The Online Photographer

I really enjoy the magazine. The articles are high quality and the production values are pretty good. You can buy it at Borders and Barnes and Noble in most places in the US. I'm not sure why British photo magazines are produced with so much higher quality than their American counterparts, but they are. It's a shame that Mike doesn't have a regular column in one of the American photo mags, but I guess that is consistent with their other editorial decisions.

Phew, what a relief!
Black & White Photography has very unique position in the magazine world, maybe now its fall towards the normal commercial standard has been stopped.
Each month's new issue was annoying me more and more, I was close to not buying it in future. Let's hope it gets back on track.
To be fair to David Corfield he did enter into a spirited dialogue with his detractors on the APUG forum and I wonder how much that rather public battle had to do with his leaving.

Cheers, Robin

Elizabeth Roberts has been an excellent contributor to the magazine for years. She understands the magazine's ethos and direction, and writes brilliantly. I can't comment on the nature of his stewardship, but I found David Corfield's articles cringe-worthy at times. I've been a subscriber for years but found myself for the first time skipping sections of the magazine filled with amateur photographic clichés and directionless drivel. I'm sure he's good at what he does, and I wish him every success, but B&WP is a special magazine, and it just wasn't the right gig for him.

You didn't fancy the move across the pond to take up the reigns then, Mike?

"It's a shame that Mike doesn't have a regular column in one of the American photo mags..."
Oh, do we still have any American photo magazines? Oh yeah, there's Outdoor Plumbing.

I used to subscribe to this magazine from the US, having them shipped to me from the UK, and did so for about 3 years before stopping about a year or so ago. I've liked it ever since I came across one of the earliest issues years ago on sale in Hong Kong (business trip from Beijing where I lived at the time). To be honest towards the end of Ailsa's tenure I felt the magazine was starting to go seriously down hill. It was getting too "cutesy" and informal and started to seem like a lot of editorial content was being written by people with only a rudimentary knowledge of photography (I was beginning to fear an article on digital photo scrap-booking or some profile on a weekend soccer mom photographer was coming any time). I hope this new person gets it back on track and with a bit more intellectual foundation to the magazine's direction and content. Last thing we need again is another photo magazine pandering to the lowest common denominator of reader.

BTW, does anybody else think the paper quality has dropped over recent months? Most copies now come with 'curled' pages that refuse to sit completely flat (quite important in a photography mag) and look even worse after a few months.

Older mags still appear perfectly flat.

I agree entirely with the opinions expressed above regarding the recent direction of the magazine, and in fact cancelled my subscription the other week as part of a cost-cutting drive - had the mag appealed more, I might have tried to make savings elsewhere. A shame, because I came across many great photographers through it and broadened my awareness considerably. I'm now somewhat gutted to hear that Elizabeth Roberts - consistently an excellent contributor in the past - is taking over, but at least I have the remainder of my current sub to see how things pan out and perhaps reconsider.

I could see the reasoning behind what David Corfield was trying to do - draw in more newbies to improve circulation and give a firm foundation for expanded content - but his own derivative articles let the side down, and the regular "advertorials" that suddenly started appearing were a huge turn-off. In the end, I decided that if that's what it took to make the magazine viable, it wouldn't have any worthwhile value to me.

Can't find it anymore in Antwerp. Not enough market for a monthly magazine that costs more than most paperback books. Subscription is, for much of the reasons already mentioned by others above, not an option. Overseas subscribing is ridiculously more expensive anyway.

So I have to do without.

I miss it though. Especially the darkroom bits.

For those looking for another quality photographic magazine [also from the UK] take a look at AG, expensive but in IMHO the best there is , beautifully printed, well writtem.
Clive
Antibes, France/Mealagh Valley, Ireland
www.clive-evans.com

Miss Ailsa terribly, but Liz is the editor we should have had all along. Time to renew my subscription methinks!

"remind you of anything" - yes, it reminded me that I went to the Edward Steichen show in Zurich recently!

(Funny how it looks modern because it now resembles a standard photoshop montage)

Interestintg. I've been buying this mag for about two years, and did notice a change after Ailsa left. However I continued to buy it for the articles by Lee Frost, Eamon McCabe, Les Mclean and Mike. It's the only photo mag I buy, unless I'm abroad somewhere, and spot something interesting. I never knew they did a graphics free cover for subscribers - that is enticing!

Really encouraging to see so much praise from so many non-UK readers for what undoubtedly has been (and hopefully will be again) one of the more interesting photography magazines in recent years.
The clean covers on the subscription copy of B&W have consistently used brilliant image choices.

