I've noticed the same thing. I really like the look of the new site, but it also appears, at least given the articles written since the new site went live, that LuLa's focus may be changing. Historically, the site has offered a balance among many subjects, from deep introductions to new techniques (like ETTR), thorough equipment reviews from the perspective of working photographers concerned with image-landscape image making, to essays (and I use the word deliberately in the sense of being crafted with respect to a higher standard than "articles" on aesthetics and visual composition (like Briot's contributions). Among journalists and serious writers, 'essays' have much higher status that mere 'reviews' or technical articles.) LuLa has been my favorite site for quite some time, due to the depth of its work and the quality of its photographers/writers who contribute to it. I have been helped immensely by the reviews and articles (and occasionally by essays) at LuLa.
One senses, though, in the material published since the NewLuLa (NewLA?) went live, particularly what is showcased on the home page, that the new site isn't merely new due its design, but new in focus, as well. It appears to this reader that LuLa is now all about aesthetics, criticism and photo-epistemology. How do we know what we see? How do we prepare to recognize what we see? How do we think about preparing to look to see if we can see what we might design to see if we seriously thought about form, function and the aesthetics of seeing?
There's an adage in universities these days, that any Humanities department not explicitly and methodologically pragmatic, will, over time, become increasingly esoteric, post-structuralist and theoretically inward looking, concerned with theories of knowing. Seems like LuLa is moving in the same direction--perhaps having "academic" ambitions to ascend to a higher plane on the journalism status hierarchy. If this is so, then I'm assured that the writing will remain outstanding and insightful, but probably of decreasing interest to many readers, including this one, as the epistemology of photography holds little interest beyond the always helpful reminder that aesthetics and composition are at the core of what it means to make memorable images. I fled the University decades ago and couldn't wait to be rid of Big French Theorists like Foucault and Derrida. I"m hoping I'm wrong that LuLa is moving in this direction. But since the new format was introduced, I haven't read one article that I've actually found truly enjoyable or very helpful.
