View Camera Magazine Subscriber Only Section [Archive]

Daniel Grenier

22-May-2004, 04:42

Steve,

Ahhhh that "subscriber's only" thing! I own every single issue of VC as I subscribed way back on day 1. I stopped subscribing some time after, however, opting to buy VC at my local book store instead. This, after receiving too many damaged issues from the Post Office. Although the website's "subscriber's only" section brings value to some, it cheats me - a full paying VC enthusiast - from enjoying those added features. How about making it a "buyer's only" section with an accesss code in VC proper as opposed to the mailing envelope? Would that not be fair enough for all?

steve simmons

22-May-2004, 07:31

We get far less money from the retail buyers then we get from the subscribers. By the time the booktore and the dstributor take their share we are left with far less than what a subscriber gives to us.I have never understood the atitude that you are being cheated by buying newsstnad copies. We are publishng the same size magazine we've always published and we have not raised the newsstand price in ovr 10 years. You are getting the same value you've gotten off the newsstand since 1994 or before.

Buy subcribing you pay less, you get access to the subscriber section, and we get more. It seems like a winning play for both sides.

Our magazines come in a plastic wrapper and shold be protected.

steve simmons

Donal Taylor

22-May-2004, 10:19

I have also found exactly the same problem. You read an article which is some ways really a "teaser" for what is on the website. So you get a fairly brief article with "read the full extended details on our subscriber website" which, as I buy at the newstand I can't get into.

Last time I was in the book store I didn't even bother to look at the View Camera because the last few issues ahd become rather frustrating (bought Blindspot instead).

"You are getting the same value you've gotten off the newsstand since 1994 or before." Not at all correct - some articles are really incomplete "extracts"

Richard Fenner

22-May-2004, 10:32

I know this has come up before, so may be repetitious... but I dislike the subscriber-only section. I enjoy sitting down with a magazine, without the computer bright and humming in front of me, without the thought 'I should just check my email/that film order/that photographer's portfolio/the weather etc etc'. Although I download the PDFs to read later, in years to come, they will have no relation to the article in the magazine, but will exist as standalone pieces, all incomplete. Maybe people would be willing to accept a price increase to add a few pages to the magazine?

Tom Diekwisch

22-May-2004, 13:58

I got my new issue today and I have just become a subscriber after buying it at the newstand for five years. Yes, it's bent, but yes, it's a cool magazine. I really like the mix of technical, photographic info, and features. It's one of the best magazines out there. Anyway, I see my subscription more as a support of their work than anything else.

RichSBV

22-May-2004, 17:06

After reading constant bashes of View Camera's web site and policy, I'd like to finally offer my own opinion...

First off, View Camera is one of the best photo magazines I have ever found. I may not be too fond of the digital stuff, but you take the good with the bad... Overall, it's a great magazine and I hope it stays around a long time!

Second, I don't care one way or the other about the subscriber-only web site. I can't be bothered trying to remember to keep that label around for a password...

Third, I get really tired of people bashing steve for his site and policy. His reasons are valid and it is HIS site and magazine. If you don't like it then don't use the site or read the mag! To be professional (and adult) about it, you could simply send steve an e-mail and explain your views _politely_! Bashing it out over and over again in public is a waste of everyone's time and makes a fool of you (now, who am I talking about? No one! Speaking in general here)...

I take View camera (and Camera Arts) at face value for what they are as magazines. I would not want to do without either. Thank you Steve! And don't ever let me forget to renew! ;-) I do have a habit of forgetting those things... If at some future time I decide to take advantage of the web site, well that's just gravy and no more...

Now, lets all be nice. No bashing... And just because an issue or two isn't to your liking is pretty much just normal for magazine publishing. I give any magazine a years worth of reading. If after that year I decide it's not worth renewing, I don't. And there's quite a list of "don'ts"...

steve simmons

22-May-2004, 20:28

I am writing this response with the full realization that in the past you have not been able to listen when offered constructive criticism. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

We re very eceptive to constructive criticism. What is frustrating is bashing that does not offer a solution.

