Author Topic: Filmwasters – The Magazine! (Read 23293 times)

Andrea. · « **Reply #50 on:** October 24, 2013, 06:28:44 PM »

Well, the last newspaper of that type Vignette - went back online after finding it too expensive to print and distribute the newspaper version.

And anyway, if you want a hard-copy of pdf, you can always print it out!

LT · « **Reply #51 on:** October 24, 2013, 06:56:37 PM »

You do make a very strong point there Beck .... And the site was originally supposed to be like an online magazine with monthly guest gallery, articles and so on. Life just took that away from us, Susan's time was increasingly focused on her own work and maintaining that market, ed 's wonderful family came along, Skorj Damion and I got buried in work, and so on. Gradually, the only thing left was the forum. We'd love to get the podcasts back on a regular basis, but it just ain't gonna happen right now.

So I don't mind the magazine idea, I think it might get some momentum going again around here ... Provided I don't have to do too much for it, I'm a little busy right now :-)

PS superb to have you back and posting Beck ... We've missed you :-)

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #52 on:** October 24, 2013, 07:06:22 PM »

Should that magazine work there is of course the possibility of reusing content (maybe just a bit later?) on other parts of the site (like the guest gallery). But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Francois · « **Reply #53 on:** October 24, 2013, 08:47:49 PM »

Call me old skool, but I feel the printed word on paper is considered to have a much greater value than when printed on a screen.

Besides, if I get texts published, I can always add that to my CV

Adam Doe · « **Reply #54 on:** October 24, 2013, 09:40:10 PM »

For me, a large part of the joy of film photography is that it is a series of processes. Shoot, develop, print. While I enjoy looking at images on a monitor, I feel that the series of processes is at its rightful conclusion when the image is printed. A good photo should be printed.

Pete_R · « **Reply #55 on:** October 24, 2013, 09:50:47 PM »

I think I've read every word on this so far and one word is missing in my view "readership".

Who is this for? Who's going to read it and what would THEY want.

If this is just being aimed at existing Filmwasters then I think I'm strictly with Becks. Getting some regular features back onto the site would be far preferable than producing something completely separate - in any format. Maybe the onus for getting these features back on the site could be farmed out to those keen to contribute - maybe we need some independent editors for the site and take some load off the owners.

If this magazine is to be aimed at non-members then someone needs to do some market research to find out who's going to read it, what format they would want it in and what content would they like to see. And I would also then have to ask the question - why?

I think the biggest downside of all of this is that it may take away from the present site. People may not contribute so much, preferring to contribute to the magazine.

Just my 2 cents...

Francois · « **Reply #56 on:** October 24, 2013, 10:22:53 PM »

I must admit that this is a double-edged sword...
There's got to be a way to get both to work without killing each other.

As for readership, just post a few links on a few flickr groups and get Mike Raso to talk about it and you're in business

Pete_R · « **Reply #57 on:** October 24, 2013, 10:48:39 PM »

Quote from: Francois on October 24, 2013, 10:22:53 PM

As for readership, just post a few links on a few flickr groups and get Mike Raso to talk about it and you're in business

Getting interest isn't the issue. There's plenty of film based groups out there that could be a source readers but you have to ask what they want if you're aiming this at them because if you don't get it right in issue 1 then issue 2 won't happen. And you have to offer more than can be found elsewhere. There's already an awful lot of information out there on film cameras and their use.

It just seems to me this is an instance of doing something for the sake of it with no real thought as to why, or who it's for.

Pete_R · « **Reply #58 on:** October 24, 2013, 11:03:49 PM »

Just thought I'd throw this in too.

Earlier this evening I wanted a recipe for a particular dish (mother-in-law coming to dinner...). I have about 6 feet of shelf space filled with cookery books which probably contain a number of examples of what I was looking for, but what did I do, I used Google. It would have to be something very specialised that I couldn't find with Google that would make me start ploughing through my books.

Hope you see what I'm saying.

OK. I'm going to shut-up now.

beck · « **Reply #59 on:** October 24, 2013, 11:11:01 PM »

Perhaps thats what is really behind this drive and desire....the lack of FW owner pariticpation and keeping up with the chores on getting new material in here like it once thrived....so maybe some are wanting or crying out subconsiouly or cryptically or what have you and wanting to get some sort of fire started on their own because of the stale air and dead features via FW ?! There I said it.....probly not but ill puff on it more and say I have always said in the past bring on some folks who can take over the wheel and drive for a spell while the FW crew do their thang elsewere. i looked goddam forward to guest galleries podcasts and so on then when the goose was laying eggs.....but when it started slowing down and a month turned into several months, i lost interest and my attention span went elsewhere. i need maximum stimulation and you can expect water works gallore from me when it is a party.

