Magazines

[Michael S]

I still subscribe to View Camera and have for many years and there is no doubt that quality has dropped off as of late. With the outstanding exception of Ed Richards photographs, which were stunning, the last issue left quite a bit to be desired. The Polaroid images of Ron Vam Dongen looked as if they might have been beautiful at one time, but were hopelessly damaged from lack of fixing (I know, that was supposed to be the point). I won't get into the poorly lit and executed protraits or the grab shot landscapes, all I can say is that the quality of work submitted must not be all that great. What other explaination can there be? For a while there, we subscribers were regaled with lens charts, which is information that can be obtained easily on the internet. I think since the recession hit, View Camera's advertisers have dried up and they are having a hard time filling the pages. Not to mention the fact that I didn't receive my May/June issue until after the first week in July, I still believe that we, as a Large Format Photography community, should endeavor to support View Camera magazine with our subscription dollars since we know what quality they are capable of. On a side note, I also think that it would be a good idea to submit any work which might be of interest as they may be more receptive to it now.

[D. Bryant]

This thread is really a follow on to Thom's comments about the latest View Camera Magazine, and the general value of magazines. I do have some images in the May/June issue, and it was a real pleasure working with Steve on the layout and content. (While I do not get much photography published, I have published several books and nearly 200 articles in law and science. I know what a pain a bad editor can be and what a pleasure it is to have a good one.)

Last fall I realized I was getting buried in unread magazines and let a lot of subscriptions lapse. This gave me time to think about what I really wanted to read. I found I really like good photo magazines - View Camera, Lenswork, Black and White (even thought it costs the earth since it comes from England.) I also like literary magazines - Economist, Atlantic, Wired, New York Review of Books. Sure, I read on the screen - probably more than most people - but I also like both the paper and editorial work behind it.

Having been part of some discussions about the survival of investigative reporting as part of my day job, I know the key is that well edited and reported media has to make money. If I do not subscribe to magazines I like, they will cease to exist. While I might not have much interest in alt-process stuff or soft-focus pictures, a magazine that only did what I liked would not last long.

Like Thom, I like some edited content in my life. I even like quirky editors with a point of view, whether that is at View Camera or Lenswork, or the Economist.

The Internet is great, but so is the edited world. Books are nice, but magazines are better because you get them through time. Unfortunately, if we do not subscribe to our magazines, they will get weaker and eventually disappear. For someone new to large format photography, you would be a lot better off to spend a week with back issues of View Camera Magazine and Lenswork than a year on the WWW, trying to sort wheat from chaff.

I have essentially quit purchasing magazines except for a select few. My selections are based on the ones that I enjoy most.

IMO, Brooks Jensen has established a new standard for publishing photography magazines with Lenswork Extended. I'm assuming that eventually all magazines will become virtual publications, either distributed electronically over the internet or on CD. Hopefully this will be a greener solution, reduce the expense of publication, and broaden the audience substantially encouraging publishers to continue publishing. Judging by the prescence of internet websites for various magazine and newspapers the publishers accept this eventually as well.

In short I think the days of the printed magazine are numbered. As penetration of the internet becomes universal or ubiquitous the numbers of printed magazines will wain.

The new Apple iPad raised the bar with is high quality display so this to me is important part of the acceptance of electronic publishing- that is having a magazine like electronic viewing device to read with.

And I'm ready to shed all of the paper and regain shelf space.

My 2 cents,

Don Bryant

[jeroldharter]

View Camera magazine could be better, but it is the only magazine I am aware of devoted to large format photography and therefore is the best of its kind out there. I have subscribed for many years. The internet is great but it lacks the aesthetic of magazines which have their place too. With the near collapse of the large format/film market I don't understand why anyone would grumble at this point.

[Sascha Welter]

I'm assuming that eventually all magazines will become virtual publications, either distributed electronically over the internet or on CD.

Have a look at MagCloud. On-demand magazine publishing over the Internet, but not digital. The publisher produces a PDF, magcloud prints it on demand and sends to subscribers and buyers.

Not surprisingly, when browsing through the list of magazines, there is a lot of photo related stuff - photos just look different printed on paper than on a screen. Also not surprisingly, a lot of niche stuff - once the need to print a large run is out of the way, many a hobbyists or niche magazine becomes viable. It's probably not going to be the cheapest of magazines that way, but factoring in the cost of a large press run, prices might not be that different for a magazine in a special field.

