Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Color Photography version of Lenswork  (Read 28112 times)
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2009, 06:59:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PhillyPhotographer

Cool! Henry Rasmussen's Black & White magazine is pretty variable in content quality, but reproduction is very good and it covers a very wide range of subjects and styles. A color version would be a fine thing, far better than yet another 'gearhead' magazine.
Logged
pw-pix
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 06, 2009, 04:45:53 AM »
ReplyReply

JPEG recently announced they were closing on Jan 5th 2009 due to running out of money.
Then they followed up with the news that they may have found financial support to continue.
It's nothing like Lenswork though, much more like Flickr.
Logged

Moynihan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 118


WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2009, 06:00:59 AM »
ReplyReply

While not (probably) up to the reproduction quality of Lenswork, a new magazine for "fine art" color may come out with in a few months.
I picked up a copy (#65, March 2009) of B&W. It is aimmed at collectors of B&W photos.
On page 17 is an ad for "Color", which appears to their new "fine art" color publication.
Also:
http://www.bandwmag.com/color/color.html

Logged
michelson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #23 on: October 20, 2009, 11:25:37 PM »
ReplyReply

I have kept up to date with Color magazine (by B&W), they are available at my local Borders.

Subscription Info:
(415) 382 0580

COLOR
42 Digital Drive
#5
Novata, CA  94949


(I am in no way affiliated with Color or B&W magazines)
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2009, 03:42:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Moynihan
While not (probably) up to the reproduction quality of Lenswork, a new magazine for "fine art" color may come out with in a few months.
I picked up a copy (#65, March 2009) of B&W. It is aimmed at collectors of B&W photos.
On page 17 is an ad for "Color", which appears to their new "fine art" color publication.
Also:
http://www.bandwmag.com/color/color.html





Just picked up on this thread again.

I bought B&W for a long time and have a stack of them that weighs very heavy on the shelf. As others have posted, the print quality seemed pretty good even if the content was inevitably variable. The Specials became very expensive and I decided that they were so unevenly filled with the great and the worst of photographs, that they ceased to make sense as purchases, so I stopped.

Where I have to laugh out loud is at their claim to be aimed at the print buyer. Really? So where and who are all those guys so numerous as to make a product like B&W viable? And why is the mag sold through kiosks instead of only by subscription?  In my humble it is aimed fair and square at the wannabe snapper and does/did a good job of showcasing photography and selling ad space to those with the dreams.

Been a while now since I did, but I feel no desire to buy any photographic magazines any more. With the ubiquitous web they are, in my mind, more or less redundant.

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #25 on: October 21, 2009, 09:30:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Easy there, Rob. I had a half-page ad in issue #4 of Color and I have another in the current one -- issue #5. I'm not entirely happy with the magazine either, but it's a startup. It takes time for something like this to bloom. I like Lens Work, but I can't see that it's any better than B&W. The reproductions are better, but small. I do like Brooks Jensen's writing, though.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2009, 11:30:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Easy there, Rob. I had a half-page ad in issue #4 of Color and I have another in the current one -- issue #5. I'm not entirely happy with the magazine either, but it's a startup. It takes time for something like this to bloom. I like Lens Work, but I can't see that it's any better than B&W. The reproductions are better, but small. I do like Brooks Jensen's writing, though.




Russ

My opinion was about B&W - I have never seen the colour one and don't miss the original B&W, which isn't any startup any longer, though you were probably referring to the colour one. That you advertise in it sort of underlines my point - that's really what these mags are about: the publisher making money from photographers' dreams. And why ever not? If one can't indulge a dream, then it's a sad day.

I hope you get some return from the space - I have abandoned my attempt at a website for a host of personal reasons, not least amongst them being that I have concluded that there is a distinct possibility that my muse has long gone and ain't comin' back no mow! In other words, I have become disenchanted with so many old images, reworked from Kodachrome or not, and have serious doubt about whether there's any juice left in the tank after all with which to power new ones. Only time will tell, and that's a commodity I probably can't afford to waste, is time.

Rob C
« Last Edit: October 21, 2009, 11:31:01 AM by Rob C » Logged

michelson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2009, 11:38:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Color magazine could be improved for sure.

One thing that I notice is odd is that most of the people who have featured articles, also have advertising. I'm not sure which is the chicken, and which is the egg, but it leaves a potential ethics question unanswered.

It is more oriented towards collectors, than to photographers. I originally started reading to gain a better understanding of what collectors saw in a photograph (besides $$$).

