View Camera Magazine suggestions?

[Micah Marty]

(I'm taking the liberty of starting a new thread in case folks don't see the thread that spawned this discussion.)

A ways down in the thread below on Michael Fatali, Steve Simmons, editor of View Camera magazine, generously offered the following:

"I am very open to hearing suggestions as to the types of articles people would like to see in View Camera. Just keep in mind the following:

--We can't do just b&w landscape photography

--There are just so many ways to do film graphs

--I would prefer not to repeat articles we have done in the past. We have many readers who have been subscribers from the beginning and I do not feel it is fair to them to give them the same article again. Now, what would yu like to see in future issues???"

On behalf of others in this forum, allow me to thank Mr. Simmons for keeping his cool after reading the thread on Mr. Fatali--and for gracefully giving us this opportunity.

Suggestions for View Camera?

<><><><><>>

[David A. Goldfarb]

I haven't seen the current issue yet, but has VC done a feature on Andreas Gursky yet? I think he's doing some things that are intrinsically large format.

I think VC did a great thing by publishing Michael Smith's pieces on Azo. I am sure those articles have contributed substantially to keeping it around at least for the moment. They were free publicity for Kodak and informative for readers. Given the rate at which materials seem to be disappearing, maybe there ought to be a regular column that makes the case for why these films and papers should stick around, or perhaps why new materials ought to be made available in large format.

[David Kaufman]

There are two large format photographers of note who, I believe, have not been profiled in View Camera. One of them is the American-Israeli photographer, Neil Folberg, who has produced stunning books on the Sinai desert and synagogues of the world. Another is Edward Burtynsky, a Toronto photographer who is Canada's, and one of the world's, leading (colour) photographer of the industrial landscape. I would also be interested in an article that discusses the lighting techniques and choice of film and chemistry of Yousuf Karsh, who achieved such a distinctive look in his best known portrait photography of the 1940s through the 1970s.

[Bruce Pollock]

The recent issue devoted to architectural photography was great. Also liked the article on Richard Nickel in the current issue. I'd like to see more interior and exterior LF work in colour, if possible. How about Norman McGrath?

[Andy Biggs]

I would love to see an issue on either Michael McKenna, or his up-and- coming assistant, Rolfe Horn.

[Chad Jarvis]

As far as a photographer profile, I would like to see one on Patricia Richardson, Plano, TX. She is an outstanding environmental portraitist with an impressive resume. Technically speaking, I think continued concentration on alternative processing (not just Pt/Pd - thanks) will not only encourage newcomers to the disciplines but will serve to reaffirm that masochism is indeed alive and well amongst large format (as if that wasn't enough) enthusiasts.

[Dave Willison]

A few off-the-cuff remarks regarding VC magazine: (1) Unfortunately, it's the only LF camera periodical; without it we would be in the dark. (2) A picture is worth a thousand words and Mr. Simons might consider eliminating every thousand words and adding at least one photograph. They say that Playboy readers fall into two categories--those who read and those who look at the pictures! (3) Eliminate the "cult of personality" that afflicts typical mainstream media. I'm not particularly interested in famous photographers, their personsal biographies, or their philosophy regarding photography. If I want philosphy I'll read LensWork.

......................

[Ed Buffaloe]

I was a "charter" subscriber to View Camera, and have a complete set of the first 4 or 5 years of the magazine. At some point, I felt it was no longer addressing my interests. The number of technical articles fell off, to be replaced by more portfolios and interviews.

I have recently resubscribed, though I often find myself somewhat "let down" by an issue when I receive it. I feel the magazine somehow doesn't have enough substance--I always want more of the "good stuff". But by the same token, I am cognizant of the difficulty of putting out a world-class production six times per year. I have noticed from the earliest issues that the magazine is poorly proofed--there is some typo, misspelling, or incorrect usage in almost every issue. [March/April 2001, page 61: "Humidity still plays a roll..."]

I'd like to see some articles on large format pinhole photography and infrared photography, more excellent alternative process articles (like Sullivan on Ziatype Printing), and more technical articles.

On the whole, I think Steve Simmons is doing us all a great favor by publishing View Camera, and I don't think he's making any money on it, so it is really a labor of love.

[dave bulmer]

With the recent demise of more lf film, perhaps this publication could use it's clout to badger the film makers about what we lf film users can expect to lose and / or gain in the near future.

[Fender]

First I would like to thank Mr. Simmons for a first rate resource. I was really upset with myself when I failed to send in my renewal (don't ask)and missed the last issue. Thankfully the new issue showed up yesterday.

I myself would love to see more articles on still life studio techniques, lighting, composition, and special effects, close-up and macro work, an article on old lenses and the results one can expect might be nice, and more hard core technical articles like the one last year spelling out how to mix and use T-Max developer. The T-Max article alone has saved me enough to cover my subscription this year!

Thanks again,

[Jim Bright]

I let my subscription lapse because, as novice I wasn't getting much out of the technical articles. If there were comprehensive technical articles that were written with my skill level in mind then I'd resubscribe. But I'm not going to order back issues for previous material when I'm not confident it will translate into better pictures for me. As of now I just scan the new issues on the magazine rack to see if they contain anything of interest. I hope this isn't taken for anything but solicited constructive criticism.

[Sean Billy Bob Boy yates]

Why is the quality of the reproductions so variable?

In this issue Messers Fatali & Schory's work looks really good but Mr.s Spence & Kirby come off pretty dark and mucky. Similarly in the SEP/OCT issue with the Mammoth Camera Workshop review and portfolios - Paula Chamlees work was done MUCH better justice than had been done when you ran an entire article on "High Plains Farm" in the MAR/APR (or was it May/June) issue. I've seen Kirbys work in Lenswork Quarterly and know it can look better than it did in this issue of VC.

Of late you have been including tech info in the photographers profiles - for which I am greatful! Keep it at the end though as an aside rather than dwelling on it UNLESS the article is specifically about technique. If the technique is something off the beaten path, some amplification would be appreciated.

My favorite issues were the MAR/APR 95 and JAN/FEB 98 - both CHOCK FULL of good material. I feel like there hasn't been an issue that useful in a while.

Gordon Hutchings' articles have been quite good and his writing style is much apprecaited.

How about an article, or series on "What's in my Camera Case" - i.e. a break down by photogs with a shot of their case -how they pack it and when/how they use it, how it applies to their approach, etc. The same thing could be done for darkrooms, etc.

