Not a complaint, just an observation. Since my subscription to Camera Arts expired a couple of months ago and I've just this week purchased my first 4x5, this discussion prompted me to go the to View Camera website and look at the subscription page. There's a link there to a "special limited time offer". However, the offer expired in October of 2002, 13 months ago! The impression that this gives is not a good one.
Regardless, I'll go back and subscribe to both magazines later today.
Dear Steve Simmons,
I am a French subcriber to View Camera, and I think it's the best magazine I've ever read on photography. I've told it in an email a few months ago.
It is one moment of joy when I receive the magazine, which is read from the first to the last page.
About the password, as I subscribe through Robert White in England, I have never seen any password on any label.
I used to send you an email to ask for it. I stopped asking for this d... password, as I receive no more answer from View Camera. I don't access this section anymore, and I regret it
A suggestion : It might be better to send your subscribers a password once a year when they subscribe. It might be also a very good alert for people who forget to renew their subscription not to be able to connect to the subscriber's section when the subscription is over.
Best regards
JLL
Steve,
View Camara and Camera Arts are two of the very best photography magazines out there. I am really looking foreward to going to the View Camera conference in Montery in April. Thank you for doing such a terrific job!
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
Hi Steve,
On a tangent --> I have most of the issues of View Camera published over the past 5 or 6 years, but I don't have access to the aforementioned online content on your site. Why? Because I am not a subscriber. I live in Canada and had looked into a subscription to View Camera, but was taken aback when I was informed that it costs me more to subscribe than to pay the cover price at the news stand!! This doesn't strike me as a particularly logical pricing model for any periodical (regardless of the bonus subscriber website content) - one would presume that you would want my subscription. View Camera isn't the only culprit either - I ran into the same scenario with B&W magazine. What gives?
My wife purchased for me both View Camera and Camera Arts from Amazon.com. There doesn't seem to be any six digit numbers on the labels. I e-mailed the first month and recived the number for that month. I have e-mailed twice from the web site to ask why I haven't recieved any more than one copy of Camera Arts when I have now revieved 3 of View Camera, (none with 6 digit numbers) but there has been no reponse.
Steve, I'll bet it seemed like it would be easy when you started the magazine... I've been a subscriber since 1989 and I have to say you've done a great job. Unlike any other magazine of its quality and longevity VC seems intensely personal, a characteristic I appreciate. So any small quirks are easier to understand and accept. Let's keep moving forward though. Slightly off-topic to this thread, I also appreciate the thoughtful articles about Eliot Porter. That type of writing is all too rare in the 'photographic' press and takes the magazine beyond the mere nuts and bolts, which is always welcome. Press on regardless!
Most posters seem to focus on the magazines and I'm with everyone who says that it's a one of a kind quality publication. Something that market needs for sure. I would be the last one to discourage Steve from continuing his venture. However, Steve is asking for input on the web site itself. To rephrase my earlier post let me say it this way:
- I see a web presence for ANY entity as a selling point, mostly due to its universal and instant accessibility
- if its web version does not at least match the paper form, I have a problem with it, this is especially the case for a publication that preaches aesthetics and frequently proves that point with wonderful images
View Camera web site (as much as I like its simplicity) feels cheap from first to last page, it's amateurish, and is a far cry from what it looks like on paper. I have no complaints about the content or scope of topics represented there, just the form of delivery. If one decides to subscribe, based ONLY on what he sees on the web, he's in for a nice surprise. But would there be anyone who would NOT subscribe because of it? This maybe the only question that needs to be answered. If you care for your professional image (and something tells me you do), then I think the site needs an overhaul, from basic formatting, to layout, navigation etc. It does not need a splashy design, to the contrary it calls for a simple yet elegant design.
I'm not saying this to hurt one's feelings. I do see however, a significant editorial disconnection between the magazine and its web form.
No matter what happens to the site, it will not prevent me from buying or subcribing to VC or CA, as long as the content remains solid.
Best Regards.
Witold
simplest solutions are usually the most difficult ...
I have been looking around for a good camera magazine with a slant towards LF and fine art.
I have never held "View Camera" in my hands.
I looked at the website and did not subscribe, largely based on the web site. You may think this is awful, but one has to make the decision based on some criterea, and that was pretty much all I had to go on. The web side is a mis-mash of things, OK for a small website, but does not say good aesthetics (or usability) to me.
Now that I have read this thread, I actually have quite a bit of enthusiasm for the magazine and will probably subscribe, but I am indeed one of those who was turned off by the web site since it was all I had to go on.
A web site representing a photography magazine with a strong fine art bent absolutely MUST have great pictures, artistic design, excellent graphic arts and give the viewer the impression that they takes such things seriously.
I'm a little late at getting to this thread, but I'll comment as a "View Camera" and "Camera Arts" subscriber as well as someone who specializes and developing web sites for publications.
I have to agree with most folks here, the process to log onto the site is cumbersome at best. And -- not to be cruel -- but the design of the site itself doesn't present a very professional appearance. I'm also not fond of PDF-only content. It's better than nothing but having HTML content is better.
First, I'd recommend thinking about what you hope to accomplish with the web site. One of my clients, The New York Review of Books, derives a great deal of income selling online subscriptions to their archives. This, IMHO, is one of the best things a magazine can do for their subscribers -- providing a complete archive (with searching) of their content.
Second, I'd recommend a through analysis of your site's access logs. This can tell you how people use the site and where problems might be happening. Pay special attention to something called the exit summary (i.e. the last page a visitor sees before leaving).
Third, the site must be an integral part of your publishing efforts -- it can't be a poorly-funded second child because it'll show. Frankly, no site is better than a poor one because it'll turn off folks that might otherwise buy the hard copy.
In summary, there's no magic bullet. Your online publishing needs as much thought and work as the hard copy to succeed. But when done right, it provides a wonderful resource to your subscribers as well as a great marketing tool for the printed version.
BTW, I'm not trying to sell anything here -- I'm fully booked as it is -- but if you have any questions please feel free to email me.
To make people buy or subscribe, you have to give away a look at the magazine. My suggestion is to lay out a "hole" issue, to make a hole impression.
The material can be taken from different issues over the years, but it need fresh ads. If the material is still "fresh" after several years, you will also give something to new subscribers. The cost of this may be low, but you might gain much, and it might be pointed at from different photo sites: "for the best magazine, go to VC, look at the "fake" issue and decide yourself"
Øyvind
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks