Location: Taking a trip through time on my silver machine in the White Peak
Posts: 1,427
ATB to Liz! [time can move slowly here in Derbyshire....]
__________________
"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]
Thanks for some of the kind comments and support shown to me on here. GMC decided to review their staffing and bring the editorship in house, which is entirely understandable. I stepped in when Ailsa left to fill the breech, and now Liz is sufficiently confident and inspired to step up to the plate. It was a freelance contract. My job is done - although I will still remain as a contributor to the magazine and I very much look forward to continuing a relationship with you all.
Cheers,
D
Hmmm, it's all a bit of a mess at the moment but I really do hope that the magazine pulls through this. I must admit I've not really been eagerly awaiting new issues in my post box recently as I used to, but I will continue subscribing and hope that things improve. All the best David, and did you get to keep the MP?
If/when they get rid of the "Advertorials" I'll probably start buying it again. I can live with the digital content, although it has no interest for me, in trade for the often excellent articles, images and other goodies. But, by infesting the magazine with adverts masquerading as editorial they totally destroy any credibility the magazine may otherwise enjoy. How am I to tell if an article is giving the opinion of the author or that of some advertiser? Or, am I supposed to check the start of each article in the magazine for the "Advertorial" banner? B*gg*r that for a game of soldiers!
For example: I wonder who actually pays for the DSLR listing page?
Thanks Mike: I have now. Pretty much agree with what he says, including what he says about the dangers of diluting the focus of a niche product which has also happened at B&W Photography. I take the point that he makes re' advertorials not falling within the editor's remit so you can't blame the editor for them, but ultimately it makes little difference who puts them in as the result is the same: disenchanted (ex-) readers.
The advertorials simply amuse me, I find them easy to spot and ignore. What doesn't amuse me is the rather indulgent tone in the contributed text, and the diminishing amount of space devoted to actual photographs printed at high quality. Since I'm on a rant, I'll just say that most of the recent covers have been disappointing; the shot of Bailey must have been a disappointment for him in particular. The hunched over model also didn't strike me as particularly flattering, we see far better work here on a consistent basis. Alright I shall say no more!
I have been reading B&W since very early on - cannot remember which issue - but it was less than 10 & at the time it came out bi-monthly
(Anyone remember that far back?)
The magazine has changed over time - and some of the best bits - those you read on the first flick through have come & gone - but mainly gone.
I am pragmatic enough to understand there has to be some D*g*t*l input into the magazine - it draws in some advertisers - but there have been a couple of recent issues with the unfortunate tone of Digital = Good & film = old fuddy duddy
I was livid when I saw some of advertorials - they ready insult your inteligence - and have almost cancelled my subscription more than once at their inclusion.
The two things that keeps me will B&W is
firstly - the lack of product testing & equipement reviews
secondly - the concentration on pictures as the main focus of the magazine
This probably gives the B&W advertising accountants a headache - but it is the unique selling feature of this Photography Mag - almost all the others are CAMERA Mags
So - good luck to the new Editor Liz - she will need it
I will hold my peace for 6 months, let her establish herself and find her own direction for the magazine before deciding to stick with it or sadly give up on B&W
Martin
Since I'm on a rant, I'll just say that most of the recent covers have been disappointing; the shot of Bailey must have been a disappointment for him in particular. The hunched over model also didn't strike me as particularly flattering, we see far better work here on a consistent basis.
I was thinking the same. The thing which caught my eye was looking at the back issues page in the current magazine and the last 10 issues have all had portraits of some kind on the cover. Then you compare that with the huge variety in cover photos of the previous 18 months issues. I enjoy portraits and dabble myself, but a bit of variety would be nice.
I'd just subscribed to Silvershotz and was about to cancel B&W but I'll give it another 4 months and see. Best of luck to Liz.
Linear Mode
