chris000
Landscaper
I still read the UK Black and White Photography regularly and occasionally Outdoor Photography or Professional Photographer depending on what's in them.
The simple truth is that any magazine that did not cover equipment at all, or ignored those digital things, would sink without trace within a few months. Commercial realities and all that.
The simple truth is that any magazine that did not cover equipment at all, or ignored those digital things, would sink without trace within a few months. Commercial realities and all that.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I just subscribed to JPG, the first time I have paid money for a digital magazine. Dang, I'm gonna have to buy an iPad now...
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I, too, subscribe to UK's B&W magazine, although I agree with Dave that after two recent changes of editor it seems to have shifted its focus and content downstream somewhat. I looked up "Shutterbug" last week but it seems to have just gone into indefinite hibernation, and I found in the past that "Silvershots" became just too esoteric to hold my interest for a second year.
But I just followed up Bill Mattock's lead and it looks like "Shotsmag" is worth more investigation.
ryan26
Established
Pablito
coco frío
Fotomundo, published in Argentina (in Spanish), is an excellent magazine with a good mix of "art photography," photojournalism, photo news, and articles on technique and equipment.
Any Spanish speakers on this forum would enjoy it.
Any Spanish speakers on this forum would enjoy it.
gavinlg
Veteran
I know exactly what you all mean - I find all the photography magazines in Australia (most from the UK and the US) quite boring and predictable. There are exceptions however:
Capture: Australian pro magazine - deals with pro issues, up and coming artists, business matters and relevant industry news.
I decided a while ago I was sick of picking up a photography magazine and reading "how to use HDR like a pro" in every single issue. I realised I wanted to just look at good photos, not read about technical camera crap. This was the point I started buying fashion and pop culture magazines. The level of photography in some of these is just unbelievable, and I get a lot more out of them than the run of the mill camera mag.
Online zines are really coming into things as well - for instance:
http://sokozine.com/
Download a copy of that (some nsfw as fashion can be sometimes) and as long as you're somewhat appreciative of fashion, there is always some awesome work in every issue.
The other thing is Japanese camera magazines. I can't read them, but they cover rangefinders, old SLRs, MF and heaps of film, and the pictures are always wonderful. I have one from my last trip to Tokyo and I still look at it once a month or so - it just doesn't get old. It's called something like "japan camera" or "asahi camera"
Maybe I'll put some pics up on this thread.
Capture: Australian pro magazine - deals with pro issues, up and coming artists, business matters and relevant industry news.
I decided a while ago I was sick of picking up a photography magazine and reading "how to use HDR like a pro" in every single issue. I realised I wanted to just look at good photos, not read about technical camera crap. This was the point I started buying fashion and pop culture magazines. The level of photography in some of these is just unbelievable, and I get a lot more out of them than the run of the mill camera mag.
Online zines are really coming into things as well - for instance:
http://sokozine.com/
Download a copy of that (some nsfw as fashion can be sometimes) and as long as you're somewhat appreciative of fashion, there is always some awesome work in every issue.
The other thing is Japanese camera magazines. I can't read them, but they cover rangefinders, old SLRs, MF and heaps of film, and the pictures are always wonderful. I have one from my last trip to Tokyo and I still look at it once a month or so - it just doesn't get old. It's called something like "japan camera" or "asahi camera"
Maybe I'll put some pics up on this thread.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
ALL magazines, not just niche photo ones, have hit the skids. For years I used to purchase a dozen different ones per month, looking for inspiration, reading, maybe even clients... but a few years ago I just stopped. And when I feel guilty about not supporting print, I go to big shop like Barnes & Noble and thumb through several... and am left with no good reason to buy a single one.
They're dead to me.
They're too cheap and difficult to work for and even if you get stuff in one, fewer people are reading them (or expecting much) so the benefits of being published are declining too.
There is better photojournalism, fashion, and cool stuff in general on the internet.
They're dead to me.
They're too cheap and difficult to work for and even if you get stuff in one, fewer people are reading them (or expecting much) so the benefits of being published are declining too.
There is better photojournalism, fashion, and cool stuff in general on the internet.
Last edited:
gho
Well-known
I have never been tempted to buy a photo mag at the newsstand, and I even do not skim through them. I do not buy a new camera each week. To my eyes a lot of these mags are rather looking like advertising magazines.
This is not what I would expect from a photo magazine, but maybe I have not found the good ones yet. Less ads and gear, more pictures, photographers and essays is what I would be interested in.
This is not what I would expect from a photo magazine, but maybe I have not found the good ones yet. Less ads and gear, more pictures, photographers and essays is what I would be interested in.
maddoc
... likes film again.
In the past I have never bothered to buy any of these magazines but instead some books about photography. Recently, I buy the Japanese "Camera magazine" because it mainly covers photography and is not dedicated to digital imaging.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
Yep. I know the older I get, the more critical I get over movies, books, and magazines. Some younger folks think I'm only negative, but they seem to forget the 10% of things I've read or seen that I rave about...
That said, most of the photo mags I've read for years I find very mediocre these days.
