|
Francisco Castro wrote: Dan Howell wrote: Once in awhile I come across one or two of those print on demand 'magazines' with a bar code on them.
Nov 16 21 06:05 pm Link Is anyone willing to name the magazines? I have no clue what you all are talking about, but I do wonder if some of the mailing lists I'm on count as these kind of publications (they are mailing lists for print editions) Nov 16 21 07:12 pm Link C.C. Holdings wrote: You can find many of them on the printers websites:
Nov 16 21 09:14 pm Link C.C. Holdings wrote: Nov 25 21 11:33 am Link SayCheeZ! wrote: ahhhh, thanks, yes different than what I was worried about
Nov 26 21 09:34 am Link Noah Russell wrote: I just found out that one of photos from this shoot will be used as an advertisement for Style Craze Magazine https://www.stylecraze.com/ and will be on the digital billboard above Forever 21 boutique in New York around Dec 11 2021. It will make a great backdrop for a photo of a rat eating pizza or a cigarette smoking cockroach. Dec 05 21 07:39 pm Link The term "published" has been a joke for many years now. When I see someone claiming it, it's usually a newb. Dec 07 21 11:15 am Link Nogawd Photography wrote: That cliche phrase is overused as much as "Award Winning Photographer".
Dec 09 21 10:33 am Link I know a locate "model" who's only every shot with her amateur photographer boyfriend. And she goes around telling people she is "published" because their images were used in some cheesy car wash calendar. The word publish means absolutely nothing these days. Dec 09 21 05:40 pm Link Select Model Studios wrote: The same can be said about 'experienced' and 'professional'. I still choose to use those words and published in my bio because it is true and there aren't better words to describe the results from 20+ years of working.
Dec 10 21 04:04 am Link Has the insightful Dan Howell vacated the premises? Nov 30 22 07:03 am Link Jefferson Cole wrote: I hope not. I find his contributions to be interesting and helpful. Nov 30 22 07:35 am Link It's nothing special. Haha... it's like winning a trophy when you are playing tee ball in kindergarten. Everyone has been published by these online zines. Dec 01 22 07:12 pm Link Actually it is just another form of scam, in my view. Everywhere you turn, there are scammers of one type or another.
I have mused over whether there is anything genuine, about this site, as I have yet to even get a reply from a model I send an inquiry to. Realize that you can't even make contact, without paying a fee, so there is no such thing, as a "free" page. Rick Sep 08 23 03:45 pm Link Lallure Photographic wrote: Are you checking to see when they last logged in?? Sep 09 23 12:41 am Link Surely the important thing is the quality of the photography rather than the commercial basis on which it is published. Bob Guccione started Penthouse magazine by himself, featuring his own photography. Vanity or good business? Oct 13 23 04:22 am Link I have appeared in 4 online POD magazines and honestly are in them for one main reason and that is they put my social media links in them. I find that as the people who have the magazine have already bought at least one magazine they are a good market to buy books. I must admit it doesn't increase sales much but more than the cost of a magazine so what the hell.
There is one other reason it keeps my dying mother happy: I show her the magazine and it makes her happier. I suppose that is a fairly good reason for sending in an email to them: already have pictures. The thing is though the fact is there does not necessarily have to be an equivalent of the magazines of the past because the present works very differently. The next best equivalent would be a facebook group that was very popular: maybe: or a webpage that was popular. There is a webpage that specifically specialised in art nudes of large people: the founder was featured in Volup2 magazine an online english/french magazine. Its not a print on demand problem its a marketing problem. Those that crack the marketing will make decent money and those that don't wont. A solution may be to specialise in a geographic area so that people in that area may be more inclined to stock it. Oct 13 23 05:52 am Link SayCheeZ! wrote: Francisco Castro wrote: Dan Howell wrote: The thing is some specialised magazines don't put barcodes on because they don't want the public buying them anyway. Such as magic magazines for magicians they don't have barcodes because unless you are a magician you aren't supposed to be able to buy them because you would know how all their effects: tricks: are done. Oct 13 23 06:08 am Link amandawebster wrote: Why would I care?
amandawebster wrote: Yes
amandawebster wrote: No
Oct 13 23 07:38 am Link This late in the game POD vanity press might be kind of fun. Lost count of publications years ago. The first was a thrill for a 17 year old in high school. The Army stuck a crown graphic press in my hands and said you are now a photo journalist. Pick out my assignments and copy man and go to work. When you hold a camera in the military, you out rake everybody:-).
