Photog featured in different mags in same month

WarEaglemtn · Jul 23, 2006

The Alan Ross article in View Camera and his work in LensWork at the same time is interesting. Does this present a problem for a publisher/editor when the same photographer is featured in 'the competition'?

How does the publisher/editor react when he sees the work in a competing magazine? Is it seen as affirmation of his choice or does it cause problems?

tim atherton · Jul 23, 2006

The same happened last year with Robb Kendrick tintypes in the same two magazines (and also of course, National Geo...)

http://www.largeformatphotography.i...?t=14714&page=2&highlight=tintypes+geographic

(Kendrick posts his response in this thread)

The answer is - yes/no/maybe/not really... these are really just articles about the photographers work, not some breaking news story or unique record of events

In some cases it's bad business - in other cases magazines can take so long to get an article to press you've no idea if and when it might happen and it's just coincidence and tough luck

tim atherton · Jul 23, 2006

I'd add, these two mags are chasing after/serving so much of the same market, with a lot of crossover and generally seem to chose portfolios of a "certain type" that they end up fishing from a pretty small pond - so this is almost inevitable.

(a recent post on photo mags on the LF list probably listed more people buying View Camera and Lenswork than anything else...)

scootermm · Jul 23, 2006

WarEaglemtn said:
The Alan Ross article in View Camera and his work in LensWork at the same time is interesting. Does this present a problem for a publisher/editor when the same photographer is featured in 'the competition'?

How does the publisher/editor react when he sees the work in a competing magazine? Is it seen as affirmation of his choice or does it cause problems?

I think a big thing to keep in mind is whether or not a particular magazine/editor would consider the "other" publication as being competition. In this comparison I would hardly believe Jensen or Simmons would consider View Camera or Lenswork to be competition. I think because of the niche market that a majority of these magazine hold none, to me, would be considered competitors. View Camera fills one niche, BW UK another, Lenswork another, BW US another. Thats what is so wonderful for the readership. Even when similar articles are run on the same photog each magazine takes a unique perspective and I enjoy reading this editorial uniqueness.

jovo · Jul 23, 2006

Alan Ross is also featured in B&W magazine with the same photograph that appears on the cover of Lenswork featured prominently in the that article. In the Lenswork piece, out of 19 photographs, only 3 were from this decade and only 2 from the 90's. It would have been nice to see more of his most recent work. What was published is, nonetheless, excellent photography that is inspiring to view.

bill schwab · Jul 23, 2006

A lot of times when you make an editorial/promotional push you are lucky enough to get picked-up in several places. It is just the way it works sometimes. Ever notice how the same celebrities and authors are hot in the media for small spurts of time? Same thing in our small world of business. Artist gets exposure... magazine gets free copy and art... enthusiasts get their reading and viewing pleasure. Everybody wins.

B

Davec101 · Jul 23, 2006

Quite a few magazines i have seen of late have had Nick Brandt's wildlife photography featured in the same month,also Allan Jenkins cyanotype work has been in a lot of publications i get recently. I dont have a problem with it unless it stops other worthy photographers from being featured at all.

David A. Goldfarb · Jul 23, 2006

Given the number of magazine covers that Angelina Jolie seems to be able to command in any given month, I'm not too worried about photographers getting two portfolios in print at the same time.

Aggie · Jul 23, 2006

Well Alan is getting around this month and next. We did an article on him in October to replace a book report that was handed in instead of the main article we wanted. It was a fast scramble to get a big name, and alan was very gracious. I'm biased, we have more photos, and a better article IMO, and no I didn't write it. If you ever have a chance to meet Alan Ross in person, He is a truely great guy. I wish him all the best.

philldresser · Jul 23, 2006

David A. Goldfarb said:
Given the number of magazine covers that Angelina Jolie seems to be able to command in any given month, I'm not too worried about photographers getting two portfolios in print at the same time.

David

Now you've done it. You mentioned Angelina Jolie and now Blanksy's going to get all excited again

Phill

donbga · Jul 23, 2006

tim atherton said:
I'd add, these two mags are chasing after/serving so much of the same market, with a lot of crossover and generally seem to chose portfolios of a "certain type" that they end up fishing from a pretty small pond - so this is almost inevitable.

(a recent post on photo mags on the LF list probably listed more people buying View Camera and Lenswork than anything else...)

Priddle-praddle.

