The typical photo magazine aimed at amateurs is 90% about equipment and 10% about art. And that’s a very sucessful formula, as most amateur “photographers” are really equipment junkies and not artists.

Outdoor Photographer is more like 50:50 gear and technique. There’s still a lot of equipment writing- which tripod, which lens and so forth- but a significant amount of editorial space is devoted to technique as well. Unfortunately most of it is about creating the same stale and hackneyed nature photos that fill the pages of this and other magazines: Heavily filtered, over saturated color images of senic vistas that make for nice posters but say very little about the subject.

In some sense the notion of there being an “outdoor” genre of photography is rather silly; can you imagine a magazine called “Indoor Photography”? Good photographers are good photographers, and can see images wherever they are- and with whatever equipment they use. For every Ansel Adams who obsesses over technique there’s a Cartier-Bresson, who couldn’t be troubled to get his exposures quite right, and truth be told, Cartier-Bresson was the better of the two when it came to art.
Rating: 2 / 5

Somehow my purchase of this magazine haven’t been received. Could you please check?

Thank you much,

TJ
Rating: 5 / 5