I recently acquired the Summer 2009 issue of Source Magazine, a beautiful magazine which is not widely distributed within the United States, as I had to obtain my copy directly from Dublin, Ireland, where it is published. I had received it shortly after obtaining a copy of Volume 2 of The Aftermath Project.
From a physical standpoint, it was interesting to compare the stiff cover book of the Aftermath Project with the stiff cover magazine. Dimensionally they are approximately the same size, similar in heft and hand and perhaps similar in page count. It is a little difficult to really compare the quality of the printing as I have temporarily misplaced my 10x loop during the studio re-modeling project, but they look comparable, probably both printed offset. The binding of Source is sewn but not glued, thus it has the capacity to really lay flat on top of my desk, while The Aftermath Vol2 has been glued and does not have the same capacity to lay flat, e.g. it has a memory and wants to close itself.
The paper stock is considerable different, although the paper stock is similar in weight and dense opacity (yeah, you can not see through each page, so no image ghosting), the Aftermath Vol2 is matte stock and the image has been lightly varnished, while Source is printed on a near luster. The paper stock and image varnishing making for one of the biggest differences after the binding in terms of each’s aesthetics.
I will discuss the details of The Aftermath Vol2 in a future post, but suffice to say, there really is a blurring of the higher end magazines like Source as compared to these recent stiff cover books. And the quality of this “magazine”, much like LensWork and a few other magazine, is actually superior to some of the softcover/perfect binding print on demand “books” that I have reviewed.
I suspect that sometime in the near future, it will be very hard to tell these two apart, which I think in the long-term, benefits us all.
Best regards, Doug