Joe Lipka · Jul 23, 2006

It is not above the realm of imagination to suppose that a photographer with an exceptional body of work would submit to multiple publications. Having more than one accepted would be a wonderful problem to have.

tim atherton · Jul 23, 2006

donbga said:
Priddle-praddle.

presumably you actually mean prittle-prattle. If so, how so...?

donbga · Jul 23, 2006

tim atherton said:
presumably you actually mean prittle-prattle. If so, how so...?

Thanks for correcting my spelling.

tim atherton said:
and generally seem to chose portfolios of a "certain type

If you look at past issues of those two magazines you will see that really isn't true. When is the last time Lens Work published color archietectural interiors?

Or color any color portfolios. Sometimes there are similarities but the editorial slant is completly different, IMO.

tim atherton · Jul 23, 2006

Both magazine are serving a niche within a niche (at least)

with some exceptions (often quite good exceptions) the subject matter that both tend to publish could be described as perhaps "mid-modern" (i.e. probably 85+% of the content of both could have been taken in the 1930/40/50's if you ignore the odd billboard or whatever)

There is a certain type of photography (and whether it's in colour or not really makes little difference) that tends to predominate in both and which draws from the same fairly narrow strand of photography. Occasionally they step out of this at one end or the other (these days Lenswork perhaps more often).

I don't think you are likely to see even much, say, Friedlander in Lenswork. Nor will you see much Robert Adams or Shore or Esser - or even Misrach these days - in View Camera (though neither is impossible, but they wouldn't be characteristic of either mag). Or much Sally Mann in either (even though View Camera has featured her in the distant past as I recall).

tim atherton · Jul 23, 2006

PS - the fact that in less than a year the two magazines have twice both featured major portfolios of the same photographer at the same time ( the first time both were the cover stories I think) speaks volumes. There are hundreds more good photographers than that out there....

(and btw - I happen to think Lenswork is a particularly good magazine)

donbga · Jul 23, 2006

tim atherton said:
I don't think you are likely to see even much, say, Friedlander in Lenswork. Nor will you see much Robert Adams or Shore or Esser - or even Misrach these days - in View Camera (though neither is impossible, but they wouldn't be characteristic of either mag). Or much Sally Mann in either (even though View Camera has featured her in the distant past as I recall).

I beleive that Adams, (not Gomez or Ansel), Misrach, and Shore has appeared in VC in the past.

As far as LensWork is concerned I'm willing to bet money if Friedlander were to submit a portfolio he would be published and the same perhaps for Adams and Mann.

But the under current to your posts lately seem to me to suggest that you embrace what many art schools with a photography curriculum are teaching, "traditional photography is residual photography".

Frankly, a lot of the current color work I see today is banal and quite boring. Big ass inkjet or cibachrome prints seem to be one of the trends these days; work that is devoid of emotion or point of view.

Don't misunderstand me, I've seen enough of the disneychrome nature photography of the typical subjects such as fall color, sunrise/sunset, rocks and roots, - post card photography to last me pretty much a life time. And I do like the work of those listed above, but I don't see much new work today that is being promoted as cutting edge worth looking at for long.

tim atherton · Jul 23, 2006

donbga said:
I beleive that Adams, (not Gomez or Ansel), Misrach, and Shore has appeared in VC in the past.

Not as far as recall, apart from Misrach, which I indicated - as in I'd be suprised to see View Camera publish his shrub or beach studies? (But they did publish An-My Lê - so who knows) - they are somewhat different from most of his desert work

And you may be right about Friedlander... who knows

But the under current to your posts lately seem to me to suggest that you embrace what many art schools with a photography curriculum are teaching, "traditional photography is residual photography".

I'm not sure what "traditional photography" is? But that aside, I've really no idea what the art schools and departments are currently teaching. I do know what kind of contemporary photography tends to interest and excite me though, and what my friends and colleagues who are photographers talk about, look at and enjoy.

(I'm still intrigued by the traditional photography thing - is it Frederick Evans? Gustav le Gray? Atget? Sudek? Many Ray? Walker Evans? Roger Fenton? Francis Frith? Maholy Nagy? Kertesz? to name a few of my favourites of widely varying schools and styles - give me a clue)

Frankly, a lot of the current color work I see today is banal and quite boring. Big ass inkjet or cibachrome prints seem to be one of the trends these days; work that is devoid of emotion or point of view

..but I don't see much new work today that is being promoted as cutting edge worth looking at for long.