I'm not a huge fan of the photoshop heavy featured artists. There are many other magazines that cover digital artwork, and most of these are so heavily altered they go into the bin of "compositions". To me it just dilutes the magazine. HDR is arguably a digital photographic technique. Dozens of photographs, cut out layer by layer, and then composited into one image is no longer photography. (Digital art?)
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2009, 01:08:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
Russ

My opinion was about B&W - I have never seen the colour one and don't miss the original B&W, which isn't any startup any longer, though you were probably referring to the colour one. That you advertise in it sort of underlines my point - that's really what these mags are about: the publisher making money from photographers' dreams. And why ever not? If one can't indulge a dream, then it's a sad day.

I hope you get some return from the space - I have abandoned my attempt at a website for a host of personal reasons, not least amongst them being that I have concluded that there is a distinct possibility that my muse has long gone and ain't comin' back no mow! In other words, I have become disenchanted with so many old images, reworked from Kodachrome or not, and have serious doubt about whether there's any juice left in the tank after all with which to power new ones. Only time will tell, and that's a commodity I probably can't afford to waste, is time.

Rob C

Rob,

I don't really expect a return from the advertising. As you point out, it's a fun thing, but I can't really afford to keep doing it. I haven't yet sold a print from magazine advertising. The only place I sell prints is in local galleries, and, to put it mildly, with the recession, sales are slow.

Sorry to hear your disenchantment. I've never seen any of your photographs, though I know you did fashion before you retired. Are you sure your muse is gone for good? I sometimes hit flat spots too and I've always found the best way to get juice back into my tank is to grab a camera and go out amongst 'em. Of course, I love street photography above all, and being out amongst 'em is my particular filling station. Also, I recently bought the expanded version of Looking In, the catalog for the Robert Frank show now at the Met. The book contains more than 80 of his contact sheets -- for me, a stimulating look at a very good street photographer at work. I'd be willing to bet there's something similar for you if you look for it.
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2009, 01:08:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, double post.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2009, 01:10:36 PM by RSL » Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #30 on: October 21, 2009, 01:18:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: michelson
Color magazine could be improved for sure.

One thing that I notice is odd is that most of the people who have featured articles, also have advertising. I'm not sure which is the chicken, and which is the egg, but it leaves a potential ethics question unanswered.

It is more oriented towards collectors, than to photographers. I originally started reading to gain a better understanding of what collectors saw in a photograph (besides $$$).

I'm not a huge fan of the photoshop heavy featured artists. There are many other magazines that cover digital artwork, and most of these are so heavily altered they go into the bin of "compositions". To me it just dilutes the magazine. HDR is arguably a digital photographic technique. Dozens of photographs, cut out layer by layer, and then composited into one image is no longer photography. (Digital art?)

Michelson, I know at least one guy who advertises in B&W and who also has had featured articles in the magazine. In his case I'm sure there's no correlation and no ethical problem. I also know that I regularly submit to B&W and Color contests and advertise intermittently, yet I haven't won a feature article in either magazine. Which brings me to your second point -- the heavy use of composites and "photographs" corrupted with Photoshop. I suspect the reason I've never had a feature article is that I simply refuse to do that kind of crap.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #31 on: October 21, 2009, 03:25:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Michelson, I know at least one guy who advertises in B&W and who also has had featured articles in the magazine. In his case I'm sure there's no correlation and no ethical problem. I also know that I regularly submit to B&W and Color contests and advertise intermittently, yet I haven't won a feature article in either magazine. Which brings me to your second point -- the heavy use of composites and "photographs" corrupted with Photoshop. I suspect the reason I've never had a feature article is that I simply refuse to do that kind of crap.




Another thing to remember here is that when B&W started they wouldn't even consider digital images of any sort. In that sense, they were collector-oriented but as you see, they couldn't hold that position because it was the photographers who were buying the magazine in numbers, not the collectors. Disenchant digital snappers and you lose your market. I suppose they did start off with high principles, but ran up against the inevitable truth which is that their market was always going to have to be the photographer, however much they protested otherwise. (A good ploy by which to attract photographers hoping for the inside track, though!)

I simply don't believe that such a sizeable collector market can exist. I would love to be wrong there, but I don't think the day will come when that many people really see photography in that light - at least not in the numbers needed to run such a publication.

They also wanted to run free of advertising so as not to compromise themselves...

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 21, 2009, 03:56:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
Another thing to remember here is that when B&W started they wouldn't even consider digital images of any sort. In that sense, they were collector-oriented but as you see, they couldn't hold that position because it was the photographers who were buying the magazine in numbers, not the collectors. Disenchant digital snappers and you lose your market. I suppose they did start off with high principles, but ran up against the inevitable truth which is that their market was always going to have to be the photographer, however much they protested otherwise. (A good ploy by which to attract photographers hoping for the inside track, though!)

I simply don't believe that such a sizeable collector market can exist. I would love to be wrong there, but I don't think the day will come when that many people really see photography in that light - at least not in the numbers needed to run such a publication.

They also wanted to run free of advertising so as not to compromise themselves...

Rob C

Rob,

It's been a long time since I've been to New York or San Francisco, but I get down to Santa Fe fairly often. I can think of at least six fine art photography galleries in that town and all of them are still in business. A few years ago the count was three or so. I remember going into one of the big ones about a year before Cartier-Bresson died. The least expensive photographs in the gallery were two signed prints by HCB: "Sunday on the Banks of the Marne," and "Rue Mouffetard," the picture of the kid carrying two wine bottles. Both pictures were priced at $5,000. I came back the next day and "Rue Mouffetard" had sold the previous afternoon. I went down again about two years later, after Henri had died, and visited the gallery. Again, they had signed copies of both pictures but now the price on each had gone up to $15,000. I said to the gallery owner: "I'm surprised. I expected that when HCB died his signed prints would go up by a factor of about five." He replied: "Well, see. They're a bargain."

A few years ago there was a gallery in Manitou Springs named "Phototroph," owned by a gal named Elaine Bean. Elaine had contacts in Denver, New York, etc. When she had an opening, people came from all over. She sold a lot of photographs, including quite a few of mine. Unfortunately, when the hurricane hit the gulf coast some of her relatives were made homeless. They moved back east and she closed up here and moved back to help them -- just before my first opening was to open.

There's a serious market for fine art photography, but it's pretty regional. It's very difficult to sell photographs in the area I'm in, but it's not difficult in Santa Fe or New York or San Francisco. Until the recession set in the market was growing and I was selling fitfully, but not too badly even in what a lot of people who don't know any better call a "cow town." The market's still there and I think it'll come back gradually unless our government does what FDR did and prolongs the recession. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2009, 03:58:30 PM by RSL » Logged

michelson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #33 on: October 21, 2009, 08:55:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Michelson, I know at least one guy who advertises in B&W and who also has had featured articles in the magazine. In his case I'm sure there's no correlation and no ethical problem. I also know that I regularly submit to B&W and Color contests and advertise intermittently, yet I haven't won a feature article in either magazine. Which brings me to your second point -- the heavy use of composites and "photographs" corrupted with Photoshop. I suspect the reason I've never had a feature article is that I simply refuse to do that kind of crap.

I'm not implying that I have some inside knowledge, but it just seems iffy to me. It at least leaves the door open to misjudgement: I'm sure that my thought train is not necessarily unique and was the first to notice this correlation. If there truly is no correlation, the magazines should make a point to reinforce this fact.


Oh, I found their website: http://www.color-mag.com/
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #34 on: October 22, 2009, 10:52:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: michelson
I'm not implying that I have some inside knowledge, but it just seems iffy to me. It at least leaves the door open to misjudgement: I'm sure that my thought train is not necessarily unique and was the first to notice this correlation. If there truly is no correlation, the magazines should make a point to reinforce this fact.


Oh, I found their website: http://www.color-mag.com/

Yes, I've noticed the correlation too. But then I consider the fact that most of the editorial photographs come from people who submit to the magazines' contests, and in most cases these are the same people who advertise in the mags. I've always been a bit suspicious too, but I think the above fact helps to explain the situation.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #35 on: October 22, 2009, 01:54:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Russ

I really hope that the photo art market does pick up and that your own efforts keep on paying off too. Your diagnosis of location, location and location is so damn pan-applicable (neologism?) in that it basically governs everything we do.

I am happy to recount my own little adventure in trying to set up a show of photographs in my current home-town in Mallorca. The first gallery I went to asked me to leave the pics because the lady who runs it was away. I left the pictures and when I returned about ten days later, was told that though they liked them, I should go to the capital city here on the island and they gave me a list of galleries to try. My next stop was another gallery about fifty yards away from the first. Again, a lady runs that and isn't available at time of cold call. Leaving the stuff again, I return to collect and am told they seldom show photographs at all because they don't really sell. Well, if you don't show how can they? Anyway, they did show me two large photographs they had there, sitting on the floor, face to the wall. I wouldn't have bought them either, except that one was not that unattractive: a large goldfish between plastic.

