I have two rolls of unexposed Kodachrome, one open and one boxed and sealed. I'm keeping these for use in photograhic talks. Has anyone else ever noticed the delicious smell of a freshly opened Kodak film?

Because it is a perfectly reasonable thing to discuss in the General Digital Photography section which I have just moved it to. Along with monitors, Photoshop and any of the other things we might want to use with our Pentax cameras.

It's no different than talking about film in relation to film cameras.

Purple fringing is something that can be over emphasised as a problem. I've seen some lenses which will look quite bad when pointed at bare branches against a bright sky, but in normal photography nothing is visible.

The K-5 has the ability to correct a Pentax DA or FA lens if you shoot in JPEG. If you shoot RAW then your RAW converter may well do the same.

Anyone who has an interest in photography is welcome here, the only proviso being that it's a support site for Pentax Users, so some things are off limits as we want to keep the site Pentax-orientated.

Those who post are posting their own opinions and do not represent PU policy.

Whatever the issue may be, it's time for it to settle down. Life's far too short for the forum to be filled with bickering that just wastes space and time.

If you guys have an issue please deal with it elsewhere.

Correct, there is a certain amount of depth of focus at the film/sensor plane. This allows for some error in the location of the film/sensor plane.

However, whereas smaller formats have more and more depth of field, they have less and less depth of focus. This means that smaller formats need higher standards of precision. This is where the 110 film cartridge and Kodak Disc formats fell down, with their cheap construction and tiny formats.

Just a thought, what do we think of the tag options on EPZ? Do they cover things better than the PU version?

Be careful where on the web you tell the world that you'll be away for 74 days...Facebook is notorious for being a burglars' information service, and it's possible someone could track down where you are from what you've posted so far.

I have seen someone offering monthly policies and it was one of the regular advertisers. Can't remember who though!

Classic photojournalism is attached to an article and does indeed tell a story, but then that isn't possible here on PU.

I would be concerned that too many categories, both in images and forum sections, simply confuses and pictures get posted all over the place just like in the forums messages get posted in the wrong places.

I personally don't see a problem tagging street photographs at photojournalism - what else are they than what Cartier-Bresson did so well? Was he a photojournalist?

Feel free to disagree, but let's have a clear idea why we create a new section or category.