For me the "How" of photography is important, but the "Why" moreso - I am VERY glad John Paul Caponigro cotributes his interviews! The darkroom and camera kit articles would hopefully illustrate how the two - the "how" and the "why" work together.

Little bummed at the re-tread of Ron Wisner's on-line Q&A column in this last issue. I guess that may be part of the reason for my fading enthusiasm - I'm on-line now and don't feel as isolated as I was when I first started subscribing. Used to be I couldn't wait the two months! I think maybe that's why a lot of us were surprised at the Fatali article - we had all known about the incident and discussed it pretty extensively back when it happened. I guess a lot of us assumed it was common knowledge.

[scott jones]

I'd like to see an article on Phil Harris from Portland, Oregon. His recent book "Fact Fiction Fabrication" is excellent. I especially like his constructed photos called "fictions" which seem to arouse emotional/psychological responses in me. He can be contacted at philboy@teleport.com

Scott

[kthompson]

Well, I'm not a "charter" subscriber, but I've been getting VC for a looong time. It's one magazine that I save every copy of, and find myself going back to old issues for reference from time to time. I think it's a well designed, and reproduced publication, but I have noticed the typos...I'm not really interested in landscape photography, so I didn't follow that other thread, but I thought I'd just add a voice of support for the magazine. The only other publication out there that's better (for me) is PDN. Photo Tech has pretty lousy reproductions, and aside from David Vestal, there's not much to it. The one publication I really miss is the old Camera & Darkroom magazine. I get "Camera Arts", but I don't find it to be as interesting as C&D was. Also, I believe VC had an issue with Norman McGrath a few years back. The only gripe I have with VC, is that every few years when I have to renew, they inevitably mess it up . For the past two times, I've had my subscription lapse, and have had to call back again, the first time more than once, to get it started back up. The first time (4 yrs+ ago) I was sorta annoyed with having to make a third call...and Steve Simmons actually picked up the phone that day....

[james norman]

i would like to see a focus on the HABS/HAER photographers, jet lowe and jack bouchard. i would also like to see a series of intensive articles on significant historic photographers - edouard baldus, le gray, carleton watkins, sebah, bonfils, beato, macpherson, a j russell, etc. i really don t care about pop "fine art" photographers. i dont need to see any more "technical" articles for beginners.

[Blake]

Yo,

I realize it's the only one we have... and Steve realizes that it can be better and that's great so I won't mince words or make mine "civil".

In no way would I want View Camera to concentrate on any one aspect of large format photography, especially landscapes. Lack of variety in VIEW CAM hasn't been a problem so far but cow-towing to workshops and "fine-art" photogs has.

The coverage of the above seems disproportionate to the numbers of photogs actually attending workshops and practicing the arts. Do I want our beloved View Cam to become a trade pub? Yes, if it means no more "fine art" then good, go do it. I do enjoy the landscape work chosen for the mag as well as the architectural and the tech stuff is great, perfect and exactly what I need but regrettably, I might enjoy one in ten of the "fine-art" features... it's the majority of the fine art and all the hot air that goes with those kinds of photography that's killing valuable column space.

Please edit subjectivity to nothing and let the photo do the communicating even if it means ball-gagging the "arteest" by merely quoting them once... especially if they're given to putting on heirs. Instead emphasize their materials and techniques rather than relegating the things we can know about a photo to the last couple of graphs.

The technical articles are fine and there's no point in jazzing up a chart or graph. View Camera customers are aesthetically conservative lot and "jazzing down" is what we want. It's the shit that passes as fine art and the softheads who make it that I can't stand. It's a sucker's game and Steve and staff should show more restraint. If fine-art is to be reviewed then make sure it's stood those archetypal time-tests first.

Of the ones I can remember from past issues I felt were lousy... well, here tis' like it or not Kenna sucks, burn his camera...at least he's not wordy. Chamlee's photos were boring, not quiet and beautiful but rather without worth of any kind. Jan Oswald's photo-art isn't good enough to be toilet paper and her talking about it makes me want to kill. That thing on TILT studios was a waste and I won't waste more words describing it.

I've seen better photographic "art" put up for review on photonet's critique page. That's the blind-spot, if Steve seems to have one, fine art. So my suggestion in short is... fire JPC.

love and hand grenades,

tribby

p.s. Steve, I do want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for the first two years of View Camera and every mistake inside them. They were good, get the fire back, go rehire those people. I'd also like to thank you for "Using the View Camera". It's the only one of it's kind and in the future we'll credit you and it for helping to keep LF alive.

[kthompson]

J Norman, I'm with you on all that. My favorite issues have been the ones that dealt with the more historic photographers/processes. That may have to do more with my line of work (probably your case too). The HABS/HAER issue was a great one, along with the FSA article. There was another interview a while back with Eric Long, and the Smithsonian photographers that really hit home with me. The museum photographer (staffers) community is pretty small, so it's nice to see a focus on this stuff. Personally, I'd like to see some more technical articles dealing with conservation/preservation. Like I said, I'm not into landscape stuff, but I enjoyed the Chicago Albumen Works article, and things like that alot.

[Trevor Crone]

The work of Andreas Weidner. It good to here photographers are going to be doing their own profiles rather then some third party.

[Andy Biggs]

Technique, technique, technique.

I would love to see more ways to improve my exposures and processing. Both digital and traditional printing methods.

[Elizabeth S. Woodruff]

I would like to see an article on the Packard Shutter--it's history, use, and especially modern applications.

[David L.]

A swimsuit edition.

[Micah Marty]

More than specific photographers who have or have not been featured in View Camera (which is either water under the bridge or only 1-2 issues? worth of material) I?m interested in the "types" of article published.

Unlike a poster somewhere above (the Playboy guy) I?m not convinced that View Camera should offer more (or larger) photographs and fewer words; frankly, I?d kind of like to see more words. Pictures are available everywhere we look, and while numerous photos are obviously appropriate in a magazine about photography(!), the difference between a half-page photo and a full-page one is several paragraphs of enlightening text. I also find with photography magazines that are short on text that if I don?t like a set of photographs I get nothing out of that section. On the other hand, I may not be crazy about someone?s photographs but they may have a lot to say (Robert Adams leaps to mind; his book of essays "Beauty in Photography" is to me perhaps the single best photography book ever even though it has few photos overall and none of his own). Besides, many magazines will publish good LF photos, but only one magazine?View Camera?is likely to publish the story behind those photos.

