Black and White Magazine's "change" of heart...

[hortense]

What is Inked Magazine?

 

[Dave Parker]

What is Inked Magazine?

LMFAO, that is classic!!!

 

[Dorothy Blum Cooper]

The real die-hard traditional photographers such as most everyone on this forum will still continue to create their masterpieces and galleries will continue to represent those works to collectors of fine art photography.

You are correct in that statement. However, the 'traditional' photographers now have one less magazine to rely on as non-digital.

 

[DavidS]

You are correct in that statement. However, the 'traditional' photographers now have one less magazine to rely on as non-digital.

Why do you need a magazine that is devoted to soley traditional photography? The market for traditional fine art photography and just that with no mention of today's technology isn't big enough to sustain a magazine. Hey, I wish Emulsion the best of luck, but that sounds more like a how-to magazine than a magazine geared towards high end collectors. It's like Sports Illustrated, I'm sure everyone wants a magazine geared to JUST football, but it just doesn't make business sense when a lot of photographers out there who are fine art photographers deal in traditional AND digital. This website is lucky that most of you can join together and discuss processes and the such, but I'm sure this website's annual costs aren't that of a magazine with a large circulation. It'll be difficult to get newsstand distribution because you'll be TOO niche and then have to rely upon 3rd party distributors who won't be as big as the Curtis' or Ingram's or the Speedimpex's who can get your magazine to ALL of the bookstores.

If you don't like reading about digital photography, don't read that section. But don't cancel your subscription to a magazine that is informative on the market for black and white photography just because he's making a good business decision.

 

[Dave Parker]

I still don't understand, the purpose of this website is clearly stated, the members have made their feelings known and would like to have a magazine devoted 100% to traditional photography, why is it, that we keep having these conversations? If you want to run inked as a hybrid with both digital and traditional, then do it! I don't know why the conversations keep poping up here about how or why anyone of us has to accept the duel roll of any magazine, the buying public will make it known if they like content of any particular magazine with their purchasing dollars. The mission statement is plainly posted on the entrance page of this website, it is not in difficult language to read, there are a great many other websites that are devoted to, or let digital information in..

I wonder if Sean can program in a 'digital pop-up filter' as the topic keeps popping up, and it does not belong here!

If I want to read about digital on the web or in a magazine, I have plenty of choices to do it with. But I have enough respect for the owner of this website and the users wishes, to not do it here!

Dave

 

[Dorothy Blum Cooper]

Why do you need a magazine that is devoted to soley traditional photography?

Need? Nah...I want a magazine that features/caters to traditional methods of photography. Cancel my subscription? Why would I pay 'full price' for a magazine that may only give me half of what I need? I will "buy" the issues I want so I don't 'need' to subscribe.

*do they have an icon expression with a s*#t eating grin!?*

 

[Ed Sukach]

Why do you need a magazine that is devoted to soley traditional photography?

For the same reason I "need" APUG. "Smart" business decision are nice - but I do not subscribe to, or read, any publication solely for the fact that it is produced as a smart business decision.

If you don't like reading about digital photography, don't read that section. But don't cancel your subscription to a magazine that is informative on the market for black and white photography just because he's making a good business decision.

Not why I would subscribe to/ de-subscribe. Unfortunately, most - In fact, ALL of the publications that have allowed "just a few" digitally specific articles invariably change their basic philosophies from that of "art" and "fine" photography to a frenzied, "Take the photograph and why worry about it ... here are the miraculous, wondrous ways you can screw around with it afterwards."

You say there are "many" Fine Art Photographers working with "Digital Photogrpaphy" and infer(?) that the numbers of those who work with film are not sufficient to sustain a magazine. Do you have any "hard" information of those numbers ... which to me, would be necessary to support a "good" business decision, or are assumptions being made? Related - how may "Digitally" oriented (philosophy-wise) magazines are available to those who do work digitally, and how many for those work work with film ... or to put it another way, just what is the competition, and what is a reasonable expectation of sales?

How does this sound?

In a Board of Director's meeting, the information is brought to light - "Only ten percent of our profits are generated by film-based photography. Sound business - We will discontinue film-based products."

At the next meeting - PANIC!!! "Our profits are down by TEN PERCENT!!! - Heads will roll. Committees must be formed, Consultants hired --- to find out WHY..."

