" 

 :::Yes, do please source some more of the statements. See the subsections below: a lot of issues have got jumbled up within this section, which threatens to grow to inordinate length; so let's separate them.      

 ===the expertise, or not, of User:Hoary=== 

 Question raised above: What makes [Hoary] such the expert? 

 I do not claim to be an expert. Please evaluate my questions, comments, etc, on their merits, or lack thereof. If a comment of mine merits a peremptory response, feel free to give it one.     

 ===Awards=== 

 Me: Article lists awards, but most aren't sourced. They either should be disinterestedly sourced (cf this) or should go. 

 Response: All one has to do is go to those sites, dig even the tiniest amount to find the proof, or allow us to display the award on Wiki, we'd be happy to allow that, do you want a pic of the awards?  if every award in wiki needs to be source to the level Hoary would require, i can point to multiple other photography listings that are not sourced at all and therefore they should ALL be removed. [...] 

 No, not photos of the awards. 

 Yes, every assertion of an award in Wikipedia needs to be reliably sourced. Yes, many are indeed poorly sourced. These should all be removed or sourced. If you find a section (e.g. a list of awards) that's unsourced, feel free to add ""{{Unreferencedsection}}"" to the top of it. If you find items that are unsourced within a patchily sourced list, feel free to add ""{{Fact}}"" to each that's unsourced. It would be much appreciated by all if you put some effort into sourcing them yourself, rather as I sourced the exhibition for cited in this article. If what's labeled as unsourced remains unsourced for some time (just how long being a matter for your own discretion), then remove it.  

 I have done some digging for evidence of the awards mentioned in this article, and, for whatever reason, have failed. If you can do better, yes, please do so.     

 ===8×10, and Adams=== 

 Article says: He uses the same type of camera Ansel Adams used, primarily the 8x10 large format film camera. 

 Me: If this means something other than that he uses view cameras, I'd like to know what it means, and to have evidence for this. In the meantime, I don't understand the need for a reference to Adams here. 

 Response: in the article by Outdoor Photographer (the preeminent experts in this field here in the US - which arguably makes them the largest in the world for this type of publication) they state that the torch has passed from Ansel.  Given that there are very few full time professional photographers using an 8x10 film camera, as their only means of creation, it is a relevant statement. 

 That Lough ""primarily"" [article] or ""exclusively"" [talk page] uses 8×10 sheet film is a clear, informative, and helpful statement. 

 Here's what Outdoor Photographer says about Adams, Lough, and the torch: 

 :The torch is passing. The path blazed by Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, Eliot Porter, Galen Rowell and others is being followed by an ever-growing number of new-breed photographers who aren’t saddled with the same restrictions of film and darkroom. 

 This comes together with (i) the clear indication that Lough is a notable example of this ""ever-growing number"", (ii) the statement that Lough uses an 8×10 camera, and (iii) other interesting material, such as that Lough has no great love of carrying this stuff around and would be delighted to use a smaller, lighter substitute if the results were just as good. 

 Specifically, the article says that Lough uses an Arca-Swiss 8x10 F-Line camera, Schneider Super-Symmar XL 150mm f/5.6 and Fujinon 300mm f/5.6 lenses. While I claim no photographic expertise (see above), I venture to suggest that the precise choice among well-constructed 8×10 view cameras is less important than, say, the focal lengths of the lenses, let alone the creative vision of the photographer. 

 Therefore I don't understand the prominence given to Adams in the Wikipedia article.  

 (Incidentally, that's quite some mixed metaphor perpetrated by Outdoor Photographer, isn't it? A torch  for illuminating? for blazing? for razing?  is being passed; yet a blazed, charred or merely trodden path is being followed. Maybe William Sawalich was in a hurry when he wrote it, or maybe he's entirely innocent of it and it was later added by some cliché-loving editor.)  [[User