New Magazine Direction | photo technique Forum

While we acknowledge and will correct the typography fiasco, I would like to address other issues of the new photo technique. I particularly want to respond to those readers who are concerned that we are abandoning traditional photography, as well as those readers (old and new) concerned that we are not giving enough editorial space to the relevant technology issues of the continuous learning curve that is digital photography.

For most of my 40 years as a photographer, (30 of which I was a contributing editor of Darkroom Techniques, and then Photo Techniques), I worked with a view camera, but I have moved to digital for the last decade. It is my philosophy as a photographer and emeritus professor of photography, having taught graduate students for 30 years, that the medium of photography has never existed on the basis of unrelated techniques or unskilled aesthetics. For that reason, I have incorporated the technology and methodology used in creating photographs into two categories.

The first is a series of portfolio/article combinations that demonstrate both the means and the end result. Articles are extremely diversified and will include commercial and fine art projects. In all cases, the work will be of the highest caliber finished imagery.

Please note that while I will be working with dozens of new photographers from around the world, as well as many of the contributors to Photo Techniques from the last decade, I am concerned only with the final photographs and the techniques and methodologies incorporated in their creation. I have no intention of making a distinction between a silver-based or digital process. The medium of photography since it inception has manifested itself in a number of processes, of which digital is the most recent.

The argument about what constitutes “true photography” based on processes has continued throughout our history. It was proven irrelevant in the past as it is now. I will also add that “photography” has never been defined by one application or aesthetic genre. photo technique is dedicated to the inclusion of all forms of photography.

The second part of the format change is expanded technical articles. The intent is to completely follow a process in detail, rather than offer short snip-its or tips.

While I personally acknowledge David Vestal for his valued insights and blatant honesty, I will be opening the opportunity to others to offer commentary, both established and new writers, to invite intelligent discussion on the issues facing photography as a medium. Rest assured, David will periodically be back.

It is important to note that I do not edit the content of the commentaries, even if I personally take issue with their direction. It is my intention that the Forum will provide an opportunity for interaction between readers and the comments made. Forum submissions will also not be edited for editorial content, providing the exchange is intellectual and well founded. Photography is not myopic. That is one of its amazing qualities.

The magazine will never address the interest of a point-and-shoot mentality. If anything, my intent is to elevate the magazine to a more professional level.

The fact remains that there is very little new in process, technology and equipment that is not digitally based. But that does not mean that new methodologies and new creative forms of silver-based imagery are not being done. As long as this is true, it will appear in photo technique. Again, I am not restricting myself to editorial balances. Photography that deserves print space, no matter what process, will get print space in photo technique. In the next issue, space is fairly evenly divided between silver-based and digital.

If you have any further concerns, you are welcome to contact me directly at pschranz@phototechmag.com. I also encourage you to use this site for intelligent discourse on photographic issues.

Paul Schranz,
Editor, photo technique

DougLandrum says:

April 7, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Hi Paul, I half agree with the statement by Hans Jonas – the part that I half agree with is “I only care about the final result.” The part that I don’t agree with is “how it is achieved really doesn’t matter.”

How it’s achieved matters from the standpoint of doable craft, the joy of the work and consistency of result. And how much effort against excellence of result. While it always takes more effort to achieve excellent results, the results should not be hit and miss.

Since I took your Masilla Workshop course in B&W digital printing and bought a state of the art printer, I have not considered going back into my wet chemistry darkroom. Digital processes are now equal to or beyond the wet darkroom in results and paper choices. Although I always enjoyed the process of producing silver prints and the joy of seeing the image develop, the set up and clean up of the wet darkroom and the endless washing and drying and the variations of result even in the most rigorous adherence to technique make for me reasons to depart to digital. Because the digital processes that you taught – bringing the joy of the process in Photoshop, the excellence of prints on great paper from my state of the art Canon printer and the ability to print at will without an ordeal of set up and clean up – digital B&W is the way I go now. Digital is a different process. I lament my departure from the old process and the physical process of the silver print but I can achieve the same or better quality of result in the digital process.

The magazine improvements are substantial. Keep going. I hope to see you in Masilla again soon. Best, Doug

WP Themes says:

February 1, 2010 at 2:02 AM

Good brief and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Thanks you for your information.

Hans Jonas says:

January 30, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Dear Paul & staff: I am a third generation semi-retired portrait photographer and a long time subscriber who several years ago noted that yours was one of the very few photo publications worth while reading. Now that the issue of type has been settled I look forward to the next Photo Technique. In regard to the Silver vs. Digital. I remember as a very young lad watching my grandfather make prints on the roof of the studio by sunlight; I remember my father’s brown fingernails. The progression from tin to silver on paper were a step by step variation on a theme. What we have now is a revolution and until the dust settles we are going to be in this transitional period. One thing is for sure: Digital is not going to go away and is the way general imaging is going to be made. After photography came on the scene in the early 1800′s, painters didn’t discard their brushes. I like that PT addresses both silver and digital since both are image makers now in use with the emphasis on the nuts and bolts to make, us, the image makers, better at the craft. Most of the time I still use film but I can see the advantages of digital and do not turn my back on it. As a photographer I care only about the final result; how it is achieved really doesn’t matter. And so in this revolutionary period I wish you the ability to choose well and be thick-skinned enough to avoid damage to your self-esteem.

J G Papeika says:

January 16, 2010 at 10:03 PM

Dear Paul and staff,
I appreciate the balance of the new magazine with unique “alternative processes” on one side with Bruce Barnbaum’s more traditional techniques for Slit Canyons on the other with Nolan Preece’s and Olivia Parker’s and Julie Blackmon’s fusion of techniques. As always I learn much from David Vestal and CTein and enjoyed the retrospect on Kodachrome by Sharma and Sargeant. I can go on and on; but the point is that I enjoyed the new magazine. Keep up the great work!
P.S. The improved quality of paper really helps the photos to shine through without the ink coming off in my hands.