Feb. Issue B&W (US) 1st Impression

[photomc]

The Feb issue of B&W (US) came in the mail yesterday and after a first look wanted to hear what others think of it. There is a nice article on the Center for Creative Photography, complete with a small write up on AA, Siskin, W.E.Smith, H Callahan, E. Weston, P Strand, etc. A big write up on the next photo annual and how great the last one was (if you check the forums, this is the same one I found a BIG ho!Hum!), then there is a little blurb about how film is going away (with some interesting quotes from John Sexton - Lead in for the Silver Conference I think), feature (and cover) by Ryuijie and a nice ad by the Contact Printers Guild with a print by our own Matt (scootermm) way to go Matt.

So while not a bad issue, I see the signs that this may become another publication that seems to want to tell us that tradtional methods are becoming replaced and no one will want our work...or if you look at the glass half full, then we are producing work that very few will be making and it will be what collectors want...who knows.

thoughts, comments?

 

[Peter Schrager]

B+W MAG/RAG

If I had to listen to what the world had to say about me or my artwork I wouldn't get out if bed in the morning. I walk to my own damn tune and I surely hope that others follow suit...when I've taken the last exposure with my last piece of film then I will know that film is dead. Make ART!
Best, Peter

 

[Lee Shively]

Crap! I was planning on subscribing to "B&W" now that my "Aperture" subscription (what a mistake that was!) has expired. Maybe I'll hold off on the subscription and buy a few more issues at the newsstand to see how things will go.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Mags

People could also start buying photographs from other people right here. Living with a great piece of ART will teach you more than any magazine I ever read.
Just a thought....
Best, Peter

 

[Jorge]

More and more B&W photographers are going the digital route. I am not surprised that B&W magazines starts to cater to them, the magazine survives by advertisment and a lot of it is from the little ads that appear on the back, many of which are from photographers doing ink jet printing. Once the editor decided to allow digital and ink jet printing, it was just a matter of time before we saw this.

Dont worry, be happy and move on......

 

[roteague]

More and more B&W photographers are going the digital route. I am not surprised that B&W magazines starts to cater to them,

Don't worry, be happy and move on......

Good advice, the photo world is going to move in this direction, regardless whether we like it or not.

 

[photomc]

Yeap...looks like it will be easy to let the sub lapse now, and by something at a news stand when it interest me, or better yet as suggested above use $$ to buy a print. A shame though there is becoming next to nothing out there (though there are still some excellent books to add to the library). The one High Point to the issue is seeing scootermm have his work in there

 

[Curt]

Magazines usually have a couple of good pictures and maybe a paragraph of information worth knowing. Other than that it's ads and hype. Go to the book store or magazine stand and buy three photo magazines. What did it cost? Could you have spent that money on film, paper, or chemicals instead and got you information right here?

Curt

 

[jvarsoke]

One of my favorite parts of that mag (I think it's B&W -- maybe the other brit mag) is the re-creation of famous shots. They always do it in digital, and they never get the feel of the shot right. The Michael Kane shot comes to mind. The digital has none of the grit, yet it's left QED.

To me is just usually demonstrates why I use Silver. Though, with products vanishing it will be harder and harder to get the same effects.

 

[avandesande]

I like B&W because you can read/see a lot of photo history. Most of the digital stuff looks like surreal crap though, because it is.

 

[jovo]

I received my copy of B&W yesterday. I was the first time I felt really surprised by how poor the quality of the reproductions are. It's not that I had ever thought they were particularly good, but yesterday I was startled. Michael and Paula probably pay a good deal to advertise their 'graphs therein, and I had seen actual prints of some of the work reproduced last May in Springfield of the ice on black sand series from Iceland that Paula did. Well, I couldn't tell there even was sand under the ice in the ad. The treacherous thing about it is that digital prints look no better or worse than any other kind of print...contact, platinum, silver, what have you. I appreciate all the more what lengths Brooks Jensen goes to in Lenswork to make photographs look really good. Henry Rasmussen doesn't share that standard by a long shot.

 

[rmann]

Perhaps a look at the British published "Black & White Photography" would be worth a look - www.gmcpubs.com - in my opinion a very nice monthly (runs around 100 pages) with a strong traditional darkroom content. Nice mix of professional and amateur submissions.

