Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

New Rock magazine

mikllaw

18-Apr-2012
9:23:28 AM

I just got my copy, it's good.

The article on Athol was very moving. They say everyone is good and interesting when they die, but this would have been a great story even if Athol was alive and well.

The bouldering in Switzerland article made me want to go bouldering in Switzerland, can't get much better than that.

The big cliffs and Dave Roots articles were good. I think Ian Brown could have put the boot into our poxy route on Bluff mountain a bit more, but its crapulence is somewhat disguised by the poor route description.

I think Australian climbing literature is always better when there are two magazines on the boil.
Cons? the photocaptions were hard to read, even with glasses.

Duncan

18-Apr-2012
10:28:38 AM

What's up with all the photos of Sam and Marc on Root Canal? The one in the previous issue and the ME ad weren't enough? I'd rather see more of Simon Carter's photos. The gear reviews of stuff that's been around for ages smacks of advertorial too. There were still little things that made it obvious the editior isn't a climber that made me cringe, for example in Ian Brown's article where he says that the editor asked him to explain "trad".

I agree that the Athol and Lincoln tributes were great, as was Ian Brown's article.

Dr Nick

18-Apr-2012
12:41:06 PM

At a guess the photos are because Kas sent a bunch of them in and they're not bad. Want some more photos, get out there and start taking them. At least this time they had climber/climb/photographer identified!

tastybigmac

18-Apr-2012
2:20:56 PM

I thought the one in the ME ad was the pick of the bunch. Are they years old? I seem to remember seeing them before...

Dr Nick

18-Apr-2012
6:01:48 PM

Taken around August/September last year from memory, but similar to ones of... Chris Jones? many many years ago on the same route.

tastybigmac

18-Apr-2012
7:38:05 PM

Ah, cheers.

Duncan

18-Apr-2012
10:26:47 PM

On 18/04/2012 Dr Nick wrote:
>At a guess the photos are because Kas sent a bunch of them in and they're
>not bad.

That's damning with faint praise if ever I heard it.

Dr Nick

19-Apr-2012
12:49:06 AM

The shots are fairly similar to ones that were taken many years ago, which is probably to do with where the anchors of the next climb along are! Straight off that's a negative, though it's a very photogenic spot (how many people have a shot of Kachoong looking out to Mitre Lake?).

There are also a few bits that I don't think are quite right - as stated earlier, the one of Sam used in the ME ad is probably the pick of those I've seen, with the big one of Marc clipping having motion blur on his hand and being a bit washed out in his body.

They're certainly of publishable quality, but turn the page and compare composition and colour for Onsight's piccies. On the flip side, Kas can't have been taking climbing photos for long and at a guess doesn't quite have the investment in toys that the pros do. Having someone new getting published shots is a good thing, provided that he's going to keep pushing his skills as a photographer and not just assume that getting shots in a mag means they're good enough.

(Edit: can't spell investment)


benjenga

19-Apr-2012
6:45:53 AM

I suggest that rock mag starts a reader submitted photo comp each month then at least there will be some fresh shots and I am sure having one photo published is very exciting.

Duncan

19-Apr-2012
11:32:43 AM

On 19/04/2012 Dr Nick wrote:
>They're certainly of publishable quality, but turn the page and compare
>composition and colour for Onsight's piccies. On the flip side, Kas can't
>have been taking climbing photos for long and at a guess doesn't quite
>have the investment in toys that the pros do.

Good luck to the guy, I bet he's glad that he spent that time hanging off the rope. Publishing that many pics of the same route suggests that they were scraping the bottom of the barrel though. Hell, pick any three of Dave Bateman's photos - problem solved.


BlankSlab

19-Apr-2012
12:02:34 PM

On 19/04/2012 benjenga wrote:
>I suggest that rock mag starts a reader submitted photo comp each month
>then at least there will be some fresh shots and I am sure having one photo
>published is very exciting.

Couldn't agree more. Im sure it would create a push for some unusual images from those off the beaten or not so visited places.

Dr Nick

19-Apr-2012
1:48:22 PM

I had a look at Rock's contributor guidelines, and it's $80/page. Given he's got two full pages out of those shots, a day's hanging about has earned $160 + whatever the ME ad netted.

I do agree that having 3 shots of the same route (and having a similar shot last issue) indicates a shortage of supply. Now I'm thinking of sending off a few of my piccies.


benjenga

19-Apr-2012
6:47:54 PM

On 19/04/2012 Dr Nick wrote:
>Now I'm thinking of sending
>off a few of my piccies.

That's what I am thinking... Getting tired of all the same photos when there are so so many good climbing photographers. Get out there, get snapping and lets see some real shots.

tastybigmac

19-Apr-2012
8:50:59 PM

At first I misread your post Ben and thought you said "so many good looking climbers"....

Damien Gildea

19-Apr-2012
10:33:20 PM

On 18/04/2012 mikllaw wrote:
>I just got my copy, it's good.
>
>The article on Athol was very moving.
>Cons? the photocaptions were hard to read, even with glasses.
>

Yeh Mike I agree. I was one of the ones slagging them off in the other thread but I looked through this one the other day and I'm happy to say I thought it was pretty good. Though I agree about the captions lost against the background.

Duncan

24-Jul-2012
9:15:32 PM

So how many issues does the new guy get until we're allowed to say that picking an editor who doesn't climb was a terrible idea? The latest issue is utter garbage.


benjenga

24-Jul-2012
10:03:52 PM

I think the mag is getting better but it is still a far cry from what it used to be.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

25-Jul-2012
8:43:26 AM

On 24/07/2012 benjenga wrote:
>I think the mag is getting better but it is still a far cry from what it used to be.

I thought the same thing back in the 'daze' when Rock started having sport climbing articles...
& then later again with the rise of indoor climbing, and also bouldering articles!
Heh, heh, heh.

Winston Smith

25-Jul-2012
9:22:32 AM

Vertical Life makes Rock look dumb and redundant.

Will_P

25-Jul-2012
5:08:27 PM

I'd do a comparative review of VL and Rock, but it'd get me too worked up. I have a paid subscription to a mag that was once of relevance to climbing in Australia, and have just read the second edition of an online only, free publication, and the gulf between the two is staggering.

Compare, for example, the interviews - David Lama in Rock, asked questions like 'Do you ever wish you had a sibling?' and 'What would your singles profile read like?' (an inane question that received an appropriately-juvenile response); against Damien Gildea, our own Damo666, in VL, who, while asked pretty predictable questions, gives riveting answers.

Or check out the gear reviews - neither publication risks revenue by slagging off a product (it's been a long time since I've seen that, but I've got some gear I'll happily criticise in a funny but informative way for any magazine who'll publish it), but there's what appears to be a balanced assessment of form and function (VL) versus verbatim reprinting of what the manufacturer has written (Rock). That's just plan lazy.

More to come, Rock. I have some ideas about how you can become what you were again.

There are 51 messages in this topic.