I have slways made an effort for collaboration ideas here and there but leon was quick to remind me no no nooo! i ask put some people in charge as mods or admins and allow them to soup up those features we all miss rather than its mine mine mine!!! id be stoked to reign as head mistress of the collabs section or guest gallaries.

Is dat Deja Vu parfume I am wearing?

Ill admit a magazine in my hands would be gold and now that my taste has evolved I would want something so sophitcated and high end that it would spin heads around. But of course it looks good in my brain. Now Im all confused all over again.

Verian · « **Reply #60 on:** October 25, 2013, 10:05:31 AM »

The last thing I wanted this to be was in any way divisive, so perhaps there is a middle ground which better suits more people than the current suggestion. I’d be quite happy to take a different approach and keep everything here on this site, such as the magazine tab idea, or even to direct my energies to picking up sections that exists and have become fallow recently, or new sections, I honestly don’t mind. At some point in the future this may grow side shoots, such as a book for one of the projects, or a themed magazine based on the same, it could be anything.

Or I could pipe down and do nothing, if that’s what people prefer I won’t be offended. Apologies if I appeared bullish at any point, I do like to plough on with things and sometimes this can come across in a different way than intended.

If a consensus of opinion can be reached then go with that, maybe one of those polls?

zapsnaps · « **Reply #61 on:** October 25, 2013, 11:04:51 AM »

Verian - if I'd known that you were going to keep my ideas for topics, I'd have put more effort into them.

There are now many views circulating on this topic and most, to a degree, have some merit, even though they are contradictory. I can see both sides. But I personally favour the mag, printed.

An idea. Pick a date. 31st December sounds good to me. (I love giving people an option and then telling them which they want.) Those who would like to submit stuff, send it in by the cut-off date. Most of us have work on file we could submit anyway. Others will use it as an excuse to shoot something fresh. Have a look at both the quantity and quality of the submissions. That will give the editorial panel an idea of whether they have sufficient material for half an issue, a full issue or several issues.

I'd be happy to submit on the off-chance that this goes ahead. If in early January the submissions 'feel' right, immediately announce the next copy date as 30th June (working on your idea of 2 issues pa). It doesn't matter that it may take until 29th June to get the launch issue away, the editorial panel will have lots of material from which to fashion the second edition.

I see this working (or not) by the constant flow of quality material, rather than anything else, with the exception of volunteer manpower.

One last thought. To keep the mag fresh, images should not have been shown on the FW website before. That will achieve two things - provide an impetus to submit your best work to the mag and for non-submitters to look at the mag as every picture and every article will be new to them. It will not just be the forum re-hashed.

Now, if you'll all excuse me, I'm going to go and get a cup of tea and then return to the day job. I'll be back at lunchtime, London time.

Pete_R · « **Reply #62 on:** October 25, 2013, 11:33:38 AM »

Quote from: zapsnaps on October 25, 2013, 11:04:51 AM

submit your best work to the mag and for non-submitters to look at the mag as every picture and every article will be new to them

= death of the forum...

I know, I said I'd shut-up but, really...

gothamtomato · « **Reply #63 on:** October 25, 2013, 12:01:11 PM »

Quote from: Verian on October 23, 2013, 08:41:26 PM

In relation to copyright, I would suggest Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. In brief, all content may not be altered or used for commercial purposes and any use must clearly state who the copyright owner is. It’s more complicated than that but it is the strictest of the CC licences. Submissions would be on this CC basis. There would be an element of trust with regards to model releases and suchlike.

This is where the stumbling blocks would be. Without copyright protection, you are going to limit the photographers who would contribute work. I know I, nor any of the photographers I work with, would ever use creative commons that allow others to use your work. Regardless of whether they give you attribution or not doesn't matter. We all use copyrights. People should not be able to use your work just for attribution, they should have to ask first and get your agreement for any usage. Just because the magazine is non-profit, it doesn't mean the content should be able to be stolen and used by others. In my opinion it should be clearly stated that every photograph and article is copyrighted. Period.

I have magazine publishing experience and I don't know of any magazine anywhere who would publish without ©.

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #64 on:** October 25, 2013, 12:04:41 PM »

The only thing this license allows is for people to share the finished product (and not make any money from it): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ Which is what people will do anyway when you offer a free PDF download.

