Black and White Photography magazine

Peter S said:
Hello everybody,

I assume I am not the only member here with a subscription to the UK magazine B&W photography. Just wondering whether I am alone in not really liking the new direction the mag seems to be going. Have been reading it for at least a couple of years and always looked forward to next months magazine, but with the recent change of the guard it seems as if the editor is filling up the magazine all by himself with very "interesting" stories about his adventures with a Leica MP etc etc. In the recent magazine he even discusses how to shoot sheep....

Maybe I am one of the few not liking it, but am seriously considering not renewing my subscription, but then wat? As much as the internet gives us meeting places like RFF where we can discuss photography, buy and sell equipment or just talk about fondling cameras I always have liked to also read about photography on paper. Do you have any suggestions for other magazines focussing on B&W photography ? I live in Amsterdam, but do not mind having to subscribe to an overseas mag.

P.
Click to expand...

Dropped my subscription last year even before the new editor. Was getting too "cutesy". Only get Lenswork now, and come here from time to time.
 
There do seem to have been one or two slightly weak issues recently (though I use that term relatively - it's still head and shoulders above the run of the mill rubbish that passes as photo mags in the UK*)

I haven't been reading it long enough (and I don't think the new editorial team have had long enough) to be able to tell whether there is a long-term trend or whether there have just been a few issues that have been a bit short of material and have needed a bit of stuffing - it's very very hard to fill a high-quality magazine every month.

And on the other hand, that Bailey interview was wonderful. And not just in the man himself, but in the style in which it was presented - I thought it was something of a journalistic/editorial masterpiece.

[* Talking of photo mags, I've always had a soft spot for Amateur Photographer and have been reading it on and off since the late sixties. And I only recently realised that the bearded sage whose column at the back I always first turn to for inspiration is the same Roger Hicks who graces this forum - many thanks Roger for all your contributions to this art of ours]
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Drew,

Very true, except that you might well be astonished at how many people REALLY CARE about reviews, and love to read them.

They're also useful for bulking a magazine out: there is a limit to how many genuinely different technique pieces you can find.

As far as possible, Frances and I try to review only kit we think we might like or need, on the grounds that if we want to know what it's like, others probably do too. It's a bit like asking on the forum here, "Anyone got a...?"

Admittedly we do the occasional 'Thought it might be interesting...' piece, and sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. We also have different reactions to different bits of kit. For example, Frances really likes the Zeiss 18/4 and I can't see the point, whereas I really love the 1,5/50 C-Sonnar and she thinks it's quite nice but would prefer the 50/2.5 Summarit.

Negative reviews almost never get published (Amateur Photographer is a noble exception) and they also stop manufacturers sending stuff out for review (no-one can afford to BUY kit for review any more).

There is, therefore, little point in writing negative reviews, but at least when Frances and I review something, we say what we think. If it's really awful, we'll contact the manufacturer and say, "We're not going to review this because..."

You can therefore be confident that if we do review something, and say we like it, we're not just being polite/keeping advertisers happy, whereas if we don't review something it may either be that we don't like it or haven't been able to get hold of it (or haven't found anyone to publish a review, which is increasingly common with film kit).

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger, you make an excellent point, and one that I think many overlook.

A reviewer's opinion is, by definition, ALWAYS subjective, whether they are reviewing cameras, lenses, film, films, books, restaurants, hotels, or last night's TV

If you are to make any sense of a reviewer's comments, you have to build a "relationship" with them. Read them often enough to understand their personal foibles, likes and dislikes, and how they compare to your own. A reviewer with whom you disagree is valuable for the facts they present, but also for the views they express. If you understand WHY you disagree, you can make consistent judgements based upon that.

That said, I agree with the comments about Black & White. The most recent editions have been very disappointing.

Regards,

Bill
 
I think the magazine should revert back a few months, it was much more inspirational then, but now seems to be heading down the "AP" formula. Will certain features be repeated every 12 months ?

I would consider a subscription if it became a better read - as in substance, I prefer something I can get my teeth into rather than gramatically correct padding.

Equipment reviews are OK, just seems a bit much Digi bias recently. As for the "photographing sheep" feature.....................
 
Unfortunately I renewed my subscription just before Ailsa left. I wonder if you can cancel it and get a refund? I'm a film fotog so I liked all the darkroom-related articles - I even liked the homey descriptions of reader's darkrooms, and I'm not interested in any of the digital-related articles that are beginning to dominate. The other thing I liked about the magazine was the photos, they used to be really good, not so much any more. The equipment reviews are poor and the last one about the MP by the editor was truly pathetic. I don't know why I read equipment reviews anyway. All in all the magazine is on a slide and hindsight is a wonderful thing, if I was paying attention I probably wouldn't have renewed. I have written to the editor about my concerns though.
 
