|
|
Reader's Forum: VOL. 4, NO.1 • SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2003
 Pass it OnThe promise of your publication is refreshing to “old timers” who deal mainly with film and “old time” darkroom work. Even though I have been into serious photography since 1977 and darkroom work since 1980, there is still much for me to learn. The Big Thicket Camera Club that meets in my studio once a month is more or less computer-illiterate and wants to know the best route to work with film, so your magazine will surely be shared with them. John Adams, Warren, Texas Ed. Responds: If you are a current subscriber and belong to a Camera Club, I’ll be glad to send you free copies of the current or last issue for each of your members. Send an email to Deana Fisher, pvadvert@ctelco.net and tell her I said so. Old Films I have two rolls of 1960s 620 roll film for prints. The film shows it should be developed using the C-22 process. Do you know of any company that still can process with C-22? Janice Keefer, via email Ed. Responds: The place that can develop your film is Rocky Mountain Film Laboratory, which specializes in old films and processes. They tell me they just developed some film from the 1950s and it came out just fine, a little faded due to dye deterioration, but printable. Of course, a lot depends on storage. Their phone number is 303-364-6444, or www.rockymountain film.com. This information was provided by members of www.apug.com. The Mail Must Go Through I recently resubscribed for two years. I did so to continue receiving one of the best photo magazine’s I’ve ever read. Do I always like every article or portfolio, no. I do read them, sometimes I have to work to understand them. More Darkroom? explore new techniques. More Portfolios? yes, I love them. More equipment reviews? I prefer to photograph, not buy more bells. Am I a photographer because my lab has gone digital? Yes, but I never get enough time to photograph as much as I would like. So I’m largely relegated to enjoying my beloved craft—from the click of the mechanical shutter in my Leica to the pungent stench of hypo in my closet-cum-darkroom—through your magazine. It is less the balance of articles or portfolios than the combinations of photographers and writers. I don’t think there is a perfect formula, but there are provocative views, different perspectives that help me look more broadly at photography. I’ve had the good fortune to live on four continents and work with a variety of people. I’ve managed to see the world a little differently as a result of the people I’ve known and the way they approach and solve the problems we share. Your magazine is one of a very few that brings photographers from around the world to share their visions and technique. Les McLean, Mako, Dr. Tim Rudman and the other writers who take different approaches than the more mainstream (and increasingly digital) American fare. The magic formula lies in the balance between McLean and Ctein, Lamb and Pupo. This is why I impatiently wait for the next edition to arrive in my mailbox. Please keep pushing for more latitude. John Sunnygard, via email Where’s DFA? First, I have to say I'm not a subscriber, though I DO buy an occasional issue at the newsstand. I saw an issue several months ago advertising a new magazine to be called "Digital Fine Art(s?)" that I was especially looking forward to because the cover showed a blurb for a portfolio of digital photography by my greatest inspiration, Jay Maisel. I was calling monthly asking when it would appear at the newsstand and was finally told it wasn't going to happen. So NOW I'd like to see that layout appear in Photovision magazine. I’m not a film purist and the name of your magazine doesn't suggest that Photovision is restricted to film! I say have a mix. I'm still shooting film (color transparency) but will have no regrets about leaving it behind, maybe when the next generation of DSLRs appears. Bob Casner, via email Ed. Responds: The publisher of Photovision has decided not to launch Digital Fine Arts, after all. This is not because he does not believe in digital imaging as an art form, it is just not a possibility at this time. All those trusting souls who sent in checks and credit card orders for the first issue of DFA, rest assured, no checks have been cashed or credit cards processed. We apologize for any disappointment this may cause our digital readers. Remember the Alamo I was quite pleased to read your latest editorial in Photovision. Specifically, I was pleased to note that you’re questioning the magazine’s current stance on non-traditional/chemical means of image capture and processing. Even more specifically, let me note that I’m one of those pesky in-between cases you alluded to in the editorial: I capture on film, then print on inkjet or Lightjet. I was about to submit my portfolio, but…checked your web site and found that because of the inkjet output I would not be able to. I subscribe to photo magazines to learn about the art and techniques of photography, but with 90% of the weight on the art. Thus, portfolios are of the greatest interest, perhaps a little bit on art critique/criticism, but I’m definitely not interested in the formula for another developer. I say the latter not because I have labs process my film, but because even when I had my own darkroom that was not the source of my interest and pleasure in photography. Thus, I am one of those who would appreciate a magazine that focused on the art of photography, presenting portfolios, articles on composition, critiques of photographers known and unknown…I am basically UNINTERESTED in the technical aspects of how the image was made, I want to know what the photographer was trying to convey…present technique only to the extent that it is necessary to implement vision. If the photographer used a point-and-shoot digital, so be it…present/critique the results thereof, not the means whereby they were attained. Good art will bubble to the surface, no matter what the evolution of technique is…there will always be room for chemical processes, even in the day when the last company closes down its film production line, and the only thing that can be done is…sensitize glass plates, or make a paper negative! So focus your magazine on the aspects of photography that will last the test of time; your latest issue was a good one from this perspective. Be somewhat more open-minded about the image capture/output process, just look for good photography…for every analog fanatic that wants you to make a last stand at some imagined Alamo, you will gain many interested photographers that will be interested in a premiere artistic magazine. Perhaps if you abstain from the whole analog/digital debate, and appeal to the artists in the photography community, you will have a much larger potential market than you may currently have. By the way, I really loved the article on Siskind. Joffre Swait, via email Know Your Friends Photovision is one of the photography magazines that I look forward to receiving and read cover to cover. Thanks for all the good work. Your July/August asked for some feedback about “No Digital” Photo-vision is fine with me just as it is, but it seems to me that avoiding a specific technology is dogmatic and petty. Look at your portfolios by Siskind, Pohribny, and Pupo. In each case the photographer is manipulating what is there to express something about what is being experienced. Would these images have been of less value if they were printed (or manipulated) digitally? My color work is printed digitally because I like the tactile quality of the print. In any case, I appreciate the mix you offer. Fine if you don't want to modify it. You know who your readers are, and you do a wonderful job in addressing their interests. Bruce Blum, via email Critique When I first received the announcement of your magazine and read the description, I immediately sent my subscription request. I have enjoyed every issue as I watch your magazine grow and find it's voice and place in the photographic community. Since you ask for reader input… Your Editorial Position When people discuss music the focus is not usually to bemoan the fact that synthesizers are playing a big roll in the creation of music, or that the digital storage media will be obsolete at some future date. The same should be true for photography. I subscribed because I wanted a place to read about the art and practice of photography without hearing “the D word.” I no more want to read “digital hate mail” than I want to read “digital love letters.” There are many photography publications that never discuss optical design, why can’t this magazine never discuss digital technology? Your Content I love the portfolio work. I even enjoy reading the artists comments when they are in the realm of the supernatural. If this is what motivates their work it is interesting. All the work you have presented is excellent. A good mix would include portfolios, a little on equipment reviews, or what’s new; some “how to” both camera work and darkroom work; a little history of photography (people, methods…); interviews or biographical information on a photographer; and I would like to see an ongoing section on Alternative Techniques. The Alternative Techniques could be a small article with either examples of someone’s work, a how to article, or a little history of the technique. Thank you for asking for input. Matthew Scott Oceanside, California |