Lenswork will no longer be found at newstands.

[Bill_1856]

No great loss.

[davea1234]

I realize I'm coming late to this thread, but when I heard that Brooks was taking this step, I felt compelled to go to the Lenswork site and subscribe to support his efforts.

[Tomaas]

WHATEVER the reason for Lenswork being taken off the retail shelves I, for one, will miss being able to pick it up locally.

This just means I'll continue buying B&W Magazine, View Camera, Silvershotz without Lensworks!

Brooks, good luck anyhow.

Tomaas

[Kirk Keyes]

I just saw it at Borders in Portland 2 days ago.

[Turner Reich]

It's half digital stuff anyway, good bye and don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. Imagine going to a gallery and seeing a Weston on a tv screen and not a framed print.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

It's half digital stuff anyway, good bye and don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. Imagine going to a gallery and seeing a Weston on a tv screen and not a framed print.

That's really disrespectful and as a fellow magazine publisher, I take offense to your comments. Everyone's allowed to have their personal preferences, as far as likes and dis-likes of magazines and their content. Don't be classless and come on here and act like that... wishing a business ill when it contributes greatly to the photographic community overall and not just a select few in the community is in poor taste. Irving Penn has been doing some gorgeous inkjet digital prints for the past couple of years, would you insult his photography just because of the methods used to create the overall work?

[Greg Lockrey]

This digital and the so called "analog" debate is the silliest one that I ever came across. It would be like arguing about what type of media, oil or watercolor, pencil or charcoal is best to make art. Real artists don't care about the method. Perhaps someday when photographers are considered artists, they won't either.

[roteague]

This digital and the so called "analog" debate is the silliest one that I ever came across. It would be like arguing about what type of media, oil or watercolor, pencil or charcoal is best to make art. Real artists don't care about the method. Perhaps someday when photographers are considered artists, they won't either.

Nonsense. Photography is unlike any other type of art, in that it is, and always has been bound to piece of equipment. You may only be interested in the final result, but I can guarantee there are many, many, photographers who don't feel the process can be separated from the result. Saying that darkroom work, or the actual picture taking process is akin to using oil or watercolors is insulting in that respect, to that group.

[jetcode]

It's half digital stuff anyway, good bye and don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. Imagine going to a gallery and seeing a Weston on a tv screen and not a framed print.

Weston wasn't the only photographer who ever lived. One day the digital haters will begin to die off one by one like war vets and the period will be fondly remembered as one of great transition and animosity, mostly because process is more important to some people than the expression of art itself.

[jetcode]

but I can guarantee there are many, many, photographers who don't feel the process can be separated from the result.

Does this statement imply that digital processes are not processes at all? Digital has nearly eliminated film in commercial work. A significant share of fine art photographers use some form of digital process in their work. To imply that process is valid for analog photography only is a misstatement based on personal bias.