Hmmm, no magazine will be able to satisfy all its readers. But I think y'all who could so eloquently recite what's bad about that magazine ought to band up and write a petition. Sign it, and hand it to the editor.

Also, what's wrong with digital articles now and then? is putting on blinders and never consider the doors and options it opens up always better?
 
I'm glad that the new ed is "listening" but I think that he is part of the problem rather than the solution - I am not convinced he has any knowledge of photography or the equipment involved. He doesn't know a softbox from a brolly! Whilst I did enjoy the Bailey interview, the standard of photography was terrible - he looked like a fisherman!

The digital/film stuff - if it was writing high end articles on conversions and printing techniques then I'd be listening and interested. I think they are missing a trick in ignoring the "digital alternative process" that some are doing, making digital negatives. I think that they are missing something bigger in ignoring scanning to print. I have no problem with digital - indeed, I'd shoot it given an M8 - but there articles on the system seem to start with "This is a computer, and this is the "on" button" and if you are that computer illiterate, learning a darkroom is easier!
 
I subscribe to B/W and have done since it started.I too feel it has not been up to standard lately.However for me it was worth the cost this month to see the readers picture,"Berts Dominoes" .I always enjoy reading Francis"s reviews and the other regular contributors but I don't like the inclusion of color photos and believe the Editor,in the main,should stick to editing and not embarrass himself with articles like the Bleating Beauties in this months issue.
Regards
Steve
 
Pitxu said:
R. Isn't this rather like 'lying by ommition"? Don't you're readers have a right to the truth.
[/COLOR]
Click to expand...
Dear P.

Sort of. But the choice is between 'lying by omission' and 'being out of the loop entirely'. If we said 'So-and-so is a load of rubbish' then the readers wouldn't have the a 'right to the truth' for long. Better (we believe) to praise good kit justly, and not write up bad kit, than praise everything because we're being paid to praise rubbish.

It's true that it's a lot easier to praise some manufacturers (not products) than other, but some manufacturers who produce both good stuff and indifferent/bad have very thin skins when it comes to 'Why did they bother?'

Then again, sometimes our reaction is, "How much do we care?"

Cheers,

R.
 
I let my subscription slip at the end of the year and I'm glad I did. I don't see anything remotely "expert" about the technique for shooting sheep. Also, the editor has an apparent fondness for appearing in the magazine. Great if you've got something interesting to say, but otherwise forget it. If the production team are struggling to put out a good monthly read then go back to bi-monthly. Get rid of the damned digital listings. Let's be right about this, b&w mag isn't likely to appeal to the average Joe shooting digital pics of geese in the park, sunsets whilst on a drive with the wife or his kids/grand kids so stop trying to appeal to him. If financial factors are involved in the change in direction of the magazine re-examine the business model, starting with frequency of publication.
I can reccommend highly a magazine I came across called PhotoIcon. I think it's quarterly but well worth the wait. Buying b&w has become a habit that I need to re-examine.

Cheers, Lol
 
Roger Hicks said:
... Better (we believe) to praise good kit justly, and not write up bad kit, than praise everything because we're being paid to praise rubbish.


.
Click to expand...


so much for independency!
before i quit reading b&w (that was before new editor btw) i couldn't help finding the "reviews" a rather useless waiting room reading material, something that didn't say anything, and didn't piss anyone off. that goes for most photomagasines though. the only places i feel that i'm reading an honest piece of text is by some online reviewers...


but then... the amount of time i've wasted reading equipm reviews.. ,-)
 
thorirv said:
so much for independency!
before i quit reading b&w (that was before new editor btw) i couldn't help finding the "reviews" a rather useless waiting room reading material, something that didn't say anything, and didn't piss anyone off. that goes for most photomagasines though. the only places i feel that i'm reading an honest piece of text is by some online reviewers...


but then... the amount of time i've wasted reading equipm reviews.. ,-)
Click to expand...
I fully take your point, but consider also the origins of some online reviews:

1 People who have bought kit and are desperately trting to persuade themselves they have made the right choice

2 People who have bought kit and are utterly unhappy they've made the wrong choice.

As you say, so much for independence. But do you really believe that there are ANY reviews, ANYWHERE, in the last 20 years or so, that have no axe to grind, one way or the other?

There's also the point that I don't WANT to review crap. I'm really only interested in stuff I might want to use. And I think that these reviews:

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/ps firstlook summarit.html

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/ps firstlook sonnar 50.html

are both pretty fair. Of course we're not beholden to advertisers but in addition to my earlier comments you have to remember that (a) everyone has to eat and (b) miserable buggers who like reading negative reviews are also too mean to pay for a good magazine or even web-site.

