I feel the same about B&W [uk]. Used to really look forward to the thing dropping through the letter box. Now I am wondering if I will bother to renew. Mike Johnson, good writer as he is, not only hacks on about Digi but often colour too. Of course digi is out there but surely there is a place for silver-based photography somewhere as there certainly is an audience.
While I take the point that some advertisers sell mainly digi equipment, there are still those - like Retro, SilverP, Ilford, Kentmere etc - who do not.
One other point, I thought the magazine excelled when it was more about the image rather than the equipment that is now creeping in more and more. I used to take a cycling mag here in the uk but stopped that because it because more about 'advertising features' than cycling and I feel B&W is going the same way.
Missing Ailsa already
I tried emailing GMC the publishers, Ailsa's email address was the only one listed & worked but the mail was replied to automatically saying she'd left & gave contacts for two others instead, both their emails addresses bounced.
The Publishers website is not updated still showing the previous issue as current. Seems to say a lot really.
I have noticed the "you can do digital b&w" in the magazine lately. Frankly, if they keep it up I won't even look at it any more. They might as well be trying to convince me that you can make an apple an orange. Digital capture and film are different. If you want to compare the two, even the new Canon 1ds III is just starting to approach the quality of 6x4.5 film. The people who say it is the same as 4x5 have no idea what they are talking about. The only digital capture that approaches the quality of film is the Better Light system. The problem with the comparisons that I have seen is that the person doing the comparing doesn't have the experience or the equipment to do the comparison and makes broad sweeping statements about their perceptions. They just jump on the bandwagon that digital is better. I am not a luddite and I have access to the best digital equipment there is right now. For pictures that I make myself, they are all shot on film.
I hope the magazine doesn't jump on the propaganda wagon as well.
Patrick
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
I do feel for Mike Johnstone when criticised as above, his blog treads the digital/analogue divide with a degree of finesse and I've not noticed much treachery to our monochrome niche in his articles in "Black and White Photography."
This magazine is a business, I suggest that if it moves to include monochrome digital photography as a dominant feature it will be an even more limited approach than the previous concentration on monochrome analogue subjects, and result in limited sales, even in the quirky English market (they are a weird mob sometimes!)
It is interesting to sneak a look at what's happening in the digital world, even if one has no intention of pursuing that technique.
BTW Roger's article on the joys of 5x7 in BW UK some time ago was a contributing factor to my undertaking that medium. I wish he'd told how difficult it would be to find 5x7 darkslides (it's OK I'm building a set little by little)
One other point, I thought the magazine excelled when it was more about the image rather than the equipment that is now creeping in more and more.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. At their best, both the GMC mags, B&W and OP excel when they emphasise the image rather than equipment. Also, what equipment they do review is always slightly quirky or unusual. Stuff that other mags would never touch. For example, Roger's review of the V/L Bessa R2 inspired me and got me back into photography.
However, if they become just another mainstream digital photography magazine but with an emphasis on B&W, reviewing DSLRs, printers etc like all the other mags, then their days are numbered.
I subscribe to "B&W Photography" and this news disturbs me. My October issue is yet to arrive, so I haven't seen it. The reason I stopped subscribing to Practical Photography after quite a few years was their embracing of digital photography and their negative attitude to film photography. If "B&W" is heading in that same direction they will lose many readers.
LOL, I'm willing to bet that they are moving towards more digital coverage BECAUSE they are losing many readers. The fact is that if you don't cater to what most photographers are interested in, you will go out of business...
Isaac
__________________
See my adventures in Yemen here: www.isaharr.com
LOL, I'm willing to bet that they are moving towards more digital coverage BECAUSE they are losing many readers. The fact is that if you don't cater to what most photographers are interested in, you will go out of business...
Isaac
This may be the case but that doesn't mean you have have to go down the route of constant printer/dslr reviews. That way you only get a very small part of a large cake as every other magazine does that. Surely, it is better to carve a unique route catering for what other magazines don't - namely B&W imagery.
Linear Mode
