UK Film photography magazines

I've made a few Blurb books and they can be nice. Magcloud is working on the same idea in that people buy it directly from the site, the difference is that propitiatory software is replaced with standard desktop publishing software.

My thoughts here have been about trying to overcome the problems with producing a 'proper' published magazine, there just isn't a big enough market. On-demand gets round this. Obviously the quality is lower than a well printed magazine (not to mention a quality photo book), but what's the other option: a computer screen?

hoffy said:

Tis OK! I just wanted to know if I was missing something!

Anyhow, back to your post up a few spots. I agree, it would be good to have a photographic only magazine, but I also agree about the issues with circulation. The other problem is that inevitably, a Film mag will probably turn into a Lomo mag...

Click to expand...

I doubt if Lomo users read photographic magazines, if indeed at all.

Have a look at all the photo mags that are in print, and you'll see that they are usually printed on high quality paper, in full colour.

I regularly purchased the Photo Trader when I lived in AU - dedicated to everything photographic, but it was on cheap stock and cost about $3.50/issue (5 issues a year I think from memory).

If you want to get into producing a "photography" magazine that showcases photography, you'd need to have good quality printing (along with items of interest) or people just won't buy it. And of course quality costs.

The mag I mentioned previously was printed every quarter I think, but looks like it has disappeared - obviously costs, items of interest etc outweighed the number of people willing to support it.

I'm all for purchasing a good magazine, but it needs to hold my interest to keep me coming back. No matter how well printed it is, if it doesn't have interesting content, people just aren't going to purchase the next issue or worse, subscribe and that will ultimately mean its demise.

hoffy said:

Just taking this slightly off topic, I was looking at the Melbourne Camera Club Website last night and was keen to see that you still have a thriving darkroom group, well that was the impression I got from the website. Is this so?

Also keen to note that the Darkroom hire is $5 for 12 hours.... (unless I miss read it!)

Click to expand...

Personally I have never hired the darkroom so I guess the web site is correct ? I do participate in the Traditional Darkroom Printmakers Group & have used our fantastic darkroom. For group work. We have a strong core of traditional photographers & digital. But our comp nights have far more digital representation. Which makes our judges make mistakes when they stumble upon a traditional print. Personally my work is still not up to what I feel is quality work with a film camera & printing. I don't bother entering my digital work as it makes me feel like I have cheated.

Anyone in Melbourne is always welcome to come & visit the MCC. Last week we had a couple of lads from Switzerland who have traveled all over the globe with there film cameras. They were printing up some of there pic's of Oz land in the MCC darkroom.

Back to topic price of a good traditional photography magazine is not important. When I finish having a read I pass my copies around to other club members. So there value gets well used. I prefer UK publications, somewhere in the late 80's the USA mags lost there penmanship. When I was buying UK Digital Photography it was actually cheaper to get at the newsagents. Except my copy was like 2 or 3 months out of date.

ozphoto said:

I'm all for purchasing a good magazine, but it needs to hold my interest to keep me coming back. No matter how well printed it is, if it doesn't have interesting content, people just aren't going to purchase the next issue or worse, subscribe and that will ultimately mean its demise.

Click to expand...

I think the benefit of an APUG magazine would be that it is genuinely collaborative. Presumably we could all have a stake in it as we've all had the chance to have input in various ways. As I see it, if a magazine slowly took form through public discussions here, this would generate interest. If it didn't work, then so be it, as it would be on-demand, no financial penalties would be incurred. In fact, the idea of on-demand rather sweeps away the obsession with print runs, we do it for ourselves, we have the freedom to offer in put and the freedom to buy it or not.

Just remember APUG has a range of followers. So often threads here talk right over me & I need the dummies guide to the dummies guide to translate. That is why I have really been enjoying old 1940's photography books. They talk in simple terms guess people were simpler back then ?

The other option is to supply it in PDF form - then there's no need for anyone to outlay printing costs unless they absolutely want to.