One further point is that by the time you can get kit for review, you are rarely in the position of the beginner who is desperately scrambling to afford a second-hand body and lens. As a friend said of digital imaging, "The dirty little secret here is that we are all using other people's state-of-the-art computers." You therefore have to aim off slightly for the fact that most reviewers can compare the product in question with a WIDE range of other kit. Or at least, they can if they are worth taking seriously.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
"I fully take your point, but consider also the origins of some online reviews:

1 People who have bought kit and are desperately trting to persuade themselves they have made the right choice

2 People who have bought kit and are utterly unhappy they've made the wrong choice."

either way, those are the last kinds of review i would read, for anything other than the amusement.
if i'm after something, and need a fact or two to see if it's the right piece of gadget for me, i normally wouldn't rely on the overly happy consumer, or the depressed one. who would? it's been too long since i found out that my needs are (very, most of the time) different from most reviewers'.


"As you say, so much for independence. But do you really believe that there are ANY reviews, ANYWHERE, in the last 20 years or so, that have no axe to grind, one way or the other?"

perhaps true, maybe i was being a little naive.


"There's also the point that I don't WANT to review crap. I'm really only interested in stuff I might want to use. And I think that these reviews:

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photo...0summarit.html

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photo...nnar 50.html

are both pretty fair."

didn't read them, but i take your word for it.


"Of course we're not beholden to advertisers but in addition to my earlier comments you have to remember that

(a) everyone has to eat and "

indeed!


"(b) miserable buggers who like reading negative reviews are also too mean to pay for a good magazine or even web-site."

point taken (though i've paid for more www's and magazines than i care to admit). thing is, i find equipment reviews rather boring, but it happens every now and then that i need to be able to check a spec sheet and/or get some practical info about equipment. mostly because i live in a town without a professional photo shop. though, i can't honestly say that i like reading neg reviews, but if one is "reviewing" something, i expect it to be honest. not based on the next paycheck from "CaNiPeSoLePaOl", indirectly or not.


"One further point is that by the time you can get kit for review, you are rarely in the position of the beginner who is desperately scrambling to afford a second-hand body and lens. As a friend said of digital imaging, "The dirty little secret here is that we are all using other people's state-of-the-art computers." You therefore have to aim off slightly for the fact that most reviewers can compare the product in question with a WIDE range of other kit. Or at least, they can if they are worth taking seriously."

needless to say.. but if a reviewer wants to be taken seriously, and he/she only reviews "the good stuff" ??


"Cheers,

R."

best
thorir v. (aka the miserable bugger who expects reviewers to say what needs to be said ,-)
 
Last edited:
Reading reviews in a magazine is a waste of time. B&W Photography is particularly hopeless. I remember a vague review some months ago that ended with a comment about the piece of kit going well with what you might be wearing... :rolleyes: If you want a decent and reasonably unbiased review then you have to fork out for it and not let advertisers pay for it. Why some people complain about having to pay for Sean Reid's reviews is a mystery to me.
 
I bought B&W for a couple of years before I decided to take a 2 year subscription about 1.5 years ago. Don't know if I'll renew it after the summer, I have to agree on the declining standard. Too much digital bollocks and reviews, too little focus on the images and b&w techniques.

It's also very slow on delivery, usually I get it in the mailbox 2-3 weeks after it shows up at the news agent :mad:
 
thorirv said:
i find equipment reviews rather boring, but it happens every now and then that i need to be able to check a spec sheet and/or get some practical info about equipment. mostly because i live in a town without a professional photo shop. though, i can't honestly say that i like reading neg reviews, but if one is "reviewing" something, i expect it to be honest. not based on the next paycheck from "CaNiPeSoLePaOl", indirectly or not.

Edited insert: I agree completely

"One further point is that by the time you can get kit for review, you are rarely in the position of the beginner who is desperately scrambling to afford a second-hand body and lens. As a friend said of digital imaging, "The dirty little secret here is that we are all using other people's state-of-the-art computers." You therefore have to aim off slightly for the fact that most reviewers can compare the product in question with a WIDE range of other kit. Or at least, they can if they are worth taking seriously."

needless to say.. but if a reviewer want to be taken seriously, and he/she only reviews "the good stuff" ??

best
thorir v. (aka the miserable bugger who expects reviewers to say what needs to be said ,-)
Click to expand...
Dear Thorir,

There is also an ancient skill known as 'reading between the lines'.

But apart from that, yes, reviewing only the good stuff probably works. Otherwise, you won't get much to review, for long.

Maybe it's worth trying 'real' reviews. i.e. if something doesn't work, telling the readers instead of telling the manufacturer that it needs re-thinking. It is possible that if they really want to make good kit, they won't resent this.

But even then, there are three more problems.

