View Camera Magazine - What would you like to see?

Now that some of the shouting is over I do have a sincere interest in hearing what people would like to see in future issues of View Camera magazine.

<p>

steve simmons

Steve, in general, I enjoy technical articles relating to film,

paper, and printing - which we large format photographers tend to be

interested in. Don't be afraid to re-cover something, perhaps in a

different shade. Andre

<p>

PS Also portraiture: any chance of getting Richard Avedon to submit

an article? Or have I missed that one already?

Articles and interviews (if living) in each issue of great and near-

great LF photographers, with examples of their best work.

Suggestions: Paul (not John Paul) Caponigro, Marie Cosindas, the

Westons, the Muenchs, Saint Ansel, John Blakemore, Avadon, Meyerwitz,

Sudek, Strand, George Tice.... Dig into their philosophy, give

specific first-hand reviews of what they were doing and thinking for

specific pictures (ala AA's "Examples"). The difference between LF

and other photography is much more than the size of the cameras and

film -- it is the attitude, which should be emphasized.

Some of your finest articles, including those that originally

inspired me to pick up my first camera (a LF one as it happens), have

been thoughtful interviews with photographers, usually featuring some

of their work. It's fine to dwell on the brass tacks of equipment

reviews and darkroom techniques, but at the end of the day it's

presumably meant to be about the art itself. In addition to Avedon

mentioned above, it would be great to hear (again?) from Sally Mann,

Joel Peter Witken, Nicholas Nixon, just to touch on a few. Actually,

now that I think about it, there has been more emphasis generally on

landscape than portrait (in terms of artists, techniques, history,

etc). I'd love to see more portrait photographers, both in terms of

their work, but also their ideas and techniques. Not a criticism,

and I'm sure these areas have been touched on in the 13 year life of

the magazine, but they are what I'd like to see more of.

<p>

Still the first magazine I read despite a dozen professional journals

in ophthalmology I'm supposed to get through every month!

<p>

Nathan

More interviews/portfolios of current photographers.

<p>

More detailed "history of lens design" type articles.

<p>

Reviews/samples from current books (not how to stuff)

<p>

Workshop reviews/descriptions (part promotional from the people

offering the workshop plus a couple of reviews from participants)

<p>

Articles by leaders of phot suppliers (eg Kodak, Ilford) on how they

see the future of their business.

<p>

Bios of the greats with some insights from their "assistants" etc

<p>

Keepup the good work

<p>

Alan

I read 'View Camera Magazine' in thirty mintues. rarely find value.

I read 'Camera Arts' for days, constantly returning to relevant

articles.

<p>

you'd never know they were related publishings.

I agree there should be lots of interviews/profiles of contemporary LF

artists with generous reproductions of their work. You do a good job

with those sorts of features. But more women please. You may have to

beat the bushes a bit but they are out there.

<p>

Along the same lines, continue coverage of (and feature users of)

smaller format view cameras, which some women (and men) prefer for

ease of transport. One of my female students saw my 6x9 Arca and her

jaw dropped: "That makes me want to work with the view camera! The

4x5s at school are so unwieldy..."

<p>

How about a whole issue on medium format view cameras and

practitioners?

<p>

Cheers, Sandy

I know that you are asking what we would like to see, but I will tell

you what I don't want to see. I have no desire to see the number of

articles concerning digital imaging that you have been running for

the last couple years. That's why I haven't renewed. Get rid of all

the digital articles and I might consider resubscribing.

I would keep much of what you have as it is very good. Some of the

articles I would push to make more technical with much more

exploration and information in them. Much like the sorely missed

Camera & Darkroom articles used to be, a lot of information and more

depth than what we have generally available in the US market now.

I have no problem with coverage of pixelography or photo output from

scanning or inkjet/digital printers but do think you are right on in

emphasizing what we know as traditional photography. Keep it up and

let us know in print when the two can be merged or used together to

improve our work, our control of the medium or just for information

sake. In the digital realm I would like to see more in depth coverage

of the realities of it... how fast fading occurs, real life

expectance of the storage media, reality of using the digital backs

in the field and direct comparisons of traditional & digital where

they can both do the same job. Especially the comparisons of B&W

inkjet high end and B&W high end printing.

