- They wouldn’t print my pictures.
- My other gripe is the standard of pictures that pass for ‘amateur’ photographers. Each magazine has a readers’ pictures section with pictures that range from crass filler material to epic pieces of photojournalism. Some of the best pictures are taken with a £10 000 camera using a paid model in an expensive studio environment, in other words – professional. A lot of amateur magazine contests seem to be won by pros, supplementing their income. If they’ve already got the great shot (or an unused out take) why not submit it and win some brand new kit or cash?
- There’s a hellova lot of kit reviews. Kit reviews usually mean digital these days and I’m biased. But, how interesting are three page articles comparing different ISO setting on the same camera? Usually, it involves a lot of snaps of things a short walk from magazine’s office – that means London and either The Eye or Big Ben. I just don’t believe that you kit matters that much. I need more examples of great pictures and more descriptions of how great photographers work, not how their camera work. For the price of a magazine, you can normally get a half decent photo book and learn more about images that way.
So I hate them all, until they start printing my stuff.