However, I have a two-year subscription which finishes this year and was certainly considering cancelling. Under David Corfield's editorship the magazine changed its feel for me - although how many of the changes were his or were imposed on him from above I cannot say.

It must be a tough job finding that middle ground that appeals to the seasoned APUG fraternity (of which I admit to being one) as well as attracting newcomers whose only experience is digital and yet who yearn to learn more about monochrome possibilites.

I wish Elizabeth well in her new role and will certainly be renewing my subscription again this year.

I hope the new editor bring the magazine back into shape. In my opnion, the quality of the magazine has deteriorated during say the last year. It's looking more and more like one of those regular glossy photo mags that pollute the newsstand. It seems to me like it has developed into a beginner oriented magazine like the rest of the bunch, instead of providing an alternative to the endless test and equipment frenzy of the other magazines. Once they started with the stupid photo critique, I stopped buying Black & White Photography. And I'm sorry for that, because at one point it was very good.

I just look at the photographs.

I agree with Kris. And more: the Editor does not used a film camera and always said something like this: I imagine this on mamyia RZ and TriX, etc, etc, etc...

To me, at that Magazine, it was a shame.

Helcio
Bauru,Br

There's been much to enjoy in recent months but I confess I've found David's own contributions rather uninspiring. I like B&W because it takes me a while to read it. Back when I was a comparative novice it was the articles I didn't understand that attracted me. The magazine clearly had a depth that I could invest in.

Other monthlies are popcorn in comparison.

Yesterday, in a rare case of over-efficiency, I found myself with 40 minutes to kill before a doctor's appointment. Knowing there is a well-provisioned newsagents next to the clinic, I headed that way to see what was on the stands. I used to be a magaholic in my teens, but as a grown-up with a tight budget (and too many lenses on my wish list) I don't buy magazines anymore. Still, with all the talk about B&WP here at TOP, I thought this seemed like the right time to close my eyes, hold my breath, and plonk down $12 for the mag. I asked for a discount seeing as it was the March issue (and we're in mid-May), but at 9:20am the guy behind the register was in no mood for haggling (may John Cleese not read this).

Having never read B&WP, I must start off by saying that it is the best photography magazine I've read in a while. Admittedly, this isn't saying much, as my exposure to photo mags comes mainly from reading whatever selection I find at airport newsagents. Still, I found the photos of high quality, the adverts not as plentiful as in American mags, and the text well above the frat-boy slang I've come to loathe. Yes, there is some humour, but not enough to pull you away from the main point of the articles.

However (you knew there'd be one, right?), I agree that the features written by Mr Corfield were at the bottom of the quality scale. No prejudice here; I read the articles without looking at the author names, and gave a mental mark before finding out who wrote what. Invariably, Mr Corfield's articles were uninteresting and blandly written. Luckily, I loved the rest of the content! I was thoroughly impressed by the work of Martin Henson ( http://www.digital-monochrome.co.uk ) and Trevor Crone ( http://www.miragephotogroup.co.uk/TREVOR%20CRONE/index.html ). Andy Gotts's Hollywood portraits were none too shabby either. What consistently bothered me was the feeling that articles were being cut short; I was always left wanting to know more. Interviews with John Davies or the aforementioned Roger Crone felt unfinished. I'm sure these fine photographers had much left to say, and I wanted to read it! Am I maybe a closet reader, not a photographer? And can a magazine cater to my need for both images and the written word?

These issues notwithstanding, I want to make clear that if this is "bad", I can only imagine what the magazine will look like when it gets "good" again. I might have to reconsider my ban on magazine subscriptions!

As a side note, I found an article written by some smug-looking fellow (Mick something-or-other) trying to convince us that sensor sizes in digital cameras don't matter that much. How preposterous! What next? Will he try to convince us that you can take good photographs without a $2,000 lens? Really...

David Corfield has himself stated on an APUG forum thread:

"GMC decided to review their staffing and bring the editorship in house, which is entirely understandable. I stepped in when Ailsa left to fill the breech, and now Liz is sufficiently confident and inspired to step up to the plate. It was a freelance contract. My job is done - although I will still remain as a contributor to the magazine"

I was one of many feeling nervous of the direction he (or the publishers) might take the magazine. IMO it has dipped somewhat but hasn't declined too much, not enough to cancel my subscription to the only photo magazine I buy these days (more due to dissatisfaction with most titles than any form of self-discipline at the newsstands).

I bought the June issue a couple of days ago, and I'm thoroughly thrilled! The magazine is back where it should be, full of interesting material.

...and I even, happily, have to eat my words from a few comments back: Mike's column is not about digital hardware, but an essay on photography in the style that used to have me turning to his column first! :)