 

[jovo]

Why do you need a magazine that is devoted to soley traditional photography? The market for traditional fine art photography and just that with no mention of today's technology isn't big enough to sustain a magazine.

Photovision, Art and Technique was just such a magazine. As I have been told by one who knows, it ceased to exist for reasons entirely other than lack of interest, advertisers, distribution or any other reason related to its content. It could still be a viable publication had the publisher chosen to continue.

 

[mario Ag+]

Most of these mags that were dedicated to traditional photography are now accepting digital images. As far as colour goes im not suprised. But black and white is a whole diferent story. The "how" an image is produced I think is very important. The whole proccess of producing a fine art print is an artform in it's self. Many photographers including myself are dedicated to film because of this journey towards the end result.As far as these magazines go I would have to agree that they are giving into presure from advertisers. Most of the adds we see in photo mags is for some digital product and its not od because thats what is being produced in bigger numbers these days. Still I am disapointed with Black and White Mag's change of heart. There is a big diference in a fine B&w print on FB paper and a Photoshoped disaturated scaned negative or digital image on a CD or inkjet print. In black and white I belive strongly that the "how" matters just as much as the end result.

 

[Flotsam]

Last night, when I was trying to control and manipulate two dodging tools simultaneously and independantly during a twenty second exposure, and wasting too many sheets of Polymax, it occured to me that maybe I haven't given this whole Photoshop thing a fair shake.

 

[jjstafford]

Last night, when I was trying to control and manipulate two dodging tools simultaneously and independantly during a twenty second exposure, and wasting too many sheets of Polymax, it occured to me that maybe I haven't given this whole Photoshop thing a fair shake.

Scan the neg, then make an out-of-focus dodging image with appropriate densities, print it on clear acetate, and get thee back to the wet room.

 

[gareth harper]

The mission statement is plainly posted on the entrance page of this website, it is not in difficult language to read, there are a great many other websites that are devoted to, or let digital information in..

If we are going to be 'traditional' then lets stick to traditional language, please no newspeak.

And in any case this is the general discussion, books and magazines area. Considering the magazine in question, it's and interesting a relevant discussion.

 

[Dave Parker]

Gareth,

Now what is so non-traditional with 'mission statement' we have used that term in the magazine publishing industry for over 25 years now, we did way back in 1980 when I started in the publication industry.

But you can be assured the 'mission statement' has been part of the traditional magazine publishing industry for a long time now, and to top it off, my comments were directed at the publisher of 'Inked' Magazine, which was asking a question about why we should not be able to have a combined magazine.

Nothing to do with you or your so called 'General Comments'

Dave

 

[BruceN]

If you don't like reading about digital photography, don't read that section. But don't cancel your subscription to a magazine that is informative on the market for black and white photography just because he's making a good business decision.

Good or bad is a subjective thing, don't you think? To my way of thinking he's making a BAD business decision because he'll be losing my business. Why should I continue to pay for a product that is no longer what I want? Are they entitled to my money just because they've gotten some of it before? Even though they're no longer giving me the product I want in return? That doesn't sound like a business anymore, more like another rediculous government social program

 

[Flotsam]

Scan the neg, then make an out-of-focus dodging image with appropriate densities, print it on clear acetate, and get thee back to the wet room.

Yeah, That's the ticket.
Computer, scanner, printer, software, materials as opposed to a Mcdonald's coffee stirrer, a piece of a coathanger and a couple of bits of cardoard. I'd rather practice and improve my analog printing skills.

 

[jjstafford]

Heh. I thought that suggestion would revive the analog spirit!

 

[gareth harper]

Now what is so non-traditional with 'mission statement' we have used that term in the magazine publishing industry for over 25 years now, we did way back in 1980 when I started in the publication industry.

Newspeak didn't start yesterday Dave. A magazine having a 'mission statement', to me, is a miss-use of the word mission. It's what I understand to be newspeak, and it bugs me big time.

the members have made their feelings known and would like to have a magazine devoted 100% to traditional photography, why is it, that we keep having these conversations?