I still disagree with those retail buyers who claim to be cheated. By putting info on the web we are able to supplement what we do in the magazine. Some portfolios will have more photos because we can put some of the text on the web. Some of the portfolios are supplemented with additional photos on the web. I do not believe the articles are any shorter because of the web content. If we cut back or stopped the web info the magazine would not get larger. We've done a consistent 72 pages for years except for a few issues after 9/11 where we cut back to 64 because of a severe drop in advertising. Many other magzines have not gone back to pre 9/11 age counts because the ads have not quite come back yet. We've gone back to 72 pages because we can't get all we want into each issue with just 64 pages.

steve simmons

Bruce M. Herman

23-May-2004, 17:02

Steve,

I think that there is value to adding extra material to the magazine articles by publishing it on your web site. I would like to address two issues here: one is the problem encountered by folks who purchase the magazine from a local book store and so do not have a password, and the second is the continually changing password, itself.

First, I propose that you adopt the model used by PDN. They have a portion of their web site open to all visitors, and a second section that is accessible only to those who pay a modest additional fee payable annually, say $10-15 in the case of VC. This approach would make it possible for folks who do not subscribe to purchase their magazine locally and yet still have access to the web materials if they pay the fee. It would be their choice.

The same choice would obviously extend to subscribers. By making the access fee payable on an annual basis, password management would be more straightforward for both the subscribers and for you, too. The issue of a bimonthly changing password has been my single biggest complaint about your magazine. This fee would also provide you with some extra working capital for the web site, allowing you to maintain a larger volume of older material.

Personally, I do not mind that not every article is equally interesting to me. Your magazine serves a diverse audience and would not survive if it were more narrowly focused. I appreciate very much your efforts.

Bruce

steve simmons

23-May-2004, 20:47

Lets look at some reality. If we expand the articles in each isue to include wht is on the web we can

pull an article to make space - ok which one????? three diferent readers will have three different suggestions

increase the page count and increase the price

which route should we take?

or we can take the route we've chosen which is to slightly shorten an article or two, ad an extra article to each issue and place supplemental info on the web at no charge to subscrbers Retail buyers are still gettng the 72 pages of info and actually more editorial matterial since ads are till down compaed to pre 9/11 days.

If you really do not want to subscribe but want access to the web we will sell a web subscription for $15.00 per year. Call us at 800-894-439 m-f 8-5 mountian time.

steve simmons

Kirk Gittings

25-May-2004, 00:54

I feel like some of the critics of Steve do not understand the magazine business very well. Keeping magazines afloat in this market without cutting pages and or raising the price is remarkable. And VC is a business not your local photo club or a chat room! What Steve is doing is consistent with what is going on in the magazine business everywhere and he is not shortchanging anyone as other magazines are. he has really struggled to keep the quality up as ad revenues have dropped for all magazines. As a matter of fact I think he gives more value for the dollar than the others do. Come on, the subscription price is a steal. It is embarrassing how many cheap whinny people there are out there.

Jorge Gasteazoro

25-May-2004, 10:01

Kirk,

This issue has been rehashed here and in other forums so many times I decided, like many, that I would stay out of it. Until you posted your message.

The issue is not whether the magazine is good or bad, but that there seem to be some recurrent problems that Steve refuses to fix. The log in for subscribers is one of the most usual problem. Why is it that people have so much trouble loggin in? Why do they have to come to forums like this to get the answer, instead of being able to go to the VC web site to do so?

Personally I dont see any problem with additional material for subscribers in the web site, but to a certain degree it smacks of pettiness and is perceived as punishing those who only wish to buy the issues that interest them for not subscribing. Regardless of how little income Simmons derives from news stand sales, people are paying full price for that issue and I believe many feel cheated by what I imagine is the "for more photographs see the subscriber section in our web site" line (I have not seen an issue since I moved to Mexico since it is not sold in news stands, unlike photo techniques).

More important, IMO, is the fact that if VC is failing to balance the article content well enough to maintain a wide interest, forcing people to pick and choose the issues they like then there is a problem with the editorial decisions. For many years I did this, I went to the book store, saw the issue and if I found one or two articles I liked I would buy the magazine, if I did not see any, why would I buy it? Worse yet, why would I subscribe to a magazine that failed to hold my interest more than 50% of the time? Some years even less! Certainly this behavior from a customer is not due to being "cheap" but a symptom of the magazine content.

