Currently in Minneapolis, a place where my net connections are painfully poor — and we needed a quick snap in square format today, for inclusion in the next edition of GPU Gems. Nothing like a 20-minute deadline and -3F weather with a -15F windchill to spur you :)
The current issue of B&W Magazine has just shipped — it contains a photo by yha as part of its coverage of APUG.
Happy holidays!
December 23, 2004
Dirk
December 24, 2004 01:26 AM
Excellent shot! Is it a self-portrait?
Dirk
December 24, 2004 01:32 AM
How does B&W Mag compare to Lens Work?
bjorke
December 24, 2004 03:40 PM
Yes, a rushed self-portrait...
B&W is a beautifully-printed collector's magazine -- that is, it focuses on collecting photographs and photographers' portfolios, as opposed to LensWork's emphasis on photographers and the act of photographing. There is some overlap in that both magazines are keen on printing portfolios of B&W photography (and both do it VERY well), although B&W focuses primarily on the world of print sales. As such it is a somewhat larger magazine and (I'm guessing) has a larger circulation.
Robert
December 30, 2004 02:50 PM
Happy holidays, Kevin! Nice self-portrait, BTW...
I'd take slight issue with the "beautifully-printed" description for B&W...Lenswork definitely features quality black and white printing, but I think B&W's is mediocre much of the time. Obviously, magazine printing isn't going to come close to high quality fiber or even RC prints, but Lenswork and View Camera show it can be done, as well as few other magazines.
B&W has positively butchered some artists' work (whose prints I've seen first hand) -- it's very "sooty" printing IMO. Brandt and Brassai might not mind, but Zoneheads and even a number of contemporary photographers who favor a subtle approach to midtones and highlights don't fare very well in the pages of B&W.
bjorke
December 31, 2004 01:53 AM
Interesting observation about B&W -- funny because when I first saw that magazine I was quite enamoured with the printing, and started my subscription right off. I've looked at the magazine reprint of my own photo, but haven't yet compared it to one of my prints... maybe in the next few days once I return to California. I certainly have no specific knowledge of their printing process, whether it's a standard magazine print flow or something more involved (probably nowhere near as involved as the complex multi-pass printing Brooks Jensen specifies for Lens Work).
Congrats BTW to you Robert for the print that cropped up in the latest issue of SHOTS :)
bjorke
January 1, 2005 02:01 PM
Postscript from Home: Now that I'm here I could compare B&W #35's reproduction of my photo to the silver print original. A little dark, more like a lower gamma than the original. Then again the original was 35mm, not LF. They also clean-trimmed the print edges, as opposed to my rough-edged enlarged original.
Also waiting in the home mail box were LENS WORK 56 and MONO 43. B&W is clearly better printing than MONO, which seemed to shift black levels from page to page and print to print. But yeah, LENS WORK's printing continues to knock the ball out of the park.
Comments on "Chilled Gems"