Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Emilmedia on January 06, 2013, 04:10:18 am
-
There were rumors about two years ago that Samsung was developing a medium format camera that would change the market... What happened with this? what do you think?
-
There were rumors about two years ago that Samsung was developing a medium format camera that would change the market... What happened with this? what do you think?
It would make little sense for them.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/exclusive-samsung-goes-medium-format-canon-and-nikon-should-be-worried/
-
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/exclusive-samsung-goes-medium-format-canon-and-nikon-should-be-worried/
Weird, Nikon and Canon don't offer medium format cameras…
-
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/exclusive-samsung-goes-medium-format-canon-and-nikon-should-be-worried/
That bogus rumor from 2011 has it all when it comes to wishful thinking about unicorn products: not just a mass-market camera maker going into a format bigger than 36x24mm, but a _square_ sensor.
It reminds me of an old saying about horses:
"If rumors were products, we'd all have medium format cameras in our pockets."
-
How about this rumor (which I just made up):
Kodak (that you all thought was dead) is secretly working on a full-frame 8x10" DSLR with a dymanic range of 23.2 stops and a suggested retail price of $379.99. ::)
-
a full-frame 8x10" DSLR with a dymanic range of 23.2 stops
They cannot do that because DXO's graphs cannot display such numbers....
-
Weird, Nikon and Canon don't offer medium format cameras…
Not really.
They are very close to MF quality, have way more functionality and a huge market.
I really don't see them being interested in a shrinking market.
On top of that both Canon and Nikon know that they have up their sleeves. Non bayer array sensor technology
could be the next large leap in IQ.
I think if anyone were to get into MF it would be Fuji with all their MF lens expertise. A MF digital with more DSLR functionality would be a
prestigious product for Fuji to have. However I wounder if it is really something they need. Personally I think that scaling up the Xpro-1
quality to a full frame DSLR would be a big enough step forward.
I think that both Nikon and Canon would do better by pursuing motion picture cameras than delve into MF.
Regarding Samsung. The only reason I could see for them coming out with an MF camera would be to
give the brand more prestige as a camera manufacturer. This could be a good more to bolster sales of their other cameras.
Samsung recently launched a camera that runs on the Android OS. IT would be very interesting to have a professional
camera that runs on the android OS. IT would make developing custom applications very interesting.
(http://www.geeksuper.com/samsung-galaxy-camera-announced-with-latest-features/samsung-galaxy-camera-specs/)
-
They cannot do that because DXO's graphs cannot display such numbers....
Dragon sensor from Red
(http://nofilmschool.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/RED-EPIC-Dragon-Sensor-Dynamic-Range-Chart.jpg)
Loads of dynamic range, but small sensor.
-
Weird, Nikon and Canon don't offer medium format cameras…
Not really.
They are very close to MF quality, have way more functionality and a huge market.
…
Fred,
"Weird" was in reference to the rumor not to the fact that Canon & Nikon have no medium format camera in their line. I can't think why C & N would step in medium format market at the moment. It doesn't make sense.
-
Well, a collegue of mine talked to a rep at Samsung Sweden... He kinda confirmed that there might be something like this in the works. As Fred say, they want to improve their rep as camera company. They have sooooo much money to spend and want to be nr one on all fealds. Cellphones, computers, whites, TVs... Why not cameras?
-
If you really want to check out rumours such as this one, then an interesting place to start would be to search LinkedIn for current Samsung employees with a background in MF...
-
Well, a collegue of mine talked to a rep at Samsung Sweden... He kinda confirmed that there might be something like this in the works. As Fred say, they want to improve their rep as camera company. They have sooooo much money to spend and want to be nr one on all fealds. Cellphones, computers, whites, TVs... Why not cameras?
However one has to consider if there is really any validity to medium format bringing a company any photographic prestige in the eyes of consumers.
There was a time when medium format had a definite and significant IQ superiority. There was also a time when medium format had significant prestige
in the eyes of the public. MF was the camera that went into space, that for example is not the case today.
Just look at the last two Pirelli calendars. Shot mainly with 35mm DSLR with a few shot with MF. This is the sort of high end luxury/fashiony/glamor
publication where Samsung would like to be seen, but if this kind of publication also demonstrates that 35mm DSLR and MFD are more than adequate....
well where does the advantage of having a MFD product
There is also another thing to be considered. Visibility. A company like Samsung would want a flagship camera that is going to be seem.