First, what shouldn?t View Camera do? The magazine must acknowledge that the playing field has changed in the years since the magazine was founded. There?s no reason to cover material that?s easily accessible out there (or right here at this site) on the Internet or material that is well-covered in books (like Steve Simmons? own!). Many technical pieces fall into this latter category?especially articles for beginners (which strike loyal?i.e., longtime?VC readers as a waste of space). Even pictures can be viewed at photographers? websites in great detail and in greater quantity than the magazine is likely to offer.

So what SHOULD View Camera do? There?s still a lot that isn?t available on the web (or in books) and View Camera could use its gravitas to provide it. For me, the whole challenge of photography is "learning to see," and I?ve tried to think of what kinds of articles or feature series would be helpful toward that end. Five thoughts:

1. A feature called "People to watch," or "Emerging photographers" or "New eyes" ? This would be a single excellent photo and paragraph from an undiscovered, often unpublished LF photographer (like many of us on this site), perhaps 2 or 4 persons per issue (one page each). It would be cheap for the magazine, be interesting for readers (who would benefit from seeing strong images they might otherwise not have seen), and would be a big boost to amateurs (in both senses of that word). It?s not an unrealistic expectation, as to be published one would need only have a single home run, not an entire winning career.

2. Icons of photography ? Not people (who are well-covered in books) but images. I?m thinking View Camera would publish an image that is either well-known or strong enough that it should be well-known, along with a historical explanation of it? and then would have a variety of photographers and academics/critics/curators comment on the image, say, a paragraph each. (I see it as a "dead-photographer" feature because I think we could all learn more from studying the work of those who made our mistakes decades before we did). Again, the goal would be not only enlightening conversation and an exchange of perspectives but also "learning to see."

3. Multiple interpretations of the same subject by different photographers (yes, this could entail literally publishing a set of workshop pictures). Alternatively, an explanation of how one photographer solved the challenge of a single subject (snapshots from various angles, explaining the shortcomings of each, accompanied by a larger reproduction of the perspective the photographer ultimately judged the best?with an explanation why it works for him/her). Not a lot of space; perhaps a double-page spread every other issue or so.

4. More on books. Book reviews (both new and long out of print); book lists (personal favorites) by photographers, known and unknown (and by subject: landscape, architecture, etc.); articles on the book industry; interviews with authors, editors, publishers, and printers; excerpts from new books; stuff on collectible books (a huge sideline to photography collecting), etc.

5. An ongoing series of self-written (or ghostwritten, based on scratchings by the photographer) profiles of "working photographers," no more than one per issue: "On location with Susan Jones" or "In the field with John Smith." Each installment would show a few examples of the featured photographer?s work?enough to establish a common language with the reader, anyway?but would primarily consist of text to help the reader understand how the photographer ticks. (I like JPCaponigro fine, but instead of interviews I think he should be used more for analysis?seemingly his main interest; he could oversee #2, above?and of course for digital subjects.) This kind of series would let View Camera revisit the excellent photographers it has featured before, but without covering the same ground.

In terms of understanding the "working photographer" series suggested in #5, maybe it would help to think about what the average View Camera reader would talk about with the profiled photographer if they were to spend a day together (perhaps driving around scouting and not even taking any pictures). For example, many successful photographers claim they?re just "naturals" or that they?re "self-taught," when in fact (except for those who through trial and error figure out how to use a camera that washed up on their desert island) we are all immeasurably influenced in the way we see by countless other photographers. When I see a photographer?s work, I want to know how s/he got there, what they?re trying to say, and where they?re going with it. But I don?t want gaseous philosophy or excessive artsy-fartsiness of the kind that?s in art students? "artist?s statements" at a gallery; I?m talking nuts and bolts, what works and what doesn?t in real life, in trying to be creative and good and fresh every single day. Reality photography, if you will. Examples of the kinds of questions I wish these working photographers would address:

"How did you get into photography? How did you get into LF photography? Which photographers did/do you find inspiring? Even more importantly, what was it about these photographers and/or their work that you find inspiring? (EWeston?s compositional eye, for example, or Ansel?s subject matter, or Minor White?s "spirituality") What don?t you like about these mentors? oeuvre? Which photographers (especially dead ones) do you think are underrated? Overrated? How did you develop your own eye? Do you have a lot of photography books? Collections, technique, themes/places, or monographs? What books do you prize most? What other forms of artistic expression are inspiring to you? (Cezanne landscapes? Bach fugues? Bob Marley CDs?) Do you get creative blocks, and if so how do you overcome them? Do you like the "post-production" (darkroom/computer) part of the image-making process or would you rather be in the field? Do you usually know you?ve got a strong picture as soon as you click the shutter or do you find you make new discoveries, including cropping, in the darkroom or on the light table? When in the darkroom or at the computer do you like to work alone for hours on end until a project is done, or do you revisit it frequently on different days to see it anew? At these times do you listen to music or work in silence? How do you balance family and personal life with your photography? If you?re married, how does your spouse affect your work? Do you take vacations or trips without photographing? Do you have other hobbies? Do you have other artistic outlets (e.g., piano, sculpture, woodworking)? Why do you use the specific photographic tools that you do (monorail vs. folding, metal vs. wood, etc.)? Do you have any little tips about technique, composition, focusing in low light, keeping dust out of your holders, etc. that are by now instinctive to you? How do you transport your stuff around, both between locations and on location? Does your photography depend more on walking to places or flying/driving there? How do you find subjects? How do you get gigs? Any horror stories about failed assignments, through your fault or others?? Are you a good bookkeeper and marketer, or do you rely on others for help in one or both of those areas? How do you approach a familiar subject? An unfamiliar subject? Do you think you work best in an unfamiliar environment (e.g., a place you?ve never visited before) or with a subject you know inside and out? In a new location, do you start shooting right away to get your first impressions down, or are you a slow starter, wanting to soak in the place for a few hours or days first? Do you use any tools to help you visualize a scene before setting up your tripod or before shooting (viewing filters, polaroids, digital p&s)? How do you organize files of your past work? How do you preserve spontaneity in your photography (or don?t you, valuing contemplation instead)? Who is your best critic? Whom do you "run your images by" for comment? Do you rely on your spouse/significant other more for positive support or for clear-headed critique? Do you socialize more with other photographers or with people outside the field? Do you do other kinds of photography or use other formats? How do you say something new about a familiar subject? Why do you use black-and-white? (Or why do you use color? Or when do you use which?) What would you say you bring to a project that other photographers don?t? What makes a photograph "yours"? Who is your audience? Do you see the consumers of your photographs as different from yourself? Why should others care about your work? Why should they visit your website? What are your goals? How is your eye or your work evolving? Was there a breakthrough time in your aesthetic development, a Eureka moment? Did you realize it at the time or only in retrospect? How do you feel about your early work? When you see your new work as a viewer (on exhibit or in a publication), do you notice the work?s shortcomings or its strengths? Do you teach? Why or why not? If you were teaching, how would you find a middle ground between "just do what I do" and "do your own thing"? What do you think intermediate-to-advanced students are looking for? What?s the best format for teaching? Have you participated in workshops where you were not the teacher? What advice would you give to beginning photographers about learning to see? What do you see as the future of LF photography? Of photography in general? Of the still image? What about the role of digital manipulation; does it appeal to you or not?"