Phil Bebbington · « **Reply #65 on:** October 25, 2013, 12:30:16 PM »

Well, am I late to the show, or what! I started by being in favour and then Beck arrived (lovely to see you) and I was in favour of what she said. I guess I am largely in favour of both. The PDF publication with an option to print sounds cool. Not sure what I could offer given my aptitude for doing nothing. The flip is a more active site with podcasts and all that goes with that. Kind of win win, really. I guess wherever the momentum is.

As for Beck as Queen of the Colabs. That made my pulse race from my hotel bed

zapsnaps · « **Reply #66 on:** October 25, 2013, 12:32:44 PM »

Quote from: Peter R on October 25, 2013, 11:33:38 AM

Quote from: zapsnaps on October 25, 2013, 11:04:51 AM
submit your best work to the mag and for non-submitters to look at the mag as every picture and every article will be new to them

= death of the forum...

I know, I said I'd shut-up but, really...

Sorry, Peter, but I don't agree. The UK antiques trade & art galleries sell stuff 52 weeks of the year. But they keep their very best stuff for the 4-or 5-day prestige fairs in London. It's all about editing (in the real sense of the word - not the PS misuse) & holding the very best work back for the greatest impact, to reach the largest audience. Many people regularly submit to the weekend thread here. But if they kept their two best shots of the year back and submitted them to the mag, would the weekend thread noticeably suffer? I don't think so.

And if the mag simply featured the best of the weekend thread, I don't think many people would look at it for long. People want to see fresh work. The two main London auction houses always get excited when something is fresh to market and never been seen in public before. These lots regularly exceed upper estimates. Things need to be fresh (even if antiques or old masters) to excite.

IMHO.

tkmedia · « **Reply #67 on:** October 25, 2013, 01:42:58 PM »

gothamtomato
Like most publications, magazines can have multiple types of copyrights and contain creative commons, but of course the photos can still belong to the respected photographers who maintain their own copyrights, and might not want to use a cc. Photos being submitted release the usage right for inclusion in that publication. There are various levels of cc types with non-commercial, no-dev, etc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/

Pete_R · « **Reply #68 on:** October 25, 2013, 02:03:00 PM »

Quote from: zapsnaps on October 25, 2013, 12:32:44 PM

Quote from: Peter R on October 25, 2013, 11:33:38 AM
Quote from: zapsnaps on October 25, 2013, 11:04:51 AM
submit your best work to the mag and for non-submitters to look at the mag as every picture and every article will be new to them

= death of the forum...

I know, I said I'd shut-up but, really...

Sorry, Peter, but I don't agree. The UK antiques trade & art galleries sell stuff 52 weeks of the year. But they keep their very best stuff for the 4-or 5-day prestige fairs in London. It's all about editing (in the real sense of the word - not the PS misuse) & holding the very best work back for the greatest impact, to reach the largest audience. Many people regularly submit to the weekend thread here. But if they kept their two best shots of the year back and submitted them to the mag, would the weekend thread noticeably suffer? I don't think so.

And if the mag simply featured the best of the weekend thread, I don't think many people would look at it for long. People want to see fresh work. The two main London auction houses always get excited when something is fresh to market and never been seen in public before. These lots regularly exceed upper estimates. Things need to be fresh (even if antiques or old masters) to excite.

IMHO.

Somewhat different circumstances I would say. If I were to think of submitting my 'best' pictures to the twice yearly mag, I'd be saving up ALL my best pictures for six months so that I could then make a choice of which to submit or maybe, let the editor decide which to accept. But would probably depend on how submissions were organised I guess.

Either way, it's diluting the forum.

Late Developer · « **Reply #69 on:** October 25, 2013, 02:11:30 PM »

"Editorial committee"?? Sorry................??

The beauty of the current FW Forum, flawed and loosely controlled as it may be, is (at least to me) a thing of beauty. It's one of the strengths of FW and part of the reason I'm still enthusiastic about the site. I think Beck's probably right when she says we may need to loosen the reins when it comes to increasing the volume of collaborations, guest galleries, etc. Perhaps that's all that's needed to get more folk back on board and submitting more frequently?

Going down the route of magazine publication - particularly if there's a process of submission of photos for editorial approval to decide upon which photos, articles / editorials to include and exclude will (in my opinion) almost inevitably lead to accusations of elitism and be very divisive.

Every one of us on here, so far at least, is able to post pretty much whatever subject / format we want - so long as it originates on film. If we go down the route of filtering out "unworthy" pictures, my guess is that those whose work is rejected will simply give up and/or go elsewhere.