Not many people are going to sling big clunky MF cameras around their necks and stroll around.
I also think that if Samsung had the intention of making a big push in photography
that involved medium format in the equation they would have bought Pentax.
I think that when it comes to Samsung it's more likely that you will see more movement in a relationship with google than MFD.
Also with Samsung being an electronics giant you are more likely to see big advancements in sensors and camera operating systems from them that stuffing
megapixels into the older concept of MFD.
It would be interesting to see what a giant like Samsung could do with for example Sigma.
-
However one has to consider if there is really any validity to medium format bringing a company any photographic prestige in the eyes of consumers.
There was a time when medium format had a definite and significant IQ superiority. There was also a time when medium format had significant prestige
in the eyes of the public. MF was the camera that went into space, that for example is not the case today.
Just look at the last two Pirelli calendars. Shot mainly with 35mm DSLR with a few shot with MF.
snip
Validity in photography is and probably always will be from what imagery is shot with what camera.
For dslrs it's normally sports. A bunch of white lenses at the Olympics, or the super bowl moves people towards Canon, Black Lenses to Nikon.
I'm not saying brands can't be invented (RED) or changed (Target) in the mind of consumers, but if Samsung made a whiz bang professional camera tomorrow I think it would be a difficult sale in the professional ranks.
Even Sony who bought Minolta, has Zeiss lenses and has moved their dslrs to the pro league aren't the first choice in the pro league, sports, journalism, advertising or art.
When Nikon came out with the D3, I was at our Dallas Studio and the camera supplier I use when I'm there. On one saturday I watched 4 people walk out with at least $70,000 of long black lenses. All were upper management/ceo types and all were as happy as clams.
Consequently when the D3x was out for about a year I asked this same supplier how many they sold. they said about 10 to 15 in the first month. I asked how many to professionals . . . 0.
Now if Apple made a professional camera, with their brand awareness and their marketing it would probably dominate in two years.
(That doesn't mean Samsung isn't good, it just means it's sold to a different crowd and doesn't have the perception of other brands).
IMO
BC
-
Hi,
I think RED essentially make HDR. Two exposure merged into one frame.
Best regards
Erik
Dragon sensor from Red
(http://nofilmschool.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/RED-EPIC-Dragon-Sensor-Dynamic-Range-Chart.jpg)
Loads of dynamic range, but small sensor.
-
Hi,
I guess DxO knows hows to draws such graphs... Also DxO is one of the few actors who actually publish measured data.
Best regards
Erik
They cannot do that because DXO's graphs cannot display such numbers....
-
Hi,
Possible? Yes! Probable? Not.
Why not? Well, it is about sales. The smaller formats are good enough for most work. I guess that MF is for demanding professionals and for connoisseurs, for both groups trade marks mean a lot. It's is also about building a system, sensor, camera and lenses.
Best regards
Erik
There were rumors about two years ago that Samsung was developing a medium format camera that would change the market... What happened with this? what do you think?
-
Validity in photography is and probably always will be from what imagery is shot with what camera.
For dslrs it's normally sports. A bunch of white lenses at the Olympics, or the super bowl moves people towards Canon, Black Lenses to Nikon.
I'm not saying brands can't be invented (RED) or changed (Target) in the mind of consumers, but if Samsung made a whiz bang professional camera tomorrow I think it would be a difficult sale in the professional ranks.
Even Sony who bought Minolta, has Zeiss lenses and has moved their dslrs to the pro league aren't the first choice in the pro league, sports, journalism, advertising or art.
When Nikon came out with the D3, I was at our Dallas Studio and the camera supplier I use when I'm there. On one saturday I watched 4 people walk out with at least $70,000 of long black lenses. All were upper management/ceo types and all were as happy as clams.
Consequently when the D3x was out for about a year I asked this same supplier how many they sold. they said about 10 to 15 in the first month. I asked how many to professionals . . . 0.
Now if Apple made a professional camera, with their brand awareness and their marketing it would probably dominate in two years.
(That doesn't mean Samsung isn't good, it just means it's sold to a different crowd and doesn't have the perception of other brands).
IMO
BC
I think it's a misconception that 35mm DSLR are mainly associated with sports photography.
Validation in the broad market does come to a certain from what is shot with what equipment.