Bottom line Kirk, calling people on this forum cheap whiners I think is out line when the problems stem from the decisions made by the editor of the magazine.

Paul Metcalf

25-May-2004, 10:38

"By leaving out relevant formulas or charts, etc. from articles in the magazine proper, you are forcing people either to reject your publication completely or to subscribe. "

Michael - can you give examples to help focus the criticism from generalities to specifics? I'm not aware of any critical information being left out of any articles. Even Bruce Barlow's paper/developer study didn't lack the necessary details in the paper magazine to reach valid conclusions. My experience to-date as a subscriber is that the additional information on the web is better off there and not in the paper magazine in order to maintain a legitimate business case for Steve.

Problems logging on? Too difficult? Really, compared to setting tilts and shifts, calculating bellows extension factors, adjusting for filter factors, dodging/burning when printing, scanning adjustments...???

One positive criticism that I'd like to offer that hasn't been mentioned is that I prefer how Steve doesn't overtly clutter up the articles with advertisements like other rags. I like that most of the ads are either standalone on their own page or nicely tucked into the back of the mag. Hopefully this will continue.

Jorge Gasteazoro

25-May-2004, 12:08

Problems logging on? Too difficult? Really, compared to setting tilts and shifts, calculating bellows extension factors, adjusting for filter factors, dodging/burning when printing, scanning adjustments...???

Why do you assume that people doing LF are equally adept with computers, or for that matter that they do scanning at all? I use a 12x20, yet I suck a making scans, should I be an expert in scanning or logging into web sites because I can use a ULF camera? Hogwash!

I can balance a chemical equation or follow a chemical mechanism very easy, yet I cannot do a differential equation to save my life, adeptness in one field does not mean the same for other fields.

Kirk Gittings

25-May-2004, 17:47

Jorge et al., I apologize about the cheap whinners thing, that was a cheap shot, but really. Steve is in business. He has a product to sell and he has the necesity and the right to define how that product gets out there. If he wants to use the web service to encourage subscription, so be it. That is not "transparent motives" or ripping people off. It is probably just sound business. It is his product to sell as he wishes and believe me he is interested in the most effective way to do that. Let me give you an example with my commercial work. Sometimes I sell one time use rights and sometimes I sell unlimited use rights. Is that fair to every one? You pay the price for what I give you. It depends on allot of business considerations. I sometimes discount fees to customers who give me tons of work or lots of exposure like some magazines. I sometimes charge higher fees for customers from larger markets like Chicago or LA because they expect to pay more. I sometimes give my work away to charities because I care about the issue or because (heaven forbid) it might be good pr. (transparent motives!). The point is-it is my product to sell however I see fit. If I am foolish or greedy about that then I will pay for it somehow.

What I object to in this discussion is the attitude (not by you Jorge) of some here that Steve is withholding something that rightfully belongs to them because they bought the mag. at a higher price at the news stand. No! These are two different packages of his product. Steve is very clear about how you get the extras. You buy the damn subscription package! Or not! What is the big deal? I have a subscription and yet I have never looked at the web site once. And yes for those who want to know about my "transparent motives", Steve is one of my best friends, but when he is wrong I have no problem telling him so and have many times.

steve simmons

25-May-2004, 22:37

I find it curious that none of my critic have responded to my questiosin my post of May 23rd. It is s if you did not read my response ut roceeded to criticize the magazine and my editorial decisions anyway.

If all you want to do is see your name on this roster please do it at someone else's expense. If you want a meaningful dialogue with me then respond to what I say and what I ask.

stev simmons

Jorge Gasteazoro

25-May-2004, 22:55

If all you want to do is see your name on this roster please do it at someone else's expense. If you want a meaningful dialogue with me then respond to what I say and what I ask.

Better yet, why not conduct the dialog at the VC site? As well as the questions on how to log in, since they seem to pop up every 2 months.....

