New Look Amateur Photographer Magazine

beethamd

beethamd

Unix-like
Local time
9:43 PM
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
215
What do you think? No Roger Hicks or Mike Maloney, but lots of big photos of the writers.

Mmm. Not sure. Subscription under review.
 
Its about 30 years since I first got AP and it has changed a lot in that time When I got the new look issue this week I thought if this was a brand new magazine I would throw it away and not bother again!!Not sure if I will buy it again.

Regards
Steve
 
I'm not convinced either, having just read this Saturday's edition (the second in the new format). Roger Hicks is a serious loss to the magazine and I am concerned that many of the changes seem to be style over substance, and attempt to make AP more like all the other camera magazines out there.

This is a shame as I have been cancelling a few subscriptions recently because so many mags - Practical Photography, Photography Monthly, and all the ones with 'Digital' in the title - have become almost identical. AP stood out with its own style and I hope Damien Demolder finds his feet soon and prevents AP from becoming yet another plastic digicam magazine. It's not that I'm anti-digital, it's just that there is already so much written about modern consumer DSLRs that I found AP's diversity of topics very refreshing and it would be a shame to see that go.

Oh well, we'll see. There's still Outdoor Photography and B&W Photography...

Dan
 
icemendicant said:
I'm not convinced either, having just read this Saturday's edition (the second in the new format). Roger Hicks is a serious loss to the magazine and I am concerned that many of the changes seem to be style over substance, and attempt to make AP more like all the other camera magazines out there.
Click to expand...

My thoughts too. And Roger seems to have gone without even word written about it.

This is a shame as I have been cancelling a few subscriptions recently because so many mags - Practical Photography, Photography Monthly, and all the ones with 'Digital' in the title - have become almost identical.
Click to expand...

I was reading the first new issue in bed, and shaking my head a lot. Helen put her book down on her lap, looked over and said, "what's up now?"

"Look at this, Angela Nicholson printed at full page height. Now, why do I need to see that?"

She just picked up her book and frowned while shaking her head. I carried on moaning about other stuff, like the use of those silly red crayon effect circles and arrows that, at first, I'd thought had been drawn by hand in each and every copy.

Oh well, we'll see. There's still Outdoor Photography and B&W Photography...

Dan
Click to expand...

Indeed. I may place a subscription with B&W Magazine.
 
I'm sad to see the changes too. My magazine arrives on Saturday mornings, and part of my weekend's relaxation is reading Roger Hicks whilst having a nice hot bath. That's gone. I'm not fussed about Mike Maloney. The Ivor Matanle feature today on the Canon EOS 650 was ultrashort with very little information. On balance, I wish it was back the way it used to be. Then again, change is always hard.
 
Maybe we should start a bring back Roger Hicks campaign, He was a member of this forum,and a regular poster until he upset some of the the thin skinned people from North America and was asked to leave
 
Must say I miss Roger Hicks too, although I was beginning to wonder how long he could keep it up. A talented and opiniated writer who always made me think and annoyed me at times too. All good things come to an end, I suppose but a note of thanks to him would have been nice.

The new AP is strangely like the the 1939/40 editions I mentioned in a recent thread. The "new" section giving a critique of readers pictures could have been straight out 1939.

I must say I have enoyed reading the first two new style editions quite a bit, but I would like to see a bit more imagination on the coverage of photography. Spring colours? It's been done a million times!
 
I think most of the photography magazines suffer from the same malaise,
B&W magazine is about the best,Outdoor Photogrphy Magazine is also very good.
My Favouritie is the American B&W mag
 
It wasn't so much about Roger, more the fact that his column is absolutely not about gear, not about technique, not about anything other than discussing photography itself. That was a pretty unique spot, and all credit to him for creating that. It was great bath reading :D
 
I haven't seen the new format yet, but I think we have a different view on AP here in North America. The tests, whether you agree with them or not, are leagues ahead of anything we get here. At least opinions are given. Our mags never have never met a camera that they didn't love.

I have mixed emotions about Hicks. I've read some of his columns that I've enjoyed, but too often I wonder just what it is that he's ranting about.
 
I won't miss Hicks, rarely bothered to read his column, he didn't ever seem to me to have much to say that was worth reading. As for the rest of the redesign, it mostly seems to be about making the articles shorter, shallower, and even less interesting or useful than they were before. I mainly bought it for Ivor Matanle's articles, if they get the same treatment it'll be a shame.

Ian
 
I miss Hicks. Sure sometimes his column read like 'I've got 500 words to produce by Friday', but it was thought provoking whether you agreed with him or not. As has been mentioned he often talked about photography rather than gear, which has to be a good thing.

For those in North America who see AP as some kind of pinnacle I can only suggest they read (or look at the pictures in ;-) the two leading French magazines. For a combination of technical reviews and discussion of photography they are streets ahead of most of the UK mags.
 
Roger had a cycle of articles in (now defunct) Russian Fotomagazin. In contrast to what his AP column seemed to be, they were more focused on technique and practical ways of photography. I found them well written and informative. I'd say I miss Roger here, although with understanding that it was his choice and a number of forum mebers feel contrary.
 
I'm a big fan of Roger Hicks' writing - but he will be back at AP - sharing the back page on a rota basis apparently - once every 4 weeks or so...but he runs his own website which I also like and has produced a book of his articles...and can be found at APUG...

The big loss is the Ivor series on old cameras and systems - excellent material. The 2 side effort on the EOS this week is a travesty in comparison.

I'm going to give it another few weeks to make my mind up but I'm not overly bowled over at the moment...seems to have been dumbed down...and if we lose Crawley's lens reviews as well then it won't be worth even looking at.

They haven't sunk to the 'how to digitally composite a unicorn on a stormy sky' so all is not lost.... :)
 
cameramanic said:
Maybe we should start a bring back Roger Hicks campaign, He was a member of this forum,and a regular poster until he upset some of the the thin skinned people from North America and was asked to leave
Click to expand...
What happened?
 
I always turned to Roger Hicks article first. And Ivors old camera system articles made for great bedtime reading.

There is a plethora of style-over-substance photo magazines out there, but think there is a niche which Hicks and Mantle could have live in.

Don't miss Maloney at all - his photo scared the crap out of me anyway.

Ah well, that frees up £2.15 a week to spend on film and chemicals :)
 
I'm also not keen on the new version. I do miss Hicks but more importantly I find the magazine harder to read with the use of much lower contrast typesetting (dark grey letters on a light grey background in some bases). Too many dumbed-down articles. I think I'll stick to the GMC publications for the time being.
 
cameramanic said:
Maybe we should start a bring back Roger Hicks campaign, He was a member of this forum,and a regular poster until he upset some of the the thin skinned people from North America and was asked to leave
Click to expand...

I can't decide if this remark is mostly arrogant or ignorant. It certainly has plenty of both. And if Roger Hicks left because "some of the the thin skinned people from North America" asked him too (highly unlikely by the way...not Roger's style) then who is the thin skinned one?

I suspect that if Roger saw any value in being here he would be contributing regularly.

Have a nice day, Gov

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom