Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 83

Thread: New B&W Magazine

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    232

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    I have a pile of View Camera back issues that I constantly review for invaluable information. A blog site seems more ephemeral, and it might be difficult to retrieve items of interest posted a few weeks or months prior.
    Also, I highly doubt many of us have a slick and up to date website, I certainly don't.
    -Brad

  2. #22

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirk Gittings View Post
    Are you reading the same magazine I am? VC has made major strides in the last couple of years and has published some of its best issues ever.
    I was purely referring to VC's website (I thought it was obvious from the way it was stated), as David's effort is going to be on-line to begin with. Some of you should remember that topic being brought into question on this forum, by the publisher himself asking for input. Given what happened afterward (virtually nothing) I stopped buying the magazine. I'm sure I missed out on some great articles (and I NEVER question the content of the printed magazine), but I don't regret it nevertheless. I'm gonna keep my head high on this and will make no further comments.

    My apology to David for making an off-topic statement. Let's get back to what's at hand.

    Thank you.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,736

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Biggerstaff View Post
    Marko,

    I understand, but when comments are made about other publications or websites, saying they are "underwhelming" without stating why you feel this way or providing examples on how it could be improved, then the comment is not constructive, no one learns from the statement, nothing can improve. The statement becomes a matter of opinion (others may feel different).

    This happens all the time in these types of threads (not just in this one). Someone states a matter of opinion as a fact with no support, someone else reads it and gets offended, the origional intent of the thread is lost and a big flame war begins.
    Eric,

    First off, I also understand where you're coming from and given that we are in understanding , I am replying for the benefit of the thread.

    If you look back, you'll notice that both Witold and I concentrated on commenting David's site in a rather constructive way. Tough, but constructive. Witold's remark about VC's refusal to improve their website drew Steve's consternation to which I replied that as good as the content of his magazine is, his site was indeed underwhelming.

    I said that because I really believe it and I have plenty of reasons for it, none of them with malice since I really like the magazine, but I chose not to discuss them because this thread is about David's website/magazine, not Steve's. If Steve really wants to hear my reasons, I am always open for discussion, but either in a different thread or through other means.

    I still don't think any of this was out of line with this thread and that it should provide David (or anybody interested) with lots of material to think about, especially since the entire thread was started with the express purpose of soliciting opinions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Biggerstaff View Post
    What is sad in these types of threads is that any opportunity for anyone to learn and possibly improve is lost. My intent with my post was to try and keep everyone on topic in support of David and his new project. Providing examples of "the good, the bad and the ugly" as you put it is fine, and a great way to learn. But, the questions become, why is one good, why is one bad and why is one ugly?

    I agree with your response but the previous posts that brought VC into the mix were, in my opinion, not very constructive or educational which is why I posted what I did.
    Like I said above, I did not want to channel the focus away from David's magazine by starting a detailed discussion about Steve's. While I do NOT think of VC's website as the ugly, I do, frankly, think it is bad as the websites go and I do have my reasons for it which I will be more than happy to explain to the interested parties, if any, in a separate discussion.

    But since the question was raised and again for the OP's benefit, let me just say the following: the website in question may have been slightly conservative back in '95 or '96, but we are now seeing the 2007 off. In my mind, it should be relatively obvious why I described it as "underwhelming". If not, just visit a few other contemporary magazines' websites, photography-related or otherwise, and compare.

    Again, this is NOT meant with any malice, I buy the VC regularly and I admire the effort Steve's obviously putting into it and the quality of the content. I would LOVE to see his website match his magazine, or even come close to it.

    Just as I would love to see David's effort succeed.

  4. #24
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    9,864

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    You are right. I misread it. Sorry.
    Quote Originally Posted by witold View Post
    I was purely referring to VC's website (I thought it was obvious from the way it was stated), as David's effort is going to be on-line to begin with. Some of you should remember that topic being brought into question on this forum, by the publisher himself asking for input. Given what happened afterward (virtually nothing) I stopped buying the magazine. I'm sure I missed out on some great articles (and I NEVER question the content of the printed magazine), but I don't regret it nevertheless. I'm gonna keep my head high on this and will make no further comments.

    My apology to David for making an off-topic statement. Let's get back to what's at hand.