I'm not "anti" the idea of a magazine - but I would definitely not want to submit photos for someone else to decide whether they are suitable. That would seem to be a recipe for the formation of "cliques" rather than broadening the appeal of Filmwasters to the widest audience possible.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #70 on:** October 25, 2013, 02:47:19 PM »

Late - A mag and a forum are different beasts. A forum is as close to 'live' as it's possible to get. Here's a snap I took today, this weekend, this week etc. A mag has got to be more considered, otherwise what's the point?

Life is a selection process. Why should a magazine submission be different? It's analog(ous) to showing the world my latest roll of 36 (hell, no!) from the lab and creating a website. They are both my work, but my portfolio or website is distilled to the best available at the particular time of creating it.

I now only shoot nudes. If the editorial panel or the mods of FW decide there will be a 'no nudes' policy, I'll still follow the mag avidly, even though they wouldn't accept my work. To turn my back on it would simply reduce the amount of enjoyment I get from this site.

Late Developer · « **Reply #71 on:** October 25, 2013, 04:33:12 PM »

Quote from: zapsnaps on October 25, 2013, 02:47:19 PM

Late - A mag and a forum are different beasts. A forum is as close to 'live' as it's possible to get. Here's a snap I took today, this weekend, this week etc. A mag has got to be more considered, otherwise what's the point?

Life is a selection process. Why should a magazine submission be different? It's analog(ous) to showing the world my latest roll of 36 (hell, no!) from the lab and creating a website. They are both my work, but my portfolio or website is distilled to the best available at the particular time of creating it.

I now only shoot nudes. If the editorial panel or the mods of FW decide there will be a 'no nudes' policy, I'll still follow the mag avidly, even though they wouldn't accept my work. To turn my back on it would simply reduce the amount of enjoyment I get from this site.

Zapsnaps,

A mag and a forum are indeed very different. If we were talking about producing another "Black and White Photography" style magazine (whether it's the UK or USA version is irrelevant) I would be with you 100% - but, unless I've misunderstood the intention, I don't think that's the route down which we're headed.

My "concern" (for the want of a better word) is that an FW magazine might cause a split - i.e. a number of FW's would see the magazine as their preferred means of promoting their work, whereas the rest would remain Forum only. There may, of course, be some that would try to have a foot in both camps but it could be an "either / or" situation.

I'm not sure I agree that "life is a selection process" without having to qualify that statement. For me life is about opportunities and options and choices and also about mutual support and fellowship. As I've said already, I'm definitely not anti-magazine and I would support creation of one. However, I wouldn't want to do so if there was a significant risk that it could have a detrimental impact on the Forum or what FW stands for.

LT · « **Reply #72 on:** October 25, 2013, 04:46:05 PM »

Quote from: beck on October 24, 2013, 11:11:01 PM

I have slways made an effort for collaboration ideas here and there but leon was quick to remind me no no nooo! i ask put some people in charge as mods or admins and allow them to soup up those features we all miss rather than its mine mine mine!!!.

Beck - this site was never about community effort ...it was never meant to be a co-operative. The premise is/was simple. The five of us put up the cash and time ourselves to fund and run the site, and we make the decisions. We always considered all ideas that people sent us for collabs, then picked the one we liked the most - the collabs are/ were picked on a turn-by-turn basis, so it was never just me saying no, it was who ever was due to pick on that occasion.

It is Mine-Mine-Mine bacause it costs us a lot of time, money and effort to keep the place running. I take your point about perhaps it being time to share this load now ... I'll discuss it with the others and see what they think.

My health is preventing me from being involved in photography at all right now, and you know about how busy the rest are. SO it makes sense to ask people to help us out ... I'm sure we'll be in touch soon about it.

L.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #73 on:** October 25, 2013, 04:50:36 PM »

Late - I agree with you!

As I said a few post back, I can see both sides of the argument, and I do yours, too.

By 'life being a selection process' I mean that, despite my best efforts, my employer chose me, as did my wife and friends. I too selected to accept the options available. I agree about fellowship and support, but that's also not without selection. I favour charities supporting people rather than animals, for instance. I have selected this site as a place to spend quite a good deal of time poking around and trying to learn more.

Selection is like connaisseurship or choice. It's about preference and allocation of resources.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #74 on:** October 25, 2013, 04:52:46 PM »

Leon - sorry to hear that it's your health that's kept you away recently - I just presumed it was the day job.

