it for the membership

If you mention your magazine, post your wedding, comment on your business,
C&C your website, post your latest client Portraits, .............you are all guilty of advertising....:razz:

 

[Jerm]

Most people use forum membership to learn and to exchange ideas, be it the 'never picked up a camera before' right through to the veteran running they're own business.

I'd be surprised if the vast majority of the pro's on here don't have some kind of link or tie in with a manufacturer or a supplier in some shape or form. That can be as inconsequental a small discount through to full blown sponsorship. That's the reality of business life.

It is neither practical nor in many cases possible to declare interests before commenting on or giving advice. To assume that readers can't differentiate between blatant advertising and genuine postings smacks to me of a nanny state. Actually, as said before, most don't actually care as long as the posting is infomative.

Jonathan has made it very clear in his signature that he has an occasional tie in with Lencarta. He neither has to apologise for it nor does he have to preface every comment or posting that he makes with a reminder.

IMO he has been the model of propriety in his postings.

Yes the moderators have a difficult task but they are trying to control boundaries that they themselves have set, which are of course open to interpretation.

However, IMHO the moderators also have a duty to moderate comments and attacks from people who have a their own agendas or who wish to make their own interpretations of the rules and boundaries.

Failure to do so means that popular and informative postings by professionals will cease. I've seen this on a number of other sites.

The forums need input from people like Jonathan. Jonathan on the other hand does not need the forum...

 

[Matt]

Most people use forum membership to learn and to exchange ideas, be it the 'never picked up a camera before' right through to the veteran running they're own business.

I'd be surprised if the vast majority of the pro's on here don't have some kind of link or tie in with a manufacturer or a supplier in some shape or form. That can be as inconsequental a small discount through to full blown sponsorship. That's the reality of business life.

It is neither practical nor in many cases possible to declare interests before commenting on or giving advice. To assume that readers can't differentiate between blatant advertising and genuine postings smacks to me of a nanny state. Actually, as said before, most don't actually care as long as the posting is infomative.

Jonathan has made it very clear in his signature that he has an occasional tie in with Lencarta. He neither has to apologise for it nor does he have to preface every comment or posting that he makes with a reminder.

IMO he has been the model of propriety in his postings.

Yes the moderators have a difficult task but they are trying to control boundaries that they themselves have set, which are of course open to interpretation.

However, IMHO the moderators also have a duty to moderate comments and attacks from people who have a their own agendas or who wish to make their own interpretations of the rules and boundaries.

Failure to do so means that popular and informative postings by professionals will cease. I've seen this on a number of other sites.

The forums need input from people like Jonathan. Jonathan on the other hand does not need the forum...

We have been moderating posts and threads though. I've told others to stop the comments against and they leave, I ask Jonathon to be careful and he leaves. We cant win.

Personally I think Jonathon is overreacting to something that seems to be pretty straightforward, I dont have time to read every post and would expect adults to be able to post without me having to come along and wipe up after them. All I'm asking for from Jonathon is some commen sense to be applied when posting About workshops. Obviously the easy way out is to just leave, so the haters win and we all lose.

 

[lofcuk]

I am confused is Nikon better than Canon?

 

[Garry Edwards]

Let's be clear about this, the first person to make any negative comments in the original thread was Hoppy UK. These concerns were addressed but didn't satisfy Richard, who seems to me to be honest and well-intentioned but who I believe feels that the disclosure protocols followed in the photographic titles should apply to forums too.

Then kiteninja expressed concerns too, but he didn't join in until post 34, long after Jonathan had made it clear that he was sick of these attacks (post 16). OK, Kris made a cryptic post (after he had resigned) but basically it was all about one man, all of the other posts on that thread were either positive, neutral or on topic. I may be wrong about that, possibly there were other posts that were deleted. In fact I probably am wrong, because Matty said to Richard

I didnt mean you, but as youre here, you can take the blame

- but that's how it looks to me.

Jeremy has made a number of what I think are good points in this thread, including this one

Yes the moderators have a difficult task but they are trying to control boundaries that they themselves have set, which are of course open to interpretation.

