The thing I dislike with it is that when they show how they do it in the darkroom they compare it with photoshop.
I don't even understand how they can compare the two.
/ Marcus
I agree, and it seems to be pandering to the kind of discussions/arguments/comparisons you see on mixed (film/digi) forums, which are tedious to say the least.
I just wanted to say here publicly how much I enjoyed seeing Kate Seymour's documentary photographs of her brother in the September issue.
Please don't think, B&W Photography mag, you are at the mercy of market forces which are inevitably digital.
There are many film users (who may also be digital users) who would value more film input, and who may lose interest if you don't provide it.
I also think the magazine has got a little 'tired' - too much of the same formula/s over and over again...
I just wanted to say here publicly how much I enjoyed seeing Kate Seymour's documentary photographs of her brother in the September issue.
I agree, it was an excellent article. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see more of. I feel that there has been too much reliance on the Getty archives and on articles which are basically adverts for current exhibitions. Interesting as those are, there needs to be a balance.
Hey, when did that happen? The readers gallery prize is now halved. It used to be 50pounds at Imaging Warehouse and 50 "in cash". Now it's just the 50 at Imaging Warehouse Not being greedy, just feel less like trying to enter my stuff (though 50quid at novadarkroom is nothing to be sniffed at, it doesn't go as far as 50quid would do if i used it at Silverprint or other places).
I'd love to see more portfolios (not gizmos) which can inspire and entertain whatever approach or subject matter you prefer.
J
This was exactly the reason I subscribed to it in the first place. While I have never "left" photography as an avocation, it had taken a back seat to my other interests. Seeing the portfolios and reader contributions re-kindled my interest in trying it again ...can I do that? ...or sometimes, I can do that!
I have only bought a couple of issues over the last few years, but I do browse it at Borders. I also noticed the printing quality has declined. I also was annoyed by the advertisments that ran at the bottom of the pages of the readers portfolios. Really ruined the page spreads. One thing about digital how to's and product reviews, I can find more current and relevant reviews on-line. If not on-line, there are a dozen other publications for less money that basically do nothing but product reviews. The remaining image content does not match the quality of B&W, Focus, Lenswork, all three being primarily concerned with images and the photographers who made them.
__________________ "Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
Robert Adams
Last edited by Jim Chinn; 09-13-2007 at 01:50 PM.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
Well, UK B&W magazine will look much better when you read next: In one regional photo magazine here they used to publish reviews for mobile phones photo capabilities!!!!!
What about that
__________________
Bosnia... You don't have to be crazy to live here, but it helps...
Welcome David, and thank you for taking the trouble to post, I too wish you well in your new venture, and trust that you will take note of the concerns raised here.
Many of us have supported the magazine from it’s inception, and helped nurture it through the submission of articles and photographs, as well as by subscription.
We wait, we watch, and, in time will decide if our support should continue.
Roger,
One reason is that I have already got it and after 20 years use I have
be very attached to it. The quality is without question legionary,
I like and prefer fixed focal length lenses and it is a classic.
JON
Dear Jon,
Point fully taken. The lens you have; take pictures with; and love, is always superior to any other.
On the other hand, F. and I agree that if we could possibly afford the new WA Tri-Elmar -- we'd have it!
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)
Dear Ross,
Sorry mate!
But you can also use 13x18cm and half-plate (4-3/4 x 6-1/2 inch) film-holders in the same cameras -- which is why I have all three formats, because I started some years ago when film was even harder to find than today!
Not being greedy, just feel less like trying to enter my stuff (though 50quid at novadarkroom is nothing to be sniffed at, it doesn't go as far as 50quid would do if i used it at Silverprint or other places).
Linear Mode
