Magazines

[Ed Richards]

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.

[Bill_1856]

When I started out in photography there were three photo magazines on the newsstands in the US (Mod, Pop, and US Camera). They were ALL lousy, and got worse until the '70s.
Forget about photography magazines -- there seem to be uncounted dozens of magazines about Photoshop. As you can plainly see, the problem is just that you're interested in the wrong things.

[rdenney]

I once bought View Camera on the newsstand regularly, though I never subscribed. But I can no longer find it on the newsstand. Reports of subscription snafus and administrative lapses have warned me off of subscribing at this point. Have they improved so that this is no longer a significant risk?

Rick "who also subscribes to too many magazines" Denney

[jnantz]

i used to subscribe to vc magazine and enjoyed some of it.
i let my subscription lapse after seeing how the publisher
treated people on line. i had a hard time separating the magazine
from the person behind it ...

[Ed Richards]

Whatever the past issue with VC, it has been working fine the last few years. Steve has been very supportive of view camera projects, such as the PhotoNola show he curated and published. One major problem is that subscribers confused this list with customer service at VC. If you do not like VC, or PopPhoto, fine, but why flame them online?

For those who buy at the newstand - subscribe, otherwise all the money goes to the distributor.

Personally, I find it hilarious that a list of folks devoted to an antiquated form of photography has so many people who find looking at images online just fine. We should be killing for mags that publish images on real paper, esp. like VC and Black and White that actually use a full size sheet of paper! Nobody knows you are a digicam on the WWW.

[Greg Blank]

Magazines and art agencies love your take. Keep giving them the good stuff and you'll soon drink from a non labeled bottle.

Truth is always the truth and unvarnished, artists always believe painting on rocks has magical properties.



We should be killing for mags that publish images on real paper, esp. like VC and Black and White that actually use a full size sheet of paper! Nobody knows you are a digicam on the WWW.

[Greg Blank]

NO! they suck creativity out, through one's pantsand tell you, you'll be a millioniare photographer buying thier advertisers best product.


I once bought View Camera on the newsstand regularly, though I never subscribed. But I can no longer find it on the newsstand. Reports of subscription snafus and administrative lapses have warned me off of subscribing at this point. Have they improved so that this is no longer a significant risk?

Rick "who also subscribes to too many magazines" Denney

[Greg Blank]

This was stated rather tongue in cheek.

I think if you like the content a specific magazine has you should buy it. Most of the advertisers in fairness are just trying to make a living and they do support many peoples livelyhoods directly and indirectly. I guess if blame is to be placed I think the desire for having digital cameras in general has placed the whole "industry" of photo on
edge trying to maintain profit factors that it once had. Which is a double edged sword for photographers.


NO! they suck creativity out, through one's pantsand tell you, you'll be a millioniare photographer buying thier advertisers best product.

[Frank Petronio]

I've read plenty of View Camera magazines and I think this forum blows it away. One has to use some common sense filtering to get to the best stuff online but there is no way VC or any of the instructional books come close to what's on the front end of this website (the non-forum parts).

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

If you guys are so-called environmentalists, save some trees.

[Brian Ellis]

I dropped View Camera magazine a few years ago, not because of any problems but just because I subscribed to it for about 15 years and it was getting stale. Which isn't intended as a criticism of the magazine. It was more a matter of "after 15 years, six issues a year, how much more can be said about a form of photography that hasn't changed all that much in 150 years?" I've come very close to dropping LensWork for the same reason - if I see another portfolio in there about cowboys or portraits of people in exotic lands I think I'll barf. But there's still a lot in LensWork - portfolios and writing - that interests me and I think we should support publications like that so I continue subscribing.

I also subscribe to Aperture because it takes a totally different slant than any other photography publication I know of. And I recently added Photo Techniques after having dropped my subscription to it several years ago. Most of my photography-related reading time over the last five years has been devoted to Photoshop that I thought it would be nice to get back to a photography publication. So I'll give it a try for a year and see how it goes.