Fashion from what I see is being more and more shot with 35mm DSLR, even in studio.
Even at the highest and "trendiest" levels.
Just look at http://inezandvinoodh.com/. They shoot for Vogue and Harpers Bazaar, Louis Vitton, Dior, Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent
They shoot 35mm DSLR.
Both Canon and Nikon make both high speed cameras designed predominantly for sports and higher MP cameras for
other purposes.
-
Fred, these are some of the most amazing videos I've seen. Lady Gaga just ratifies herself as the most amazing woman alive.
Thanks for the link!
Eduardo
I
Just look at http://inezandvinoodh.com/. They shoot for Vogue and Harpers Bazaar, Louis Vitton, Dior, Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent
-
Fred, these are some of the most amazing videos I've seen. Lady Gaga just ratifies herself as the most amazing woman alive.
Thanks for the link!
Eduardo
I can confirm she's quite amazing. I've worked with her twice. She is also simply one of the most charming people I have ever met.
-
Fred,
When it comes to equipment I buy, I spend very little time thinking about what others use, probably way too much time about what I need/want to use.
I'm not going to argue about the use of Nikon and Canon as viable professional cameras. They are and have been for a long, long time and we obviously know where you stand on that thought.
I and others have shot a billion images with dslrs in every type of situation.
In fact I just bought a 1dx, so it has it's place.
That doesn't mean that formats other an 35mm aren't considered and for high profile work Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf are used with great regularity. To a lesser volume, Leica and Pentax.
In fact that doesn't even mean that medium format is used less, just lately their is a lot of noise about the new Nikon. Internet noise doesn't always equate to real world use.
In regards to branding, I don't think the public has a lot of in depth knowledge about any segment of the professional photography industry. They may know Lady Ga Ga but most well heeled amateurs are probably more impressed by the cameras used for Sports Illustrated.
I'm sure you get these questions, I do almost every time I fly. What magazines do you shoot for? Nobody in the public would believe me if I told them shooting a series lifestyle advertising for Chase pays about 1000 times more than shooting the cover of Elle.
Next question. What cameras do you use? Say Nikon, Canon they go uh huh, If you answer Hasselblad they go ooh, and ah if you say Leica some will say yes, some just don't know, though most industry people say Leica is running at full capacity.
If I say Contax/Phase or RED I have to explain, though if the person asking is a photo geek, then thet're very interested.
I'll admit I'm biased. I'm brand agnostic as I own most of the brands mentioned (other than Samsung), but I love professional equipment. Big lenses, big lights, big stands, big trucks. I like large production.
I'll also admit I think cameras like the Nikon d800 and canon 5d2 are amazing devices for the money, though they do very little to inspire me. To me their like Toyota Camrys. They work, do their job well, but don't give me the same felling when I work.
I like equipment that is unique and not sold on every corner. I like things I feel I should treat as precious.
But back to the original theme of this thread. Samsung I hear makes good electronic equipment. I even looked at their latest phone, though I just thought it was a less than robust I-phone.
Taking that brand to a professional arena seems like a leap.
IMO
BC
P.S. The reason I bought a 1dx rather than a d800 was I like Canon's colors better, it tethers amazingly well with ethernet, the iso is a gazillion for some interesting low light work and I'll use it mostly for fast lifestyle, on figure fashion, 15fps cut frame video and cinemagraphs.
Also the lcd stays on when tethering, but the main reason was I already own 30 something mpx cameras that I find special on set and in post, so adding another 30 mpx camera won't change much for me.
-
Bcooter, have you seen their tvs? They are probably the brand that feels most high quality. And the phones i quite like too. Yeah apple was first on the ball but man they are slacking in some areas (not design tho). I think it would be refreshing. Like the 5D ii or RED. They do have the money to do pretty much anything they want.
-
Bcooter, have you seen their tvs? They are probably the brand that feels most high quality.
I recently bought a tv and neither LG nor Samsung were on my list. Design, annoying apps, websurfing and tablet integration seems to be their thing, while actual image quality is left as an exercise for Panasonic, Sony and other Japanese manufacturers (+ Philips).
I base my judgement on informal viewing in stores, at friends places and reputable review sites, thus my opinion may be disputed.
-h
-
Personally i prefer the Plasma image quality from Panasonic, same reason why i want to move to medium format. LED is sharp and contrasy as hell and i dont like it. Don't feel natural. Medium format has this feel to the images that has nothing to do with resolution or sharpness.
