Magazines

jaggiebunnet

hi all,

Finally upgraded to a DSLR and was wondering what magazines folk read and would recommend. As they are about 8euro a pop I would rather see what other folk tend to go for before i splash the cash on a few.

Cheers
Robert.

elven

I had a leaf through 'digital camera magazine' this month actually and for a beginner it would do rather well.

In the past I've read outdoor photographer, practical photography, photography monthly (points off for only ever having pictures of bimbos on the front cover and not actual photography...) and pretty much all the others.

If you're starting out, they are probably going to be as good as each other - after about 6 months, they repeat everything they have said. If you're looking for something rather more substantial you can subscribe to lenswork - very heavy on the black & white and not aimed at beginners, or someone showed us another one called Ag which I think looks fabulous - it's quarterly - and I haven't brought myself to pay a whack for it yet although it looks like a very good subscription. Just google 'ag photography magazine' and I expect you'll find it.

This kinda should be in the main forum though, it's not to do with processing...

jaggiebunnet

Thanks - mods can you move if this is the wrong place.cheers.

and a fellow scot on the boards - good stuff!

Spyral

I agree with Elven on the whole 'regurgitation factor' and most of the stuff you can find on tinternet somewhere or other. I've bought about 4 or 5. One was one a close up and portrait special the other was a really specialist macro mag, one was a review of cameras (what to buy type thing) and the other was just general based on the season. . mostly landscapes and nature. The last one was a speicallist black and white FILM one which I got to see what it was all about as we had to learn it for the module in uni. I keep them, dont refer to them often, but if im ever uninspired I use them to steal ideas from !

elven

Hahaha I guessed from your nick that you might not be a local

Look out for Feileacan, Eirebear - the name is deceptive - and odonnell, my husband, who has no interest in photography and yet frequents this forum :rolleyes:

Eirebear

Hiya Jaggie!

Elven mentioned DC Mag in her post, i actually buy it quite regularly as i find it handy for post proccessing ideas.
The thing about me is im too lazy too look for things on t'internet half the time and im really crap at searching for what i actually want, so im building up a nice wee stockpile of bits and pieces that ive pulled from the mag and try out every now and again.
Its a fairly good read as well.
And very good for showing you the very basics when it comes to actually taking the pictures.

This boards is extremely useful at times too by the way, most people are more than willing to help out...in their own unique ways!
I didnt know Feileacan was a scot......were taking over

jaggiebunnet

Cheers Lads, I bought DC Mag last night and gave it a quick once over before bed, looks pretty good and i will definitely pick up some good tips from it. The photoshop stuff looks pretty clear too which will be good when i finally get around to using it.

I have a philosophical (sp?) dilemma though, isn't using photoshop cheating? Surely the picture is what you take and if you touch it up afterwards, although it might look great, isn't the picture you took? Don't get me wrong i am not adverse to using photoshop, have done some stuff in the past and think the capability is great, but just wonder - i mean back in the ole pre digital days the photo was the photo wasn't it? Has anyone else thought about this or am i just too old

elven

Aaaaaargh!

Nooooooo!

Someone, take me away before I get started....

Ok, stock answer:

Are we playing some sort of game? Did someone tell you there were rules? What are you trying to prove? Do you think they didn't manipulate pictures before digital? What effect does it have when you shoot slide film like velvia, or high speed black & white?

Pressing the shutter is only half of the job. If you leave it there, and expect to get fantastic results, you're cheating yourself, really. If you use a DSLR, and especially if you shoot in raw, you're actually predisposed to processing your pictures in some way or another because none of the saturation/contrast/sharpening stuff is done in camera like it normally would be.

*deep breath*

Don't worry, this isn't aimed at you, really

Have a read of my blog if you want to know what I really think

jaggiebunnet

elven wrote:

Aaaaaargh!

Nooooooo!

Someone, take me away before I get started....

Ok, stock answer:

Are we playing some sort of game? Did someone tell you there were rules? What are you trying to prove? Do you think they didn't manipulate pictures before digital? What effect does it have when you shoot slide film like velvia, or high speed black & white?

Pressing the shutter is only half of the job. If you leave it there, and expect to get fantastic results, you're cheating yourself, really. If you use a DSLR, and especially if you shoot in raw, you're actually predisposed to processing your pictures in some way or another because none of the saturation/contrast/sharpening stuff is done in camera like it normally would be.

*deep breath*

Don't worry, this isn't aimed at you, really

Have a read of my blog if you want to know what I really think

did i touch a nerver there?

I don't disagree with anything you said elven, just trying to gauge what folk think.

I think I will go and get me a coffee and read your blog to see what you really think

elven

You'll find people at both ends of the scale from annoyingly righteous purists to those who see the limits of manipulation being the same as the limits of their imagination - and round here there's a lot of in between. It depends a lot on what you're shooting, and also, what you're shooting for - obviously there's no scope for manipulation in documentary stuff but if you'rew producing something for artistic value, there's no reason to put limits on it.

Unfortunately, it all gets a bit political and people try to push their point of view as the real/correct one, rather than appreciating that it's an individual choice. I was recently reading about people looking for digital photography to be given a different category to film photography because they believe that when you've manipulated it in photoshop, it's no longer a photograph. I'm calling what I do photography because I don't care, and what I do starts with a camera. If they make a 'digital imaging' forum on boards I suppose I'd just have to move!