"B&W" magazine says No to digital photographs

[squareframe]

As I mentioned, I love the photography in B&W and have every issue.

On the front cover of every issue are the words 'Black and White

Magazine For Collectors of Fine Photography'. Open the magazine and

read the advertisements .. the galleries. The publishers can do what

they want of course, but it makes good business sense, to

editorialize on your sponsors behalf. It appears not be a

digital/traditional argument at all, but simply a wise financial

decision when you understand the market you have identified, your

niche position, and your identified (and headlined) purpose. If it

was truly about the image only, why write this editorial?

 

<p>

 

Christopher Burkett is my neighbour. He is up at 3:00 every morning

laboriously printing his art that commands upwards of $7000/print.

Each print has his fingerprints on it, as he says, and I wonder the

differences in the art/gallery world if he wrote a batch program to

dump hundreds of inkjet prints out while he sleeps, to find them

ready to ship when he awakes. I honestly do not know, nor do I care,

about the ramifications of that scenario, but if I were a magazine

publisher I would certainly understand who feeds me, who bends my

ear, and what the motivations are.

 

<p>

 

It seems the gallery, edition, artist/middleman/client paradigm is a

fragile one these days and one in need of adjustment. There are

strong forces resisting it.

[michael_feldman1]

There are two kinds of answers to this question, the obvious

economics of running a magazine, and the philosophical issues

involved with the value of traditional vs. digital photography.

 

<p>

 

As noted by Daniel, the economic issues are fairly obvious to anyone

who picks up B&W Magazine. The bulk of the advertising revenue in

B&W Magazine comes from Galleries such as Scott Nichols Gallery

(inside front cover and page 1) and J.J. Brookings Gallery (back

cover). Most of the other multiage ads are from similar galleries

that specialize in high value prints from the masters, in addition to

up and coming artists.

 

<p>

 

You can�t expect a magazine to bite the hand that feeds them. The

future revenues of these galleries, not to mention the multimillion-

dollar investment in inventory that galleries and museums have made,

is threatened by the idea of digital photography, namely that all

prints are identical in quality and value. This of course leads to

the philosophical discussion about the value of various prints made

from the same negative, esthetically and commercially (supply vs.

demand).

 

<p>

 

Soren Kierkegaard posed the following question in the title page

of �Philosophical Fragments�:

 

<p>

 

�Is an historical point of departure possible for an eternal

consciousness; how can such a point of departure have any other than

a merely historical interest; is it possible to base an eternal

happiness upon historical knowledge.�

 

<p>

 

In the above quote, Kierkegaard was referring to the historical

Jesus, and in this discussion we are referring to the historical

knowledge of the print. That is, whether a print made by the

photographer nearest to the time that the negative was made, is more

valuable than a print made at a later date, or more valuable than a

print made by someone else after the photographer has died.

 

<p>

 

We know that from a purely esthetic point of view, a print made at a

later date may actually have more artistic value as the

photographer�s experience printing the image and the materials

improve over time. A supervised assistant (e.g., Cole Weston) should

be able to produce a print just as well after Edward Weston is dead

as Cole did when Edward was alive. But we all know how the market

values these two prints (both made by Cole) are quite different.

 

<p>

 

The world of fine art photography (commercial galleries and museums)

is completely dependent on making this distinction in historical

knowledge in the way it values photographic prints. It depends on the

presumption that no two photographic prints are exactly alike, and

some vague logic about the intent of photographer being more pure in

the expression of their artistic expression nearest to the time that

the negative was made. In reality, the earlier prints are usually

more scarce (supply vs. demand) which affects the value of the print

far more than purely esthetic concerns.

 

<p>

 

Digital photography, by virtually guaranteeing that every print is

identical (even after the death of the photographer), and by the

knowledge that exact copies of the digital negative (digital file)

may exist somewhere (unlike a conventional negative), throws the

entire world of fine art photography asunder. So it is no wonder that

the galleries and the museums will do everything they can to make a

distinction between convention and digital images.

[bob_salomon]

:can you name some other photography magazines that were

only founded in the past three years that are now at the 24,000

level?:

 

<p>

 

Since he uses unaudited figures of "about 24000 in 28+

countries" you can not do a comparison as agencies look only at

controlled audited ABC figurews. We want to know a reliable # of

impressions per ad per market and he is not ststing these

figures in a standard, acceptable form.

 

<p>

 

As for fast growth wiyh aududited figures check Outdoor

Photography.

 

<p>

 

You may or may not like the magazine but they have legitably

measured demographics.

 

<p>

 

Of course the other question with B&W's stated circulation is

how many of the "about 24,000" are located in the US specifically

(as well as in the other "28" countries and how many of these

readers cross over and are readers of other accepted ABC

audited publications.

 

<p>

 

Perhaps he has a total readership that only reaches his

publication or perhas he has a readership that can be totally

reached by advertising in other poto magazines. If the former,

and he can proove it, then he should see a big increase in

advertising revenue. If the latter he could experience a total lack

of continuing industry advertising as his magazine is not a viable

alternative for reaching a large enough base with a low enough

cost per impression.

[david_goldfarb]

Reality check: In the current issue with the editorial posted above,

there is one portfolio by a photographer who prints giclee on

watercolor paper. Also a brief news item on someone who does digital

composites. I doubt he will stick to such an absolute ban on digital

techniques.

[james___]

Bob, if you know of another "photography" magazine, one that deals in

traditional photography, that is increasing sales faster than black

and white I'd like to know about it. It is the fastest growing

magazine in the nation. I didn't say the best selling I said the

fastest growing. If you don't like the magazine then that's cool.

[james___]

Bob, check outdoor photographies new subscribers trend. Point made.

And outdoor has been around for what? 10 years or so. and I just love

these idiotic assumptions that the artist should control the markets.

The patron, buying public, determines what a product will sell for.

Not the gallery. Many galleries are stuck with merchandise that was

over priced and now they have to devalue it and it makes them look

bad.

[bob_salomon]

James,

 

<p>

 

Who says it is the fastest growing anything?

 

<p>

 

Not audited is no proof.

 

<p>

 

It's funny. Right now I am exhibiting at the SPE show in Las

Vegas. SPE is the show for photographic teachers and students,

primarily at the 4 year level.

 

<p>

 

At the show they have a large area for photographic magazines

and books. You know like Yale Univ. Press, MIT Press, Photo

Austria, etc. Apparently while this place is loaded with educators,

gallery participants, publishers, etc. There is no indication that

B&W even exists.

 

<p>

 

Asking attendees I have found only one who has even heard of

the magazine.

 

<p>

 

Oh yes, attendance is at least 2500 members of SPE as of the

latest count.

[ole_tjugen]

There are specialist digital photography magazines.

There are specialist wooden boat magazines.

There are specialist quilting magazines.

There are specialist flyfishing magazines.

Why not a specialist B&W analog photography magazine?

 

<p>

 

About time, if you ask me.

[james___]

Interesting Bob. I talk with hundreds of photographers in my travels

around the southwestern US and almost everyone of them has heard of

Black and White and Lenswork magazines. Both at PhotoLA and PhotoSF

this year the magazine was the talk of the event. Now if you don't

like the magazine then don't buy it.