However, when it comes to crispness, dynamic range design of the TVs Samsung is in the lead. Thats also why they are market leaders with BIG margin.
-
However, when it comes to crispness, dynamic range design of the TVs Samsung is in the lead. Thats also why they are market leaders with BIG margin.
We will just have to disagree, I think they are marketleaders because they are cheap, thin and filled with useless apps. That may be what the mass-market wants, but I could care less about those things. In fact, I would pay more to get rid of some of the crap that is put into current televisions.
By "LED", I assume that you mean LCD tvs with LED backlighting.
-h
-
That is whats called LED today so yes. Samsung charge about 6000 bucks for their highest level tv when it comes out. I dont know its that cheap? Of course they have low price models too... its like saying nikon is cheap cause they have point and shoots for 50 bucks.
-
That is whats called LED today so yes. Samsung charge about 6000 bucks for their highest level tv when it comes out. I dont know its that cheap? Of course they have low price models too... its like saying nikon is cheap cause they have point and shoots for 50 bucks.
no. it is like claiming that market share cannot be taken as an indicator of absolute quality.
-
I think it's a misconception that 35mm DSLR are mainly associated with sports photography.
Validation in the broad market does come to a certain from what is shot with what equipment.
Fashion from what I see is being more and more shot with 35mm DSLR, even in studio.
Even at the highest and "trendiest" levels.
Just look at http://inezandvinoodh.com/. They shoot for Vogue and Harpers Bazaar, Louis Vitton, Dior, Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent
They shoot 35mm DSLR.
Both Canon and Nikon make both high speed cameras designed predominantly for sports and higher MP cameras for
other purposes.
Fred,
When it comes to equipment I buy, I spend very little time thinking about what others use, probably way too much time about what I need/want to use.
I'm not going to argue about the use of Nikon and Canon as viable professional cameras. They are and have been for a long, long time and we obviously know where you stand on that thought.
I and others have shot a billion images with dslrs in every type of situation.
In fact I just bought a 1dx, so it has it's place.
That doesn't mean that formats other an 35mm aren't considered and for high profile work Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf are used with great regularity. To a lesser volume, Leica and Pentax.
In fact that doesn't even mean that medium format is used less, just lately their is a lot of noise about the new Nikon. Internet noise doesn't always equate to real world use.
In regards to branding, I don't think the public has a lot of in depth knowledge about any segment of the professional photography industry. They may know Lady Ga Ga but most well heeled amateurs are probably more impressed by the cameras used for Sports Illustrated.
I'm sure you get these questions, I do almost every time I fly. What magazines do you shoot for? Nobody in the public would believe me if I told them shooting a series lifestyle advertising for Chase pays about 1000 times more than shooting the cover of Elle.
Next question. What cameras do you use? Say Nikon, Canon they go uh huh, If you answer Hasselblad they go ooh, and ah if you say Leica some will say yes, some just don't know, though most industry people say Leica is running at full capacity.
If I say Contax/Phase or RED I have to explain, though if the person asking is a photo geek, then thet're very interested.
I'll admit I'm biased. I'm brand agnostic as I own most of the brands mentioned (other than Samsung), but I love professional equipment. Big lenses, big lights, big stands, big trucks. I like large production.
I'll also admit I think cameras like the Nikon d800 and canon 5d2 are amazing devices for the money, though they do very little to inspire me. To me their like Toyota Camrys. They work, do their job well, but don't give me the same felling when I work.
I like equipment that is unique and not sold on every corner. I like things I feel I should treat as precious.
But back to the original theme of this thread. Samsung I hear makes good electronic equipment. I even looked at their latest phone, though I just thought it was a less than robust I-phone.
Taking that brand to a professional arena seems like a leap.
IMO
BC
P.S. The reason I bought a 1dx rather than a d800 was I like Canon's colors better, it tethers amazingly well with ethernet, the iso is a gazillion for some interesting low light work and I'll use it mostly for fast lifestyle, on figure fashion, 15fps cut frame video and cinemagraphs.
Also the lcd stays on when tethering, but the main reason was I already own 30 something mpx cameras that I find special on set and in post, so adding another 30 mpx camera won't change much for me.
