Newest Issue of Black and White Photography

[Bob F.]

FYI: Joe Cornish has just started writing a bi-monthly column for Outdoor Photography; and Joe is decidedly film biased.

V. interesting - that fact alone is certainly enough to make me take a look at the current/next issue! Ta.

Cheers, Bob.

 

[B-3]

...snip... ...if they can produce eye popping fabricated pseudo reality in PS that wow people. ...snip...

Replace "PS" with "darkroom" in that sentence and isn't that what many of us try to do in the darkroom. All photography is fiction, B&W especially so.

 

[roteague]

V. interesting - that fact alone is certainly enough to make me take a look at the current/next issue! Ta.

Cheers, Bob.

The December 2005 issue was the last column I read by him, where he wrote about photographing the quality of the light - with a great image from Lapland. The cover of the issue, was a total disaster, IMO. It is a blended image (from two digital images by Guy Edwardes (I bought his book on "100 Way..." , but won't buy another book by him), but comes across as pretty fake looking.

 

[Nige]

What is actually starting to annoy me about Ailsa's magazine is not the occasional digital bit, but that there seems to be more equipment reviews. Bob.

ditto...

add to that all the digital 'new products'. Yeah I know that's pretty much all you're going to get in a new products section, but I don't read any of it. That goes for Elizabeths 'going digital' series too... MJ's columns.. any basic Photoshop stuff (how old news is that!). Waste of good paper IMO. I like the pictures... main portfolio, readers pics, the interviews and the printing explanations (although it sounds like we've lost Julien's interesting articles now... I just got Issue 52 so haven't seen that yet)

I do have every issue, so I guess I'll keep buying it, there's nother else comparable... until Emulsion that is!

 

[FrankB]

I love B&W mag and get really excited about it arriving in the post every month. I love the photos, and stuff about developing / printing and the like. Digital bores me too however, it is B&W mag not a pure film mag. Whatever, it is the best mag available in the UK at the moment i think. Keep up the good work Ailsa

In any case, none of the aberrant content stops it from being the only magazine I automatically buy every month without even bothering to look inside it first!

I do have every issue, so I guess I'll keep buying it, there's nother else comparable... until Emulsion that is!

I could be wrong, but I think I'm starting to spot a recurrent theme here...

All the best, Ailsa!

 

[Dave Miller]

Ailsa, take no notice - make sure it's commercial first; and non-digital second.

 

[severian]

magazine cynic

I do hate being cynical but last week I went to Borders collected all the photo magazines got a caramel mocha (only 1 a week). When I finished with the magazines my mocha was still hot and I'm not a speed reader. These magazines a really thin on anything photographic beyond the basics not to mention expensive. Is anyone old enough to remember CAMERA magazine? It was published in Switzerland and was probably the last really good magazine.

Jack

 

[Dave Miller]

I must beg to differ, in my opinion the last really good magazine was Ed Buziak’s “Darkroom User”. That’s the standard and content that I would like to see again. Having said that, it wasn’t commercial. Great shame.

 

[BarrieB]

I must beg to differ, in my opinion the last really good magazine was Ed Buziak’s “Darkroom User”. That’s the standard and content that I would like to see again. Having said that, it wasn’t commercial. Great shame.

I agree on both counts, Camera was a great mag. and so was Darkroom User, by Ed Buziak. However I thought that this mag. was a commercial success and it was because Ed`s wife was seriously ill that it stopped being produced.*
Has any-one got an update on this ?
Perhaps one way to combat the intrusion of 'Digital ' into B & W magazines is for all of us to ' Write letters to the Editor ' an voice our concerns , AND to suggest suitable articles for publication. Do magazine editors belong to APUG ? they may not be aware of this and other discussions !!!!!
Barrie B . Australia.

 

[roteague]

Do magazine editors belong to APUG ? they may not be aware of this and other discussions !!!!!

Ailsa at Black and White Photography (UK) does.

 

[Dave Miller]

See Ed's blog at http://blogs.salon.com/0004217/2004/10/14.html

fot the reason for the demise of the magazine.

