What's the deal with Outdoor Photographer magazine?

[roteague]

Remember that there are two reasons to run a magazine. One is to talk about the subject, and the other is to sell advertising space. Quite a few magazines seem to forget the first.

I would normally agree with you, but the people that run Outdoor Photographer (US) have made pretty clear their preference for digital. You can find any number of books on the shelves by Rob Sheppard and George Lepp. I wouldn't expect to see anything else from them (including biased articles expousing the superiority of digital over film - which is on their web site currently).

OP is trash.

 

[roteague]

( I must declare my vested interest as they used one of my pictures for the "opening shot" this month )

Crispin,

I haven't seen the current issue yet; the latest issue I've seen yet is the May 2007 issue (we are always about two months behind here). I love Outdoor Photography, as a magazine. I can't get over how stunningly beautiful the UK is, and I love the non-bias the magazine has towards film or digital.

 

[rusty71]

I'm not against camera or lens tests, If they're done with real world subjects, and in real lighting situations. The only US mags I still subscribe to are Shutterbug and American Photo. I used to get Lenswork, but the price is too steep right now. I do occasionally pick up the UK mag B&W Photography, which does have a great balance. They did an article on analog vs digital printing recently. They sent a negative to a digital guy to output, and then did a analog print in the good old darkroom. It was great because both produced very good, but very different prints. In the end they concluded the darkroom print looked better, not because it had more tones, but because it had starker shadows. But really it was a toss up. You'd never see a US magazine do something that fair. Maybe it's something about the U.S. mentality. "All or Nothing" seems to be the mindset today.

 

[Marc Akemann]

After reading as much of the August '07 issue of "Outdoor Photographer" (U.S.) as I could stand, I promptly e-mailed OP and cancelled my subscription. I've been meaning to do this for the last several months, but this latest issue was the final straw for all the reasons the previous messages to this thread covered. "Popular Photography", or whatever they call themselves now, I cancelled a while back, as I did with "Shutterbug". I get much, much more useful photographic information from APUG than any of those catalogs,...I mean, magazines.

Regarding "Shutterbug", I have enjoyed Roger Hicks' & Frances Schultz's articles as well as Robert E. Mayer's work, but, when the editor of the magazine spends most of a page talking about "The Year D _ _ _ _ _ _ Took Over" (July '07), which is an editorial based on some kind of "truthiness" about 2007 marking the first time that more prints will be made from d _ _ _ _ _ _ than analog sources, that's when it's time for me just turn around and walk away. I mean,...what the hell?! Based on this "truthiness", he then asks us to "...mark 2007 as the year the industry officially declared that d _ _ _ _ _ _ took over." So now this useless 'truthiness' is legitimate enough to call it official? It seems to me that only insecure d _ _ _ _ _ _ image makers would want to keep track of information this fallow.

Anyway, it is nice to have an actual magazine to read once in a while, so "LensWork", "View Camera", "Silvershotz" and "Focus" magazines are what I get.

I guess I vented a little bit there. Sorry.

Marc

 

[dferrie]

I got quite confused when I started reading this thread, until I realised it was referring to the USA Outdoor Photographer rather than the the UK Outdoor Photography. I can back up Mr Teague and recommend the UK OP ( I must declare my vested interest as they used one of my pictures for the "opening shot" this month )

Preaching to the converted in a niche corner of the internet may make us feel better, but contributing pro-film articles (or even just film photographs if, like me, you ain't much of a writer) might make a difference.

Crispin,

Congratulations on featuring on OP, I actually had the magazine in my hand yesterday and did like the opening shots. I ended up not buying the magazine as I got distracted by some books I had to get, now that I "know" one of the featured photographers I'll have to back and buy it. I think you have a good point about us contributing images to these magazines. In the USA/UK you have a wide selection of titles available (we get most of the UK titles in Ireland) but in Ireland we have no locally published title and only on the very rare occasion is Ireland featured in UK mags and considering it's such a short hop to get to Ireland (with really cheap flights) it would be nice to see Ireland featured more often, so maybe it's time that some of us Irish APUGers starting submitting work to the UK titles to raise our profile and what Ireland has to offer photographers!

David

 

[TStodPhoto]

I like what Jerold said:split contrast printing, RH Designs timers, different paper developers such as Amidol, alternative processes, use of large format cameras, etc. Topics which generate the most questions on the forum. Seems to be a core group of people here ho could do such things well. I would be willing to pay for that as I assume many would.

I been thinking about this for a while and of course... I keep getting told that I should start my own magazine, specifically what some of my ideas are is to have a variety of issues dealing with all aspects of LF Photography and Alt. Processes... especially some if not all the things mentioned above by Jerold... I would to prefer to only do B/W issues but it doesnt mean I will never do a color issue.. that will need to be discussed by me and my group of writers and etc... Which I have not found any volunteers for this step... I want to have advertisers only dealing with traditional photography and i know this may piss a few people off but I like traditional rather then the digital side... so no digital advertisers... I want a monthly issues with great issues and the stuff readers want... of course with high quality print work from a reliable printer.... I want to have a place in the magazine where people cant advertise there darkroom rental places worldwide and etc... I am also in the talks with a few companies about becoming a disrtibutor of there products so it is available at all times of the year and not 2 times a year.... I hope to call it "Silver Gelatin" by the way I have the copyright for the name... Let me know what you all think and also OP sucks...