My post was not about your camera choices. My point was about how what work is shot with a cameras system effects
how it is perceived in the general market and how it can effect the brand as far as using a new camera system as a prestige flagship
to promote the overall brand.
My point is that the most prestigious and glamorous work in the eye of the general public is Fashion and Fashion with celebrities.
While you point out that a commercial lifestyle shoot for Chase pays more than a cover of Elle, shooting the cover of Elle will raise the day rate of the photographer
significantly.
Also if I recall correctly Annie Leibovitz had or has a very lucrative contract with Vanity Fair. If I recall correctly it is/was $ 2,000,000.
Fashion has huge allure and because photography is such a large part of fashion it gets a lot of exposure through it.
Just look at the hits a backstage fashion shoot gets:
http://youtu.be/O-JSfo0kuaA (http://youtu.be/O-JSfo0kuaA) 215,320 hits.
My point was that if a camera manufacturer like Samsung is considering a flagship camera for brand prestige
they will be looking also at what type of exposure it will get in the general and social media.
Also lets not forget the Hermes Leica ;)
-
........
Validity in photography is and probably always will be from what imagery is shot with what camera.
For dslrs it's normally sports. A bunch of white lenses at the Olympics, or the super bowl moves people towards Canon, Black Lenses to Nikon.
........
In regards to branding, I don't think the public has a lot of in depth knowledge about any segment of the professional photography industry. They may know Lady Ga Ga but most well heeled amateurs are probably more impressed by the cameras used for Sports Illustrated.
........
Regarding Sports Illustrated the photos that seem to count the most are the swimsuit edition photos...that are Fashion photos.
The Swimsuite edition is a bigger buisness than the magazine that started it.
From The Buisness insider:
And while many giddily await the special glossy's arrival on newsstands for its endless stream of bikini-clad models posing on sun-drenched landscapes, for Time Inc., the publication's parent company, the Swimsuit Issue means something more: a multi-million business that's bigger than the sports magazine that spawned it.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/sports-illustrated-swimsuit-issue-history-2012-2?op=1#ixzz2HXGlzqLH
[/quote
-
If Sports Illustrate swimsuit edition is fashion, then Maxim is haute couture.
But maybe your right . . . maybe readers buy the magazine to view the swimsuits.
In regards to payout. Gross billing that includes production costs vs. net are different numbers.
IMO
BC
-
Thanks for the link, Fred.
It's been a while since I looked at them and nice to renew the relationship!
What it does prove however, is that great fashion pics are ever dependent on great models and great clothes, quite apart from photographers. I think these fashion superstars don't know how lucky they are to get to work with the clothes that they do.
Rob C
-
If Sports Illustrate swimsuit edition is fashion, then Maxim is haute couture.
BC
?????...
Two totally different things.... Sports illustrated swimsuit edition
is Fashion photography and has nothing to do with sports photography; Maxim has nothing to do with Haute Couture.
From Vogue:
(http://www.madeinbrazilblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/0515124.jpg)
Sports Illustrated
(http://celebshut.com/wp-content/uploads/celebrities/irina-sheik/sports-illustrated-swimsuit-photoshoot-2011/irina-sheik-sports-illustrated-swimsuit-photoshoot-2011-14.jpg)
Both top models, sand on lovely skin, a skimpy swimsuite and a good photographer bringing out sensuality and skin that does not look like it came from some
lab at Adobe or Capture One.
-
Semantics aside, this guy has been making exciting pictures for many years, combining sex appeal, fashion, style, hedonism and sybaritism; often, with a Pentax 67. I think he comes, originally, from Venice, Italy.
http://www.marinoparisotto.com
It used to Marino Parisotto Vay, but for some reason the Vay was dropped from the website name.
Rob C
-
Hi,
I know that the Pentax 67 was very popular in Fashion in the nineties, I don't know why. I have one, it is built like a tank, but nothing really exiting. The interesting thing with the P67 is that it has low sync speed (1/30s) lacks AF. I wouldn't say the lenses I have are really excellent (Fisheye, 45, 90, 165 and 300) but those lenses are probably not top of crop. Hard to say from scans, though.
I guess some famous guy started using it and the mass followed. At least the one viewfinder I had is awful. Quit possible the metered prism was better. I took some pride in not using built in meter as I was a spotmeter kind of guy.