Many of Esser's vedutas and landscapes are - for me - quite fascinating, rich and beautiful. Would that I could afford one to keep on the wall... And of course much of Sally Mann's work to me seems almost pure emotion. And much of Sugimotos work to me is stunning and speaks volumes in terms of point of view (as does Basilicos work).

(and don't get me going on size - I've never understood why so many photographers still seem to have an almost pathological attachment to miniautures, even when the technological reasons for them have long fallen! There are few other art forms that so artificially limit themselves in the same way that I can think of... but that's a whole other topic)

donbga · Jul 24, 2006

tim atherton said:
Many of Esser's vedutas and landscapes are - for me - quite fascinating, rich and beautiful. Would that I could afford one to keep on the wall... And of course much of Sally Mann's work to me seems almost pure emotion. And much of Sugimotos work to me is stunning and speaks volumes in terms of point of view (as does Basilicos work).

Just so other folks can see some of Esser's work, here is a link to visit:

http://www.albrightknox.org/acquisitions/acq_2002/Esser.html

Need we say more.

donbga · Jul 24, 2006

donbga said:
Just so other folks can see some of Esser's work, here is a link to visit:

http://www.albrightknox.org/acquisitions/acq_2002/Esser.html

Need we say more.

And here is another one in color:

http://www.aeroplastics.net/dreamscapes/ESSER.html

What else do I need to say.

tim atherton · Jul 24, 2006

I never quite understand this need to denigrate and dismiss work (perhaps because it apparently doesn't accord with your own view?)

Have you looked at the full range of his work? Have you spent time with the books? Gone to an exhibition? Our is it a knee-jerk thing based on not having bothered to inform yourself

tim atherton · Jul 24, 2006

A silly sort of pissing match carried out by pulling random images of the internet makes little sense - especially as well all presumably know (this being apug and all) that the internet is no way to present images.

But you could have chosen these two for example

which obviously give a very different view.

Perhaps you could explain why you happened to pick the two you did?

BTW I'm still waiting for an explanation of "traditional photography"...?

donbga · Jul 24, 2006

tim atherton said:
A silly sort of pissing match carried out by pulling random images of the internet makes little sense - especially as well all presumably know (this being apug and all) that the internet is no way to present images.

But you could have chosen these two for example
which obviously give a very different view.

Perhaps you could explain why you happened to pick the two you did?

I'm still waiting for an explanation of "traditional photography"...?

What wwas wrong with the first two. You could have posted links if you wanted to be specific.

As for traditional photography, you know what I mean Tim. Or to put it another way, I interpret your comment about work looking like it was made in the 30s, 40s, and 50s as being what you think traditional photography is.

Take a look at this link for the work of Holly Roberts for something that has some emotional content and is modern, not traditional:

http://www.photoeye.com/Gallery/for...io=Portfolio1&Gallery=0&Keyword=HOLLY ROBERTS

In the end it's all a matter ot taste. And no this ain't no pissing match.
The style of

tim atherton · Jul 24, 2006

donbga said:
What wwas wrong with the first two. You could have posted links if you wanted to be specific.

well - it's what appears to be the attached snide remarks, such as "Need we say more."

Take a look at this link for the work of Holly Roberts for something that has some emotional content and is modern, not traditional:

http://www.photoeye.com/Gallery/for...HOLLY ROBERTS

modern with the small m I take it - yes, interesting stuff.

As for traditional photography, you know what I mean Tim.

Actually, I really don't know what you mean by it - it's not at all clear?

"traditional photography is residual photography". presumably a quote from somewhere? But what exactly do you mean by it?

Photography (even just limiting ourselves to a fairly broadly defined field of "art" photography) has a huge number of traditions, styles, movements, schools which have existed, changed, developed and - some of them - died through the history of the medium. Which one are you singling out as the "traditional photography" (which apparently is now being dismissed in the art schools)?

donbga · Jul 24, 2006

tim atherton said:
Which one are you singling out as the "traditional photography" (which apparently is now being dismissed in the art schools)?

I made that clear in my last post.

As for the quote it was made at a recent SPE conference earlier this year.

Photog featured in different mags in same month

WarEaglemtn

tim atherton

tim atherton

scootermm

jovo

Membership Council

bill schwab

Advertiser

Davec101

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Aggie

philldresser

donbga

Joe Lipka

tim atherton

donbga

tim atherton

tim atherton

donbga

tim atherton

donbga

donbga

tim atherton

tim atherton

donbga

tim atherton

donbga

Photog featured in different mags in same month

Membership Council

Advertiser

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency