ok -I've avoided expressing an opinion so far, but I can hold on no longer.
The magazine is about Black and White photography in all it's many forms. The beauty of it so far as that there has (in the main) been an excellent balance between all the many process that fall within the umbrella. The magazine, in my eyes, has never been about film, digital, alt or any other process, it's about the making of black and white photographs. My hope is that David continues the excellent juggling act that Ailsa managed in making sure the Magazine was relevant to all who participate in black and white photography. A lean towards a bias in any direction would ruin the concept of the magazine, and this would be a great shame. The magazine has been successful so far, some features maybe a little tired, some may need freshening up, but the core concept is good and strong.
A move toward film only is not for this magazine - it's a great idea for a new publication though, for sure.
Ditto.
I've read all the entries in this forum, and thought I'd add my comments.
As a Canadian, I've only recently found B&W Photography magazine. I've purchased it since the 'discovery', and will continue to do so. I haven't purchased a subscription because it is more cost effective to purchase it at my local newsstand as an overseas subscription from GB is expensive.
As a photographer I am concerned with the images I produce, or see, and the equipment is, and should always be, secondary. If an image, or portfolio, evokes a positive emotional response, I don't care if it was taken with a digital, or an 8 x 10 view, camera. I suspect that for many male photographers (myself included, dammit) the mechanical aspect of the analogue process garners undo affection, which only serves to confuse the issue. Are you a 'better' photographer because you use a 'Blad as opposed to a Kiev; Nikon as opposed to Yashica; Leica as opposed to Zorki; or because you use analogue as opposed to digital? No. In fact, I would caution that you might be a 'poorer' photographer if you fall into the trap of assuming that more expensive, or analogue, equipment automatically relates to better photographs.
I don't find the current mix of digital and analogue offensive. While I shoot film (35mm & mf), I switch to digital, post exposure. Having had a darkroom in a couple of houses (allowed for it in the current house, but have decided against it because of (gasp!) the digital process) I appreciate, and understand, the 'wet' process, although I don't practice it beyond developing my own film.
No magazine, or website, is going to match my tastes and desires on every occasion for equipment, process, or aesthetics. As an example, I shall use Kate Seymour's photography (September, Issue #76) as an example. Her piece doesn't resonate with me. That said, I don't object to it being in the magazine, as I realize that my 'tastes' are not universal, and that it will resonate with many other readers. (And in case I get flamed, I am not passing judgment, or making any comments, on Kate's abilities, her passion, or aesthetics; only that her work didn't excite me. If it excites you; great.)
My suggestions for David? I do want to see other photographer's portfolios; I don't need 'typical' product reviews (that said, I did purchase an HP B9180 printer in part influenced by the Mike Johnston reviews); I don't need Photoshop lessons, though I do appreciate articles on the process, whether analogue or digital ('The Printer's Art', is typically where I turn first when I purchase the mag. I appreciate it whether it is digital vs analogue, or analogue vs analogue; it is the artistic vision that is intriguing); I don't want 'frothy' articles that take up page space but say nothing (Shutterbug, for example, and a recent article on inkjet papers); articles on film and/or film developers are of interest, but so would relevant information be on inkjet papers; and I do appreciate articles on vintage camera gear (that damned male fascination with the mechanical!).
Bottom line: I want to be intrigued, challenged, excited, puzzled, and ultimately, satisfied, by my photographic reading. If David can do that, on a reasonably regular basis, I'll be satisfied because in spite of what some perceive as its warts, B&W Photography is a hell of a lot better than the majority of the alternatives.
Location: Taking a trip through time on my silver machine in the White Peak
Posts: 1,442
Great materials you should work with would be so much better-eg Foma, Adox etc.
__________________
"The thing is to stalk your calling in a certain skilled and supple way, to locate the most tender and live spot and plug into that pulse....a weasel lives as he's meant to,yielding at every moment to the perfect freedom of pure necessity" [Annie Dillard]
Bottom line: I want to be intrigued, challenged, excited, puzzled, and ultimately, satisfied, by my photographic reading. If David can do that, on a reasonably regular basis, I'll be satisfied because in spite of what some perceive as its warts, B&W Photography is a hell of a lot better than the majority of the alternatives.
