Large Format Journal

[DanJones]

Just got the summer issue of the Large Format Journal. I would be interested in what others in the group think about the publication.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Where can I see this journal??

[Jeremy Moore]

I'm a fan, but then again my name is in this issue

You can check it out at http://www.thelargeformatjournal.com/

[Don Bryant]

Just got the summer issue of the Large Format Journal. I would be interested in what others in the group think about the publication.

I have mixed feelings about the publication. My biggest complaint is the poor reproductions. As an example look at page 61 of the '06 summer issue. The photo by Jeremy Moore is very poorly reproduced.

I suppose my benchmark is Lens Work Extended which always has excellent reproductions. Also comparing LFJ to Lens Work Extended the layout could be more effective and professional, especially considering that the magazine is delivered as a PDF document.

I've also been under whelmed by Roger Hick's articles and I do wish that Kentmenre would replace their ad with another.

I do like seeing new work by "unknown" photographers, including this issues coverage of the Texas Chruch Project.

I subscribed for a year but I'm not sure I will resubscribe.

My 2 cents,

Don Bryant

[Doug Howk]

The strengths:
Color images look better than most print magazines. An example is Wells Cathedral by Quentin Bargate ( almost makes me want to try some LF Velvia ;-)

Ease of distribution/use - I'd buy a pdf version of all photography magazines, except Lenswork which I value for its quality of reproductions. Its especially nice to be able to re-size the print & images - a valuable attribute as I get older.

Weakness':
Has a certain amateurish appearance with layout (of course the same could be said for View Camera magazine).

Passwords are a pain - despite subscribing for two years, have to wait till they send you the password for current issue.

Quality of B&W images: but digitized B&W images always seem to lack good tonal range, and are always a weak imitation of the real print.

Overall, I think its a great investment and look forward to each issue.

[Don Bryant]

[QUOTE=Doug Howk;185514]
Quality of B&W images: but digitized B&W images always seem to lack good tonal range, and are always a weak imitation of the real print.

QUOTE]
It's just not the poor tonality that irks me, in the photo example I cited the image is pixelated, not uncommon for LFJ.

Don Bryant

[Jeremy Moore]

It's just not the poor tonality that irks me, in the photo example I cited the image is pixelated, not uncommon for LFJ.
Don Bryant

I know what you mean, Don, that's one of my favorite images I sent for the article.

[lee\c]

I am no expert on scanning but the as the Texas Church Project, we submitted to the Journal our own scans. I don't know how they would be responsible for the scans if they simply run what was giving to them. Considering that, I was pretty happy with how the TCP article looked and read. I am sure Matt Magruder did the very best scans he could do given the prints he was sent to use. Kudos to Matt.

lee\c

aka

Lee Carmichael

[Don Bryant]

I am no expert on scanning but the as the Texas Church Project, we submitted to the Journal our own scans. I don't know how they would be responsible for the scans if they simply run what was giving to them. Considering that, I was pretty happy with how the TCP article looked and read. I am sure Matt Magruder did the very best scans he could do given the prints he was sent to use. Kudos to Matt.

lee\c

aka

Lee Carmichael

I don't know who is responsible for what in that particular article but if you look at Jeremy's photo on page 61 it is pixelated and diagonals have jaggies. I assume from looking at Matt's web site and the TCP web site he wasn't the one that dropped the ball.

I'm glad you guys got published but I find the quality of LFJ very irregular and as someone else said a bit amateurish.

Best,

Don Bryant

[Kirk Gittings]

I don't know how they would be responsible for the scans if they simply run what was giving to them.

That is precisely the issue. They should not be running what is given them if they are given crap. This is not an excuse for any publication which cares about the quality of their product.