All it would take is time and effort - but from past experiences, time is the easy part - it's the participation and commitment from others that can put a spanner in the works.

Unlike a magazine such as B+W (where you are paid to contribute or on staff) a totally volunteer basis magazine often gets stuck due to the lack of volunteering for articles, etc. Time gets away from us, other things in our lives take priority and the once fantastic vision suddenly fades.

I think that is what happened to the magazine put together by one of the other APUG members, but I could be wrong.

Actually, the mag I was referring to IS alive and well:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Kudos to Christopher for keeping his dream alive!!

ozphoto said:

All it would take is time and effort - but from past experiences, time is the easy part - it's the participation and commitment from others that can put a spanner in the works.

Click to expand...

This is indeed the crux. That's why I thought of an art magazine focusing upon images, not technical guides. Many people upload images to APUG galleries, there's also the portfolio section and a thriving postcard exchange. Seems to me that people want to get their photos seen.

ozphoto said:

Actually, the mag I was referring to IS alive and well:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Kudos to Christopher for keeping his dream alive!!

Click to expand...

Cheers nice magazine & it is on the trail you are all talking about for an APUG mag. The more experienced MCC folks will enjoy this when I inform them.

For myself looks like UK B&W will have to fill the spot.

hoffy said:

Yes, the equipment reviews that they tend to do tends to be digital (I wonder if that has anything to do with the lack of new Film equipment).

Click to expand...

That is one of the things that really disappoints me with the mag, they will happily do a bland 'test" of a new digi cam two months after everyone else has pixel-peeped it to destruction, telling us nothing new but not a peep about new gear that can be used either digitally or analogue e.g. new Nokton 50mm F1.1 for M mount, new Voigtlander SL 90mm for F, K and EF mount (not mentioning the 58mm, 40mm and 20mm all new in the last few years), exotica such as the Linhof Techno 5x4 that can do digi and analogue.

Ok they are not "mass-market" products but others do the mass-market faster, in more depth and perhaps better. A viable reputation can be built on being the "go-to" place for info on less well known but good products.

Anyone remember their article about Trevor Crones' ABS 10"x8" field camera?

Sim2.

ozphoto said:

I too would love to see more film based photography magazines on the market, but to be fair, magazines are in the business to make money. And (unfortunately) the money is being made in digital photography magazines.

Click to expand...

How come everything these days automatically has to be about making money? It is true that most mags are in the business to make money, but some are run by people who just have a great passion for a subject. (I don't imagine Chris W is making a fortune out of starting up CIM.) We all need money but, although it is no longer fashionable, sometimes it is possible to care for free!

I would have said that the best magazines, the ones most worthy of our support, are out there primarily to be informative, interesting and inspiring.

Ian

The small "passionate" market is just that - small. I have subscribed to a few of these mags over the years, but with rising costs of subscriptions and the content not capturing my imagination, I've let them slide.

That's not to say they aren't great magazines, but for me, the cost vs content of interest just wasn't there.

Maybe I'm one of the minority, but I like a good variety of articles in my mags (regardless of the subject) and when I find that them starting to wander away from my particular interests, I let them fall by the wayside. (I have always let the subscription finish - never cancelled mid way.)

Mainstream mags have the edge in that they have the staff on hand to cover a multitude of topics - the more "niche" magazines don't and I have found that the content can sometimes be too narrow in subject matter or just not of interest to me at all.

I subscribed to Silverprint for 3 years, but cancelled when the cost went to $20 an issue and the content just began to showcase photographer's work with very little else to fill it.

As I said earlier, I like a good mix in my magazines - regardless of whether you are a "niche" or mainstream photo mag, if you cover these areas well for my tastes, I'll be more than happy to support you.

But for now, I haven't yet found a "Passionate Photo Magazine" that fills my requirements. At this stage, it's the mags in the business of making money that are getting my $$ - good or bad, the "Big Business" model is winning - hopefully I will see a "Niche" mag take over my subscription $$ soon.