I'd agree with all that, and I don't automatically flick past or disregard a portfolio when I see that it's digital. And I don't object to its presence in the magazine.
But... (you knew there was a "but" didn't you! )
The type of articles that I do object to are (Issue 78) Technique - Traditional to Digital (in the mag for the second month running and looking like a new regular) followed (after a digital equipment review article) by the start of a new series Technique - Digital For Beginners.
These articles are not about the image. They are about converting traditional photographers to digital and they have been done to death in every photo and computer magazine on the news stand.
Like Paul, I note that there are no "digital to traditional" or "getting started in the darkroom" articles. Whilst digital and traditional share space in most of the magazine (Printers Art, Monochome Workshop, etc.) still there are specific "digital only" areas without matching "traditional only" areas. Balance, eh?
I know I said I'd give you time to get your feet under the desk David, but I really do hope we start to see these changes you've promised soon. Paying for a limited number of articles that interest me is one thing. Subsidising a number of articles that (EDIT - I'll be polite!) "very much annoy me" is quite another!
[Deep Breath]
Okay, so what's good in Issue 78 -
Some of Albert Watson's images are just plain excellent and it's a cracking article by Ailsa
Nice prominent positioning of Ilford's "Defend the Darkroom" initiative in the News section
Again, good images in the article on the Side Gallery and the Fuji competition
Mike Crawford puts in a very good Darkroom Workshop
The printer's art is interesting as always
In summary, to me Issue 78 is probably just about worth the price of admission... ...but only if I don't get slapped in the face with a lot of "conversion to digital" nonsense along the way.
I'll try and give it to the end of the year. If hasn't improved by then, I'm cancelling.
__________________ The destination is important, but so is the journey
Last edited by FrankB; 10-12-2007 at 04:13 AM.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
I agree Frank, 'just about worth it this month'. I was wondering whether B&W has the DSLR listings and Trad to Digi articles so that a certain DSLR maker puts more ads in ! Just wondering.
I'll try and give it to the end of the year. If hasn't improved by then, I'm cancelling.
Same with me.
I too was concerned that there were 3 full page ads from Canon. They are desperate to get everyone on to the lucrative (for them) digital path with the 2 or 3 year hardware upgrade cycle. Once they start heavily advertising in a mag and particularly when they start sponsoring competitions with hardware then we can expect loads more "convert to digital" articles. You've only got to see how other magazines such as Practical Photography and Photography Monthly have become an extension of the Canon marketing department.
(Quote) I'll try and give it to the end of the year. If hasn't improved by then, I'm cancelling. FrankB :
Please give David a chance to take B&W in the direction he has indicated. By the end of the year he will have been responsible for only two issues which is not a long period of time to make any changes. You must be aware that it takes time to put together new innovations and get them ready for publication. Magazines are also working on future issues weeks or even months before publication which gives David very little time to introduce his ideas.
(Quote) I too was concerned that there were 3 full page ads from Canon. Schlapp
A fact in publishing is that magazines pay the bills with the income from adverts so they cannot afford to refuse good money no matter where it comes from. Look at it this way, Canon and digital are subsidising our love for analogue and just about the only magazine in the market place that recognises and tries to support that love.
I've known and worked with David Corfield for many years, he is a very committed journalist who listens. I'm certain that he will bring the magazine that we all want to see but he needs time in which to do it. Please give him that time.
__________________
"Digital circuits are made from analogue parts"
Fourtune Cookie-Brooklyn May 2006
Les, I've got very great respect for you and because of that I'll remove my deadline.
I'm (obviously! ) not happy at the sudden change of direction of the mag, and the marked similarity between this shift and ones that other publications have made over the last few years. However, if you've got faith in David then I'll take a step back (closing my oversized cakehole in the process! ) and watch this space (with a bit more patience!).
__________________ The destination is important, but so is the journey
)
) and watch this space (with a bit more patience!).
Linear Mode
