A Photography Magazine for the 1950’s Gentleman
A rare find that exposes the story about this time in history
In the back of a musty antique shop in Perth, Ontario, I found a vintage photography magazine from 1957. Judging it by its cover, I knew it wasn’t going to be like other art publications from that era.
Called thru this Photographer’s Lens (notice the use of “thru” and the lower casing, predicting how kids would text today), it was even more compelling inside—at least from the perspective of a straight man.
The first few pages are rather uninspired, with a flowery intro statement and a grainy b/w photo spread. But flip the next page, and there’s a full-length nude of a woman, her back strategically turned away from the lens.
Remember, this was 1957. Playboy has just hit the newsstands about four years prior, launching the dawn of the “gentlemen’s” magazine. The publisher of thru this Photographer’s Lens, Mystery Publishing in New York, was obviously capitalizing on the new genre in the guise of a photography guide for men.
These days, anyone can call up explicit nudes online in a microsecond. However, back in the day, doting husbands would no doubt have hidden their “men’s” magazines under the bed, away from the prying eyes of children and wives.
If anyone found the magazine and asked questions, the man could just say he was taking up model photography. And he wouldn’t necessarily be lying.
Photographer’s Lens does offer some decent photographic tips for the hobbyist/semi-pro, such as listing all of the manual settings for each image in the book, including this pointed sample of colour model photography:
It also offered news from the camera manufacturing world. Cannon (sic) had just released its V-t De luxe 35mm model, “with the addition of an exclusive rewind knob with a uniquely designed lever.” Sounds exciting, no?
Photographer’s Lens also informed the readers which magazines were paying for photo submissions. Its parent, Mystery Publishing, was offering $100+ for colour images, on par with Playboy’s rates in 1957. I find that impressive, considering how successful Playboy became.
One could argue that all of the nudes are tasteful in the magazine, and again they’d be right by today’s standards. However, in 1957, showing a lot of skin probably still raised eyebrows. Photographer’s Lens pushed the boundaries of presenting the unclad female form—in the name of art, of course—just like men read Playboy for the articles. In fact, Photographer’s Lens may have been the first “art” mag with nudity.
Funny story about this find in the Perth antique store. While I bought the copy that day, I tossed it a few years later in a major purge of our household items. It wasn’t until after that I decided to look for the mag, realizing from the prices online (around $100) that I might’ve discarded something special.
I found another copy online for considerably less, but it couldn’t be sent to Canada by the source. Some American friends received it on my behalf, just in time for a postal strike that dragged on for more than a month up here. When it finally arrived, I had almost forgotten about it.
Anyway, I couldn’t find the second issue of thru this Photographer’s Lens anywhere, so I presume it never existed. That’s probably unfortunate for any men that subscribed to the magazine, priced at $3 for six editions. That was about $30 in today’s money, after all.
So, if you’re in an antique store and come across an old photo magazine, just buy it and don’t throw it away. Also, maybe don’t open it until you’re in the safety of solitude. Unless you’re just reading the articles, of course.