I liked the Pentax 67, actually. Well, liked it except the dark hole called viewfinder. On the other hand I made many landscape pictures I am still proud of with that camera.
Now, getting back to the hypothetical Samsung. Let's assume having Schneider lenses designed and built Pentax, as Samsung DSLRs were using Schneider labeled Pentax lenses. So they use a Samsung sensor? Samsung is not exactly famous for it's sensors. Pentax used Samsung but went to Sony for their top models.
Samsung could of course develop a CMOS sensor couple it with a great OLED display, live view and live histogram, HDMI output at 4K. They could put it into a marvellous modular camera. It may even sell, it is hard to know. A product should either match the needs or the "wants" of the targeted customers.
On the other hand, I guess that Samsung produces for a mass market and is not interested in building market recognition in a small sector where they are not present.
Best regards
Erik
Semantics aside, this guy has been making exciting pictures for many years, combining sex appeal, fashion, style, hedonism and sybaritism; often, with a Pentax 67. I think he comes, originally, from Venice, Italy.
http://www.marinoparisotto.com
It used to Marino Parisotto Vay, but for some reason the Vay was dropped from the website name.
Rob C
-
Hi,
I'm not sure... Wasn't Sam Haskins the seventies? I got the impression that P67 was quite popular just before the rise of digital, like late nineties?
Best regards
Erik
That would be I want to be Sam Haskins syndrome.
-
Hi,
I'm not sure... Wasn't Sam Haskins the seventies? I got the impression that P67 was quite popular just before the rise of digital, like late nineties?
Best regards
Erik
At least early sixties, Erik. Five Girls made him a world-wide name.
Rob C
-
I was fortunate enough to be invited along to a Sam Haskins screening of slides during a trip back to Scotland many years ago.
Amazing work, and the best reason for 6x7 and 6x6 slides after print requirements. A pleasant man, very open to questions from a mainly not-so-bright audience. He and Hans Feurer used to alternate Pentax Calendars for some years – sometimes better than Pirelli, in my view. Another reason to protect local dealerships: mine used to give me the calendar!
I bought a new Pentax 67 ll as a final resort in an attempt to rekindle both my interest in, and the market’s interest in my stock pictures, and to make shots of real estate look super good in holiday brochures. The low synch. wasn’t a problem as I used down to a 1 sec. sometimes for interiors.
Unfortunately, changing format wasn’t an answer: it couldn’t hold back the tide of political correctness nor of do-it-yourself holiday operators with small digis.
In the end, I reverted to Nikon, bitterly regretting the swap away in the first place, especially as it’s meant my rebuying a lot of stuff I’d already had. And I’m still short of much that I know I won’t replace.
But the Pentax: it was very well built, felt great, and my first handling at a photo-show by my old, now extict wholesaler was love at first feel. However, nothing prepared me for the shutter bounce which was simply something one couldn’t circumvent.
I didn’t have one of the Pentax shuttered lenses and maybe that would have been an answer for some, but my lengths were 55mm and 200mm… had that camera worked on the ‘blad or Mamiya principle, a lens in each shutter, it would have been a world-beater. I didn’t find any problem with the prism.
Rob C
-
Going back to the importance of Fashion photography
as a promotion for camera brands compared to sports photography.
It's interesting to see the print advertising trend.
While Time Inc citing a decline in ad revenue is cutting some 700 jobs. Time inc owns sports illustrated.
Vogue and Elle magazine on the other hand in September published their biggest
September issue ever.
Vogue will have a total of 658 ad pages in this year's Lady Gaga-covered September issue, a 13 percent increase over last year's 584 pages, and its best performance since 2008. Vogue's September 2007 issue boasted 727 pages of ads, but this year's editorial content will push its pages into record-breaking territory. (On Friday, Vogue will start a contest on its Facebook page asking readers and fans to guess how many pages the issue will hold. The prize is a copy of the upcoming book Vogue: The Editor's Eye.)
Elle, which is expected to have Katy Perry on its cover, will also print the biggest issue in its history. Elle has announced 400 pages of ads — a 12 percent increase — in its September issue. Elsewhere at Hearst, Harper's Bazaar, covered by Gwen Stefani, is up 17 percent to 360 pages. Marie Claire has broken its record for ad pages with a 23 percent increase to 237 pages, and Miley Cyrus will star on its cover.
I find that this is a good indication that the still image is still king when it comes to fashion.