I read them at the library or Borders these days, as I'd rather not waste my money on a subscription. That is sad for me to say, but I call them like I see them. (No, not naming names. Let's call them the "usual suspects")
Ken Smith
Why yes Ma'am - it folds
Welcome to reality. My other pastime is flyfishing - been doing it for about 35 years. Used to read the big flyfishing magazines from cover to cover and have had my subscriptions for about that long. I no longer let advertisers tell me what flyrod or reel to buy nor what materials to tie my flies with. My rods are flyfishing's version of rangefinders and folding cameras - bamboo and my reels are equally as old. Nothing like spending your days with timeless gear, whether a MF folding camera or bamboo flyrod from decades ago. It feeds the soul with satisfaction. No matter what your persuits are, do them long enough and you'll find that niche where you watch time pass by.
easyrider
Photo addict
Like others have posted, the older you get the more you feel that you have read the content before. I used to buy them all when I was a teenager and even later. Just recently I threw a box full of mags from the 1970s into the recycle bin.
I kept a selected few.
There is so much stuff online now that the mags are redundant.
I get more inspiration from fashion and travel mags than from trhe photo mags.
I kept a selected few.
There is so much stuff online now that the mags are redundant.
I get more inspiration from fashion and travel mags than from trhe photo mags.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Yes. Me, too.
mackigator
Well-known
dispatches appears to be in limbo - they mailed me before Christmas saying that they would not be filling my subscription and offering money back if I wanted it. And that they were going through a re-think.
The mag was fantastic though. Each issue contains a 50+ page photo essay.
The mag was fantastic though. Each issue contains a 50+ page photo essay.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I think Frank described the problem. There's "no production value" in today's journals. All magazines are now geared to using non-professional and unpaid writers who are enthusiasts and want to have a chance at a "carrot" of their name in print that the editor or publisher holds out to them.
Like Ken Smith noted regarding fly fishing, many writers and photographers are busy writing about 'must have' new equipment. This is what the magazines want to show advertisers. These amateur writers do this for free. The entire business model is one geared to 'shareholders/owners', advertisers and people buying goods and services, with no cash paid or outlay for writing and photography. There's no interest in writers who want to discuss current photographic styles or photographic issues of 'police vs photographers' in public areas. They have little interest in professional writers and photographers who want to be paid. Some regulars here at RFF can testify to this first hand.
So the magazines are hollow and have no production value because they are prepared by unpaid or underpaid staff. I know because I've friends who've been declined for failing to discuss equipment, locations, and technique. These writers wanted to describe some photographic styles. That brought an editors request to please rewrite and include brands, places and more "how to" plus places to stay and eat. He declined. He knew he wouldn't be published.
Because there are no paid writers or very few, these publishers are now harvesting "no revenue" because readers aren't interested in paying $12 for a magazine with amateur writing and a 75 percent commercial advertising content. What's right with this model? Nothing is right with it.
How do you fix it? Pay for good writers and photographers. Will it happen? I doubt it. Why? Because everyone has decided that quality is unimportant and cheap is what is best. This managerial credo is suffocating North America.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Jan,
This is not entirely true, though there is a good deal of truth in it.
First highlight: All the magazines I write for, obviously, pay their writers, though not well and not always quickly.
Second highlight: No. Getting kit for review ain't always easy, and the manufacturers sure as hell don't hand it out to unknown amateurs.
Third highlight: On the contrary, this is exactly what I am paid to do every week at Amateur Photographer (though on the third week of each month it's on the web site, not in the magazine). The on-site staff (I'm off-site freelance) also cover photographers' rights at some length.
For that matter, the Party Line at Shutterbug is that they are going to concentrate more on technique and less on equipment. My last two articles -- January and Febrary -- suggest that they are putting their money where their mouth is. January was about how to achieve a vintage look in your pictures (not really a basic beginners' article) and February was about creating a body of work.
Fourth highlight: Well, you have to give the magazines what they want, but I have to say, the closest I've come to what you describe is being asked to point out that you don't have to use the kit I use, i.e. they don't want one advertiser complaining that another is being favoured, and this doesn't happen very often.
The simple truth is that most articles which are rejected are those submitted by people who can take pictures but can't read and write OR by people who can read and write but can't take pictures. Then there are those doing 'me-too' articles or articles that are completely inappropriate to the magazine in question.
Fifth highlight: I can't see a price on the cover of Shutterbug but I'm pretty sure it's not $12. I do however know that it's $22.95 a year inside the US, or rather under $2 a copy. Amateur Photographer's cover price is £2.40, about $3.75, or £49.50 for six months. This is for a WEEKLY, remember: 26 copies at around £1.90 (call it $2.99) a copy.
Obviously you can't please all of the people, all of the time. In any magazine, there are bound to be articles that don't interest you personally, or me personally, or someone else personally. All you can hope for is enough stuff, of enough interest, to make it worth buying the magazine across the year -- which at $22.95 for a whole year doesn't seem a wild extravagance.
Don't get me wrong. There is a hell of a lot wrong with the magazine business, and I am normally one of the first to complain. But the picture is not quite as you paint it.
Cheers,
Roger
Philly
-
Roger Hicks;1259964 Third highlight: On the contrary said:
It's rather funny in a way. I follow your column in AP, your love for Leicas, your wife's sewing circle, your Landrover MkIII and all manner of things.
Most of the time I wonder what the heck you're going on about until the very end of the article where there is a hint of some relationship to photography.
IIRC I can't remember one occasion where you wrote about photos, images.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Well, that's the trick. Relating life to photography (including 'police versus photographers'). Writing about images in an 800-word unillustrated column is a bit pointless.
No, I don't write about photos in that column. Or at least, not often -- in fact, you do not recall correctly. But take a look at the last two Shutterbug articles.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Mohan
Established
I'm way to poor to be regularly buying the good magazines out there but this is my favorite;
http://www.foto8.com
http://www.foto8.com