Lenswork - Ouch!

[roteague]

Robert - a piece of clarification - I meant to support APUG; sorry for the confusion. I meant it as a dig to those who post rants on APUG without subscribing to it.

Sorry, I misunderstood.

[rjas]

I stopped subscribing when they started featuring more digital stuff than silver.

I find that there's usually one really good portfolio and a lot of stuff I don't like.

Perhaps they use more digital stuff because they aren't recieving any traditional work that fits with their style?

I let my subscription lapse because I wasn't interested in seeing large format images of trees and rocks - I would have liked to see more work that tells a story like the Nicaraguan images or the farming images from awhile ago. The Wakarimasen portfolio killed it for me - I just didn't "get" it and was kind of shocked to see an editor publish their portfolio in their own magazine. Felt like I paid for Brooks' self-promotion.

[Lee Shively]

I don't subscribe to anything anymore.

[panastasia]

For me the process matters, that's why I have a darkroom, use film, chemicals, and photographic paper. When Ansel Adams said that someone could make an image from one of his negatives in the future in an entirely new way or process, that was fine with him, he wouldn't necessarily like it but that was their business.

Curt

AA also said that he would be interested in digital imaging if he lived long enough to see it equal analog in fine art quality. I wonder what he would think about digital quality today considering it's limits regarding dynamic range with more detail in the shadows but lacking in the highlights, as digital provides. I read that in a magazine some years ago, dont remember which one.

[palewin]

This thread is already long enough without me, but I'm curious why so many are complaining about Lenswork publishing too much digital work. I thought the issue was the images. I fall into the group that buys Lenswork at the bookshop when the work appeals to me (the only subscription I have is to View Camera, because LF is my passion). But as a specific example, one of my favorite books is Joan Myers's "Along the Santa Fe Trail" which was entirely LF. But since Ms. Myers has a great "eye", I also love her digital work on Antarctica, some of which was recently published in Lenswork. Should I like her work less because in Antarctica she used a DSLR and an MF panoramic?

[jeroldharter]

I'm always disgusted by people who sit down and read entire magazines (or even books) for free in a bookstore. How cheap can you get? Go to a library. They just sit there forever, hogging a chair or a table and usually don't even put their dogeared magazine back on the shelf. Why not leave a barking dog tied up outside the door too? No wonder the publishers raise the prices for the rest of us.

[Jeremy]

The Wakarimasen portfolio killed it for me - I... was kind of shocked to see an editor publish their portfolio in their own magazine. Felt like I paid for Brooks' self-promotion.

Ditto. And this issue also came out right after Jensen said on the interweb that he gets so many great submissions that he doesn't have the space to publish. Finally, I'm not a big fan of getting email from Lenswork about the opportunity to buy Jensen's work. I don't think what he is doing is wrong, but I think there should be some distance between his photography and his magazine because it makes me then wonder how the portfolios in the magazine are chosen (i.e. my sister's brother is Jensen's vet so I've got my "in" kinda thing)

[Lee Shively]

I'm always disgusted by people who sit down and read entire magazines (or even books) for free in a bookstore. How cheap can you get? Go to a library. They just sit there forever, hogging a chair or a table and usually don't even put their dogeared magazine back on the shelf. Why not leave a barking dog tied up outside the door too? No wonder the publishers raise the prices for the rest of us.

Barnes and Noble encourages this and it doesn't appear to hurt their sales any. That's why the chairs are there. And what's the difference in going to the library to read a magazine or book for free and going to the local B&N?

But my opinion aside, I don't frequent the bookstore reading chairs much anymore due to the constant cell phone conversations taking place all around.

[MurrayMinchin]

Finally, I'm not a big fan of getting email from Lenswork about the opportunity to buy Jensen's work. I don't think what he is doing is wrong, but I think there should be some distance between his photography and his magazine...

One way to sell your work is to create a following...a body of people who'll buy your work. Picker did it, Michael and Paula are doing it, and so is Brooks. This can be a good thing for the rest of us if we value the band wagon they're hawking their wares from.

I benefited from Pickers technological leaps and I enjoy LensWork's quality reproductions, even if they are always warm.

Murray

[roteague]

This thread is already long enough without me, but I'm curious why so many are complaining about Lenswork publishing too much digital work. I thought the issue was the images.

One of the reasons APUG exists is because some photographers feel the process is just as important as the composition. That is the reason for the complaint.

Should I like her work less because in Antarctica she used a DSLR and an MF panoramic?

I discriminate against those using DSLRs for fine art, simply because I find digital capture inferior to using film, and don't find it a tool for fine art. Digital is fine for reporting, but LensWork is supposed to be about fine art. So, I choose which issue based upon this.