You get the idea. I apologize for going on so long, but then that?s the beauty of free bandwidth (and the drawback of no co

[Micah Marty]

...no copyeditor!).

Good luck.

<><><><><><>

[Bill Lange]

I know this might seem like a turn to popularism or might even seem lowbrow, but how a bout a critique of large format photos readers send in. A few of the Brit magazines have this feature and one in particular is very honest and sometimes cheeky - all for the beenfit of the photographer and the reader, of course.

[paul owen]

As I still consider myself a "learner" in the field of LF, I'd really like to see more "how to" articles, especially on printing/processing. I must admit to being a little disappointed with the contents of some issues but on the whole I am eternally grateful to Steve Simmons for the publication. MY BIGGEST GRIPE IS THE TIME IT TAKES TO REACH US HERE IN THE UK!!!! Regards Paul

[neil poulsen]

I like the idea of doing a swimsuit edition. I've heard that Playboy used an 8x10 view camera for their center-folds. How 'bout doing something on that.

[Dave Willison]

How about an extreme approach! Edit VC like an academic journal by publishing only work that contributes to the building of what might be described as a "theory of large format photography." First, eliminate all articles on equipment and technique unless they can be tied directly to new and innovate work. These articles would be similar to scholarly articles on methodology. Second, Exclude all work that is derrivitive, redundant, or simply replicates past work. This would have the effect of eliminating most nudes, pictures of the national parks, sea shells, etc. Third, begin to eliminate work that can be linked to either the pictorialist or modern (f64) schools. If work can be described as "post-modern" or a similar category it would be included. Again, anything that moves the discipline forward! Finally, develop a new way of publishing the "journal" which eliminates the overreliance on advertising and the potential subserviance to equipment manufacturers. Beyond that, develop of system of "blind" reviewers who decide what work is published.

----------------------

[Doremus Scudder]

This is off-thread, and directed specifically to Micah about the post above: When I was studying singing at university, one of my greatest influences and guides was a book called "Great Singers on Great Singing" by bass Jerome Hines consisting of interviews with established and renowned artists about the "nuts and bolts" of their technique. It seems to ma a similar book about LF photography would be in great demand and fill a much-needed niche. Micah's post above could easily be adapted for serious interviews with notable LF photographers as a basis for such a work. All the right questions (and then some) are already there. How 'bout it Micah? Game for a literary project? I'm sure the potential interviewees would be willing. Just a thought. Regards, ;^D)

[james mickelson]

I want to give a hand to Steve for publishing a great magazine. It is very hard to publish an all inclusive magazine which meets the varied interest of a varied readership. I think there are some real interesting and worthwhile suggestions in this thread. One of the suggestions that I feel fell flat was the suggestion that the magazine throw out all material already done and only include seminal work that is new and cutting edge. I find the monikers "new" and "cutting edge" in describing work as very boring. Remember that at one time Michael Fatali's work and Michael Kenna's work was cutting edge. I like to revisit established photographers to see what new work they are doing. And I love to see the work of new photographers. I also really like to see images. The philosophy behind work and vision is very interesting but a picture is worth a thousand words. A lot of the philosophical writing says the same thing over and over. I like the photographer to talk about what the idea is about and how it evolved. Technique is nice also. And as old hands at photography, large format in particular, we need to remember that the magazine is published for us as well as the new up and coming large format photographer. Quite a few of us looked upon VC as a bible of sorts when we first delved into the format. So I say to Steve, keep up the good work but take some of the suggestions offered here and make VC a better magazine. My one real complaint with the magazine is the deteriorating quality of the images as printed on paper. James

[Ellis Vener]

I too think Simmons does an excellent job with View Camera. he has good writers who ask (usually) smart questions and who understand it isn't about gear but about vision.

An article I'd like to see is a follow up on the Fatali profile that covers at least the same length, the damage Michael Fatali did, both to the site and to the cause of photography in the National Parks, and perhaps damage caused by other over eager photographers who think common sense rules don't apply to them, that they are more special than the next person.

[Paul Schilliger]

I have long considered a subscription, but the price of international mail has p revented me so far. Would there be a way of making the magazine available in Europe at a better rate?

[fw]

Paul, I now get my copy from Robert White in the UK (who is the UK distributor) for GBP6.50 including postage. It probably wouldn't be much more to send it to Switzerland. In Japan, this magazine was available off the shelf from Tower Records in Shibuya!

I'm looking forward to the upcoming issue given the previous discussions on this board (!), and it is disappointing that Tuan appears to have deleted that thread, although it did appear to be bordering on the litigious towards the end.

Overall, View Camera oscillates between very high quality (e.g portfolios such as David Fokos), and fairly banal and badly written word-spinning, but it has an overall air of zealous honesty which I find endearing. The current approach and balance would be difficult to change, but Steve Simmons could do well to introduce some non-American photographers - there are many Japanese LF photographers who produce excellent work - if Steve were to contact the Tokyo Museum of photography at Ebisu, I am sure that they would be very helpful in arranging introductions, etc.

[Paul Schilliger]

Thanks David! I'll have a look at this offer.

[Tim Klein]

OK, I'll throw my 2 cents worth in...

