Traditional Black and White / View Camera Magazine / Kerfuffle

[Kirk Gittings]

While the idea of an exclusively traditonal b&w magazine is attractive. I doubt that it could survive economically. As I understand it most of the big national advertising dollars are in digital without which no photo magazine could survive. Subscriptions and small VC manufacturers alone are not enough. And you can't advertise digital without talking about it editorially too.

For myself I am more interested in traditional articles and digital articles when they deal with subjects that uphold "traditional" large format artistic and technical values. I know in the current political invironment that sounds a bit silly. What I mean is like Burkholder's work with digitally enlarged negatives printing on silver or platinum. As Newman called it at the VC Conference "tradigital" work.

[Keith Fleming]

Everyone here should re-read the reply by Robert McColloch. Too many of us gripe about "problems' with View Camera Magazine that really are not Steve's fault. Robert correctly identifies poor writing by authors as a factor. I've grumbled to myself about articles that discuss photographs that do not appear as illustrations. I stop grumbling when I recall my own experience of three years editing a magazine-format historical newsletter. Too many authors lacked the skill or discipline to "write to length." Please understand that if Steve allocates four pages to a piece, he's in a bind if the author provides too long an article. An editor just can't just add one page to an issue; it has to be four. Adding four pages to 16,000 magazine copies is a big chunk of change. That's one side of vise facing an editor--the other is the frequent demand from authors of "Don't touch MY wonderful material with your editing pencil!" Also, don't overlook the fact that adding that recent additional layer of proof-reading surely came at a cost that inevitably affected the bottom line for View Camera. Finally, the clear example for View Camera authors to follow is Kerry Thalmann--he never wastes a word, he writes clearly, he surely edits his own copy before submission, and he obviously writes exactly to length. Steve's job would be much easier if more authors did the same.

[steve simmons]

With an evident paucity of imagination at the heart of the thing, there is little that outsiders can suggest that will improve View Camera. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This is typical of the cheap shots that are often fired our way. There is nothing that we could do to respond to this comment.

I you have something specific to say say it. If you want to fire vacuous comments such as this I will no longer respond. As I stated I periodically do contact privately our critics and more often than not the response is that they have not really looked at the magazine for awhile or can not be specific as to what they would like improved. We have responded to the concerns about proof reading. Visually I think the last issue of each magazine are the best we have done.The quality of work is outstanding and we are adding more specific tech info in many of the portfolios.

If there are photographers we should be contacting tell us. If there are tech articles you would like tell us. If there are how-to articles you would ike to see say so.

steve simmons

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I think there are a few misconceptions about this post. The magazine is not the American B&W magazine nor is it the british B&W photography. It is an Australian magazine named The Black and White enthusiast. As such it appears at one time it had a policy of presenting only non digital photography, thus the appeal to many at APUG. From what I understand the publisher has now bowed to advertizing pressures and will beguin to feature B&W digital.



As an entirely B&W magazine without regard to format (and now process as well) it is a magazine with a very different publishing and editing policy than Simmon's.

[Michael Jones]

Hoping not to start (or fan) flames that seem to be dying to erupt here, Steve asked for suggestions, not editorial direction. That any one person's desires for the direction of VC have not been addressed is ridiculous and presumptive. Assuming Steve has "an evident paucity of imagination," some people should remember that he has been publishing a niche market magazine for some 15 years that several thousand readers not only subscribe to and read, but choose to debate in public forums. Oh yes, and he put his money on the line to do that. Any other posters (myself included) doing the same for large format photography?

Lighten up and go make some photographs.

[Dean Lastoria]

Hi: I think that with View Camera, Camera Arts, and Lens Work one has a pretty good overview.

I think that View Camera lost its heart a while ago, and I stopped reading it, but it's back and better than ever. If anyone else gave up on it, they should come back. There are great articles on classic lenses that armatures like me could use, and that one on the new Cook to drool over (Boy I'd like to know what that puppy costs!). Anyhow, Mr. Simmons has put in some of the elements of the early photo magazines that I collect -- things like how to make a remote flash pistol using a Colt and twine from a 1912 magazine -- but for today of course. The article on how to use diopters was just what I want to see, and I'll read the digital junk just so I don't sound as ignorant as I am. The alternate process articles keep my eye on where I could go if I don’t fall down the digital abyss. It’s the right balance.

I really don't see why people have so many problems with View Camera -- last issue I almost subscribed! I buy it regularly but Canada Post and nice high-end magazines don't mix well. BTW, I never did see no typo’s and I’d rather have the content and nice photos than correct gerunds.

Keep up the good work, and thanks for a great magazine.