Hope that things improve for you
David

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #75 on:** October 25, 2013, 05:29:38 PM »

I'm very sorry to hear that Leon! I hope you will get better soon.

As far as helping out goes: I do web stuff as my day job so I'd be glad to help out that way.

Flippy · « **Reply #76 on:** October 25, 2013, 09:13:18 PM »

My 2 cents: if it is going to be printed, then a "magazine" is not a good idea, to put it frankly.
If you want to print something people will get interested in, it basically has to be less disposable and more focused than a magazine is. Make it a cohesive, detailed book for instance. Pick a subject or a theme, do it great justice and put out a solid work.

That being said, it would be awesome if the site here got back into gear and running like it used to be. I know that it can be hard to accept when it's time to bring in some new "crew" to accomplish something with your "baby", but... sometimes that's what your baby needs to succeed and grow.

calbisu · « **Reply #77 on:** October 25, 2013, 10:32:44 PM »

Hi Verian,

If I may give you my 5 cents I would say go ahead with the magazine, the worst thing can happen is... well, I do not se any ¨worst thing can happen¨. You are receiving inputs from all directions, which may discourage you or distract you from your original idea, but I would take that as a sign of the interest your idea has attracted; what it matters is that you have with you the administrators green light (at least initial

).

I was involved in the making of the fw´s book and I want to believe that some good ideas came throughout the development process. As a starting point I would ask who really is interested, and ready to contribute to the making of, and then create a separate threat in the FW´s index with limited access (if the adms agree with it, that is

). That would be the place for brainstorming, assigning tasks, etc. The main forum sometimes can be too rich for that.

Hope I helped in any way, and remember I can be of high value for the spanish edition

Carlos.

Francois · « **Reply #78 on:** October 25, 2013, 10:40:03 PM »

I think that for a magazine format to be successful without hurting the website, it would have to contain stuff you don't normally see on the site. I personally have a few ideas that could prove interesting and not in any way threatening to the site's content.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #79 on:** October 26, 2013, 08:21:26 AM »

The only way I can see this is as a retrospective collation or summation of what happens on this site as a PDF. Twice a year would seem ample to reflect the range and diversity.

I'd probably download and keep copies, though I doubt I would print them.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #80 on:** October 26, 2013, 02:04:18 PM »

Hi there. Just a quick post to address a couple of specific points before I get shouted at for not tidying up the kitchen:

The last collaboration gallery we ran received 7 (I think) submissions. I do understand the logic behind cause-effect-chickens-eggs and lack of active participation from the site founders potentially causing lack of interest from the site's regular users, but it is definitely a 2 way street and getting 7 entries for a collaboration gallery doesn't exactly make me want to dive straight into another one. It would be nice to see bigger involvement in the next one.
As usual I'm deeply touched by the interest and investment in Filmwasters shown by everyone who's posted in this thread. Whatever the outcome of this micro issue, it's great that you all care enough to pipe up and it's served as a good wake-up call to those of us who run the site.
Beck: it's great to have you back with us and you're right that the contributions from the 5 of us have tailed off in the extreme over the last few years. We'll try to get more involved from now on.

The domain hosting fees for FW are due in the next few weeks and it will be a pleasure to pay them again knowing that there's still so much goodwill towards the place.

Thanks!

original_ann · « **Reply #81 on:** October 26, 2013, 03:45:22 PM »

Quote from: Ed Wenn on October 26, 2013, 02:04:18 PM

The domain hosting fees for FW are due in the next few weeks and it will be a pleasure to pay them again knowing that there's still so much goodwill towards the place.

Thanks!

OK, maybe a little OT, but how about setting up a link where those that want to can place a condition-free donation toward hosting (and other costs). I might be alone in this thought but it would allow anyone who wants to contribute as little or as much as they want to the kitty - (or not at all - no big whoop). I know I've been quite sporadic of late but I genuinely 'puffy heart' Filmwasters.

calbisu · « **Reply #82 on:** October 26, 2013, 03:50:13 PM »

Quote from: original_ann on October 26, 2013, 03:45:22 PM

Quote from: Ed Wenn on October 26, 2013, 02:04:18 PM

The domain hosting fees for FW are due in the next few weeks and it will be a pleasure to pay them again knowing that there's still so much goodwill towards the place.

Thanks!

OK, maybe a little OT, but how about setting up a link where those that want to can place a condition-free donation toward hosting (and other costs). I might be alone in this thought but it would allow anyone who wants to contribute as little or as much as they want to the kitty - (or not at all - no big whoop). I know I've been quite sporadic of late but I genuinely 'puffy heart' Filmwasters.