 

[copake_ham]

I like what Jerold said:split contrast printing, RH Designs timers, different paper developers such as Amidol, alternative processes, use of large format cameras, etc. Topics which generate the most questions on the forum. Seems to be a core group of people here ho could do such things well. I would be willing to pay for that as I assume many would.

I been thinking about this for a while and of course... I keep getting told that I should start my own magazine, specifically what some of my ideas are is to have a variety of issues dealing with all aspects of LF Photography and Alt. Processes... especially some if not all the things mentioned above by Jerold... I would to prefer to only do B/W issues but it doesnt mean I will never do a color issue.. that will need to be discussed by me and my group of writers and etc... Which I have not found any volunteers for this step... I want to have advertisers only dealing with traditional photography and i know this may piss a few people off but I like traditional rather then the digital side... so no digital advertisers... I want a monthly issues with great issues and the stuff readers want... of course with high quality print work from a reliable printer.... I want to have a place in the magazine where people cant advertise there darkroom rental places worldwide and etc... I am also in the talks with a few companies about becoming a disrtibutor of there products so it is available at all times of the year and not 2 times a year.... I hope to call it "Silver Gelatin" by the way I have the copyright for the name... Let me know what you all think and also OP sucks...

Hmmm...have you ever heard of Emulsion ? :confused:

As Yogi Berra might say: Could this be "deja vu" all over again?

 

[TStodPhoto]

Yes I have heard of Emulsion love what they do but its not the same ideas I have... Aggie puts out a great mag... and I want to to be as good as they are... There is plenty of space out there for another mag as far as I am concerned...

 

[sbelyaev]

Sorry, I just need to vent a little bit. I just got the new OP today (Aug. 2007), and once again am disgusted by the complete lack of coverage for all outdoor photographers. Every article is digital this and digital that. I encourage everyone that gets the magazine to read the article on pg. 56 and post your thoughts. The article talks about how digital photography has supassed film (35mm anyway) mostly pertaining to publication. That may be true, but it's just the way the article is written, with things like "the media [film] is rapidly disappearing as a force in nature photography," and "there are a few diehards who love film who want to put down digital rather than simply accept their love for film." These lines are complete ignorance.

So then I see an article on black and white, only to find that it only talks about converting to B&W from a digital file. I've been getting OP for about 10 years and used to really really love it! But in the past 2 years or so, the complete lack to even recognize that film exists and run some articles on it really gets to me. I used to love when they would showcase Monte Neglar or John Sexton. This may be the last year for me. I'll stick to View Camera and Photo Techniques. Those are some good photography magazines!

That was the reason why I cancelled my subscription.

 

[sjperry]

I would suggest to Brian (and all), write letters to the editor of Outdoor Photo. Be polite and articulate in explaining the significant advantages of film for outdoors (and many other) applications. Such as quality images that gives you huge enlargements. Such as no battery dependence if you're using a Rolleiflex or other mechanical camera. Explain why you think this article is inadequate. Publishers do pay at least some attention to readers, especially subscribers. To anyone who cancels their subscription, be sure and let them know WHY. I haven't really read the magazine in years or I would also. We should try and keep film usage alive in these type of publications.

Steve Perry

 

[dickie vaara]

I think we all would be hard-pressed to find ANY single publication that still caters to 'film only'. I have looked fairly hard. One that I heard about from another APUG member was "EMULSION, although I have not see a copy.; and I think it follows large format; but other than that, I believe the other post is correct in that they are falling into the same trap of caving to the advertisers who tell them what to print and when to take their lunch breaks.

 

[Black Dog]

I certainly don't object to the occasional few pages on digi as another tool-UK B&W gets my vote as it regularly publishes stimulating portfolios by Bruce Barnbaum,Keith carter (awesome), Bruce Rae, our very own Cheryl jacobs etc (and even me twice) without going too heavy on the latest gizmos and Nikanoltas.

 

[roteague]

that I heard about from another APUG member was "EMULSION, although I have not see a copy.; and I think it follows large format

Emulsion is for all formats and all processes, if they are traditional. Go to http://www.emulsionmagazine.org/index.php for more details. There should be another issue shortly, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[roteague]

I would suggest to Brian (and all), write letters to the editor of Outdoor Photo. Be polite and articulate in explaining the significant advantages of film for outdoors (and many other) applications.

It is really a waste of time. They have their heads in the sand over there. Remember the same people that put out OP, also put out Digital Photo Pro. Additionally, Rob Sheppard has written literaly dozens of books on digital photography. Writing him, other than to blow off steam is like hitting a brick wall with your head - he won't listen.

