Nature's Best Photography - Winter 2006 Issue

[roteague]

I just picked up the Winter 2006 issue of Nature's Best Photography magazine. This issue celebrates their 10th anniversary, by publishing the top 10 photo contest winners for each of those years - a total of 100 images. I haven't counted the images, but a quick looks reveals that about 90% where shot on film. If you love good nature and landscape photography, this is probably the best magazine of its type. The images are simply stunning!!!

Also, they have announced their 2006 photo contest, entries due April 29th, if anyone is interested.

Their web address is: http://www.naturesbestmagazine.com/

.
.
.

Sorry, I didn't see any B&W images.

 

[roteague]

Not a lot of nature photographers here I guess. Too bad, this is a excellent magazine.

 

[Travis Nunn]

I do a lot of nature photography, but not even close to the level of what's usually in Nature's Best and you're right, it is an excellent magazine.

 

[Peter Rockstroh]

Yes Robert, Nature´s Best is a great magazine. And the reason why most of the images are captured on film, is that most serious nature photographers don´t trust electronic equipment when they´re sitting in a swamp or trekking through the desert. But now that you mention it, there is very little wildlife photography in this community. I guess that there are more members working with large and medium format, working with landscape and portrait, than 35 mm telephoto hunters.

 

[roteague]

I guess that there are more members working with large and medium format, working with landscape and portrait, than 35 mm telephoto hunters.

I guess there is a higher percentage of wildlife/nature photographers, like Art Wolfe, who have moved to digital, than landscape photographers. I've heard that Tom Mangelsen is one of the few remaning pro wildlife/nature photographers still solidly pro-film - I'm not a wildlife photographer, so I could be greatly mistaken.

 

[Travis Nunn]

I guess there is a higher percentage of wildlife/nature photographers, like Art Wolfe, who have moved to digital, than landscape photographers. I've heard that Tom Mangelsen is one of the few remaning pro wildlife/nature photographers still solidly pro-film - I'm not a wildlife photographer, so I could be greatly mistaken.

No Robert, I think you're right. A good friend of mine, Lynda Richardson, is a pro wildlife photographer and she still shoots film when she can, but she has had to make the jump to digital because more and more of her clients are requesting digital.

 

[Sanjay Sen]

I enjoy the work of Anup & Manoj Shah - (brothers and) wildlife photographers from Kenya. They work with 35mm film, and have done quite a few assignments for National Geographic. The latest issue of NG has a feature, Wolves of Ethiopia, which one of the brothers shot.

 

[Peter Rockstroh]

I guess there is a higher percentage of wildlife/nature photographers, like Art Wolfe, who have moved to digital, than landscape photographers.

I doubt that photographers like Art Wolfe voluntarily moved towards digital. They are sponsored and use the equipment their sponsors supply them with. I´m sure their personal images are still shot on film, beginning with their knowledge of image permanence.