I have to say, I really like the magazine's format. It's impossible to come up with a publication that covers everything, but I think Steve does a good job of touching on a lot of different things.

The portfolios and discussions with the photographers are interesting and pretty well done. I wouldn't change that much, except I'd really like to see a bit more discussion about how each photographer makes their images. As another poster said, a "day in the life" type of thing with a little more technical information about why a specific lens/film/process combination wwas chosen. It might also be nice to see a section later in the magazine with a couple of the images that didn't make the cut and a small description of why the photographer chose one version of an image over another. These images could obviously be smaller and of lower quality reproduction. The effect would be something similar to other magazines that have smaller thumbnails near the end of the publication with a description of how the image was made.

Also, I'd disagree with some here who said they'd like less reading material and more photos. I love examining the photos, but I always feel like I'm finished with the magazine much too soon for a publication that only comes out every other month. I'd like a little more substance to tide me over until my next ViewCamera "fix"!

(and like several others, Thank you Steve for putting out this fine magazine)

[David A. Goldfarb]

The "swimsuit issue" idea may have been a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I think it might be interesting to do a piece from the _VC_ perspective on Peter Gowland. Aside from his influence on commercial glamour and advertising photography in defining the _Playboy_ style of the 1970s, he wrote many popular books for amateur photographers that affected the way ordinary people looked at themselves through the camera, and he's designed some very interesting large format cameras (Gowlandflex TLR, the ultralight Pocket View, some arial cameras, and others).

I have an 8x10" Pocket View, and have ordered some parts from him, and he's a very accessible, generous guy who loves to talk about his cameras and to help people with them. He is always making improvements to them.

[Sal Santamaura]

Steve, my only input concerns an aspect you have virtually no control over. This thread (and the one that spawned it) have been around for how long now? My issue only arrived with yesterday's mail delivery! Since the USPS has caved in and made a deal with FedEx, maybe you could negotiate one with them too?

[Wayne]

Boy, what a thread. A fair number of reasonably good suggestions and several incredibly dorky ones that are almost embarrassing to read.

I'd like to see more articles about what LF photographers eat for breakfast. Edward Weston liked Rice Chex. I like Wheaties mixed with Rice Chex, especially after its sat for a while and gets a little soppy. I'm guessing Ansel didnt shy away from the bacon and eggs

[Wayne]

I'm sorry, that should have been wheat chex. tsk, tsk. So I'm also fond of hops.

[David R Munson]

Just found this thread, but I thought I'd contribute a few thoughts of my own.

For one thing, I can actually attribute some of my original interest in large format photography to a single issue of View Camera my father got for me while on a business trip about 2 1/2 years ago (during my sophmore year in high school). Since then, I have bought and devoured every issue and have gained much from the magazine. Yeah, some issues are better than others, but when you compare it to other, more mainstream photography magazines (Popular Photography and the like), it's pretty easy to tell that it really is on a much higher level overall. Steve Simmons has done a great job of creating a wonderful publication and has managed to keep it going strongly despite the relatively small number of photographers that it goes to.

What kind of articles would I like to see? I think Micah pretty much addressed everything I would like to see, and quite well I might add. I understand the amount of effort and time required to create a magazine like View Camera, and that will limit what can be done with it, but I'm sure that there are plenty of people who would be happy to volunteer their time and effort if it meant making an already great publication even better. I really like the idea of a single photograph from and a paragraph about lesser known, not necessarily professional, but still talented LF shooters. Also, and it might seem sort of amateurish, but as Bill Lange pointed out above, a critique of a few photos from readers might be nice. Practical Photography, a British photography magazine, does this in every issue and it's actually pretty interesting to read.

Finally, as far as photographers I'd like to see profiled, I think there's only one that I can think of that I'd really like to see something about- Clyde Butcher. If you're not familiar with him, he does pretty amazing stuff in the Florida Everglades with cameras up to 12x20, which is no simple task.

That's about it from me.

[QT Luong]

This is a remark on Dave's comment. If you are going to volunteer your time and effort, do it to help this site, not View Camera. View Camera, like any magazine, has already advertising revenue and of course charges subcription fees, so if you do something for them, it wouldn't be fair for you not to be compensated. On the other hand, I maintain this site without any compensation (besides the amazon referal fees, which are pocket money), do not resort to commercialization (in particular banner adds), take care of this forum despite the abuse that I receive periodically, format contributions in HTML, write articles, all this just for the satisfaction of serving the Large Format community. I would certainly welcome any help.

The main difference that I see between View Camera and this site is that View Camera has an easier access to established photographers. They are happy to be featured in the magazine, which has a high standard of quality, but they would not be interested by being featured on this site for a variety of reasons. Besides that, I don't see why some of the excellent suggestions of Micah couldn't be used here as well.

[james mickelson]

No no Dan! You're supposed to wear the swim suit. Not the 8x10. James

[Wayne]

My first suggestion is for someone at VC (and Michael Fatali) to learn how to spell ILFOCHROME! There are no "A"s in it, anywhere! Getting it right once and wrong 3 times in one article is pretty embarrassing to those of us who can both do it and spell it.

Other than that I'd like to see pictures-all kinds of pictures, good pictures, bad pictures, straight pictures and "other" (although digital gets old), alternate processes, articles (and PICTURES) on little-known, overlooked LF photographers, both present and past. As long as there are a variety of pictures, i dont care. I dont think every issue will please everyone, so variety is the key

[steve simmons]

Thanks for your comments. I am printing them and will go over them carefully.

There is a followup to the Fatali article in the May/June issue

steve simmons

[gdmcclintock]

I would just like to receive the magazine. I paid for a subscription last October and am still waiting for the first copy!

[steve simmons]

Posts: 2 Re: View Camera Magazine suggestions?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would just like to receive the magazine. I paid for a subscription last October and am still waiting for the first copy!

You can keep posting here and it won't do you any good.

I do not believe for a second you have made all your claimed unsuccessful attempts to contact us.

Here is what I have said many times

if you have a subscription problem contact

amiles@viewcamera.com
largformat@aol.com

505-899-8054 and leave a message.

You can keep complaining here or do something that will work. It is up to you.

BTW, we are closed on weekends so if you contact us during a weekend or on a holiday wait till a workday to get a response.

steve simmons

[Monty McCutchen]

Posts: 2 Re: View Camera Magazine suggestions?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would just like to receive the magazine. I paid for a subscription last October and am still waiting for the first copy!