 

[Marc Akemann]

I would suggest to Brian (and all), write letters to the editor of Outdoor Photo. Be polite and articulate in explaining the significant advantages of film for outdoors (and many other) applications. Such as quality images that gives you huge enlargements. Such as no battery dependence if you're using a Rolleiflex or other mechanical camera. Explain why you think this article is inadequate. Publishers do pay at least some attention to readers, especially subscribers. To anyone who cancels their subscription, be sure and let them know WHY. I haven't really read the magazine in years or I would also. We should try and keep film usage alive in these type of publications.

Steve Perry

I agree with everything you said, Steve. It's a real level-headed approach and I appreciate and respect that. I cancelled my subscription with the US "OP", as I mentioned in my earlier message, and simply wanted to make a quick, clean break from them. They are so heavily invested toward the digital side of things,...I just didn't want to waste any more time with them.

In 2002, I did write to them, twice, about the passing of one of nature & wildlife photography's great photographers. This Dutch photographer, Fred Hazelhoff, was doing fantastic work from the 1960's into 21st century, and contributed much to nature & landscape photography as well as environmental issues, and inspired many to enter the world of photography in Europe, including (from what I understand) Frans Lanting, who does a column for "OP". They never responded to my messages, and they never noted Hazelhoff's passing in the magazine. So my skeptism toward "OP" began even back then in '02. I guess the story would not have had any relationship with any of their sponsors, since Fred was a Leica-R shooter. I don't know,....perhaps just a little respect from "OP" for some of the things that got us here, like film and people like Fred Hazelhoff, would be nice.

Marc

 

[roteague]

I can back up Mr Teague and recommend the UK OP ( I must declare my vested interest as they used one of my pictures for the "opening shot" this month )

I just got the July 2007 Outdoor Photography issue. Is this the one with your cover? It is a beautiful image. There are a lot of film based images in this issue - when you open the magazine, you immediately see an image taken with a Nikon F100 on Velvia, and that continues throughout the magazine. Yes, there are digital images as well, but they fall apart compared to the film images - the contrast between the two is obvious.

BTW, I also picked up the July 2007 Photography Monthly. A cover image taken on 35mm Velvia. Stunning as well.

 

[photocolor]

Outdoor Photo article: I too was bemused by that poorly written article. Maybe it didn't occur to the dimwitted author to make it clear that film involves more than 35mm (med format, LF which blow away most DSLRs and even some med format digital backs), not to mention that even with a DSLR you need a really top flight expensive one to provide the capability of image quality close to or superior to 35mm film (maybe Canon 5D, 1DsMII).

Emulsion magazine - I paid for a subscription about two months ago, but got no response from several emails and even different email addresses. I had to get my money back via Paypal. Either they are on some long vacation, their computer has been down for weeks, or maybe some business problem. Hopefully they will continue to publish.

 

[jovo]

Emulsion magazine - I paid for a subscription about two months ago, but got no response from several emails and even different email addresses. I had to get my money back via Paypal. Either they are on some long vacation, their computer has been down for weeks, or maybe some business problem. Hopefully they will continue to publish.

I think Emulsion is entirely a labor of love. Unfortunately, love's labor may be lost when the folks who have undertaken to publish it are part time in every sense of the term. I've not yet chosen to subscribe for that reason. I wish Aggie well, but have not yet been convinced that Emulsion is anything more than the project of dilettantes. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

[copake_ham]

I think Emulsion is entirely a labor of love. Unfortunately, love's labor may be lost when the folks who have undertaken to publish it are part time in every sense of the term. I've not yet chosen to subscribe for that reason. I wish Aggie well, but have not yet been convinced that Emulsion is anything more than the project of dilettantes. I hope I'm proven wrong.

?

Is this guidance or opinion?

 

[John McCallum]

I think Emulsion is entirely a labor of love. Unfortunately, love's labor may be lost when the folks who have undertaken to publish it are part time in every sense of the term. I've not yet chosen to subscribe for that reason. I wish Aggie well, but have not yet been convinced that Emulsion is anything more than the project of dilettantes. I hope I'm proven wrong.

I'm afraid I'm inclined to agree.

 

[jovo]

?

Is this guidance or opinion?

Opinion. Be guided by it as you may.....or may not.

 

[jovo]

Hey John, see yer sportin' a new badge there.

Yup....it's put a new hole in my tee shirt!

 

[copake_ham]

Opinion. Be guided by it as you may.....or may not.

Thanks. I appreciate the clarification although it would have been better if it had not been followed by a Greek chorus.

EDIT: A "disappearing" Greek chrous at that.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Tsk, Tsk, George. If you want to play with the big kids, you have play nicely.

Steve

 

[copake_ham]

Tsk, Tsk, George. If you want to play with the big kids, you have play nicely.

Steve

A-yup, hear you on that.