Why i hate photo magazines

P

PapaLazarou

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,196
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Well, here is why, i have been a pro photographer for 20 years now and in that time i have taken a lot of bad pictures. Some ok pictures and some that i think are amazing, well that's what i think anyway. My point being that in these magazines some readers send in there pictures and then the magazine makes comments on them. Sometimes good comments but more often then not they will find some reason to pull a picture to pieces. Saying things like the shot is over exposed or it's not in sharp focus, only to run a feature the following issue on how to shoot shot's with blown out highlights or with an out of focus look.
Well, some of the greatest pictures ever taken are out of focus, unsharp, or have blown out highlights or even under exposed. Take a look at these shots from the book 100 photos that changed the world and i am sure you will agree.

tsquare.jpg


burrows.jpg


biafra.jpg


VCexecute.jpg


beachdead.jpg


bomb.jpg
 
All reportage, hardly the same :shrug:

I agree with you that some of the comments made in these magazines can be banal but the underlining point is to get your technical stuff sorted so when an opportunity arises you can grab it without fumbling too much.
 
TBH IMO you are totally missing the point !

Those pictures didn't change the world because they were technically perfect. They had the effect because of their content. Often pictures do this and they are great pictures despite being technically crap. If the photographer had fannied about making sure the composition and exposure were bang on (or fidnig na decent cam etc..), the moment would have been lost and the pic would not exist and nor would the effect they had.

If the book had been called "100 photos that are technically perfect" you'd have a point.
 
I agree with peoples comments, it like comparing apples and pears.
 
But that is my point a great picture is a great picture, yes we can try and get the technically part spot on but it cant always be that way. These mags should stick with what they preach, one week they are showing readers how to take a picture that is over exposed or out of focus. Then the next time they are telling reader not to over exposed and get the shot sharp.
 
I think I can see what youre saying Papa & I certainly dont buy as many mags as I used to.

I also think its difficult for the mags to keep it new & innovative month-in month-out.
I feel they try to cover too many aspects in one issue, and very often dont go into enough detail in the areas they do cover.
Must be a tough game, as theyre fighting for space & your attention on the newsagents shelves ... have you seen how many photo mags there are these days!:eek:

Also, possibly a case of heres the rules ... and heres how to break them, no? :shrug:
 
I agree i used to buy almost every mag out each month, but what i found was the same thing repeated over and over again. The same mag would do a feature then 3 months later the same thing again with slightly different pictures.
 
Well, here is why, i have been a pro photographer for 20 years now and in that time i have taken a lot of bad pictures. Some ok pictures and some that i think are amazing, well that's what i think anyway. My point being that in these magazines some readers send in there pictures and then the magazine makes comments on them. Sometimes good comments but more often then not they will find some reason to pull a picture to pieces. Saying things like the shot is over exposed or it's not in sharp focus, only to run a feature the following issue on how to shoot shot's with blown out highlights or with an out of focus look.
Click to expand...

Are you refering to the 'critique my images' sections of said magazines? if so, then the images people send in are fair game to be pulled apart. Same as if you post in the critique forum here.


Well, some of the greatest pictures ever taken are out of focus, unsharp, or have blown out highlights or even under exposed. Take a look at these shots from the book 100 photos that changed the world and i am sure you will agree.
Click to expand...

Big difference between reportage shots that may be taken under fire or under extremely stressful and dangerous conditions and nice arty landscape shots.

I, for one, would not be too worried about exposure and focus if somebody in front of me was having their brains blown out by a psycho with a handgun. A psycho who is pretty likely to turn it on me next when he sees I have a camera in my hand and that I've just captured his actions for posterity.


Correct exposure is all well and good but have you tried metering for a nuclear blast from the windows of a long range high-altitude bomber whilst trying to get away quick enough to stop you dying?

Me neither. And I don't intend finding out at any point.
 
Gandhi said:
Correct exposure is all well and good but have you tried metering for a nuclear blast from the windows of a long range high-altitude bomber whilst trying to get away quick enough to stop you dying?

Me neither. And I don't intend finding out at any point.
Click to expand...

:clap: :lol: :clap:
 
So Far my biggest selling picture, everything is in focus, apart from the main subject of the picture. In fact the picture as a photograph is so bad I don't even tell my freinds and family were it's been published. If I sent it off to a photo mag I'm sure they'd just laugh at it.
However as the photos above there is a slight photojournalism about it which is why it's been published. As already mentioned the shots above are more the moments that changed the world rather than the photos, the photo just visualy reports the moment. Although not techincally perfect photos, they do have good composition about them, that when a photographers is underpressure, with only a spilt second to get the shot, makes it even more powerful. Also remember where the photographer actauly is. Next to someone pointing a gun at someones head, or next to death and destruction. How well would you cope?
However I do also see your point that they critise one moment, then showcase a photographers photos with the same problems that have been critiqued. I would love to send in a picture by a know photographer and see if they praise or critise it.
 
My "Why I wait photo mags" started as a kid with AP - they'd run a feature on Landscape photography, great, but every shot is of the Grand Canyon, Malta, Egypt, etc. not much use when you're a kid in Yorkshire - what I wanted to see were great shots of places I could reasonably stand a chance of going!

As an adult, I changed to hating their competitions too. For example, 3 (I think) years ago I came joint 5th in DCMag's Landscape Section of their POTY. 2 others who were 5th were taken in the UK, all above were taken abroad - which is fine if you've the money/time to travel to exotic locations, but as it's a UK mag it just seemed a bit daft that there either wasn't a UK Only section at least

My Fav 'hate' is wildlife comps - not my bag but there's some here who do it extremely well - but what wins every time? Something from the African plains, Madagascar or the Glapagos Islands - how can your fab fox compete with that?