Good idea Ann, you are not alone on this

Verian · « **Reply #83 on:** October 26, 2013, 03:56:45 PM »

Quote from: original_ann on October 26, 2013, 03:45:22 PM

Quote from: Ed Wenn on October 26, 2013, 02:04:18 PM

The domain hosting fees for FW are due in the next few weeks and it will be a pleasure to pay them again knowing that there's still so much goodwill towards the place.

Thanks!

OK, maybe a little OT, but how about setting up a link where those that want to can place a condition-free donation toward hosting (and other costs). I might be alone in this thought but it would allow anyone who wants to contribute as little or as much as they want to the kitty - (or not at all - no big whoop). I know I've been quite sporadic of late but I genuinely 'puffy heart' Filmwasters.

I'd be happy to offer a contribution.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #84 on:** October 26, 2013, 04:20:29 PM »

Nope. No contributions necessary....nor was I hinting, but thanks very much for the offers.

moominsean · « **Reply #85 on:** October 26, 2013, 06:58:18 PM »

I would be happy to personally line my own pockets with your donations!

original_ann · « **Reply #86 on:** October 26, 2013, 07:13:43 PM »

Well... all the same. If someone knows how to setup one of those sites where you can contribute via paypal, I'm all in.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #87 on:** October 26, 2013, 08:12:15 PM »

OK, Sean....you're banned.

calbisu · « **Reply #88 on:** October 26, 2013, 08:15:12 PM »

Quote from: Ed Wenn on October 26, 2013, 08:12:15 PM

OK, Sean....you're banned.

Ok, now it´s getting interesting

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #89 on:** October 26, 2013, 09:23:47 PM »

You just create a Donate button on Paypal and paste it someplace. But I'm sure you knew that.

Francois · « **Reply #90 on:** October 26, 2013, 10:25:46 PM »

It's just that the guys don't want the tax man knocking on their door

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #91 on:** October 26, 2013, 10:44:50 PM »

Nobody prevents anybody from having a pdf printed by a "copyshop" or a more professional print service. Since members here are from all over the world a pdf minimizes probs with distribution, payment, shipping, customs etc. The most important reason why I don't participate at the "Share The Love" thing. Just my 2 cents.

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #92 on:** October 26, 2013, 10:55:37 PM »

PS: for me the idea of a Filmwasters (sic!) magazine is very attractive. I'm rather new here and can't screen thousands of posts from the past and I highly doubt that the well established members here can. Who doesn't want it mustn't care for it. So what's the prob if only the bosses here say go! and some guys want to do the job? If it fails nothing is lost exept the time of the authors.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #93 on:** October 27, 2013, 10:46:30 AM »

Quote from: beck on October 24, 2013, 11:11:01 PM

so maybe some are wanting or crying out subconsiouly or cryptically or what have you and wanting to get some sort of fire started on their own because of the stale air and dead features via FW ?!

Quote from: imagesfrugales on October 26, 2013, 10:55:37 PM

PS: for me the idea of a Filmwasters (sic!) magazine is very attractive. I'm rather new here and can't screen thousands of posts from the past and I highly doubt that the well established members here can. Who doesn't want it mustn't care for it. So what's the prob if only the bosses here say go! and some guys want to do the job? If it fails nothing is lost exept the time of the authors.

now I want both. I magazine is for many reasons exciting but in the end. the forum and other things around it is what I like about this place. I've not the same time nowadays to hunt the forums all day and night so something I could hold in my hand and pick up once in a while (like my old light leaks mags) would be nice.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #94 on:** October 27, 2013, 11:09:58 AM »

Dear Filmwasters....thanks for all your input and comments. It's been a really good read and lots of points have been raised which have got us thinking. We've also been given a wake up call as to the need to reinvigorate the site & we're already discussing how best to do this. We're also discussing (or will be) how best to implement the magazine idea with Verian via email and will probably start a separate board up here soon once we've agreed what form it will take.

Personally I see no harm at all in having a separate part of the site which is a self-contained 'best of Filmwasters + some new stuff' and which gets updated twice a year and which can be downloaded as a PDF etc. and that's probably the form it will take. I see absolutely no reason why this should dilute the content of, or reduce the activity on the forum.

In the meantime I'm going to lock this thread, so save up any further thoughts on this subject for the new board which we'll open in the next few days once we've had a chat with Verian.

[Other mods: feel free to overrule me and unlock this if you want]