The only feature artical I ever sold was in a model rail road mag. It wasn't as much the publication as it was the peer review I valued. :-) Still involved with model railroad to this day. Vanity press, sure why not. Just don't expect to impress anybody with it. It's just for fun, like a lotto ticket. :-) I'll sink back into the wood work now. Oct 13 23 09:32 am Link JSouthworth wrote: The difference is Penthouse was distributed to various retailers and sold to the public. It was a real publication in the truest definition. Penthouse also had REAL advertisements in it, many of the fake vanity press publications will illegally copy real advertisements and put them in their fake magazine to make the fake magazine appear legitimate.
Oct 13 23 10:12 am Link You could make a POD that was real and had real readers but seems more likely outside of fashion/modelling. I dare say someone could form a magazine for a club online and get sales. Its a marketing problem. But i admit the plan is to get people to buy the magazine they are in. One person is good at this because instead of publishing one magazine every month they publish many of 2 issues a year so the same people can appear and are doing so in different magazines making it easier to fill up. I think POD is ideal for clubs because instead of in the past running off copies on a printer they can POD and have them available to buy print copies: I personally would give away the emagazine versions and use it as a way to raise money for the club which would be put back in again. If you raised enough you could put on a convention for members without charging anything. Oct 13 23 10:56 am Link SayCheeZ! wrote: Penthouse still exists and they have a special offer right now, you can download every online issue from 2006 to present for $39.00.
Oct 15 23 04:35 am Link Al_Vee Photography wrote: Generously well said.
Oct 17 23 09:25 am Link My big issue with the fake magazines/magcloud mags is that everyone who gets in them jumps up and down and gets all excited because they have been "published" which is basically nothing more than a participation trophy. Pretty much 100% of everything submitted to those things makes it in. The cover photos are rarely of any quality and are usually placed there because the owner of the rag owes the model a favor or he/she shot the photo themselves. Also factor in the fact that 95% of the income from these "magazines" are from the people who submit content to them, or their close friends and family. There are a few very rare exceptions to this, but not many.
As someone who has actually been published several times in legitimate, mainstream publications I can tell you that the process is not an easy one. Your photos get scrutinized by an editor or editorial board, for example, so there is a rigorous screening process of what makes it in to the publication based on a set of standards they maintain. Any copy you provide is reviewed by an editor as well. So when you finally do get published, it's an actual accomplishment, and you know your work is being seen by people who actually want to pay to see it. I remember years ago when I first heard of these magcloud "magazines". Someone who made one asked if they could use one of my photos in it. I sent him the licensing fees for the photo and asked if I could get a few copies when it ran as I didn't know of any local bookstores that carried it. He said he didn't have the budget to pay me, asked if I could submit the photo for him to use for free, and then sent me a link on where I could spend $25 to order a copy once it ran. I not-so-politely told him to go fuck himself. Oct 18 23 09:32 am Link Shot By Adam wrote: I'm a member of a local FB Model/Photography group or two and I find it so odd that when some low or no talent hack puts an ad up for TFP models to be 'published' in some 'non-existent but lets pretend it's a real" magazine, the 'models' come out of the woodwork and reply "interested". I notice that it's usually the same set of 'wannabees" that respond to those ads every time.
Oct 18 23 10:27 am Link I am shocked was on a facebook group and sent to a models page and slicked on purple port. I looked at her publications and checked one: thought I may apply: honestly though it was POD and not great but thought it would let me put social media links which would help sell more books. Its was worse than that they had optional charges of $399 and others to guarantee getting into the magazine. Buying a copy of your own magazine is one thing but this is scandalous. It does mean some of these magazines are making a fortune by charging people money for the front cover etc. The magazine was called Malvie. Oct 18 23 12:22 pm Link Shot By Adam wrote: It's almost like you are saying that printed magazines never published a shitty photograph. That was never true. I have legitimately had shitty photographs published in both Vogue and National Geographic. Not the fault of either magazine, purely mine. Both of which I cringe thinking about. Additionally there was always a hierarchy to the value and stature conveyed by different magazines and different levels of publication. The 'rigorous screening process' was not about absolute quality of photography. It was about how well the images fit into the mission of the publication. Possibly those to things were harmonious, but it is just flat wrong to make a blanket statement like yours.
Oct 19 23 05:38 am Link SayCheeZ! wrote: I've seen this a zillion times too.
When I post a REAL, LEGITIMATE gig (usually a paid one), I hear crickets because I don't guarantee or pretend it will be published, even in a fake magazine. I guess I gotta change my method.... then again I wouldn't want to do a shoot with any of those 'wannabees' that I mentioned in the first place. Yes and yes. Oct 19 23 08:31 am Link Dan Howell wrote: You're obviously missing the point.