 

[vet173]

Magazines usually have a couple of good pictures and maybe a paragraph of information worth knowing. Other than that it's ads and hype. Go to the book store or magazine stand and buy three photo magazines. What did it cost? Could you have spent that money on film, paper, or chemicals instead and got you information right here?

Curt

What Curt said.

 

[Jim Chinn]

As I time goes on I find more and more things presented from the technical side of things a basic rehash of articles I have in old magazines from 20 years ago.

I find 2 or 3 publications presenting work from the same photographer quite often.

While I enjoy some of the digital pixelgraphs and portfolios from an aesthetic point of view, Every page that is dedicated to digital technique or product review lowers the value of what I paid for.

I have let all my magazine subscriptions lapse over the last couple of years. I discovered that at least 2 or 3 issues of any mag during the year does not have any content I am interested in or do not already have in another form.

Last year I did not purchase a single issue of Photo Techniques, Camera Arts,
or Aperture. I left 2 issues of Lenswork on the shelf, as well as a couple of issues of View Camera afer looking at them with a cup of joementum. I bought only a couple of Black and White Magazine issues. I have a subscription to B&W magazine, although I have not renewed my subscription and wil pick it up at the store depending on issue. I will subscribe to Emulsion when it comes out.

For me the other issue is there is only so many $ to chase so many magazines. At one time I was spending about $40 or more a month on periodicals. If you cut out half of that over the year you can get 2 or 3 very nice photo books or a couple of prints with the difference.

 

[Gerald Koch]

Sometime about a year or so ago B&W subtlely changed their criteria and I stopped buying issues at the bookstore. After looking at their Annual and latest issue I doubt I will even go back to the bookstore anymore. Nothing but pretentious garbage, IMHO.

 

[c6h6o3]

I appreciate all the more what lengths Brooks Jensen goes to in Lenswork to make photographs look really good. Henry Rasmussen doesn't share that standard by a long shot.

A friend of mine recently showed me an inkjet print made by Brooks Jensen of one of his photos. Gorgeous image. Blah print. My friend's money would've been better spent buying the magazine and cutting out a copy of that picture to frame.

For me, Lenswork is the only one worth even thumbing through at the newsstand. The reproductions are consistently excellent.

 

[roteague]

Perhaps a look at the British published "Black & White Photography" would be worth a look - www.gmcpubs.com - in my opinion a very nice monthly (runs around 100 pages) with a strong traditional darkroom content. Nice mix of professional and amateur submissions.

That is a quite well known magazine around here, but thanks for the suggestion. The editor of that magazine, is also an APUG member.

 

[roteague]

For me the other issue is there is only so many $ to chase so many magazines. At one time I was spending about $40 or more a month on periodicals. If you cut out half of that over the year you can get 2 or 3 very nice photo books or a couple of prints with the difference.

Good advice Jim.

 

[medform-norm]

Who needs a magazine when there's APUG? Better spend your subscription money on this place and on Sean!

Who knows, in the end it might generate it's own (bi-yearly) magazine with something else inside instead of pixelated reproductions. Now wouldn't that be cool?

Norm

 

[Sean]

Who needs a magazine when there's APUG? Better spend your subscription money on this place and on Sean!

Who knows, in the end it might generate it's own (bi-yearly) magazine with something else inside instead of pixelated reproductions. Now wouldn't that be cool?

Norm

Eventually I hope to start paying some top pro's to write original article content for APUG's subscriber base. I have checked on the pricing for such a thing and although not cheap it should be doable in about a year or so If I can work the site part time and keep the revenue growing. I would like APUG to continue on it's current track as well as adding more 'e-zine' style monthly content (articles, industry news, interviews, guest chats in the chatroom, etc).

 

[Dorothy Blum Cooper]

Eventually I hope to start paying some top pro's to write original article content for APUG's subscriber base. I have checked on the pricing for such a thing and although not cheap it should be doable in about a year or so If I can work the site part time and keep the revenue growing. I would like APUG to continue on it's current track as well as adding more 'e-zine' style monthly content (articles, industry news, interviews, guest chats in the chatroom, etc).

COOL!!