Re: Post Factory

Sandy,
Nice idea! To save on shipping costs sell it on the website. For sure I will
buy all issues in a pdf format.
Jacques

> Well, all I said was that the material deserves a wider audience, not that
> you should give it away. If there is commercial value and you want to take
> advantage of it I don't believe many would hold that against you. I don't
> disagree with you at all that people should get paid for their creative
> work.
>
> In fact, you might consider assembling all of the issues in a .pdf
> document and offer it for sale on your website, or somewhere else.
>
> Sandy
>
>
>
>
>
>>On Sun, 18 Sep 2005, Sandy King wrote:
>>
>>>I hope that eventually all of the issues of Post Factory will be made
>>>available in .pdf format. Post-Factory was a unique contribution to the
>>>literature of alternative photography and all of the issues were
>>>interesting and informative. The material really deserves a wider
>>>audience than that of the paying subscribers, which I was from beginning
>>>to end.
>>
>>While I certainly appreciate the endorsement (thank you!), I'm blessed if
>>I can understand why "the material deserves a wider audience than that of
>>paying subscribers."
>>
>>Which raises the question (similar to one asked 10 years ago on this very
>>list when the claim was made "knowledge should be free") of
>>why folks willing and able to spend, say, $5 plus shipping for a single
>>blank sheet of paper, that is, paper with nothing on either side, that
>>they may then proceed to wreck with a technical error or other
>>miscalculation, wouldn't spend approximately $4.50 + postage for 48 or
>>more pages covered with information, not mindlessly stamped out by
>>machine, but assembled painstakingly by others whose time (which they're
>>not making any more of) is more valuable than a piece of paper.
>>
>>Or, why do folks deserve NOT to pay for what others did pay for... isn't
>>information MORE valuable than, say, a latte, or a sheet of ultra deluxe
>>paper?
>>
>>And another point. The History of Photography list is doing a thread about
>>retrieving depth-of-field info from manuals printed ca 125 years ago.
>>Assuming there is a world with folks who can read, & life not reduced to
>>subaquatic organisms 125 years into the future, is there a prayer that
>>today's Internet info would still be readable on those systems? It will
>>almost certainly be lost, while a pile of National Geographics, or even
>>Post-Factory's moldering in an attic would be readible, that is, assuming
>>living creatures can still read, not regressed from global worming.
>>
>>But keeping the info either way -- in printed form by reformatting
>>remaining issues for digital reprint OR on website for PDF-- both are very
>>labor intensive... (Malin worked VERY hard to get #1 in PDF-- thank you
>>Malin!) Why should that labor be donated free to folks who don't care
>>enough to spend what is of course far less than the actual cost to
>>produce? (I, for instance have donated my time free these 6 or so years --
>>and actuarily speaking I have less of it left than most folks on this
>>list...) And of course contributors, including Sandy, to both P-F AND the
>>websites give their labor free...
>>
>>I don't blame folks for taking what's free, but I don't see why it's owed
>>them...
>>
>>Meanwhile -- although having Issue #1 on the alternative photography
>>website has been a godsend (thank you, Malin!), so far all but one of the
>>new subscribers who viewed it there, wanted the print version of #1 when
>>my bricks & mortar printer gets his digital machine re-re-refixed,
>>although I offered to pro-rate price and postage without it.
>>
>>But then these folks were actually paying "subscribers."
>>
>>I'll add that by cosmic coincidence, the same day as Sandy's e-mail, I got
>>an e-mail from Canada that a pack of issues had arrived (very far north),
>>adding, "I am so grateful that one can still obtain such a delightful
>>publication on real paper."
>>
>>But all these sources, real paper or virtual, are created by minds
>>contributing knowledge, experience and TIME (which in case I forgot to
>>mention, they're not making any more of) without pay. Websites in the
>>field are also, AFAIK, subsidised by labor of the site owner (among
>>others). And the formal intensive demanding labor of producing either a
>>website OR a publication in print cannot be compared to casual fragmented
>>discussion freely given on this list.
>>
>>(I do however wonder what, for instance, Phil Davis wrote for publication
>>gratis, while [ironically] reflecting on how much of HIS information is
>>now obsolete.)
>>
>>And I assume that approximately 450 pages of closely packed text are NOT
>>so easily whisked into PDF (Malin worked very hard on just one issue) and
>>don't see any particular reason to do so....Except of course expectations.
>>Folks have learned to expect website type information free, though not
>>sheets of *blank* paper.
>>
>>I have various problems ... but providing this material in other formats
>>isn't one of them. However, I do appreciate the compliment, as I daresay
>>do all contributors. Thank you.
>>
>>Judy
>
>
Received on Tue Sep 20 12:42:37 2005