    Thank you.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    at age 73:
    "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And miles to go before I sleep,
    And miles to go before I sleep"

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    1,905

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Criticizing us for not having a better web site is a little like complaining about a woodworker who does't have a better display of metal sculpture. The web site is not our primary concern, the magazine is and will continue to be. To bring us into a thread that had nothing to do with View Camera and to which I had not participated seemed at best frivolous and certainly not helpful to the topic at hand. To simply complain about our site did nothing to help David understand what you think makes up a good web site. To have explained this would have been much more helpful and connected to the topic at hand.

    steve

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    626

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Quote Originally Posted by vickersdc View Post
    And as for Steve Simmons, FocusMag and the others - they are under a whole order of magnitude more pressure than I am and I think they do deserve a pat on the back for their dedication. As I'm finding out, it can be difficult to juggle all the little bits that make up a modern magazine.
    As someone who constantly updates his website, it is nearly impossible to come up with something that is technologically sufficient to compete against the big dogs' websites (http://www.style.com/vogue, http://www.artforum.com, etc.). A magazine's website should be clean, direct and to the point unless you've got a billion dollars behind you.

    Anyway, David, I hear you're asking for submissions from writers... what about the photographers that aren't writers? What do THEY want to read in a magazine that's not being covered by all of the photography magazines out there today? While I definitely don't feel your magazine should be all about digital photography like all photo technique mags are today, talking a little bit about digital equipment might not hurt.

    So guys and gals: If you had your own magazine, what would YOU read in it? Take that idea, no matter how frivolous or silly or even complicated it might sound and tell David (not me) this.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,736

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Quote Originally Posted by steve simmons View Post
    Criticizing us for not having a better web site is a little like complaining about a woodworker who does't have a better display of metal sculpture. The web site is not our primary concern, the magazine is and will continue to be. To bring us into a thread that had nothing to do with View Camera and to which I had not participated seemed at best frivolous and certainly not helpful to the topic at hand. To simply complain about our site did nothing to help David understand what you think makes up a good web site. To have explained this would have been much more helpful and connected to the topic at hand.

    steve
    If you read back, you will see that we actually gave David a relatively pointed set of advice, namely:

    1. Get a real website with its own domain name instead of the blog - in other words, do like the View Camera does, this was a positive example

    2. Have your email point to the same domain instead of a generic free web-based mail to avoid looking unnecessarily cheap - this time View Camera was brought as a negative example, as it is using an AOL (!) email

    3. Do take the input of your readers seriously and do be ready for frequent site adjustments - unlike View Camera, and as demonstrated by your own comments within this thread.

    What we are talking about here is not complaining about View Camera nor even its website, it is simply analyzing the things a well known photographic magazine does good and what it does bad when it comes to its web presence.

    You seem to think a web site is utterly unimportant and that's fine, it is your magazine and your site, you are certainly entitled to set your policies the way you find fit. But in the end, if your own web site is not your primary concern, you shouldn't be concerned with what other people think about it either.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    1,905

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    You seem to think a web site is utterly unimportant

    show me where I said this?

    Our web site communicates a lot of info to people. To me that is more important than having a sexy site that could overwhelm the content.

    I am done. We work hard with our publication and judging from the recent comments our efforts are improving things for our readers. This is what matters most to me.

    steve

  9. #29

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Quote Originally Posted by steve simmons View Post
    You seem to think a web site is utterly unimportant

    show me where I said this?

    Our web site communicates a lot of info to people. To me that is more important than having a sexy site that could overwhelm the content.

    I am done. We work hard with our publication and judging from the recent comments our efforts are improving things for our readers. This is what matters most to me.

    steve
    Nothing changed, your arrogance just blows my mind. You sure have a nerve to even suggest that you did not say (or imply or whatever) that in your mind a web site is utterly unimportant. Nobody said anything about a need for a "sexy" site. Your site may have information, but it isn't even formatted. A kid in 6th grade could format the info you have on your site in a superior way. What your site shows is, that you completely don't care about its visitors. A typical "take it or leave it approach". Furthermore, it was you Steve Simmons who back some time ago asked about "why so many complaints about our web site?". Many (including myself) pointed out to you the problems. Any of those comments took time to think about, to write them. And again, you asked for them then. The result of that is still visible today. You have (constructive) criticism at the furthest point of your body.

    It's a real shame that a person with obviously great knowledge of the medium and desire to serve the LF community, ends up spitting into every critics face, time and again. But as it was stated already, it is your magazine and your web site. You made a choice to live it like so and don't expect people to pad you on the back, just because you happened to publish an informative magazine (and link it to a childish looking web site).

    You have managed to make some outrageous comments over time, all pointed at your critics. You continue to get away with it. So be it.

    I'm gonna have to apologize to David once more. Sorry.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,736

    Re: New B&W Magazine

    Sexy site? Overwhelming the content?

    Come now, that kind of danger is not even theoretical.

Similar Threads

  1. View Camera Magazine - strange problem (?)
    By Jan_6568 in forum Resources
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21-Jan-2007, 12:10
  2. B&W magazine contest question
    By vinny in forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 13-Nov-2006, 22:08
  3. The Real Problem with View Camera Magazine
    By Rory_3532 in forum On Photography
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 16-Jun-2004, 00:47

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •