xixi_gelly
Member
Like in many fields, there's one big name institution that attracts both outsized worship and criticism in photography and that would have to be Magnum.
Some may pooh-pooh it as struggling or, worse yet, increasingly irrelevant in today's changing media environment but to me, it represents a shining history and a commitment to all kinds of photographic excellence - spanning journalism to art - that I hope endures for a long, long time.
So I'm curious about the cooperative: I know the climate for editorial work is awful but how are its photographers faring right now? How is the agency as a whole doing? What are the commitments that photographers have to make in terms of paying dues? Does the agency share profits in a partnership structure? How does it compete against Getty, VII, Panos, Noor, Vu, etc?
And why do members sometimes leave?
Would appreciate whatever thoughts and knowledge you have on this institution, warts and all. First hand experience particularly welcome
Some may pooh-pooh it as struggling or, worse yet, increasingly irrelevant in today's changing media environment but to me, it represents a shining history and a commitment to all kinds of photographic excellence - spanning journalism to art - that I hope endures for a long, long time.
So I'm curious about the cooperative: I know the climate for editorial work is awful but how are its photographers faring right now? How is the agency as a whole doing? What are the commitments that photographers have to make in terms of paying dues? Does the agency share profits in a partnership structure? How does it compete against Getty, VII, Panos, Noor, Vu, etc?
And why do members sometimes leave?
Would appreciate whatever thoughts and knowledge you have on this institution, warts and all. First hand experience particularly welcome
ian_watts
Ian Watts
I doubt anyone here is privy to the financial health of the cooperative but Magnum's diversification into workshops and online print sales (and running them more frequently than might otherwise seem decent) suggests that, like many other agencies, it is feeling the pinch a little from the race to the bottom in the wider media world and I guess it might struggle if it relied only on its income from licensing photographic images. I suspect that the cooperative nature of the organisation helps with the bigger, more commercially successful members like Martin Parr essentially subsidising the work of the the lower profile or less commercially orientated members. Magnum still has a very strong "brand" which they seem to have leveraged (sorry for the ugly business jargon) in tie-ups with Leica and various news outlets so it seems to be sensibly managed. Which is good because Magnum is still an important organisation and IMO a benchmark in the editorial and reportage world and I'd certainly be sorry to see it wither and/or go under.