You can keep posting here and it won't do you any good.

I do not believe for a second you have made all your claimed unsuccessful attempts to contact us.

Here is what I have said many times

if you have a subscription problem contact

amiles@viewcamera.com
largformat@aol.com

505-899-8054 and leave a message.

You can keep complaining here or do something that will work. It is up to you.

BTW, we are closed on weekends so if you contact us during a weekend or on a holiday wait till a workday to get a response.

steve simmons


Why does posting here do him no good? You obviously check in here. You are the publisher of the magazine. You are aware that there is a problem for the potential subscriber now. Is it really that difficult to provide customer service by calling/emailing Andrea yourself with the gentleman's name and have her look into it? I doubt it would take much more time to type that email to her than it takes to essentially call someone who wants to subscribe to your magazine a liar.

Monty

[steve simmons]

Monte,

Up until a PM sent to me today this person never gave us his full name, an address, any proof or payment, or any way to contact him. What were we supposed to do? If he had contacted us directly we would be able to either talk with him at the time, or respond as we would have had an e-mail or mailing address.

We have an excellent reputation for our customer support. Just review the comments made here and on the other View Camera thread. When there was a problem people have said that after one phone call everything was resolved quickly and to the customer's satisfaction.



steve simmons

[Don Hutton]

We have an excellent reputation for our customer support. Just review the comments made here and on the other View Camera thread. steve simmons
You think so? Bizarre - there are dozens of threads with dissatisfied customers. Yes, plenty of happy ones too, but the fact remains, you still seem to have a great talent for pissing off your customers. Your disdainful attitude to your customers with problems is exactly why I will never, ever subscribe to your magazine again. And I'm certain I'm not the only one.

[steve simmons]

Mr. Hutton,

Please go back and read the comments in the newer thread on View Camera and the newer comments here. When there has been a problem and we were notifed it was taken care of immediately. The gentleman in question here made a comment in this thread and the other one complaining about poor service. In neither case did he give his complete name, a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number, or any proof of payment. We had no possible way to check out anything or fix anything.

It was not until he sent a PM to me that I received today that we had any of that info. I copied the PM from this forum and pasted in in a note to my office manager. She will rectify the problem when she is here on Monday (tomorrow).

When we have enough information to take action we always do so.

steve simmons

[steve simmons]

We have had people come on here, claim to have not been sent the magazines they claim to have paid for and it then turns out they never paid us for anything.

If. he is legitimate then contact us and give us your full and correct name, mailing address, e-mail, phone, and proof of payment. This is all we ask.

As I said in a previous post, the individual involved finally sent me a PM with the information and my office manager will look into the situation on Monday the 16th.

steve simmons

[gdmcclintock]

I certainly did not intend my post about not receiving View Camera to cause a flame session. Flaming is a waste of everyone's time and I apologize for being a catalyst for such nonsense. If View Camera is anything like Steve's excellent "Using the View Camera" book, I am sure I will be a delighted subscriber.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

Running a magazine is about as easy as performing brain surgery with a fork and knife. Very, very few people can do it correctly and those that can are bound to make mistakes along the way. I should know - I've made many of them. But that's life -- you make mistakes, you learn. View Camera has become an essential publication that any large format photographer MUST have. How many years has View Camera been around for? 21 years? I think he's gotta be doing something right.

[steve simmons]

David,

I have a policy of staying out of threads about other magazines. Can you do me the same favor.

thanks

steve simmons

[christopher walrath]

As a newcomer to Large Format I would like to see a good LF primer.

[steve simmons]

There are several books out there that I recommend

Jack Dykinga's Large Format Nature Photography
Jim Stone's User's Guide to the View Camera
my book Using the View Camera

check your local library

There are several articles in the Free Articles section of the View Camera web site

www.viewcamera.com


steve simmons

[David Karp]

In addition to those three books, try the main site, to which this forum is linked: http://www.largeformatphotography.info.

[John Kasaian]

View Camera is one of my very favorite magazines and I've learned a lot from the past articles and I've been inspired by many, very many of the portfolios. Here are some more thoughts:
Things I like:

Articles that review and "how to" to use/restore/ old equiptment (cameras, lenses, enlargers, light meters etc...) As a "bottom feeder" in the photgraphy sea I find these types of articles very useful. Many contributors here such as Kerry Thalmann have written many superb articles. I realize there is only so much one can write about restoration and old optics but I've got to say, I love this stuff!

Portfolios shot by people I've never heard of who use minimal gear. These put an emphasis on a person's creativity which I find inspiring. I still recollect some of the stunning images I've seen in issues from years past. Such articles covered subjects like biological marine speciments, culverts in Japan, and panoramas shot with a Widelux, IIRC. There has been tons more of course and it's all brilliant stuff!

Historical Topics such as pioneers such as Bradford Washburn, Weegee, Vittorio Sella., and many others. I can't begin to say how these kinds of articles provide a feeling of community and identity (for me anyway!) with large format photographers of the past. I know this is POMOically incorrect, but the respect these guys deserve for being true to what they set out to accomplish has a bearing on how I look at my own work and the work of other photographers as well.

Reviews of materials like film emulsions. Products seem to come and go so quickly these days!


Things I'd like to see (besides more of the above)

Logistical considerations (shooting in extreme cold or heat, wet weather, wilderness areas, big cities etc...)

Museums (reviews of noteable photography collections of interest in the US and abroad)

Portfolios of photographers who work close to home (finding beauty in less exotic places than the usual Paris/Venice/ Yosemite type locations---lets see what's being done back yards and nieghborhood parks etc... ) Of course Paris etc... is nice too, but a steady diet of that stuff lends itself to the banal.

Projects! VC has published several in the past, but I really enjoy seeing projects where a photographer takes on the documentation of stuff like people, places, roads, rivers, highways and historic architectural.

Thanks, Mr. Simmons, for a wonderful publication. I really do treasure every back issue!

[jetcode]

VC has never held my interest for more than a day or two, no offense but I find it dry and uneventful to some degree and most likely because of it's limited target topology. I am a visual person and BW and LensWork cater more to what I like in a photography magazine.

[Frank Petronio]

Sometimes I actually consider subscribing and contributing to VC -- until I read Steve's responses on these sorts of threads and decide to pass.