First, take something like the Nikon D70. Horribly complicated (far too many buttons, counter-intuitive menus) but I was still prepared to lay out my own money on one because it did what I wanted at a reasonable price.

Second, why would I WANT to review crap? Reviews pay very badly. If you do them properly (instead of rewriting press releases, which I have hard journalists boast about doing) then they pay well below minimum wage per hour. For Frances and me, the only thing makes reviews worth the effort is using good kit. Otherwise, tests get in the way of taking pictures: it's a lot more enjoyable to take real pics with kit you like than with kit you have to struggle with. Put briefly, if I don't like the camera, I can't be assed to finish the test. It's not worth the money or the aggravation.

Third, as you point out, your needs aren't mine; and even I can be unsure what my needs are. Thus I really wanted to review the Fotoman 810. I was disappointed: not because there is anything wrong with the camera, but because an 8x10 point-and-shoot didn't suit me as well as I expected. IF you want an 8x10PS, it is a superb camera. Turned out I wanted one less than I expected. How do you want me to phrase that?

Which brings me back to 'reading between the lines'.

Finally, you don't seem to be too keen on taking any reviewer seriously. Fine. I can relate to that. But I can also relate to reading a review by someone whose biases and opinions I know, and thinking, "OK, if he likes that, it's probably good" or "If he hates that, I'll probably like it." I use the same technique with literary reviews, and bought The Great Indian Novel by, as far as I recall, Shashi Tharoor, on the strength of a really negative review in the Los Angeles Times.

Which brings me back yet again to 'reading between the lines'.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
First, take something like the Nikon D70. Horribly complicated (far too many buttons, counter-intuitive menus) but I was still prepared to lay out my own money on one because it did what I wanted at a reasonable price.
Click to expand...

a good example of what works for me/works for you. i used one for four years i think, and found it an awfully simple piece of machinery, not perfect but not with such a price tag either..


Roger Hicks said:
Second, why would I WANT to review crap? Reviews pay very badly.
Click to expand...

i have no idea. i've never gotten the urge to write one myself....


Roger Hicks said:
If you do them properly (instead of rewriting press releases, which I have hard journalists boast about doing) then they pay well below minimum wage per hour. For Frances and me, the only thing makes reviews worth the effort is using good kit. Otherwise, tests get in the way of taking pictures: it's a lot more enjoyable to take real pics with kit you like than with kit you have to struggle with.
Click to expand...

excactly!


Roger Hicks said:
Put briefly, if I don't like the camera, I can't be assed to finish the test. It's not worth the money or the aggravation.
Click to expand...

hmm.. i thought if one set out to review, he/she would review. and not "see if i like it and if it's good i'll give it an A". the approach sounds iffy to my ears, unprofessional. but that's maybe the key, who's a professional reviewer, and who does it for the pleasure.?


Roger Hicks said:
Third, as you point out, your needs aren't mine; and even I can be unsure what my needs are. Thus I really wanted to review the Fotoman 810. I was disappointed: not because there is anything wrong with the camera, but because an 8x10 point-and-shoot didn't suit me as well as I expected. IF you want an 8x10PS, it is a superb camera. Turned out I wanted one less than I expected. How do you want me to phrase that?
Click to expand...

surely you could have reviewed the piece even though you didn't like it personally!


Roger Hicks said:
Which brings me back to 'reading between the lines'.

Finally, you don't seem to be too keen on taking any reviewer seriously.
Click to expand...

how did you get that impression?



Roger Hicks said:
Fine. I can relate to that. But I can also relate to reading a review by someone whose biases and opinions I know, and thinking, "OK, if he likes that, it's probably good" or "If he hates that, I'll probably like it."
Click to expand...

so you should have finished the fotoman review after all ...
and your returning readers would have read it with all the proper filters... ,-)


Roger Hicks said:
I use the same technique with literary reviews, and bought The Great Indian Novel by, as far as I recall, Shashi Tharoor, on the strength of a really negative review in the Los Angeles Times.

Which brings me back yet again to 'reading between the lines'.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...




in good spirit.!

th
 
Pitxu said:
So to put it simply Roger, you're saying that one needs to know the psychological profile of the reviewer, understand ones own psychological profile, and then read between the lines.
What nonsense!
Click to expand...

Hm.

I think that Roger is making the same point I did two days ago on this very thread:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=745623&postcount=25

You need to form a "relationship" with the reviewer, built up over a period of time, to understand their likes and dislikes and how they relate to your own. By doing so their reviews become more useful to you. Is that so hard to do?

Simple example - when Jeremy Clarkson still reviewed cars I used to pay attention to him simply because he is a similar build to me and an inch taller; if he fitted behind the wheel, so would I.

Regards,

Bill
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom