View Camera Magazine

<p>Is it just me or is View Camera Magazine a pretty awful publication? The printing is nice and the paper they print it on is nice and it even comes to my house in a nice plastic bag. But the text is rife with grammatical and typographical errors. Sometimes you'd think the magazine had no English speaking persons on staff.<br>

The photographs they choose to publish range from excellent to trash. Sometimes they are re-printing the works of some well known master of the craft (Why? Don't we already know Ansel Adams and Irving Penn are really good?) and sometimes the stuff is truly horrible; boring, derivative, childish, repetitive. The current cover with that stunned woman who has things exploding from her hair? Really? Did you need a piece of sheet film to make a terribly trite image such as that? Most likely I could have produced that with my $20 CoolPix and 15 minutes in PhotoShop.<br>

Is this a case of the Emperor's New Clothes? Do people like the magazine because they think everyone else does? Do people subscribe hoping for a bit of information on a topic covered by no other publication? I promise you, they have seen the last of subscription fees from me.<br>

How do other readers and subscribers feel about it? Maybe I am all alone here. I am interested in hearing from anyone who disagrees with me or agrees with me.</p>

<p> Well, I've subscribed to View Camera magazine for several years and look forward to each issue. I have also purchased copies of some earlier years for reading and reference. I just finished doing a contents list for my own use for the 2001-2005 years (see below.) While the list ends with issues from 5 years ago it is pretty representative of the usual magazine contents.</p>

<p> After looking over the list of those 30 issues there are large format photos from over 140 <strong>different</strong> photographers ... so I'd expect there to be a wide variety of styles and tastes. There are also a large number of articles on alternative processes, lenses ... specifications and histories, cameras (including comparison articles), shutters, metering equipment & techniques, films and film testing, developers and darkroom equipment, digital sensing equipment, digital printers and work flow, and a whole lot more ... all of it directly related to large format photography ... the only publication that does that. </p>

<p> It has been published for 21 consecutive years ... which is actually pretty amazing. Large format photography is a niche market and publication of any periodical is a huge undertaking ... not only do you put your heart, soul, and finances into the effort, your product is out there for every public comment ... many of them pretty brutal. If you wonder why there is only one large format magazine ... try publishing one.</p>

<p> I think the test should be: Does View Camera magazine benefit the large format community? If it does, and I can learn something from it or be inspired to get off the computer and actually take and print some photographs, then it deserves my support. I'm not saying, in any way, that View Camera should be above constructive criticism ... I'm just saying the criticism should be constructive and consider the WHOLE picture (pun intended.)</p>

<p> If you'd like to review my list of contents from 1/2001 through 12/2005 to see just how much material and whose photos have been published, it is located at the URL address below: (You'll have to cut and paste it into the URL box. I couldn't get the link button to work in the response box ... and you'll need Word or something compatible with Word to read it):<br>

<strong>http://home.comcast.net/~mary.j.graves/VC Magazine Contents.doc </strong></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have never subscribed, but buy a copy just about every other issue. Some of the photography doesn't interest me very much, and it isn't cheap. But it is nice to see photography reproduced in nice print. I wish they would publish more content in a single issue. It seems they often have just one or two photographers, and frankly it would be nice to get a more diverse group of images. B&W Magazine does a good job of this, but they are not dedicated to LF work. I think LF mag is a noble attempt, and even though there are errors now and again, I support their efforts. It can't be easy to even stay in business with so few people shooting LF these days. Maybe their readership is as much collectors as photographers.</p>

<p>Where to get that magazine in Sweden?</p>

<p>Actually, View Camera is one of my favorites.</p>

<p>Yes, the editing is sometimes sloppy. It's a low-budget production with minimal staff, and mistakes are made. And yes, sometimes the images are not my taste. But that's a matter of taste - not objective quality of the publication. On the other hand, some of the images are wonderful. I typically clip several images from each issue to go into my collection of images that I find inspiring.</p>

<p>It's the ONLY magazine that treats large format photography with any kind of respect. It contains some technical information, but unlike most of the photo magazines today, its not a constant stream of technobabble on this software versus that. And it treats analog and digital as equal siblings - no other magazine does that.</p>

<p>I've been a subscriber for the last several years also. In part because of what Louie said, that by subscribing, I'm supporting the only true LF magazine.</p>

<p>From what I understand, the typos have been around for many years and I've just kind of accepted them as part of what I envision as a home-grown, labor of love type of publication for the few folks that pull it all together.</p>

<p>I agree with that the level of art leaves something to be desired. It's almost as if the mentality is that if it was created with LF gear and film, it must be art... Yeah, may images are really flat or lacking... Maybe there is a lack of really excellent artists using LF as they have dispensed with LF after finding better formats? Probably not... It makes me wonder tho... Especially the articles focusing on technique. These typically have really substandard photos with regards to all things that are art. Even when the technique being described is interesting, the photos leave me less than enthusiastic about it.<br>

For me, there is a big disparity between View Camera and LensWork. The latter is where I get blown away by artistic talent. I routinely keep inspiring portfolios that are published in LensWork. This publication is also a labor of love but maybe because of being open to a wider variety of formats, the base of photographers and talent is larger...<br>

But again, because it does benefit the LF community (and me), as Jim affirms, I continue to support View Camera and understand that it is a small operation and I'm sure they are doing their best and expending a lot of energy to publish it at the level we're seeing.</p>

<p>I remember a bit of announcement or discussion of a new large format magazine, or view camera magazine, perhaps 1 or 1 1/2 years ago.<br>

The question was where it was published , was guessed and then revealed, ... it was in Poland, published in English.<br>

Not sure what happened to that magazine ? as many predicted short life due to diminished popularity of large format and film cameras in general<br>

But that was perhaps a different managize.</p>

 

<p>I buy it occasionally, even though I have no LF equipment, nothing bigger than 6x9. It has articles of technical interest that I appreciate. This I believe is where they should concentrate their efforts (plus new of events and news in LF photograophy) and leave portfolios to other magazines. If the field is to survive, thay have to bring others into LF and the specifics and possibilities of LF technique and equipment is one way to interest others. </p>

<p>peter</p>

<p>there are lots of opinions in the magazine section<br>

here on p.net: http://www.photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/?category=Publication%3a+Books%2c+Magazines</p>

<p>I've subscribed for 8 years now. To me, while it's the only one dedicated to large format, I see it more as a personal magazine of Steve Simmons. The technical and other information articles are excellent and it is the only one with ads for large format equipment, but I find the artistic ones are more a personal view of the photographic art. For that I prefer LensWork magazine.</p>

<p>@ Frank Menesdorfer: the only way to get it in Sweden is to subscribe it; best is doing the subscription with Mike Walker (www.walkercameras.com) in GB; he handles European clients for View Camera Magazine.</p>

<p>The great thing about View Camera magazine is that it is showcasing the diversity of work being done with view cameras and has done so for over 20 years. You may not like "that stunned woman who has things exploding from her hair" but, the fact of the matter is, the photographer who took that picture chose to use a view camera to do it rather than a digital camera or even a smaller format film camera. Quite frankly, it could very easily be a magazine of rocks and trees but Steve searches out people who utilize large format cameras in their work and I, for one, applaud him for doing so. </p>

<p>I always say to people, that if I could only have one photography magazine, it would be "View Camera Magazine".</p>

<p>The best out for me. And, I subscribe to way too many photography magazines.</p>

<p>View Camera is an incredible publication. It serves the LF community well. It was View Camera Magazine that got my interest in 4x5 going. It was with the article about Chris Jordan in Seattle. I think that was back in 2003 or so.</p>

<p>I am very happy to have generated a spirited dialog and to see the opinions of those whoe agree with me and those who don't; to one extent or another.<br>

Sometimes I feel as if the magazine is a little silly in its conception as if it was a cooking magazine that devoted its attention to foods made with spoons and not with knives or forks. Or a magazine about the cinema that only reviewed films made in black and white and not in color.<br>

My conception of cameras of any sort is that they are tools and it is the creation - the creative expression - that is paramount. This does not mean that the tools are unimportant. The tools are quite important.<br>

Maybe there should be a website like DPReview.com that concentrates on the hardware with no pretense to artistry. They leave the artistry to the artist and tell you only about the various tools and what they can do. Perhaps View Camera Magazine crosses over the line into fetishism when it attributes specific (greater?) artistic vale to a photograph predicated upon the tools used for it's creation. I believe the photograph must stand or fall on its own.<br>

If I make a website, will you visit me?</p>

<p>No pun is intended ...</p>

<p>"...Maybe there should be a website like DPReview.com that concentrates on the hardware with no pretense to artistry...."</p>

<p>There are plenty of publications that do exactly that, they ignore the tools and publish just photos. Why don't you get those?<br>

The Camera View is not likely a commercial success, it's more labour of love type of thing...with all its flaws that we all notice but over look, and hope for the best in the next issue.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I just subscribed to view camera magazine a couple of days ago, looking forward to getting my first issue. I really enjoy B&W magazine too but like a previous poster said, it is not directed at large format photography, besides i purchased mr. simmons book on the view camera several years ago when i started in large format and it was an excellent resource and i still refer to it sometimes. im more than happy to subscribe to his magazine. </p>

<p><em><strong>"View Camera is an incredible publication. It serves the LF community well. It was View Camera Magazine that got my interest in 4x5 going. It was with the article about Chris Jordan in Seattle. I think that was back in 2003 or so. (Dave Luttman)</strong></em><strong>"</strong><br /> Dave ... yes it was in 7/8 of 2003 ... Chris does amazing things with mundane subjects. While his photos might not appeal to pure landscapists or portraitists, that article has certainly made me look a lot closer at ordinary scenes when I'm out and about with my camera. The photos in that article are amazing and they are: a downspout in an alley, a boxcar, a railroad car's knuckle coupling, and a time exposure of the Seattle Marathon. You have to see them to understand what is possible in LF color work. Without VC Magazine, I never would have seen them.<br /> <img src="http://home.comcast.net/~mary.j.graves/Chris%20Jordan%20Hitch%20web.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>That's it James. It made me sit up and notice. It was shortly after that when I was able to get a Shen Hao 4x5 rig with 75 and 150 lenses, and about a dozen Fidelity holders. I was blown away at the quality one could obtain with such simple gear. Even using my cheap Epson V700, I can't believe the level of detail in the scans. And getting a drum scan for large prints....unreal. Having a 32x40 that you can crawl into because it seems so real.....well, I've never seen that from a DSLR.</p>

<p>Chris is a great guy for sure. Incredible images.</p>

<p>I think Bob hit it about right: <br>

<em>"From what I understand, the typos have been around for many years and I've just kind of accepted them as part of what I envision as a home-grown, labor of love type of publication for the few folks that pull it all together."</em><br>

It's about the only printed LF magazine around. I have issues back to the beginning--and I usually can find something interesting in one or another--even the old ones. That says to me the mag is less about promoting fads and the "latest" gadget--and more about technical and artistic matters. That's why I buy it.<br>

<em><br /></em></p>

<p><em><br /></em></p>

<blockquote>

<p>"...Maybe there should be a website like DPReview.com that concentrates on the hardware with no pretense to artistry...."<br>

There are plenty of publications that do exactly that, they ignore the tools and publish just photos. Why don't you get those?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly. Not only plenty, but <em>every</em> other publication with the possible exception of <em>Photo Technique </em>(which gives more or less equal space to both digital and traditional methods) either concentrates on the artistry solely or is entirely devoted to digital. The fact that <em>View Camera </em>is strictly LF I think is unique in and of itself and is of great service to the LF community that other publications either give a passing nod or ignore altogether.</p>

<p>I've been a subscriber for about three years, and I take the grammar and other mistakes in stride. I've gotten plenty of usable information out of it, along with inspiration from the images I've seen there. <br>

--Gary</p>

<p>I wrote some stuff for Steve several years ago and I can assure you that I was OK with my gramattical English. I'm with Scott, however, this is a magazine for Steve Simmons and the rest of us can like the book or not. Mostly, I like the book because I like LF, I own 5 or 6 VC's, I have over 6 decades of professional experience and I teach photography as a profession (these past 20+ years). We have taught only digital for the past 6 or so years since that is most of the business. I still enjoy some film work and still do some LF shooting (BTW I have over 450 magazine writing/shooting credits).</p>

<p>Lynn</p>