Can I conclude from your summary, Tim, that the dreaded DSLR-listing is ommitted???
One can always hope
Jaap Jan
Why is it 'dreaded'? The magazine has readers who are interested in that and it has to stay viable or sink. It is only 1 page out of nearly 100 and there are far more pages on film and antique cameras. A magazine has to provide content for a wide range of tastes and expectations and that is not an easy balancing act.
Personally, I found many of the images in this issue really ejoyable and worth the subscription. I pass over what doesn't interest me. I can derive real pleasure from a B&W image that hits the spot, regardless of how it was produced - but as it happens, most (a guess) in this issue were produced in the darkroom FWIW.
Tim
Tim, I feel it's just advertising in disguise. You may be right that other readers value it. I just can't see how.
David, I'm sorry to learn we "churne up your insides". If we do, I feel, it's because we would like to cling on to one of the last bastions for film photography. I have eagerly anticpated every issue since the very first and have to say I still do. I haven't seen March yet, it's always a bit late in Holland, but I have to say December to February struck me as very positive under your reign. I hope it stays that way. I for one wouldn't like to cancel. Hang in there!!!
Could the magazine be better - of course, but that takes time, and I think things look good so far. Could it be more focused to what I want ? - sure, but it'd probably have a circulation of one - me!
It is after all called B+W magazine, not Strictly Analog B+W.
Oh I was going to ask if there was alt process stuff but now I read the bit in the back of issue #82 and see it says alternative processing, so i guess that's not necessarily anything like van dyke brown, pt/pd, cyanotypes (! I still live in hope of a special Blue & White Photography magazine ) Just toning and stuff?
__________________
~Heather oooh shiny!
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
David. I haven't seen the latest issue yet and have seen two views on its content. Tim Rudman's description certainly makes it sound as if trad B&W has maintained the level of content it has had in the last three issues which I have bought. I also got a secondhand issue from several years ago and the trad content didn't seem to be that much greater than recently. A one page DSLR content is exactly that - one page only. Not really a problem for me and I can simply skip over Jerry Lebens digi bit.
So if things continue as they are, I'll probably continue to buy issues but things continuing as they are in terms of analogue content is key and begs several questions:
Will they continue as they are?
Is there any comittment on the part of the magazine to keep the content of analogue to at least its current level? I use "magazine" advisedly in the context of control of content as I suspect that the editor's views may count for little if the owners believe that more profit stems from increasing digi content. Look at AP and probably others as an example of this apparently inexorable move to digi
So David, what is the current thinking of B&W towards the future of analogue content?
If you cannot really give any committment or know that the digi storm clouds are gathering from the direction of the owners but cannot be frank about this then I can understand this but I'd prefer you to say that you cannot give any assurances.
It would be better financially for both B&W and me if I were to subscribe but I still feel uneasy about this as things stand. Any help you can give to clarify things would be appreciated.
Location: Taking a trip through time on my silver machine in the White Peak
Posts: 1,442
Same here!
__________________
"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]
Well, I thought it was a pretty good issue. I haven't read it all and there are some parts that I won't read, like the Sony DSLR review and the Tamron "advertising feature". I still don't see the point in B&W reviewing "mainstream cameras" like digital SLRs.
However, I thought the portfolio was very good and the Andy Gotts interview was excellent. A really fascinating story coupled with some superb portraits, I'll certainly be buying his book. I always really like Eamonn McCabes articles and this was another interesting one. Haven't looked at the pinhole article yet but it looks interesting.
I'm not too keen on the Practical Photography/Photography Monthly style critique and I noticed the same style competition towards the back. The prize is a years supply of Ilford inkjet paper. I do some digital but only colour and not enough to tempt me to enter. I was saddened by the fact that silver prints were eligible but had to be scanned and sent in by CD. My scanner's not wonderful and it certainly couldn't show the full range of tones in my prints. For me the finished article is the print, not a 72dpi image on a screen.
All told, David has an incredibly difficult balancing act to do -- it must be one of the hardest jobs in the photographic magazine trade at the moment. I think (I hope!) things are improving. I still believe that B&W is at it's best when it concentrates on the image and not the technology.
) Just toning and stuff?
Linear Mode