Eventually, I went to see gallery number three and they asked me to leave the pics and come back within a few days. Bingo! They offered me April of next year.

But their selling tactics are woeful: they seem to open as and when they please, and the one that is going to show for me is open only in the mornings. I would have thought after a good lunch would have found prospective buyers more attuned to spending... maybe not, considering the cost of eating out! Well, it will be an experience and a first for me. But it seems to be a very arbitrary way of conducting business. Maybe that`s because of those ladies who travel and lunch so much...

Rob C
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 6185



WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 22, 2009, 02:38:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob, Your experiences in cold-calling galleries pretty much parallel my own. Nowadays what I do is give them my card and suggest they check my web site. Later -- considerably later -- I come by again and, at least by inference, ask them if they've seen my photographs. If the answer is yes I then ask them if they'd like me to drop by a couple portfolios so they can take a few days and look them over. As a result of that approach I have one hot prospect at the moment, but, unfortunately, during the extensive construction we're doing at our house my framing table is out of commission. I hope it's going to be back in business sometime within the next two weeks, but I can't count on it. It's all very frustrating but still fun -- as long as you don't have to make a living doing it.
Logged

ckimmerle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 442



WWW
« Reply #37 on: October 23, 2009, 12:02:34 PM »
ReplyReply

A couple of points.  First, I am confident that purchasing an ad in B&W does, in now way, affect whether or not a photographer will be published in the magazine. First, the quarter-page ads, which are the most abundant, are too cheap to have any monetary influence. Second, the magazine publishes so many different photographers from their two annual contest issues as well as throughout the year, that there is bound to be some overlap between publishing and advertising. I don't think that rates as a perception of impropriety. Lastly, at least on this subject, I was published in B&W a couple of years ago (straight landscape!)and seriously considered purchasing a small ad to keep my name in front of people's faces. I didn't do it, but can definitely see others going that route. That might be were much of the overlap lies.

As for galleries, Rob's and Russ' experiences are similar to mine. As I shoot straight b/w landscapes, which is the antithesis to today's post-modern
psuedo-photography, my work is not in high demand. Still, I have managed to get a large museum exhibit this past summer and a few gallery commitments for 2010-2011. What I found helps, considerably, is an introduction, be it by mail, email or phone. The art world is very cliquish. If a gallery owner/director thinks others in power positions appreciate the value of your work, you'll have a better chance.

And Russ, I tried doing the "take a look at my website" thing, but it fell on deaf ears every, single time. Not sure the art gallery world is ready for that, yet.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2009, 12:04:05 PM by ckimmerle » Logged

"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeing new landscapes, but in having new eyes." Marcel Proust

Chuck Kimmerle
WWW.CHUCKKIMMERLE.COM
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #38 on: October 24, 2009, 04:42:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ckimmerle
As for galleries, Rob's and Russ' experiences are similar to mine. As I shoot straight b/w landscapes, which is the antithesis to today's post-modern
psuedo-photography, my work is not in high demand. Still, I have managed to get a large museum exhibit this past summer and a few gallery commitments for 2010-2011. What I found helps, considerably, is an introduction, be it by mail, email or phone. The art world is very cliquish. If a gallery owner/director thinks others in power positions appreciate the value of your work, you'll have a better chance.

And Russ, I tried doing the "take a look at my website" thing, but it fell on deaf ears every, single time. Not sure the art gallery world is ready for that, yet.




Hi Chuck

My very limited experience of the gallery world thus far only found success (in getting a show) because the greater part of the stuff is black/white, though converted from Kodachrome. I was told that that made it interesting... I would have hoped that it was the subject matter/treatment, but there you go. The subject matter is a mixture as I have some landscape, some skin and some of my painting photographs. Some say you should stay within the boundaries of a single genre - we shall see; my hope is that providing a variety might appeal to different tastes - after all, this isn't as if the gallery visitor was a client seeking a single solution to his marketing problems!

I abandoned the website idea partly because I became somewhat tired of the thought of seeing old shots over and over again - perhaps if the muse comes back, kicks my ass and sends me out again, then the idea of a site might become attractive once more. At the moment, it is a gloriously empty white space with all the promise of a roll of Colorama paper; perhaps a better deal than just a collection of pictures that I currently wouldn't have the energy, or material enough, to change regularly. It is all wound up with an internal mind problem - a mixture of personal grief, indecision about whether to stay here in Spain or otherwise, and not a little spiritual jaundice. I hope that time is indeed a healer and that next year sees me recognize the guy in the mirror and maybe fill that blank zone.

Ciao

Rob C
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad