I'll second Frank's comments about what NOT to include. It is a huge turnoff to see digital evangelizing. I can pay a lot less money for a much fatter magazine here in the US called Shutterbug if I want to read equipment reviews about how the latest digi-gizmo which supplanted the previous digi-gizmo (now six months old!! and obsolete!!!) will totally revolutionize my life if I just burn another huge hole in my bank account to acquire it. Do NOT become yet another whore to the never-ending vicious cycle of crass consumption.
DO have more articles about the photographic experience - the how and the why people take photographs, not the what with. Also, reach out to the folks who practice alternative processes - it would be nice to get more frequent coverage, and if folks saw what these processes were, a lot more interest would be generated in them. As the film-based photography market changes, you will continue to see growth in these media because supplies of silver-gelatin products are changing. You can cover the digital/silver intersection with discussions about making digital negatives for alternative process printing. If you would like an article on the subject, I'd be happy to work with you.
I have to agree with Frank and Scott on this one. Not only is it a turnoff, I find it downright disrespectful to those who have chosen to continue using film.
"A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer
I agree here. In the October issue there is a small info box noting that out of 3000 asked pros in europe 67% will continue to use film.
Lets say the B&W analogue entusiast is about 10% of the intire amount of Photomag readers. Does that mean that every mag should have 10% covering that them or that 1 in 10 mags should specialize in B&W analogue?
I remember the review of the Bronica RF645. In the start it was asked why bring out a MF rangefinder? For the same reason you have B&W magazine. There is a need for it. The need for RF645 where not enough to keep it here. Is the need for B&W magazine? I really do believe so.
People may think they want more reviews, more PS and more on D-printing but what if you give it to them and they find out they don't need that anyway and they can have it in Amateur Photography, Popular Photography, Digital Photography, Fotomagazin, Outdoor Photography etc???
Kind regards
Søren
Put it this way Frank: I've just been talking to Leica and shall be living with an MP soon and reporting on my rediscovery of manual, no frills, film based photography.
(snip)
So I need YOUR ideas and opinions...
Cheers!
David
Slightly OT. For those that don’t reside within the UK, an explanation of the term “MP” is warranted. It could mean “Military Policeman”, but in this case I feel it is intended to refer to a “Member of Parliament”. Since David is intending to co-habituate; I hope he has picked a pretty one to do it with, although beauty often lies with the beholder.
With regard to Leica, their recent adverts have extolled their digi range, and given me the impression that they have ceased production of film based machines, so I'm not too impressed with that idea.
Slightly OT. For those that don’t reside within the UK, an explanation of the term “MP” is warranted. It could mean “Military Policeman”, but in this case I feel it is intended to refer to a “Member of Parliament”. Since David is intending to co-habituate; I hope he has picked a pretty one to do it with, although beauty often lies with the beholder.
With regard to Leica, their recent adverts have extolled their digi range, and given me the impression that they have ceased production of film based machines, so I'm not too impressed with that idea.
Well, the Blair Babes must be good for something.
Can't say that Leica advertising had struck me as ceasing production of film cameras: the MP seems quite well represented, though as it is much outsold by the M8, and the M8 will appeal to more people, and many people don't realize that any Leicas are still in production, their ads seem rational to me.
Have followed this thread with interest. I wish you all the best in your new job, good to see you posting on APUG.
In general terms I agree with the 'more film, less digital' sentiment. I appreciate that you cannot ignore digital, but I think the balance should be weighted towards film. This isn't an ostrich stance, just a recognition that for me the film bit is key (I use a mixture of analogue Ciba and digital Lambda prints from my reverse-processed trannies for example). I'm not a digital photographer, but if it was an interest I'd go elsewhere to find a digital mag.
Please please please more Galleries and Portfolio's - the emphasis on interesting work rather than articles encouraging you to buy more stuff (!) is what sets B+W Mag apart. I like the idea of galleries and features that illustrate the range of b+w work approaches and working styles - alternative processes, unusual films, cameras etc. Am sure there are plenty of opportunities for increasing reader participation around this.
I'd agree too that it would be better not to go down the route of too many equipment reviews. The only reviews that really interest me are of unusual or quirky film kit - the stuff that never really gets reviewed elsewhere. If I need a review 'standard kit I usually go online and compare...
Thanks Gavin, message received and understood. And thanks to every single one of you who have made me feel welcome here and offered me suggestions. Always good to hear from you!
Please please please more Galleries and Portfolio's - the emphasis on interesting work rather than articles encouraging you to buy more stuff (!) is what sets B+W Mag apart. I like the idea of galleries and features that illustrate the range of b+w work approaches and working styles - alternative processes, unusual films, cameras etc. Am sure there are plenty of opportunities for increasing reader participation around this.
It's interesting to realize that Black and White Photography, Lenswork, and Focus carry no product reviews at all and seem to be doing well. Two of them, in fact, are monochrome only publications at that. So there is clearly a market for such specialized periodicals. ( In the 70's, in fact, I remember not renewing my subscritption to Popular
Photography because the relentless 'selling' had nothing to do with why I wanted to read a photo magazine, and after a while I just got sick of the hype. )
If I'm not mistaken, Nature Photography magazine is entirely made up of reader's submissions. It's still on the stands, so it must be a formula that's working.
Linear Mode