Profile a major historical name every few issues (as you have done

often) as well as searching out the lesser known names of history

that have made contributions to the craft. (as you have been doing)

<p>

As for the bricks some throw at your very large & public picture

window on the world, let them throw them. No matter what you do you

can't please everyone. Get even better printing & some bitch the

quality isn't high enough. Accept an ad from a digital firm & some

piss & moan about you quitting on 'real' photography. Feature

landscape photos, architectural or portraits & those with other

favorites feel slighted. You can't do it all in one issue, but then

you know that. I have watched the magazine grow through the years &

enjoy it. Just a bit more depth to many of the film, equipment and

technique articles please. Other than that, keep up the good work.

Thanks for your comments. Portraiture will be the theme of our

Jan/Feb 02 issue.

<p>

I will work on your other suggestions.

<p>

steve simmons

MORE COMMERCIAL WORK !!!

<p>

No, I don't mean more ads.

<p>

I mean more articles about commercial photographers who use large

format in their ad jobs. You know ... product photography, etc.

There's a huge amount of commercial (non-arsty) photographers doing

very good, creative work in large format. Yes, many have gone the

digital route but there are still many using traditional methods.

<p>

Tip/techniques of the aboved mentioned photographers. Interviews, a

day in the life of so and so while he/she tackles an assignment.

Above all, something with substance.

<p>

Regards

<p>

BTW, I'm glad you asked. I consider that pretty gutsy.

I first started reading <i>View Camera</i> in September 1998

when my father picked up an issue for me while on a business

trip. Since then, my favorite articles have been those regarding

the art and philosophy of large format photography as well as

some of the more advanced technical articles. I'm no a huge fan

of digital, and I think that at times there has been too much

concentration on digital techniques in your magazine. There are

other magazines devoted entirely to digital processes that can

do a better and more thorough job. That said, I don't object to

the occasional article on digital- there have been a few that I

have found very interesting and informative("Mixing Traditional

and Digital Processes," Nov/Dec '99), but like others I think that

after a point it becomes overkill.

<p>

I've always enjoyed articles by/about photographers like John

Wimberly, John Fokos, and Gordon Hutchings. As someone

else said- I'd like to see some more still life/commercial work,

too- along the lines of the Jan/Feb 2001 article on Rob Stanton.

<p>

As far as technical articles are concerned, I think equipment

review type articles are kind of a given, but shouldn't be over-

done. What I'd like to see more of are articles pertaining to

refining technique in traditional b&w darkroom proceses in

pursuit of making fine prints- things like split contrast printing,

use of papers like Azo, and split toning techniques.

How about something for the novices and newcomers to the world of LF?

Do only professionals read View Camera Magazine? I doubt it - I'm

not a professional and I read it .....

Ditto to everything Dan Smith said. As a specific example, I'd like

to see an extended exploration of the qualities of available fiber

based b/w papers, especially with regard to differences between

graded and VC types. My own tests show very significant sharpness

distinctions, usually in graded's favor, but there are undoubtedly

other factors that can be demonstrated such as tonal scale, etc.

This is a lot of work, but effort that would be very much appreciated

by those of us who do not do photography professionally and have

limited time to dedicate to it (see recent thread on that subject).

<p>

Most of all, thanks Steve for what you've provided us over the

years. It is appreciated.

Dear Steve

<p>

Thanks for giving all of us the opportunity to contribute our

personal ideas and preferences. However, even more thanks for

working hard and publishing a great magazine!

<p>

As some have pointed out, no matter what track is pursued, some will

feel left out or not given their due. If you talk about

architecture, a table top person might not feel enough coverage has

been done to their field. Hopefully, over time, you can write about

all of our favorite subjects.

