Digital BW, The Print

Good points Alessandro.  
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Alessandro Pardi 
  To: 'DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com' 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 4:57 AM
  Subject: RE: [Digital BW] B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints


  Wise, wise words.
  I think that letting them know how many people are in this forum may be a
  better policy than simply unsubscribing from their magazine. Maybe they'd
  change their mind and reconsider the statement that "digital is based more
  on technology and conventional photography is based on craftsmanship"
  (exactly the same reasoning applies to painting compared to analog
  photography, by the way).
  And if a magazine ain't enough, they might even start thinking about
  creating a new one...

  Alessandro Pardi

  -----Original Message-----
  From: earregardless [mailto:earregardless@...]
  Sent: mercoledì 27 febbraio 2002 07.17
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints


  Wait a minute.  I read Rasmussen's "Opening Shot" as stating that, in 
  his - the editor/publisher's - opinion, black and white's "connection 
  with the past" merits the policy that B&W "will not widen our 
  editorial scope to include Digital photography."  Rasmussen 
  continues: "This is not a judgement reflecting the worth of 
  practitioners of the new ways, but a practical necessity - it's 
  impossible to please both sides in the same forum."  

  I see nothing in the article (p. 7 of the April 2002 issue) that says 
  that digital lacks the tradition, heritage, and other qualities that 
  collectors are looking for.  Rasmussen is clear - in his opinion, 
  digital is based more on technology and conventional photography is 
  based on craftsmanship.  The magazine's concentration on conventional 
  photography is "a decision in consideration of constancy."

  Regardless of the possibly misguided basis for his opinion, he's 
  entitled to it.  He does say that "we may from time to time 
  reevaluate our policy, and will keep readers informed of developments 
  in the Digital arena."  Thus, there is nothing in the article that 
  suggests that it will not have any articles or feature any discussion 
  of digital prints.  

  Face it folks, despite the raves of enlightened practioners, as of 
  February 27, 2002, there is still quite a bit of skepticism - and not 
  without reason - about digital photography.  The leading - and, as 
  far as I know, only - magazine devoted to black and white photography 
  (and a damn fine publication) is not so much dictating standards but 
  is rather reflecting popular opinion.

  Besides posting here - which is a bit like preaching to the choir - 
  perhaps a letter to the editor would be more effective in getting 
  Rasmussen's ear and the issue before the collecting public.  That 
  will ensure that, at least for the July 2002 issue, there will be a 
  discussion - not a monologue - on the merits of collecting digital 
  photography. 





  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]