 

[roy]

Camera was a great mag. and so was Darkroom User, by Ed Buziak. However I thought that this mag. was a commercial success and it was because Ed`s wife was seriously ill that it stopped being produced

Agreed. I had a lengthy telephone conversation some while before Ed departed where mention was made of his wife's illness as my wife had, at that time, been working with people similarly afflicted. I think it was generally put about that his relocation was for the reason you mention. All the same, it was a shock to learn of the cessation of publishing the magazine as I thought it was going to be continued at his new location. All that is water under the bridge now but it still left many people in the lurch with running subscriptions and no explanations.

 

[Eric Rose]

My solution to all this is to ignore it. I have given up buying magazines with the exception of Lenswork. I have found that the return on investment has significantly declined for me at least. For beginners I can see they would benefit from the magazine as they seemed to be targetted at them. For someone like myself that has all the camera gear I could ever use, their "gotta buy the latest gadget" stuff is lost on me. I know enough darkroom technique to be dangerous and could really use some practice refining those skills rather than learn some other tricky thing.

I find I learn more from actually making photographs. Novel concept eh. That and sitting down with other photographers who are actually making new images and trying to expand their craft. Those photographic craftsman/women that are not content with just copying the style of other noteable photographers. This site is also a great resource for technical information.

The US Black and White Magazine is nice to look at, but I have no desire to copy others. So why bother wasting time going over all the shots. Some may use it for inspiration. That's ok, but just waking up in the morning is great inspiration for me LOL!

I guess once you've been at this for nearly 40 years you begin to want to simplify things. I don't really care about the digital/analog debate. It has no effect on how my photographs look or how I approach a concept. It might in the future, but I'll deal with it then. Maybe I'm becoming the Andy Rooney of photography. Must be that darn pyro .....

 

[severian]

darkroom user

Never heard of Darkroom User magazine but it sounds like it was a good one. I'll bet it never made it to our shores

Jack

 

[severian]

twin brother

My solution to all this is to ignore it. I have given up buying magazines with the exception of Lenswork. I have found that the return on investment has significantly declined for me at least. For beginners I can see they would benefit from the magazine as they seemed to be targetted at them. For someone like myself that has all the camera gear I could ever use, their "gotta buy the latest gadget" stuff is lost on me. I know enough darkroom technique to be dangerous and could really use some practice refining those skills rather than learn some other tricky thing.

I find I learn more from actually making photographs. Novel concept eh. That and sitting down with other photographers who are actually making new images and trying to expand their craft. Those photographic craftsman/women that are not content with just copying the style of other noteable photographers. This site is also a great resource for technical information.

The US Black and White Magazine is nice to look at, but I have no desire to copy others. So why bother wasting time going over all the shots. Some may use it for inspiration. That's ok, but just waking up in the morning is great inspiration for me LOL!

I guess once you've been at this for nearly 40 years you begin to want to simplify things. I don't really care about the digital/analog debate. It has no effect on how my photographs look or how I approach a concept. It might in the future, but I'll deal with it then. Maybe I'm becoming the Andy Rooney of photography. Must be that darn pyro .....

Eric,
I completely agree with everything you said. Perhaps we are really twins seperated at birth. You provide a dose of common sense and a dash of reality.Or maybe we both have ingested a bit too much selenium.
Jack

 

[gwatson]

I agree with Dave on the commercial viability of magazines. Articles on digital printing/ capture etc. don't do a great deal for me, (and the news the Julien Busselle is moving towards dig surprised me), but the APUG membership is not representative of the magazine's readership. I think that B+W Photography is a good egg, and if that means putting up with the odd article on dig, then I'd rather that than see it sink. And I think Ailsa has a tough job really - you can't please everyone all the time, after all. Problem is people don't often tell you what a good job you are doing, but are quick to tell you when they believe you've got something wrong.

Geoff

 

[Ailsa]

I've been following this thread for the past couple of days, and have been in two minds about whether to respond, but it's Friday afternoon and I don't want to be brooding about it all weekend!

Firstly, I really do appreciate the feedback, as it clearly comes from the heart. It would take until next week for me to discuss every point that has been raised, but those of you who have brought up the fact that a magazine has to be commercially viable in order to survive have hit the nail on the head. Striking the right balance in terms of content is probably the biggest bane of any editor's life - not to mention producing the magazine on time and on budget.

What never ceases to amaze me is the fact that here I am, producing a magazine (with the help of some outstanding colleagues and contributors, of course) that covers a very niche area of photography, and yet even within that niche opinions are extraordinarily diverse. I wouldn't have it any other way, and it's one of the many things I love about my job. However, it does mean that I can't satisfy everyone all of the time, much as I would like to. The good news is that Black & White Photography is very healthy, and has shown an increase in sales both in the UK and overseas in the past six months. I'm delighted with this, as it means there are people out there who are probably picking up the magazine for the first time, and falling in love with the medium of monochrome photography, therefore contributing to its future.

I don't know whether anything I can say here will make a difference to readers of the magazine, but if anyone would like to correspond with me personally on any of the issues raised in this thread, I would be only too happy to hear from you. I am always on ailsam@thegmcgroup.com between Monday and Friday, but for now I'm off to enjoy a glass of wine, a curry, and watch Brighton & Hove Albion lose yet again tomorrow afternoon...

Have a great weekend everyone, and thank you again for all your comments.

 

[roteague]

(and the news the Julien Busselle is moving towards dig surprised me

The complaint isn't about Julien going digital. It's about "Julien has found the light, hallelujah!!" being trumpted all over the front cover, as if the rest of us are just dumb clods plodding along with film and paper.

 

[FrankB]

I agree with Dave on the commercial viability of magazines. Articles on digital printing/ capture etc. don't do a great deal for me, (and the news the Julien Busselle is moving towards dig surprised me), but the APUG membership is not representative of the magazine's readership. I think that B+W Photography is a good egg, and if that means putting up with the odd article on dig, then I'd rather that than see it sink. And I think Ailsa has a tough job really - you can't please everyone all the time, after all. Problem is people don't often tell you what a good job you are doing, but are quick to tell you when they believe you've got something wrong.

Excellent post, Geoff. For me, I think that pretty much summed it up (at the current analogue / digital ratio at least).

Ailsa - Thank you very much for your response. May your weekend be both long and happy, your curry be flavoursome and your wine glass runneth over (without staining the tablecloth)!

As for me... well, my decision's made and I'm afraid I'm voting with my feet... ...by walking over to the phone and subscribing for another year. To the best of my knowledge, it's still the best photography mag in the UK by a fairly long chalk!

 

[roteague]

As for me... well, my decision's made and I'm afraid I'm voting with my feet... ...by walking over to the phone and subscribing for another year. To the best of my knowledge, it's still the best photography mag in the UK by a fairly long chalk!

Frank, in spite of the criticism, I still think it is an excellent magazine. I don't do much B&W, but I still buy this magazine everytime I see it. I also like Outdoor Photography. IMO, the UK based photography magazine are a lot less digital biased than their American counterparts.

 

[Eric Rose]

I must amend my comments below somewhat. The only other magazine that IMHO is worth looking at is the UK B&W. I buy it whenever they have some article I find interesting. Unfortunately of late there has been to much digital stuff for me. But that's where the market is going like it or not, so they have to cater to it. Fortunately they try hard to still present traditional b&w in a good light.

 

[Wayne]

They choose to cater to it, they dont have to. I choose to give my money elsewhere (Emulsoin, for now), I dont have to.

 

[Chuckiesinluv]

You are Right... Digital is here to stay and rule. I have 100's of nice B&W photos printed by my hands until 2003.
Chuck

 

[jerry lebens]

Sorry, I was a bit slow picking up on this thread. Ailsa had me chained up.

Seriously - I can personally vouch for Ailsa's absolute passion and support for trad photography, and her ambition to keep it represented in her magazine.
In fact, Ailsa is probably the greatest champion for traditional photography there is and chipping away at what she's achieved with B&W is, I'd suggest, counterproductive. When Ilford was relaunched one of the first doors they knocked on was Ailsa's and for good reason.

Personally, I love both trad and digital and it upsets me to be involved in what I see as a pointlessly schismatic argument : But those of you who really want to see more trad methods should shout for joy, embrace the fact that B&W exists, and bombard Ailsa with your 'better than digital' folios and support.
In short, put your money where your mouths are.
If you don't get involved, then your worst fears will materialise and B&W will go digital because of market forces (probably losing Ailsa on the way)... That seems to me a fairly pointless way of proving that you were right.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'd also mention that Ailsa has been a regular participant in the APUG postcard exchange and has posted on APUG for reasons other than flogging the magazine or workshops, which is more than I can say for some other prominent magazine editors (and I do mean that in the plural) who have passed through here.