[steve simmons]

This thread is about View Camera magazine. I am happy to hear any constructive comments - good, bad or indifferent.

I appreciate all the comments that have been made and the time people have taken to make them.

steve

[Daniel Grenier]

Well, no more than 15 minutes ago I went to my local bookstore and bought the current VC. I have done this since day one of the magazine and I own every single issue. It is now the only magazine I buy every issue. It's just one of those things I haven't gotten tired of yet.

[jnantz]

Sometimes I actually consider subscribing and contributing to VC -- until I read Steve's responses on these sorts of threads and decide to pass.


i had a subscription and cancelled / didn't renew for the same reason.

[Rob_5419]

This thread is about View Camera magazine. I am happy to hear any constructive comments - good, bad or indifferent.

I appreciate all the comments that have been made and the time people have taken to make them.

steve



Clearly not::D
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=37244&page=10


Re: View Camera
Obviously from a man with more opinions than knowledge. His exposure to View Camera is when he can 'pinch', which in most useage means steal, a copy from someone else. Clearly no ethics or integrity.

His web site is all about old equipment and nothing about images.

As far as the quality of our reproductions they are good enough for George Tice, Paul Caponigro, David Muench, John Sexton, etc. to happily be in the magazine on multiple occasions. That speaks much more than anything this unknown can say.

As far as the size of our readership in the UK the 140 copies does not include those that have an online subscription and he does not even consider these people at all. In fact, since Mike took over the UK distribution the circulation has increased and continues to do so. To us, and to Mike, those 140 people are very important. There is also retail distribution in the UK as well that is independent of Mike Walker.

No knowledge, but lots of opinions.

steve simmons



I honestly wouldn't have bothered to comment on the print quality compared to other popular magazines if I'd realise you were so easily offended by the suggestion that you check what other magazines are out there.

[steve simmons]

Constructive comments are usually best if they come from an informed source. The one I commented on that I am not being ??? for did not.

He claimed we had a distribution in the UK of 140 copies. This is untrue. What I said was that we send 140 issue to Mike Walker for his distribution to his subscribers. We also have retail distribution in the UK as well as people from the UK with online subscriptions. To infer that with only 140 copies being distributed in the UK is something that is not very important to us was and is presumptuous and simply innaccurate. Je jas jad the View Camera logo on his site since Feb 07. At the moment he is redoing his web site so a lot of things are not there - for a short moment only.

We frequently get criticized for our reproductions. Yet, all of the name photographers, who have lots of experience getting their work published in books, magazines, catelogues, etc. have been very happy with the quality of reproductions in our publications. We don't have hyped up, over digitized, artificial reproductions in our publication. All of the portfolio pieces are four color reproductions. The black and whites are CMYK quadtones from curves Stephen Johnson helped me build many years ago. They are reproduced at 300dpi which is as good or better than all but the high priced art magazines. If you take a magnifier to the photos you will see the CMYK dot pattern.

steve simmons

[QT Luong]

I do not intend to generalize my expectations to others, but let me say that although I may not be a "name photographer" (yet :-)), I have photographs published in hundreds of publications worldwide. In each case, what matters the most is the check, and the credit added to my CV. Except in the (rare) case of monographs, I do not care that much about reproduction quality. In fact, in many cases, I do not even get a copy of the publication.

On the other hand, if I buy a publication, it is for my enjoyment, and this enjoyment is greatly reduced by poor reproduction. Just to give an example, although I greatly admire Burstynsky's work, I did not get Manufactured Landscapes because the reproduction was unsatisfactory to my eye.

If the readers complain frequently about the reproduction quality, maybe it would be a good idea to listen to them ? The goal should be to please readers, rather than authors.

[steve simmons]

If the readers complain frequently about the reproduction quality, maybe it would be a good idea to listen to them ? The goal should be to please readers, rather than authors.

This statement seems to imply that readers and authors are different groups of people. This is not the case. Everyone that was profiled and shown in the May/June issue has contacted me to tell me how nice the issue looked, how pleased they were with the reproductions of their work, etc. They are also either subscribers and/or regular retail buyers. This is a regular occurrence after each issue and one of the many reasons we are able to show the work of well known and up and coming photographers. We also get compliments whenever I go to photo festivals, portfolio reviews, trade shows and conferences, etc.

We can not and will not please everyone all the time. No such luck. I also realize that there are people who will knock anything positive just because they can. That's life.

steve simmons

[gr82bart]

Sometimes I actually consider subscribing and contributing to VC -- until I read Steve's responses on these sorts of threads and decide to pass.I actually met him in person and decided never to give him a cent of my money, right then and there.

Regards, Art.

[steve simmons]

Art and I have never met.

steve simmons

[Don Hutton]

Art and I have never met.

steve simmons
Well have you ever met Bob Alden then? (careful - it's a trick question)...

[steve simmons]

No, have not met him either.

steve simmons

[gr82bart]

Art and I have never met.Oh, Steve, Steve, Steve, what graves we dig ... So you don't remember glaring at me at Photo Plus Expo last year, when I was talking to Ted? You just stared at me without saying a peep about 2-3 feet away? Go ahead and deny it. I dare ya.

Regards, Art.

[steve simmons]

I don't know who you are or what you look like and I have never been introduced to anyone named Art Liem. If we did ever speak it would have been only in passing, not anything that would make me claim to have met or know you.



steve simmons

[Mike Stewart]

Steve, I'd love to see more articles on large format portraiture. I realize it's a small nich in today's world but I know there are quite a few photographers still utilizing large format for their portrait images.

[steve simmons]

Steve, I'd love to see more articles on large format portraiture. I realize it's a small nich in today's world but I know there are quite a few photographers still utilizing large format for their portrait images.

Thanks for the suggestion and I will followup on this. I enjoy doing portraits with large format - it is a different experience for the photographer and the subject than when the portrait is done with a smaller camera.

steve simmons

[IanMazursky]

Steve,

I wanted to thank you for putting out one of the best magazines dedicated to our group.
I have worked (still do) in the magazine/publishing/pre press industry. I know how hard it is to produce a magazine let alone keep it going for more than a couple of years. So many good ones come an go. Its nice to see a great one thrive! The only issue i have had with VC is the occasional spelling mistake. It happens, but its something to keep an eye out for.
I would also like to see more articles about LF portraits, darkroom, marketing and ULF.