PS. My name has been removed so I am not accused of trying to hog te limelight.....:-)

steve simmons

25-May-2004, 23:06

Richard Fenner

26-May-2004, 00:54

'You still have not responded to my questions in my post of May 23'.

Steve, what about my comment a few posts earlier than that? "Maybe people would be willing to accept a price increase to add a few pages to the magazine?" LF users spend a reasonable amount on single sheets of film, and they may be willing to cough up a bit more to extend the magazine. Perhaps in doing so, there might even be space for something that isn't B&W and doesn't involve architecture! Seriously though, while I realise any increase in size would probably require changes with the printers and the extra pages wouldn't be matched by extra ad revenue, it could work. View Camera is in a niche position, so isn't readily compared with other magazines, and it may be that an extra 10 pages, including perhaps another two portfolios, would be worth another $2 to people.

steve simmons

26-May-2004, 06:54

Perhaps in doing so, there might even be space for something that isn't B&W and doesn't involve architecture!>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ???????????????

We do lots of material that is not black and white and is not architecture.

I have thought about going to a higher quality production magazine and raising the price.

To those of you who don't always see material that gets your interest - well, what would you like to see??

steve immons

steve simmons

26-May-2004, 09:22

hire an editor who would improve the editorial and production quality of View Camera. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

can you be more specifc?

steve simmons

Kirk Gittings

26-May-2004, 11:52

Steve,

As you know on the whole I love the magazine, content and design. Having said that these are a few of the gliches that bug me when I see a new issue. Not big deals but things to think about.

1) there still slips through the occasional typo

2) there slips through the occassional bad reproduction like pg. 52 in this issue, the Bruce Barlow picture. Is this due to an emailed file vs. scanning an original as you usually do?

3) while the design has not changed and I still like it, it "feels" a bit more cluttered and busy than it used to. My favourite period for the magazine was around 2000 (the before 9/11 phase) for the magazine, when you did that article of mine on teaching architectural photography (July/August). That was before 9/11 and the hit all mgazines took, but look at that issue. Visually it felt more elegant. I know this is vague.

steve simmons

26-May-2004, 12:07

Steve, No, I will not be more specific. You have already received many good suggestions in this forum; and I see no need to feed you additional ideas that you are not prepared to digest. In the end, it's your periodical. Its quality is governed by the limitations of your vision.

--Michael Alpert, 2004-05-26 10:21:41 ........................................................................................

This is a cheap shot and shows that you really do not have anything to say. I have attmpted to offer responses and no one has really offered any specific answers

If you are truly in the publishing business you kow that there is always material that is left out of any book, magazine artice, etc. We are simply putting that excess material on the web. If we did not go to this effort no one would be complaining. But now that we do people are feeling cheated.

If yu have specific constructive suggestions and can respond to my post of May 23rd please do so. But to take this haughty attitude is not helpful to anyone. It gives you the apearance of being an expert without having to put anything on the line for all to see.

steve simmons

steve simmons

26-May-2004, 12:16

Here are the suggestions I've heard,

increase the size (page count) of the magazine and charge more - we are considering this

sell web subscriptions to retail buyers - we are offering this and I have said so on this forum

hire an editor and do a better job - we've added a fourth person in the office for additional editing, fact checking, etc.

make the articles more interesting - I have asked several times for people to let us know what they would like to see

what have I missed???

steve simmons

tim atherton

26-May-2004, 12:42

"make the articles more interesting - I have asked several times for people to let us know what they would like to see"

There are plenty of decent gadget and gizmo articles - that side just seem fine

Personally I'd like to see more articles on some of the LF photogorpahers who work outside the the rocks/waterfall/trees subset (of which there a certainly some verty good and interstin ones) - Gursky, Struth (I know you did one a while back, but honestly - it was the worst written article with the worst illustrations I've seen in a logn time...); Geoffrey James, Nick Nixon, Sugimoto, the Bechers, Joel Sternfeld, Joel Meyerowitz, Jem Southam, Jim Cook, Elger Esser, Chris Killip, Basilico, Stephen Shore, John Davies, Sally Mann, Andrea Modica - their work, philosophy/approach, technique etc. There are new books and shows by and about these photographers coming out virtually every month. I know you've had stuff on a few of these in the past (usually longer ago rather than recently), but not all of them, and all are producing new work (Joel Sternfeld just won the prestigious CitiBank prize, but I don't think you've ever featured him, for example?)

Also (again I'm not sure what there has been recently) articles on some of the classic/influental photographers from the past - Atget, Evans, Lange, Bourke White, Brandt, etc

Richard Fenner

26-May-2004, 13:20

I think there are a few too many cheap shots being taken here - it's necessary to choose battles, and editorial isn't one to fight!

Steve, I mostly agree with Tim. There are many photographers whose books I come across, whose work deserves to be featured in VC, yet too often the work shown is of virtually unknown B&W photographers documenting more aspects of past American life. As a mostly US-audience, that probably makes some sense, but there is more out there! I'll go through some more names over the next day or so and post them, but Tim's list is a good start. I'd also like to see expanded portfolios - two or three pages isn't enough - how about five or six pages? Combine it with them plugging a book, and I'm sure you'd get the rights. I wouldn't mind seeing a shot of these people either - it's easier to think of them when you can put a face to the name.

Most photographic magazines have 'special issues' - focussing on eg B&W, nudes, landscapes, interiors, and VC follows this trend. To me, this results in people feeling they've had a couple of issues in a row with absolutely nothing in them worth reading (a frequent comment here about VC). Maybe people would like the specials dropped, and a more even spread of articles? Maybe each issue, there'd be at least one article on each of the following: landscapes alternative processes/techniques photographic history/science interiors architecture classic photographers 'modern' photographers equipment reviews

And the comment on Joel Sternfeld is a good one! Book reviews could either be done as part of a portfolio, or on their own. Christopher Burkett is now using a Hasselblad and won a Hasselblad award - he's also done a lot of work with his 8x10 since your last article on him, and has a new book out (albeit 6x6 based...) yet he hasn't been mentioned.

I don't want the interviews brought back, or at least, not in the previous form. To me, there was a bit too much JPC and not enough of the subject... Maybe if the subject feels like it, they could be given a list of issues to address in an article written by them.

I wouldn't mind seeing a series of articles on field repairs, and perhaps a couple on lighting in the field - without assuming we're all carrying three containers of lighting gear.

How about more 'travel' articles? I'm not saying 'go to x point at y time, and shoot' but rather, locals perhaps giving the reasons photographers should visit their state/country, and addressing any particular concerns faced by LF photographers. Someone might have spent a fortnight touring the south of France on bicycle with their 8x10 - well, if the photos are any good, I wouldn't mind hearing a bit about it!

I hope this gives some food for thought. I realise this would cost more, but as a UK reader already paying US$12.25 an issue on regular order (compared with US$4.17/issue for US subscribers), I'm happy to add a bit more for a bigger, better publication.

tim atherton

26-May-2004, 13:21

Steve - I just quickly checked the past articles index (and I can't remeber if anything was published recently), but I can't find any mention of a serious article on either Atget or Walker Evans - arguably two (among others) of the most important and influential photographers in the history of the medium - both of whom where also "large format" photographers. I seem to recall more Ansel Adam's articles than you can shake a stick at, but to my mind, not to cover this sort of ground (while avoiding becoming a tome of historical photogorpahy) seems somewhat out of balance and leads to what I think a number of people have expressed in different ways - that the outlook of View Camera can be somewhat narrow in photographic terms. (es, you have looked at say Sally Mann or Jock Sturges or Mary Ellen Mark in the past - but most of those do seem to be a while ago now and perhaps, the exception?

The influence of Atget and Evans, for example, can be seen in the work of many of todays LF photographers. Not only that, but their work is also often as fresh, incisive and new as much of the work being done today.

Again, just one example.

Oh - and in the contemporaries, another one - Ed Burtynsky

steve simmons

26-May-2004, 14:38

Lots of god suggetions. This is just the typeof response that is very helpful.

We have not done Atget or Evans because so much has already been done in books and articles. Evans is one of my favorites

steve simmons

Brandon Draper

26-May-2004, 16:02

I have only been subcribing to VC for only two short years. And have only used maybe 50 sheets of film through my new (3 yrd old) 4x5 camera. It hadn't been used for the past year and half. And have lost the reason why I bought it in the first place. I was about to sell it, when I dicided to find that lost love. The darkroom! So I dug out my zone system manual, all my past VC magazines and read them cover to cover. Started testing film & paper. Then thats when I came out from under a cloud. Oh what a wonderful feeling. Have been so caught up in the portrait/wedding business. And the weight of "should i start shooting digital?". I am so tired of it. How nice it has been to take a step back, and ask myself what I love about photography. The darkroom is where I fell in love with photography. The reason I first started to subscibe to VC is for some guidance in LF and some darkroom techniques from professionals. I was alittle disappointed in the content. But still a great publication. I really enjoy articles from photographers that photograph old building's and factories. I would like to see more how-to's and techniques on how they were able to photograph a particuler subject. I guess I would like to see it as a more learning experience with also a different perspective to certain subjects. Something you don't see everyday. Anyway it is still a great. I would keep reading no matter what.

Thanks!!!

Crispin Agnew

27-May-2004, 15:05

"We have not done Atget or Evans because so much has already been done in books and articles. Evans is one of my favorites"

Come on Steve, you ask for positive input, you get some good ideas, then you come out with something like this? There always seems to be a reason why you won't do something

Presumably there are not enough books or articles out there about Ansel Adams then, or architectural photography? You've never had a problem doing those?

There are plenty of hooks that VC could find for some interesting and relevent articles on Atget or Evans. Are you trying to tell me it's all been done? I'd even wager there is a good percentage of your readers who have never heard of Atget, for example...

PS - in fact if you need to free up more space, drop the monotonous architecural photogoraphy pieces

Paul Metcalf

27-May-2004, 16:40

Yeah, we might end up seeing something like this:

http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/atget/atget_archeveques.html

Donal Taylor

27-May-2004, 16:47

or even this

http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/atget/atget_tree_sceaux_full.html

a photograph that is more contemporary, intriguing and original than 99.9% of the work I see in books and magazines

Kirk Gittings

27-May-2004, 19:59

"There are plenty of hooks that VC could find for some interesting and relevent articles on Atget or Evans."

"PS - in fact if you need to free up more space, drop the monotonous architecural photogoraphy pieces."

Funny, for more than 20 years I have had the opportunity to write or talk or teach about the history of architectural photography and the names Atget and Evans always have a prominent place! I think we all have our preferences and prejudices. They to me are consumate architectural photographers. I of course never find the arch. photo articles boring because that is my profession, as it was Steve's. I think 6 or 7 of those articles over the years were by or about me! Yikes! I would personally be happy with a magazine that only did architecture and landscape. To me those are inexhaustable subjects, but then each issue would cost $1000.00 dollars because only 50 people would want it. Has anyone ever done a breakdown of the mag. content based on the genre of the artist or article? I am curious what that would be, but I am willing to bet that it would be overwhelmingly landscape and non-genre related technical articles.

steve simmons

28-May-2004, 16:13

Here is a quetion I posed in an earlier post and no one responded

Lets look at some reality. If we expand the articles in each issue to include what is on the web we can pull an article to make space - ok which one????? three different readers will have three different suggestions .

Once again, no magazine puts all of the related material bout a topic in an article. There is always material edited out. Always!!!!. Most magazines simply disgard this material We did for several years. About a year ago we decidd to make this extra material available. We were not in a position to add pages to the magazine so we put it on the web. If we did not do this no one would feal cheated. We are rewarding our best customers by making this info available to them. Retail buyer provide very little support to us as you are really supporting the store and the distributor. Yes we do get some benefit from retail sales but not nearly as much as from subscribers.If you buy 3.6 issues a year you have already paid for a subsciption and you would get 2.4 issues free, access to the supplemental info on the web, and we would benefit much more. We send each issue in a plastic wrapper so it should arrive safely.

I d appreciate the suggestions for photographers to profile. We have saved the list an will begin working on them. Stephen Shore will be in the July/Aug issue.

steve simmons