Please speak for yourself Satinsnow. Like many others I'm perfectly happy with the magazine b&w photographer here in the UK, which happens to feature digital work as well as it's bread and butter traditional work. I don't want to live in some sort of denial bubble, pretending digital does not exists.

Meanwhile I get tired of those who try to dictate to others what is acceptable in 'general' threads.

 

[Dave Parker]

Now what is so non-traditional with 'mission statement' we have used that term in the magazine publishing industry for over 25 years now, we did way back in 1980 when I started in the publication industry.

Newspeak didn't start yesterday Dave. A magazine having a 'mission statement', to me, is a miss-use of the word mission. It's what I understand to be newspeak, and it bugs me big time.

the members have made their feelings known and would like to have a magazine devoted 100% to traditional photography, why is it, that we keep having these conversations?

Please speak for yourself Satinsnow. Like many others I'm perfectly happy with the magazine b&w photographer here in the UK, which happens to feature digital work as well as it's bread and butter traditional work. I don't want to live in some sort of denial bubble, pretending digital does not exists.

Meanwhile I get tired of those who try to dictate to others what is acceptable in 'general' threads.

Hey Gareth,

If you have not figured out by now, I could really give a Sh*T about what bugs you!, I and many hundreds if not thousands here on this site, don't like digital, don't want digital here and could care less about digital...are you so dense, that this is a hard to understand? If you want to talk digital, go somewhere that has no problem with it, as stated by the Owner of the site, right up front, it is devoted to analog photography, are you still having a difficult time understanding that? your a non-subscribing member who has pretty much had nothing but controversial statements to make since you started here, and I know, that my little ole' opinion probably means ratts ass to you as well, if you don't like what I have to say, Sean has provide a nice little button, that allows you to ignore me with no problem at all, I intend to put you on my list, so this will be my last post to your rhetoric. Oh forgot to add I don't deny digital exists, I just am smart enough to know this site is not the place to discuss it, in fact I own quite a large digital imaging company here in the US.

Bye Bye.

Dave

 

[gareth harper]

Gosh!

I can't for the life of me see why this topic is not valid. It's interesting and 100% valid. And I find it sad that you choose you behave like this Dave. Is it so terrible that somebody disagrees with you.

Ignore me if you wish, but in any case I won't respond to further posts from you for a wee while.

Meanwhile I can't help that perhaps some people like to throw the dummy out of the pram, in some sort of strange attempt at censorship, as I fear that understandably Sean may be about to hit the 'delete thread' button once more.

 

[Lee Shively]

This damn thread won't die!

You're right (whoever you were...the one who asks why we need a magazine). I don't need a magazine. Every magazine I get turns out to be a disappointment.

I tossed Outdoor Photographer in the magazine rack without looking at it every month until the subscription expired. I'm tossing Popular Photography in the trash immediately when it comes through the mail slot right now. I'm so sick I could scream that I wasted money on an Aperture subsciption--can't wait til that piece of crap expires. And, while I'm sure it will horrify many APUGer's, I'm not real happy with Lenswork either right now.

I'm pretty bored with the current state of photography as reproduced in the monthy photo press. I don't need to know any more technique than I already know, I don't care about the latest equipment, I don't want to "shoot _______'s like a pro". Basically, I'm not a member of the target audience for photo magazines being produced in the early 21st Century.

I don't need no stinkin' photo magazines.

 

[MattKing]

I don't know that I have ever read Black and White Magazine, so this post is based on an assumption - that it depends at least partially on advertising revenue. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It seems to me that it is much easier for a website like this to incorporate information or discussion concerning digital photography, without impacting on its core focus, then it is for a magazine to do so. Generally, in a magazine, if a decision is made to include something related to digital photography, then the portion of the magazine devoted to non-digital editorial content may be reduced by a corresponding amount.

I say may be reduced, because the possibility exists that increased digital coverage will result in increased advertising revenue with a resulting increase in total editorial content - with a corresponding increase in non-digital content.

There are many interesting interfaces between the digital and analog photographic worlds. It seems to me that as long as this site maintains a true focus on the analog, and as long as its resources are not consumed by too much reference to digital, then the discussion of those interfaces can only add to the discourse.

As an example, I read a thread within the last few months on photonet referring to using a histogram function built in to a digital camera to provide metering information for (medium format) film photography. Could that be of interest to someone shooting on 11x14 film?