There's clearly more information on line about all aspects of photography than could possibly be covered in any magazine over any length of time. But I still prefer reading something that isn't on a computer screen and there's so much information on line, much of it contradictory and confusing, that it can be overwhelming. So I read on line solely for information and I read paper because I like it.

[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 (http://magcloud.com/). 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!)

[Andrew Plume]

I've just caught up with the current VC discussion:


Frank - I agree that this forum simply "....does blow VC mag away..." - it's very difficult for a bi-monthly mag to compete with this sort of constantly flexible forum (as we have here) - for me, one of the added bonuses here is having someone's name and web site come up on screen and the instant access into the kind of work that that person's doing + their technical thougts, which are all very invaluable

Brian - I also felt that it was starting to get fairly stale, after all it's not a bottomless pit when it comes to finding new content for such a mag

Merg - I remember that article, I also much enjoy your work and your detailed posts on this forum


I don't wish to kick start another anti-Steve Simmons campaign (which hasn't been the case on this thread so far) but a couple of years ago I started to become unhappy with everything that was being said about Steve and ultimately that led me to not review my subscription - for me, I never minded the typo's inside but there was at least one instance where the inside contents didn't match what were advertised on the front cover, that aside VC Mag has in the past been an invaluable resource for me


andrew

[Capocheny]

Frank,

I guess I'm one of those old farts who still buy and enjoy reading a "physical" magazine as opposed to the internet versions. I'm on the computer throughout the day and, for me, the last thing I want to do is to read it on the computer after hours. But, that's just my personal preference. :)

I still buy numerous mags running from VC to BW to Silvershotz, to Digital Photographer, to Bon Appetite to The Economist to LensWorks to... on and on! Newspapers on a rainy day in Vancouver with a great cappuccino is also a terrific way to spend time.

As for View Camera Magazine, one may not always enjoy or appreciate each and every article but, IMHO, there's always something interesting to read in it.

Lastly, Ed... really liked your images of, "Magazine Street, New Orleans" and "Immaculate Conception Jesuit Church, New Orleans!" Great photographs!

The "Old LSU Law Building, Baton Rouge" inspires me to get out and try my hand at shooting some architecture as well. Thanks.

Cheers

[John Kasaian]

I still like View Camera. Whatever others say about Steve Simmons, I owe him a great deal---while I always been intrigued by big cameras with bellows, a copy of Using The View Camera is what spurred me on to finally getting my mitts on one, and the excellent portfolios in View Camera as well as the technical articles on old lenses seldom fail to inspire me. Along with Tuan's incredibly excellent website (and all the fine people I've met here) and the virtual dumping of LF gear on the market since digital imaging became the law of the land, View Camera is one of those pillars that made LF photography a reality for me.

Sadly, I seldom find View Camera on the rack at bookstores anymore and my financial situation (well, lack of a financial situation) dictates that what entertainment income I have goes to buying stuff like kid's soccer shoes and attending Webelorees and not photography magazine subscriptions, but I'll always come up with the scratch buy an interesting VC issue if I do find it and I still find great inspiration when flipping through my collection of back issues.

[mcfactor]

As someone who has just brought a new printed journal to fruition https://www.cousincorinne.com/subscribe.html, I can say that there is a satisfaction in having a printed work that cannot be overestimated. Isnt that (at least part of) the reason we still use film? To eventually see our work printed on paper, rather than on a computer screen. The journal has a mix of photography, literature, and comix. The intention was to create something that portrayed photography and literature as equally important.

I also subscribe to a number of magazines that I do not have time to read, but I still like having them around to look at. There is something comforting in the permanence of them. Besides, most magazines are very inexpensive to subscribe to, so if you plan to buy them once or twice a year, it makes sense to subscribe.

[Drew Bedo]

I took a workshop with Steve Simmons in the late nineties at the Santa Fe Workshops. His gentle but frank criticism brought my photography to a higher level of technical ability and maturity.