Still buy some though - just moan all the time! Old Git eh? :lol:
 
Photo mags.
I haven't bought one for probably 8 years or more.
And I'll wager they are covering exactly the same topics now as they were then.
Just shifted towards digital a fair bit.
(and obviously all the potatochop stuff but that's manipulation not photography :lol:)
 
Gandhi said:
Are you refering to the 'critique my images' sections of said magazines? if so, then the images people send in are fair game to be pulled apart. Same as if you post in the critique forum here.
Click to expand...

Quite. The reason people send in photos for those sections is that they want a technical critique.

If they wanted a "who cares whether or not it is technically any good" response they would have asked their cat instead and saved a stamp.

Michael.
 
mij said:
If they wanted a "who cares whether or not it is technically any good" response they would have asked their cat instead and saved a stamp.
Click to expand...
You've obviously not heard any comments from my cats :eek:
 
But how can a mag be helping people new to photography, when one month they pull a pic apart and then next month run a feature on how to take a picture like the one they pulled apart.

They also say things like the picture by Mr fred Bloggs is ok but it would have been much better if he would have moved a bit more to the left. Well what if Mr Bloggs moved more to the left he would have fallen of the mountain.

So the point being again a good pic is a good pic even if you cant move over a bit to the left.
 
PapaLazarou said:
But how can a mag be helping people new to photography, when one month they pull a pic apart and then next month run a feature on how to take a picture like the one they pulled apart.
Click to expand...

By making wild claims? :shrug:
 
The Eddies Adams execution picture is one of my all time favourite war shots. The Police Chief had just come from a ditch where they'd found the bodies of families from a Cong raid on army married quarters, whisked away, terribly abused and shot, so you can understand his lack of patience to a degree. The guy being executed was in the vicinity - whether he was actually involved or not, who knows?

The police chief had the attention of the world press turned on him as a result of this shot, but he survived being pretty much a law unto himself at the time. He always carried a Mauser machine pistol strapped to his leg and every time he saw Adams for years afterwards, he would point it at him. Given the opportunity he may well have used it!

I'm not sure I could have held a camera steady under those conditions. :notworthy:
 
PapaLazarou said:
But how can a mag be helping people new to photography, when one month they pull a pic apart and then next month run a feature on how to take a picture like the one they pulled apart.
Click to expand...

Because they are muppets :shrug:
 
I think it is about perception and attitude. The magazines are really useful as a beginner, at least that what I found, and helped me become well versed in photography and pointed me to all the right suppliers etc.
As only so many subjects exist, they come round and round again on a cyclic basis, which you notice if you subscribe over a two year period for example. The use of infra red film, for example, pre-digital was useful, but I don't use the magazines much now myself, apart from BJP and BFP's Market Newsletter. Both are more suited to my needs now.
The critique's I always felt were harsh but very constructive in directing you to produce better photographs. Very rarely did anyone receive 'praise' but that wasn't the objective.
After 20 years Papa why are you still getting out of focus shots?
 
I agree that the magazines do have some good points, but like i said they call peoples work and then do the same in a later mag.
 
But how can a mag be helping people new to photography, when one month they pull a pic apart and then next month run a feature on how to take a picture like the one they pulled apart.
Click to expand...

Because it's one thing to overexpose a shot by being unskilled. It's another completely different thing to deliberately produce quality high-key images, for instance.

They also say things like the picture by Mr fred Bloggs is ok but it would have been much better if he would have moved a bit more to the left. Well what if Mr Bloggs moved more to the left he would have fallen of the mountain.
Click to expand...

I very much doubt that even the most popular magazines budget will run to the production of vehicles that can travel the space-time continuum and allow the journalists who create these critiques to see that Joe Bloggs was already hanging off the edge of a precipice in order to get the shot!




The point I'm trying to make is that if someone sends in an image for critique, then that's exacty what they're going to get. Blind critique by someone who doesn't know the circumstances under which the shot was taken. As long as the person who created the image understands and draws something out of the experience then does it matter if it's not 100% factually correct? If Joe had told the magazine that was the case then it's just crass stupidity.

I can't see how a magazine pulling an HDR image (for example) apart for being dreadful and overcooked one week and then running a tutorial on how to do it properly the next is such a big issue!
 
Gandhi said:
I very much doubt that even the most popular magazines budget will run to the production of vehicles that can travel the space-time continuum and allow the journalists who create these critiques to see that Joe Bloggs was already hanging off the edge of a precipice in order to get the shot!
Click to expand...

PMSL @ Gandhi :lol: :lol: :lol:

Please dont start another 'vote', my tolerance levels wont take it :D
 
While I agree with some of what you say, I also agree with others who say that people who send in photos for C&C wants to here what the mags have to say about their photo. I would think that a lot of people will learn from what is said by the mags and will improve their photography, many shots are sent in OOF and under exposed which I would never dream of doing but plenty of people seem to so the C&C will help them. as for suggested crops I think that this is very subjective and is a personal view.
 
Sorry i removed the pictures from my gallery and now they are gone from this post.
 
Ratty said:
TBH IMO you are totally missing the point !

Those pictures didn't change the world because they were technically perfect. They had the effect because of their content. Often pictures do this and they are great pictures despite being technically crap. If the photographer had fannied about making sure the composition and exposure were bang on (or fidnig na decent cam etc..), the moment would have been lost and the pic would not exist and nor would the effect they had.

If the book had been called "100 photos that are technically perfect" you'd have a point.
Click to expand...



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