[Terence McDonagh]

I agree that the market is probably just too small. I get my fix of the traditional stuff on this site. I'm sure it's stretching the owner's/moderators' goals and time a little too far, but I'd love to see more and more content and articles added to this site. The recent articles have been great, and within reason, more could only be better. In addition to creating my own work, I'm extremely interested in older equipment and methods (both silver and alternative) and am always looking for information that I only seem to get answered here. After four years I still feel like a beginner because I keep expanding my methods (and equipment, and more equipment . . . ) so maybe some of the folks with 20 years experience can pass on their knowledge. Like how to stop or control the addiction.

To summarize: [1] Too small an audience [2] I'd love to see more info on older equipment (pre-1920's) and processes.

[Ralph Barker]

I haven't read the APUG thread, but here's what I think would make for a good magazine for "traditional" photographers. Within your context, Steve, this is somewhat split between VC and CA, but I think the concepts apply to both pubs, as the focus of each tends to split the market in a reasonable manner. (Note, too, this is essentially a summary of a pleasant phone conversation I had a few weeks ago with Tim Anderson. Note, too, this is based on years of experience as editor-in-chief and editorial director of several internationally-distributed magazines.)

1. The editorial focus of any magazine needs to be reasonably well defined, and clear to the readership. Specific editorial content (topic areas) is really best determined through a series of reader polls, designed in a fairly scientific manner, and augmented with general market research. Such surveys can be designed by the editorial staff, if they are familiar with the process, or by an editorial consultant.

Any magazine needs first to maintain the interest of subscribers, and then be attractive to the broader market it wants to attract. It is unlikely that general questions on forums of this nature will get to the level of detail that is actually helpful.

2. All members of a magazine's staff need to clearly understand general publishing and journalistic standards, the roles played by different positions in the masthead, and conform to those expectations. The "down-home" approach works for free church newsletters, but generally not for paid-subscription magazines (qualified-subscriber mags fall into a different category, but still need to conform to publishing and journalistic standards.)

3. Topics of interest to the readership (and those the magazine wishes to attract) should be published in an editorial calendar that demonstrates the depth and spread of the editorial plan. It's impossible to cover all areas of interest to the readership every month, but the calendar can show subsribers (and potential subscribers) that their areas of interest will be covered.

4. Authors, particularly those who are submitting articles at less than industry-standard pay (typically $1/word), need editorial guidance - both as to content, and as to style. Almost everyone gets edited, and authors should expect that. If what they submit doesn't pass muster, it gets rejected. Period. Only in the rarest of cases (Ansel Adams or Edward Weston coming back from the dead, for example) should a submission go unedited or unguided, and then only with a printed editorial caveat that the article is being published as-submitted due to the author's stature.

5. Product reviews should follow clear editorial guidelines and conform to published standards that will allow reader comparisons of different products reviewed at different times by different authors. The editorial guidelines can be somewhat general, but augmented by input from product-category experts, as needed. Again, the criteria should be published, so readers understand the metrics being used. Once the editorial standards have been met, the author can wax into (presumably "expert") personal opinion, but not before.

6. The content and layout needs to be reasonably predictable and "comfortable" to the readership, even though it is largely determined (unbeknownst to readers) at the last minute by ad sales. That requires a great deal of editorial pre-planning, and a lot of advance coordination with authors, along with having a flexible pool of content - both in terms of articles and house ads. (Hey, if it were easy, anyone with a few $million could start a magazine. ;-) )

Hope this helps.

[jantman]

Aside from the Internet as a whole, View Camera has done more for my interest in LF than any other resource. It is a great magazine, the only one that I've found which is dedicated to Large Format, and it does a lot, as far as I can tell, to keep the LF world together. I'm very happy with Steve's work, and read every issue of VC and CA, as well as keeping them around for reference. At the moment, I'm very interested to read more about masking and apply it in my darkroom (latest issue of VC).

I'm very thankful for Steve's work and generosity to the LF community. I am also very much looking forward to attending the next VC conference.

The only thing which I could mention as a downfall of VC is the proof reading, and this has been getting better. It's good that Steve addressed that.

Lastly, I would just like to say that Mr' Simmons' availability, here on the forums and via email, is very much appreciated, and enjoyed. I always enjoy hearing the off-the-cuff comments of someone who is not only a big name in the LF world, but also I generally only "hear" (read) in a magazine, where things are a bit more formal.

Thanks for everything, Steve.

[Brian Ellis]

"I am very thankful for Steve's . . . generosity to the large format community."

You are aware of the fact that Steve's magazines, workshops, and conference are commercial, not charitable, ventures right? Exactly what "generosity" did you have in mind?

Saying that Steve's various ventures are "commercial" isn't intended as a knock on them at all, there's certainly nothing wrong with making money from large format photography as Steve does. I like View Camera magazine, I've been a subscriber for many years, and if Steve is making profits from it more power to him. It's just that I don't see Sinar, Linhof, Jobo, or any other commercial ventures that sell products to the large format community being praised for their "generosity" and I don't know why Steve should be praised for his since AFAIK generosity isn't the guiding spirit behind any of them(nor should it be).