pentaxuser
Member
In recent years it has not been so much a question of AP's position being "Digital good, Analogue bad" as "Analogue's existence no longer recognised" It used to do an annual B&W issue in deference to the origins of the profession and hobby that spawned its existence but as someone else alluded to, in the most recent issue on B&W it didn't even acknowledge the existence of analogue.
Yes of course it will report "new news" on analogue such as a new film but even here its coverage is minimal. I suppose its position is why waste space dealing with matters that concern practically none of our readers. It's business motto might as well be "Analoguers are not our future" After all business is business as they say but it does irk me that with almost every new photographer's work that's reviewed there seems to be the obligatory sentence about how much his or her professional life had been transformed when he/she made the conversion to digital. The " Lo, I have seen the light!" moment.
I still browse AP in my local library and I applaud its stand on photographers' rights but it's got to the stage where I go straight to the Roger Hicks article at the back as there is almost nothing else worth reading. So misrepresentation of an Ilford spokesperson on analogue matters doesn't come as any surprise.
Sorry Alex I just don't recognise the AP magazine as you describe it. Maybe it does a better, more balanced version further South where you are
:
pentaxuser
Yes of course it will report "new news" on analogue such as a new film but even here its coverage is minimal. I suppose its position is why waste space dealing with matters that concern practically none of our readers. It's business motto might as well be "Analoguers are not our future" After all business is business as they say but it does irk me that with almost every new photographer's work that's reviewed there seems to be the obligatory sentence about how much his or her professional life had been transformed when he/she made the conversion to digital. The " Lo, I have seen the light!" moment.
I still browse AP in my local library and I applaud its stand on photographers' rights but it's got to the stage where I go straight to the Roger Hicks article at the back as there is almost nothing else worth reading. So misrepresentation of an Ilford spokesperson on analogue matters doesn't come as any surprise.
Sorry Alex I just don't recognise the AP magazine as you describe it. Maybe it does a better, more balanced version further South where you are

pentaxuser