Unfortunately so far they only ship to the US and UK. They say they want to add further areas, but till they arrive in my neck of the woods, there'll probably be cheap e-paper in the rest of the world ;-)

[VictoriaPerelet]

In short I think the days of the printed magazine are numbered. As penetration of the internet becomes universal or ubiquitous the numbers of printed magazines will wain.

Overall web is useful, but annoying - people just type and hit "Send" button. In late 90's people wrote article for usenet etc, but when WWW come in "Send" become too easy, too quick. Maybe with iPad's/iBook's etc things can stabilize in future. There will be always place for editorial and web is not best place for it. Apple/Google are just establishing $market relationship in new area.

I've heard somebody saying that if mortgage industry was completely computerized and individuals can day-trade properties in one click - amount of damage that we're facing now in economy is nothing.

Online grammar and spelling, even the image repro and typesetting (such as it is), is far better than VC too.

I wish my last name was not misspelled in recent VC issue, but everybody misspells it, I have collection of publications with my name/credits wrong.

[jp]

Unless someone has worked at a newspaper or magazine, they will have no concept of the editorial choices and oversight that make it different from a blog and potentially worth paying for. It's a sufficiently small group of people, they are not going to be able to relay this to a sufficient group of future potential readers. An uphill battle that will have massive losses and an uncertain ending.

I don't presently subscribe to any photo magazines. Nothing against the ones mentioned, but we don't have magazine stands where I live to check out what's available. Photos distributed online look good because I have a good monitor.

For a while in the 90's I was a reader of American Photo and Pop Photo. Pop photo was a low quality rag meant for it's advertisers and was somewhat useful for pre-Internet shallow information. American Photo was higher quality but a little more eclectic and slightly different audience than I, so I never subscribed to that. Shutterbug was like the Computer Shopper; a marketplace totally displaced by the Internet. The articles were not the primary reason to buy the magazine.


I do subscribe to a couple of car magazines. Most car magazines are complete junk. Shallow car porn for the aspiring subscriber of materialism worshippers of what is new and shiny, sort of like Pop Photo for cars. I had subscribed to Sports Car International, which was extremely high quality photos and stories and almost no advertising, but they went under. Now, it's just Grassroots motorports and Classic Motorsports magazines, which are very agile with regard to reaching readers AND advertisers. It's not just a magazine, but a recreational and business ecosystem with participation in events, racing organizations and any forms of media. I think this sort of agility and interconnectedness must combine with quality to make a magazine succeed in the future regardless of the topic.

I used to get a lot of free magazines at work too, IT related. They've all either shut down or converted to online-only to save money. They are entirely advertiser supported either in paper or online- so that didn't change much, except for perhaps the $ amounts of advertising.

[Merg Ross]

[QUOTE=Ed Richards;608365] This thread is really a follow on to Thom's comments about the latest View Camera Magazine, and the general value of magazines. I do have some images in the May/June issue, and it was a real pleasure working with Steve on the layout and content.


Ed, indeed you have some fine architectural images in the latest View Camera Magazine. It was also good to see, in the same issue, mention of the excellent work done by Ezra Stoller, a great teacher and source of inspiration when I was making a living as an architectural photographer.

Several years ago, I also had the pleasure of working with Steve Simmons when he published a portfolio of my work accompanied by a biography written by Eric Biggerstaff. Steve, and Brooks Jensen of Lenswork, edit and publish the two photographic magazines to which I presently subscribe (and have for many years). Their publications have survived, while others have not. Why? Perhaps, it is because Steve and Brooks are photographers. They have the passion for their art, and a vehicle with which to express it. And fortunately, their publications are different, one perhaps more eclectic than the other. I wish them continued success.

As to the future of photography magazines, there will always be a market. Surely a niche market, but always a market. The monitor is not a valid substitute for a handheld print or a well produced image in a magazine.

[PViapiano]

[QUOTE=Merg Ross;609605The monitor is not a valid substitute for a handheld print or a well produced image in a magazine.[/QUOTE]

I totally agree. No matter how fancy an iPad may be (and I am not one who is impressed with it) there is no substitute for the printed page. In fact, I was a little disappointed to hear that Amazon sales of eBooks have eclipsed paper copies. I feel about books and magazines the same way I feel about photographs. They're something to hold and refer to, a tactile experience.

[Paul_C]

I was a little disappointed to hear that Amazon sales of eBooks have eclipsed paper copies.

They eclipsed hardcover sales, not all paper books.

[Frank Petronio]

It's all for naught, you old farts. Watch the magazine aisle your local supermarket shrink away, the only people reading print will be in the nursing homes.

Eureka, that's it! Marketing Genius!

Large Print View Camera (and Porn!)