I have legitimately had shitty photographs published in both Vogue and National Geographic. I'm very happy for you.
but it is just flat wrong to make a blanket statement like yours. Wrong. There are always exceptions to everything but as a general rule I'm spot on.
and I'll put my publication history up to yours any day. I wasn't aware this was a pissing contest. Again, very happy for you. I'm sure you're the most published photographer in history. Where do you want me to mail you your cookie?
What your response also suggests that there are never any rejections in vanity or POD publications You're reading into this way more than you should. I'm not suggesting that there are never any rejections, but as a general rule, I know that most of these POD mags take a lot more in than they reject.
Are there lower standards, sure. But until you have a track record or getting 100% acceptance rate in a publication like Boudoir Inspirations (hint: they reject more submissions than they accept), you might want to refrain from making absolute emphatic statements about POD. Just like in the good old days of print, there are different levels of digital magazines which greatly differing levels of readership and quality. LOL...OK. Sure.
(disclaimer: I am actively considering publishing a niche interest POD. Some might say that colors my impression of the value of POD or vanity publishing, but I would say my impression of the value of POD has colored my interest in making a publication myself.) I highly encourage you to do this. I'm sure you'll make millions off of it. If anything, your ego will be a zillionaire. Oct 19 23 08:39 am Link Shot By Adam wrote: Your response is absolutely everything I expected from you. Congrats for your consistency. Oct 19 23 03:31 pm Link C.C. Holdings wrote: I cant say I am familiar with the previous examples.
Oct 19 23 11:42 pm Link We live in the digital age; Its incredibly easy to promote oneself today, and that's a GREAT thing. Artists can singlehandly go from conception to publication by themselves! Jan 16 24 01:36 pm Link No I was not aware of that, but yes, that is a form of scam. Mar 08 25 09:45 am Link "Are you checking to see when they last logged in??"
No. If they aren't responding, they are not actively seeking work. If they aren't actually seeking work, then they aren't interested. Models have always been, on/off, and today will be interested, and tomorrow not, unless with a valid agency, doing advertising or catalog work. Sorry, but that is the actual fact. I move on, because I have no OTHER way to contact them, if they don't respond here. It is still all about what they want to do, vs ,what they can find work doing. Since I only want to work with locals, I can use more than once, and I am no longer in a market where modeling is actually a profession, I know finding models is going to be a lot harder, than before, so it isn't a priority for me, to continue to work with models. I just have always been a people photographer, more than a product photographer, so I thought I would try here. It has been pretty much a failure. I have been doing this long enough to know, when it is NOT going to work. There are no suitable models with any real experience, in my market area, on this site, at least not currently. Whether there ever were, I cannot say. I am retired, so it doesn't really matter, I just thought I might do some creative shoots, to stay involved, but it probably isn't worth going to any great effort, to find models. There are other things to do. This market is pretty much dead, it would appear, where I retired. Mar 31 25 06:28 am Link Lallure Photographic wrote: Aware of what? Mar 31 25 09:04 am Link The majority of books (about two thirds) and nearly all magazines are either written and produced by the same company that publishes them or commissioned by the same company, that is to say written to order.
The bar code on a book or magazine is the ISBN (International Standard Book Number). Each publication should have a unique ISBN, different editions of the same book should have different ISBNs to enable book retailers to distinguish them from each other. ISBNs are generated by the International ISBN Agency and then sold to publishers and individuals by affiliate companies, either singly or in blocks. Blurb Books will assign you an ISBN when you order a book from them and this will appear as a bar code on the back of the dust jacket, or if you prefer you can use your own ISBN. Fundamentally, a printed book or magazine is a physical object with a cover and a certain number of pages so it is pretty much a level playing field. May 31 25 03:22 am Link JSouthworth wrote: You seem pretty sure of that. What is a qualified reference we can check to back up your supposition.
Jun 16 25 07:43 am Link The major publishers like to plan their releases about five years ahead, which obviously means that they can't simply rely on other people co-incidentally producing the books which they want to publish at the right time. They have to assume the primary responsibility for producing and developing the products, whether "in house" or in co-operation with people outside the company. Jun 16 25 09:11 am Link JSouthworth wrote: You are so far up your own delusion that you probably actually believe that. While book publishing lead time is slow compared to magazines, it is nothing like you describe. I have recently been involved in now five books published by US and UK publishers. In each, the time span was about 24 months from initial editorial meeting to release date. In all but one I've been involved with the concept came completely independently from the author I collaborate with and were published by 3 different world leading publishers. Of the 7 books he has authored, 5 came from his own initiative and the other two were offered him because of his expertise.
Jun 16 25 11:48 am Link |
