The Real Problem with View Camera Magazine

[steve simmons]

Ok, my mistake, it is the 608. Is this the "full of errors" you are refferring? Get over it!

--Jorge, 2004-05-31 10:49:27 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

here are some recent errors

1. asuming everyone lives close enough to a store that stock the Sekonic meters so they can read the insruction book before buying or not buying such a meter.

2. Not knowing which meter I reviewed and described how to use in a past article in View Camera.

Plase get your facts straight and do not make assumptions tha everyone has the same inclinatons and opporunitues as you. It makes it appear hat you are so anxious to bash me that accuracy is of secondary importance.

In a forum such as this where newcomers to the field may be listening it does them disservice to post misleading information.

steve simmons

[Paul Kierstead]

Not to mention
<ol>
<li>The 608 is not discontinued
<li>The 608 was announced in May 2001, so the article could not have been 4 years ago
<li>I have my strongest doubts that it was calibrated to 12% gray. I would love see evidence supporting that.
</ol>

Incidentally (god, I love that pun), there is a 308 and it is also not discontinued. It does not have a spot function, however.



In fact, pretty close to nothing in the original paragraph is correct; so much so that I wonder if you two are speaking of the same article.



As an aside, I bought a L-508 (before the 608 became available) because of a review similar to the one for the 558. I do wish more "user experiences" were included, but it was all I had to go on, as there is was no vendor near me who stocked such "high-end" meters.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Ah jeeez...if I listed all the errors printed in VC I would spend the next year typing them all.

So for #1. This is not an error but what you perceive to be a wrong assumption. You could be right, you could be wrong.

#2. I do know the meter, I have one, but made an error on the style number, so shoot me. Is not like VC magazine has never made a mistake. Lets see, poor printing, poor editing, errors in spelling, typos...should I go on? you know, people living in glass houses should not throw stones.

If you are so concerned about the new comers, I would say a better thing for you to do would be to stop this asinine behavior. Certainly if I did not know VC magazine and saw your behavior on this forum I most likely would not subscribe.

Somebody should take the computer away from you and sit you on your desk and make you work on your magazine and how to improve it. Like making it easy for subscribers to log on to your web site.....

Bottom line, there are times when you get undeserved criticism, there are times when you deserve all you get....

[MattO]

Now that everyone had their blood up....

I think it is proper to discuss a photography magazine on this forum, to critique, complain, or flatter - that is no different than discussing the failings or vitues of a camera. It is a product in the market.

But the open, personal criticism of an individual is not.

[sanking]

I agree with MattO. The discussion of View Camera magazine was entirely appropriate for this forum, as were critiques, complaints, and flattering. It is, as Matt notes, a product in the market.

But, enough is enough and when the criticism becomes obviously personal I think useful discussion has ended.

I am a very long-time subscriber to View Camera and as a large format photographer am glad for its existence, as I think are many of the people who have voiced criticism in this thread. Is it perfect? Obviously not, but on the whole the magazine provides a lot of useful and interesting information for large format photographers while serving, because of its mere existence, to bind together a relatively small number of people who share some common interests.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Oh God, this is unbelievable.

Ok to set the record straight. I just went and looked in my camera bag, the meter is a Sekonic L508, which from what I understand is discontinued. So I got the numbers wrong, sue me!

Paul, I suggest if you want proof about the 12% calibration on the L508 you contact Sekonic (as I did) and ask them about it.

Second, for an instruction manual go to the Sekonic web site and download it. They have them for all the meters and can be downloaded in pdf format. No need to buy one or rely on a magazine article. Furthermore they also have quick guides, which are far more complete than any article.

As to the VC article it was about one of these dual meters, obviously they are not so different in their use, which proves my point.

Sad to say that the original thread deteriorated into this.

[Frank Petronio]

Smells like the Leica forum here

[Francis Abad]

The internet is the premiere place for information, articles, reviews, photos, etc. To compete for my hard earned dollars will necessitate something extra - whether that be better writing or better subject matter. I have about 10 years of VC issues. I stopped buying a long time ago for two reasons - (a) the articles that made it worthwhile to purchase were decreasing and (b) I could find better information, photos, reviews, etc. on the net (costs me a few cents a day to be logged in - NO CONTEST). Some people like having a bound hard copy of whatever interests them. I need more of a reason than that.

[domenico Foschi]

Definitely degenerated, but amusingly human...in a dark way.....

[steve simmons]

Jorge,

The factual info in View Camera is good and accurate. I see typos, etc in Time, SI etc.so I do not believe we are that much different

Now to claim that since it was a dual meter it does not matter that you posted a wrong model number is refusing to take responsibility for a blatent and easy to have not done mistake (you coud not even be bothered to check in your camera bag). You were wrong, admit it and do your homework before posting mis-information again - I hope anyway). Your posting the wring model number my have caused people to look for a non-existent article and I hope this would concern you.

I will check with Mamiya on Tuesday and see if the meter has been discontinued and will post here accordingly. I will also check on the 12 vs 18% calibration.

As for my stopping this****** behaviorI have been told by many privately that they appreciate the fact that I come on and correct this type of 'mis-information".

Ideally you wouold take the time and responsibility to make sure the info you post is accurate. As long as it is we appreciate your efforts. When it is wrong you should be happy to have the correct info posted, After all, whoever does post the right info is doing all of us a favor. Relax Jorge. My posting the correct info is not personal at all.

steve simmons