<p>

I enjoy studio tours to learn how past and present photographers have

set up their operations. Also, I learn much when a photograph is

shown and there is a full explanation of the setup with diagrams and

discussions about difficulties or obstacles overcome. Maybe an

article about how photographers deal with urban shooting when there

are lots of people milling about. Perhaps, a panel discussion about

lens selection when taking various types of shots-not just numbers,

but why they feel certain lens act or react better than others. I

personally would like to read histories (not merely the PR sections

taken from company literature) of the various companies who are

involved in large format-how big is the Sinar factory, how many

employees does Linfhof have, how many lenses has Rodenstock produced

over the years, a tour of Schneider's factory or maybe an article

about how Kodak makes sheet film today. Possibly a photo tour of the

US giving suggestions of interesting landmarks and directions where

out of area photographers can go when they are visiting. Tips from

photographers who travel extensively about their suggestions for the

packing and safe shipment and delivery of photographic equipment both

domestically and abroad.

<p>

Again, thanks for taking the time to ask our input.

<p>

Regards,

<p>

John Bailey

I thouroughly enjoy the magazine and it has contributed greatly to my

ability and expanding my interests in different aspects of large

format photography. Keep up the somewhat ecclectic approach to

material. I especially like the sprinkling of the mixed bag issues

with those that follow a more specific theme. My only suggestion

would be the folowing.

<p>

It is in the interest of everyone who loves working in large format

to help increase interest in the format. I think a series of

articles discussing how to get started and the pros and cons of

buying used gear vs. new gear, classic vs. modern lenses etc. I

don't know how feasable it is to talk about buying used when you

depend on new equipment advertisers for revenue, but in my case,

being able to buy used to begin with allowed me to master some of the

technical aspects and be able to make a more informed decison before

I purchased a new camera.

<p>

Also occaisonal articles dealing with xtra-large formats. I know you

have included such articles in the past and they are a real treat.

Thanks for all your efforts.

First off, a BIG thank you for producing this publication!!

Personally, give us anything and everything concerning TRADITIONAL LF

photography. I'll read interviews, field tests, equipment reviews,

printing and processing, ANYTHING!! Just don't give me DIGITAL!! I

appreciate that digital is a tool for the busy commercial

photographer who may also combine it with LF. But I guess the

majority of your readers, even those who practice in this commercial

field, want to see TRADITIONAL!! There are plenty of digital "rags"

around!!

We are in a priveliged position in as much as you are open to

suggestions from your readers and the overwhelming fear at the moment

seems to be that traditional techniques are becoming obsolete.

Recent postings concern themselves with films that are no longer

being made and the apparent "writing on the wall" that this is the

death nell for traditional LF. Please prove the pessimists wrong!!

Lets have a journal dedicated to REAL LF. I'm no technophobe, but

there is a time and a place for digital, and it aint here!!

Regards Paul

Steve,

<p>

Mainly echoing much of what has been said - articles on/interviews

with contemporary LF photographers, their philosophies as well as

techniques - not necessarily just "portrait" types - Sally Mann is an

example, though you have had some good stuff on her - so: Meyerowitz

(his World Trade Centre work among others); Sternfeld (what a great

new book); Sturges; Chris Killip; Nicholas Nixon; Misrach;

Gursky...?; and suchlike. Maybe some European (ok UK) photographers -

Don McCullin's use of LF? Graham Smith; Paul Davies?

<p>

That said I also enjoy the reviews of modern LF cameras, as well as

things like older but useable lenses - Ektars, Goertz etc.

<p>

Tim A

Not bad so far! More on alternative processes would be appreciated.

Thanks, Steve

An area which perhaps has not been mentioned which would be of value

in my opinion would be a "roving critique" of the various LF workshops

given throughout the country--an evaluation of personnel, value for

the money,the pros & cons--perhaps a touchy subject but if your

looking for "truth" then......... And, I would like to see more

articles on what is happening in "academia"--what's is being taught,

by whom of significance, what trends are being taught, who is making

"waves", what is coming out of Rochester,ASU, etc.

You presumably have some idea of the breakdown of your readership

between professional and amateur photographers but unless

professionals comprise a pretty large proportion of your readership,

I'd can the articles involving digital stuff that costs $30,000 and

upwards. The two major articles in the last issue involving the Sinar

back that cost $30,000, and the guy with the all digital system the

price of which was never mentioned but that surely was in the $50,000-

$100,000 range, weren't real relevant to someone who is never going

to spend that kind of money on photography equipment (i.e. to most

amateurs). If you want to include some digital equipment articles

from time to time, which I think you should, I'd confine them to

digital equipment that isn't so expensive that it can be afforded

only by people who can pass the cost on to someone else (i.e.

professionals), unless of course you have a lot of professional

readers, in which case I recognize that you have to strike a balance

between the interests of the two types of readers.

As I said my last issue was the Sep/Oct issue, and I loved the Gum

bichromate over platimum article. Althoug I personally did not like

the end result, and all the time I was reading it I was thinking:

Why ruin a perfectly lovely platinum print? I thought the article was

very instructive, it had a little for everybody, negative, print

registration etc. If anything I would love to see more articles of

this type, a novell approach to the old techniques, for example there

is a photographer in Canada who has been able to coat a fixed out

baryta paper with pt/pd solution and make a print, he states in his

booklet he has been able to get D max of 1.5 with pt/pd and fixed out

paper, plus a "glossy" look, I think this would be of interest to

some of your readers, another one I came across and thought it was

interesting is of a phtotgrapher doing pt/pd on plexyglass using

albumen, PVA and siloxane fixative (fixative as holder, not developer

fix).

<p>

As far as digital, from the previous responses I guess it is a touchy

subject, but if anything I would like to see a "competition" between

a expertly printed silver or pt/pd print against a piezography print.

I am sure you have many beautifull negatives, make one print the

traditonal way and the other with piezography, and show it to people

(your choice, either layman or expert photographers) and ask them

which one thy like best, and why?

<p>

I don't want to bore you any more I have hundreds of ideas, but I

guess you have enough of those already.

Anybody (doesn't have to be a "big name") doing good large format

(preferably 8 x 10) work. Their philosophy, their method of

preparation for the shoot (more about them as people), their method

of seeing, their method of exposing and processing film, and their

mehtods of showing their work. Kevin

Thanks for the comments. There have been many good ideas and we will

work on them.

<p>

Just to clarify a few things.

<p>

We've done an article on Paul Caponigro.

<p>

51% of our readers claim they are professionals

<p>

Ansel is dead. I can't imagine doing anything new about him. No

disrespect intended.

<p>

An article comparing Azo and regular printing paper is in the works.

<p>

PT/PD, silver and digital prints are different media. It would be

like arguing which is better an apple or an orange. They all have

their beauty, advantages and disadvantages.

<p>

We have done articles on used equipment since the beginning. In the

Nov/Dec 01 issue we had a detailed article on Fuji lenses. We've done

articles on lens design as well and older lenses.

<p>

The gum over platinum article was in the July/Aug 01 issue.

<p>

An article on reviewing workshops would be a challenge. Why, it is so

subjective. In my own workshops I have had people thrilled at what we

did and disappointed - all in the same group. I try and be as clear

as I can about the topics and class plans and my low tech approach.

In one of my groups I had some people going with me from 6am to

midnight and up again the next morning at 5 and others mentally check

out midweek because I was not techncal enough - they wanted to study

the camera not how to use it to make photographs. The reviews of that

workshop would have been all over the place depending on who did tyhe

writing. A couple of years ago we did a piece where 5-6 people who

teach large format did write an essay on what they try and do in

their workshops.

<p>

We get criticized about John Paul's articles but he is trying to get

into the hearts and minds of his subjects and help us get to know

them as people and artists.

<p>

We are always looking for new artists to feature - looking at

photographs is one of the best parts of my job. We will try and

feature a few more table top people. Is there an interest in more

architecture?

<p>

steve simmons