I try to review new posts to this site on a daily basis. Some are of greater interest to me than others. I tend to read the more interesting ones carefully, and may not even read others at all. If this site was taken over by digital issues, my interest would wain, but I certainly don't intend to criticize anyone who has an interest, consistent with this site's focus, that I don't share. I also would encourage anyone here who finds some topics more valuable than others, to participate more freely in those topics which are of greatest interest to them.

I just don't think that it is damaging to this community to wander off topic from time to time.

Would it be helpful to approach the question from a different direction? Rather than attempting to exclude reference to digital photography, we should be actively encouraging attempts to include anything which will foster and support and enhance our analog photography. The example above of using digital tools to create darkroom masks may be an example of a new and valuable tool which adds greatly to the darkroom artist's repetoire (sp?). Alternatively, it may be a low quality replacement for a better option, and should be criticized as such. It just seems to me that consideration of it is healthy for those who wish to explore the wonders of analog photography, and how to improve our experience with it.

My $0.02 worth.

 

[gareth harper]

Interesting points Matt,

I say may be reduced, because the possibility exists that increased digital coverage will result in increased advertising revenue with a resulting increase in total editorial content - with a corresponding increase in non-digital content.

I buy Black and White Photographer in the UK (a separate magazine from the US one) every month.
There are every month a number of digital articles, often they are digital based readers portfolios published and so on. The bulk of the magazine remains traditional B&W however, just the way I like it. It's an excellent magazine.

I'm also aware that as traditional photographers we need to attract new blood. Often digital shooters start to experiment with B&W shooting, this often leads to a curiosity in the history of b&w photography. After all it was never killed off as many predicted by that new fangled colour stuff.

So in that respect I think B&W photographer in the UK has struck the right balance. Any digital shooter who's interested in b&w, can pick up a copy and there's stuff in there relevant right now to him/her, not to mention they can read about the all old school stuff, and who knows maybe have a go at it.

The long term future of B&W materials ultimately depends on attracting the digital generation.

 

[hortense]

InkMagazine - "APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes. ..."

 

[DavidS]

Ummm..I was talking about B&W Magazine, not Inked. But I appreciate your permission for me to run my magazine the way I wish to. The website may have a fair amount of visitors, but only a few hundred at the most who are regulars, not enough to support a magazine or advertiers for a magazine whose ad costs are that above B&W and Inked. And my post was in response to someone else's post who was talking about the issue of B&W having a change of heart.

I still don't understand, the purpose of this website is clearly stated, the members have made their feelings known and would like to have a magazine devoted 100% to traditional photography, why is it, that we keep having these conversations? If you want to run inked as a hybrid with both digital and traditional, then do it! I don't know why the conversations keep poping up here about how or why anyone of us has to accept the duel roll of any magazine, the buying public will make it known if they like content of any particular magazine with their purchasing dollars. The mission statement is plainly posted on the entrance page of this website, it is not in difficult language to read, there are a great many other websites that are devoted to, or let digital information in..

I wonder if Sean can program in a 'digital pop-up filter' as the topic keeps popping up, and it does not belong here!

If I want to read about digital on the web or in a magazine, I have plenty of choices to do it with. But I have enough respect for the owner of this website and the users wishes, to not do it here!

Dave

 

[Dave Parker]

Ummm..I was talking about B&W Magazine, not Inked. But I appreciate your permission for me to run my magazine the way I wish to. The website may have a fair amount of visitors, but only a few hundred at the most who are regulars, not enough to support a magazine or advertiers for a magazine whose ad costs are that above B&W and Inked. And my post was in response to someone else's post who was talking about the issue of B&W having a change of heart.

I could really care less how you run your magazine as it will not be one that I have interest in reading, as far as the visitors to this website, you don't actually know how many would support a traditional B&W magazine do you?

In the amount of time I have been involved in this website, as well as involved in the LF traditional business, I can make a judgement based on the information posted here, as well as the thousands of orders we have taken from individuals and companies, that there is indeed enough to support a true traditional magazine, as a company that caters to the traditional market, and currently the leading manufacture in our field, I get to hear alot of information that you may not.

But you can rest assured that a traditional magazine, done properly would be a success.

Dave