Sometimes, knowing exactly what those boundaries are can be difficult, even for people like me who have a business relationship with the site and who post frequently. In fact, although I think that I now know what I am and am not allowed to post, I've only just learned it. As I understand it, I can post something about Lencarta in response to a direct question, e.g. if someone asks which Lencarta product is suitable for their needs then I can link to a Lencarta product. Anyone who isn't connected to a supplier (however tenuous that connection may be, for example in Jonathan's case) can say anything they like about any product.

I was an admin on a very large site for several years, the rules there were very strict but were clearly laid out for everyone to see and it was pretty well impossible for anyone to break them innocently. I'm now an admin on another photography forum where the rules are equally simple although very different - you can post advertising material freely, as long as it goes into the 'Trade announcements' forum. If you put it anywhere else an admin will move it there.

All forums have their own flavour, their own policies and their own rules. The problem, for a user, can be knowing what they are, so nobody should be surprised if people sometimes innocently break rules that they didn't know about and get a bit ****ed off when they are taken to task over it, or if they are accused of breaking rules that may not even exist.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, for the last time. If any publication of any type restricts what people can and cannot say to the point where the most valuable of them decides that it's all too much hassle, then all they will be left with is the people who ask questions - there will be nobody left to answer them. And the publication will end up looking like Hansard, and with about as many readers.

Anyway, I'm tired of this now. It's a lovely day and I'm going shooting.
I'm taking my Browning shotgun, it's beautifully engineered and fits me perfectly. I don't think that any shotgun costing less than about 5K can beat the Browning.
I'll take my Hunter wellies too, although I probably won't need them this weather. Hunter wellies are the only ones that I can wear all day comfortably.
I'll be taking a couple of hundred Claybuster cartridges with me, they're 100% reliable and I didn't have to go to a shop and buy them, so that's another reason for using them... The advert on my Belstaff shooting vest says "Hull cartridge Company" but they haven't given me any cartridges for a while.
And I'll be driving there in my Ford Maverick, which like most of my gear I had to pay for myself. It's a bit of a truck but perfect for the off road use I need it for - I'm not good enough for BMW to give me one of the X5's but even if they did I'd only drive it to the entrance and then get a lift in a real 4x4 from there as the X5 can get stuck in the car park, and there isn't a car park there.
And you know, nobody there will see anything wrong with the logos, or the fact that I make those equipment choices... OK, I'm not a top shooter but a few of the people I'll be shooting against are 100% sponsored, everything is donated or loaned to them but they'll be accepted for who they are and what they can achieve, not judged against some hard to define theoretical standard.

 

[Byker28i]

Jonathan, thanks for the clarification. Having never used a stripbox I guessed at it's usage but it's nice to have my thoughts confirmed.
Cheers for the detailed response.

 

[Matt]

Let's be clear about this, the first person to make any negative comments in the original thread was Hoppy UK. These concerns were addressed but didn't satisfy Richard, who seems to me to be honest and well-intentioned but who I believe feels that the disclosure protocols followed in the photographic titles should apply to forums too.

All forums have their own flavour, their own policies and their own rules. The problem, for a user, can be knowing what they are, so nobody should be surprised if people sometimes innocently break rules that they didn't know about and get a bit ****ed off when they are taken to task over it, or if they are accused of breaking rules that may not even exist.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, for the last time. If any publication of any type restricts what people can and cannot say to the point where the most valuable of them decides that it's all too much hassle, then all they will be left with is the people who ask questions - there will be nobody left to answer them. And the publication will end up looking like Hansard, and with about as many readers.
.

2 points, we're all bored of this now but I must address them

I though jonathon was getting fed up of all the comments, not just the one thread? Make your minds up, it's one thread or lots.

Secondly, we don't restrict what people can and can't say unless they are advertisers. I've reread the thread that kicked all this off, there are a lot of posters in that who should be ashamed of their behaviour, but in all honesty it's still reads like a tag team advert at the start, and that is what people object to. It would be very easy for jonathon to continue to post on this forum without falling foul of any rules, they are not that hard to follow.

This other forum of yours Garry, the dedicated trader area, we have one of those, I don't really think you would want all your posts to have to go there, you didn't want to have a dedicated like digirev, so you have to follow the rules that are set for the lighting forum.

For everyone else, any more of this antilencarta ******** and there will be some heavy handed modding going on. This unrest is being caused by grown men who should know better - very final warning.