I am proud to be a subscriber and plan to be for the long haul.
Thank you again Steve for keeping up the good work!

Mike,
Its funny you should mention LF portrait photography. One of my best clients shoots celebrity and commercial portraits on 4x5 and 8x10.
Also a good chunk of my other clients do the same. From my end (scanning them), I see a resurgence in large format portraits. It seems to brings out more emotion and a better end product. I see more and more of my clients shooting 4x5 portraits instead of medium format. I would also love to see more articles in VC about it. I have been shooting 4x5 portraits for a family book. They have a look and feel that i cant duplicate in 645.

[gevalia]

As a newbie, I want to throw in my 2 cents. It might be worth a bit less then that, you be the judge. Here goes...
I'm 46 and never picked up a camera before 4 years ago and that was a cheap digital so that I could take pics of wiring in a car I was restoring. I traded up to another Nikon digital and really got into it as a hobby. My job is technical so I loved the depth of knowledge as well as the art required to even satisfy yourself let alone others. But I have always loved B&W and digtal B&W just turns me off. The flat lifeless look (personal opinion). So a friend at work got me looking into film and I chose MF and I just took off to the point where my digital is considered added weight on trips. He also said that given what he knows about me, I would soon be in 8x10. Damned if be wasn't almost right. So now I have a 4x5 and am waiting on a Chamonix from Hugo and I am absorbing all I can in this brave new world.

My point is that I am not alone. This 4x5 I have now is a Speed Graphics with little movement and I shoot landscapes mostly. Whil I was searching for LF equipment, I came across a LOT of people that were just entering LF and MF as weel for almost the same reasons I am. More control, potentially more dynamic range, because it fits with our thoughtful approach to what we love doing, the fact that film is at the top of its game while digital is still in its infancy, and that you need to truely understand how to achieve your goal (no histograms allowed).

I was shocked at how many people were entering LF. Honestly, all I heard was that people were leaving LF to go digital. I'd love to see ViewCamera target us more then you do now.

[jetcode]

But I have always loved B&W and digtal B&W just turns me off. The flat lifeless look (personal opinion).


nearly any image can be made to be flat and lifeless ... film or digital

[Kirk Gittings]

I was shocked at how many people were entering LF. Honestly, all I heard was that people were leaving LF to go digital. I'd love to see ViewCamera target us more then you do now.

All VC does is largeformat???????

[steve simmons]

I did sent Gevalia a PM asking for more specifics.

steve simmons

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think he's asking for more articles targeted at beginners who are moving from digital to LF film without having shot film in other formats before.

[gevalia]

nearly any image can be made to be flat and lifeless ... film or digital

Thanks grasshopper.

[robert amsden]

We need a magizine about real photography, not about cameras that don't use film

[jetcode]

We need a magizine about real photography, not about cameras that don't use film

define 'real' photography ... keep it short and be conclusive ...

[David A. Goldfarb]

Dr. Gilde in the video from Photokina that's been floating around for a year or two says it's not a real photograph unless you use a black cloth.

[Daniele Minetto]

I read View Camera here in Italy, receiving it from MIke Walker UK instead of Taos Photographic FR. I' m very grateful to Steve Simmons for give me the opportunity of reading such a beautiful photographic magazine, the only one I buy, but I must admit I'm a little bit tired of waiting he decided of publishing it WEEKLY! Please mr Simmons let us be pleased more frequently with your magazine! I've read my 15 copies collection of View Camera so many times that everytime I picked up one I know all the articles before opening. I would also thank so much Doremus Scudder for his article on camera movements, The very best on this subject and to me the very best in all respect. I also like very much to see the images and, as a beginner, not so much the very tecnical ones like " what Scheipflug did'nt tell you ", on the whole I like it very very much. ( hey mr. Simmons, if you do not agree with weekly please fortnightly... )
Daniele Minetto

[John Kasaian]

I read View Camera here in Italy, receiving it from MIke Walker UK instead of Taos Photographic FR. I' m very grateful to Steve Simmons for give me the opportunity of reading such a beautiful photographic magazine, the only one I buy, but I must admit I'm a little bit tired of waiting he decided of publishing it WEEKLY! Please mr Simmons let us be pleased more frequently with your magazine! I've read my 15 copies collection of View Camera so many times that everytime I picked up one I know all the articles before opening. I would also thank so much Doremus Scudder for his article on camera movements, The very best on this subject and to me the very best in all respect. I also like very much to see the images and, as a beginner, not so much the very tecnical ones like " what Scheipflug did'nt tell you ", on the whole I like it very very much. ( hey mr. Simmons, if you do not agree with weekly please fortnightly... )
Daniele Minetto

Daniele,
Here in the US it comes out every two months.
That's not a bad thing.
I read it cover to cover a couple of times at least. If it came out every week I'd never get any thing done! :)

[jenn wilson]

i definitely would love more articles on alternative (old-school processes), maybe even including tips on building a UV light source.

also, i know there have been loads of articles on old lenses, but i'd love to see one geared in a different direction. what bits of ancient glass fit on small 4x5 boards? loads of these lenses were made for larger formats and just won't fit. it's pretty easy to find info on coverage, but dimensions aren't always on the spec sheets.

another thought: for marketing and exposure purposes - how about setting up some sort of event or issue involving large format shooters from pdn's 30? probably not feasible, but maybe the idea can be a point of departure for something else.

[frank hoerauf]

Steve, I have been reading VC for years, could it be better ....sure things could always be better. VC is tops in its field, there is no other mag that comes close. The mag cant be all things to all people, I think you know that. I would like to see it become a monthly publication. I am sure a survey of current subscribers would agree. I recently subscribed (I got tired of having the latest issue being sold out at Borders) . I did have a problem with recieving my first issue, I called your office , the girl on the phone was very freindly and took care of it immediately. Just thought I would let you know. I had read in another post of someone with a similar problem and for whatever reason they could not get it resolved.

[tpersin]

if Steve's still taking suggestions for VC, How about the results from the Foto3 competition? i'm not trying to stir the pot but people deserve to know....

Overall Grand Prize:________________

Student Competition
First Prize:_____________________
Second Prize Black & White: _____________________
Second Prize Color: _____________________
10 Honorable Mention Awards
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________

Master Photographer Competition
First Prize: _____________________
Second Prize Black & White:_____________________
Second Prize Color:_____________________
10 Honorable Mention Awards
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________