Well sure, it is all economics...Epson is not going to take a full page ad in an all analog magazine. Many of the photographers who buy the little "market" ads are ink jet printers, I am sure he was under pressure by them to showcase ink jet prints. Face it, we are a diminishing breed. There are more photographers going digital, making ink jet prints and abandoning analog everyday. Ad to this the fact that they are flat out lying about their reasons to change and why ink jet prints are "better" and you can see that this is an inevitable outcome.
The way I see it, I welcome this change. The work of those of us who will stick with all analog and have learned to control our material will become more "rare" as time goes by and hopefully will become more valuable.
B&W magazine wants to sell advertising space, they really dont care if a collector buys an ink jet print that will fade in a few years or cannot be displayed continuosly for fear of deteriorating.
I say dont be dissappointed, welcome digital and ink jet prints, it can only be better for those of us who remain making real prints.
I completely agree with you Jorge.
I've always thought that the more popular digital becomes, the more the wet darkroom processes will be considered "art".
I agree as well. You make an extremely good point!!
Originally Posted by david b
Ed Sukach, FFP.
Borders and Barnes and Noble have absolutely no problem with anyone sitting for hours drinking coffee and reading magazines or books. As a matter of fact, I subscribe to or purchase far more periodicals because I can sit down and determine if it is something I would want to get on a long term basis.
Also I am not going to buy a magazine if there is one or two articles in it I want to read. Photo Techniques should be happy I even open the cover fo their rag to read David Vestal and the occasional analoge article. If Borders was concerned they would keep all the periodicals under lock and key behind the registers like cigarettes.
I always look through View Camera, and the UK Black and White before I decide to purchase. 90% of the time I will pruchase the View Camera issue even after I have read most of it at the book store. But for the occasional issue that is mostly digital I will read the stuff I am interested it and then leave it. I buy most of the issues of the UK magazine, but find some issues that basically re-hash various technical matters that are already covered in books and magazine articles I already have.
I will probably still pick up LensWork (subscription) and B&W with their digital content as long as they do not become proponents of digital at the expense traditional photography. When they start running articles or essays about the superiority of digital in a shameless move to help promote advertisers and sponsors I will order a double espresso, skim through them and put them back on the shelf.
"Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
To each his own... Seems more like taking advantage of the system to me, but that's just my opinion.
Originally Posted by Jim Chinn
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
If bookstores didn't want you to read while you're drinking your coffee, why do they all put their cafes about two steps away from the magazine section?
They have absolutely no problem with you reading their books or magazines while you're drinking your Latte. Now, the publishers, on the other hand, may see it differently.
Bookstores are using sound marketing techniques. If you go out to buy a pair of pants you are allowed to try them on first. If the magazine has good content it will be bought. Countless of times I went B&N,took a magazine, read it cover to cover in their cafe, and then pay for it.
If the publisher thinks it is unfair, then they should pack their magazines in plastic, as many of them do.
Dunno if I'd want to buy a book that had been read by someone drinking and eating and then put back on the shelf. I like my books and magazines in 'as new' condition.
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
"On page 9 of issue 37, the editor writes about why his magazine will now accept digital work."
Fortunately B&W Photoraphy magazine here in the UK hasn't made any such silly distinction. I've bought most issues since it came out. The majority of issues have featured digital photographs and/or articles on digital techniques.
They have published the odd 'digital is not real photography' etc type letter in their letters pages, and I have to say thankfully given it short thrift in the editors reply.
"If you go out to buy a pair of pants you are allowed to try them on first."
We cetainly don't do that in the UK! Lordy lordy.