Which would you rather read? (FF magazine rant)
- This topic has 76 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated Nov 3, 2008 at 5:11 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
The main reason I don’t subscribe to FF mags is that they are not interactive. I far prefer a bulletin board where you can start topics, comment on topics, or just sit back and listen to discussions. I participate an 3 or 4 BB’s on flyfishing sites and I just love them. There is more information and opinions available than you can ever possibly digest. And if you like to write, many of these sites will publish your stuff in one way or another. Of course, you can’t make money or get famous this way, but that is not on my menu anyway.
My $.02
Godspeed all and good fishing,
Bob
This is a favourite subject of mine.
What magazines need to consider is how to hold the experienced angler/readers, those who have gone through the beginner cycle and just can’t stand to see (or write) another piece on basics. Its like a conveyor belt, the climb on one end, go through the process and unfortunately drop off the other end and/or move on to other publications.
Problem with the internet is it doesn’t pay and if you want good writing and good pics you need to pay money to the guys who are prepared to put well researched and photographed stories together.
Morsie
Morsie – I’m curious if you have thoughts on how what are talking about can be acheived- I alluded in my own rambing way
Morsie,
hmm, well researched and well photographed.
I would agree with you except I have never seen same in any mag I read. Most of the articles are “look where I fished,” “buy this gimmick,” or ” this is my opinion on that.” Much of the stuff was just plain wrong. Now I am sure there are some magazines that are the exception. It’s just that I lost patience looking and that would be my fault.
Now books, there’s another story. There are literally tons of good books out there. And I do have a lot of them.
Again, Godspeed and good fishing,
Bob
Bob –
Again, and I’m beginning to feel like I need to make a permanent disclaimer on the top of this board, but I’m going to have to ask you for specifics.
Zach,
Of course you are right. There are very talented authors writing for good publications and many of them frequent this site. It is right that they should be sensitive as to their own quality and it is wrong for me to criticize a group indiscriminately. Even though the tread is entitled a “rant,” it is unfair to good writers to lump them in with the “not as good.” I refuse to call any writing “bad” because if someone is willing to take the time to write it down, it is worthy of consideration. Only if it is blatantly wrong would I consider it bad.
But thank you for making my point. Where could I have ever gotten such instant feedback on the written word as my last post just elicited. Certainly not in a magazine. You should take it as a compliment that you provide a service that enables such instant response.
As to specific examples, I just cancelled my subscription to “Sporting Classics” because I wasn’t getting enough out of it. I do like Mike Gaddis and his prose although it is sometimes difficult to wade through. I honestly can’t remember well enough to cite specific examples of bad magazines but I would be willing to try. I “ghost” write technical engineering manuals for a major automotive manufacturing corporation. In that capacity, I have to rewrite much of what I do to get the facts right and to get the prose into the personal style of the editors. So I am not sensitive about my words. I couldn’t do what I do if I was. If you would like me to, I could read over the next few issues, a magazine of your choice, and compare it to one of my choice and comment on them. I would prefer to do it off line so as not to discourage anyone.
Thank you for your response, and again, my apologies if I offended someone with my generalized “rant.” I was out of line. And, at the end of the day, it was just one person’s opinion.
Godspeed and good fishing,
Bob
Will I think you completely missed the point.
Right now articles drive the car. While I’m sure there are subtle differences market by market I’d be very surprised to discover anything different. Writers submit queries or manuscripts, that get accepted or not.
Of coarse I “separate” what I’m doing, not sure what you mean by that
My advice.
Go buy half a dozen magazines. A fly fishing mag, Maybe Outdoor Canada, field/stream…whatever. But rather study the pictures. Note how many are supplied by the writers, come from in house stock (Freelance photographers), and come from stock agencies. In the cases where the writers supply the imagery form an opinion on how good it is or isn’t on technical merits..Read the guidlines for submitting to Grays or Field and Stream. They run 6 months in advance.The few Im dealing currently are closer to a year in advance. Meaning they are already laying out next summer and falls issues..Images for those articles would have been shot this summer/fall.
So any problems say with some of the Upland Hunting images Ive shown here?
Lets pretend I want to submit those somewhere.
Well first off I should submit to One magazine or did you forget that?
Lets assume they (whoever they are like them).Next up seasonal..Ok, those images are obviously taken in fall. Now maybe they are planning a pheasant hunt article next year…Is it a Fall (October) or winter (December) hunting article, not the issue they “hunt” is it hunting for Pheasant in the fall or when theres snow on the ground? If its a winter article it doesnt matter a whit, how good my images are. they wont get used. Period.
Thats assuming they are planning a Pheasant Hunting article to begin with. If not those images which theyve kept on file indefinately are to large degree in limbo due to FSNARs.
Now thats over simplfied a bit but I hope is a little clearer.
Assingments are another creature altogether.
So pay a photgrapher 500.00 to $1,000 to go on a shoot where as I noted anything from the weather to the fish or game can impact the quality of return. Meaning you get very little of what your hoping for when everyones operating on tight budgets?
Or pay a writer the same to generate the article thats missing for the images you have on hand?
*******In one case you have a well written article you want to run next year but not the images you’d like. You can spend hours searching your in house libraries from freelancers, conducting “Photo Calls”, paying stock agencies like Windigo, the Green Agency etc. Remember every nuance has to fit. Seasons, weather, location, even the lures/flies if thats the case..Meaning if the articles “mousing for Browns in Sept.”
Well guess what, you need Sept colours (in the fish as well), with Mice patterns (not streamers) etc. etc.etcIf all else fails you can pay a photogrpaher for an “assignment” and you payno matter what. Meaning if the articles for Musky on the Fly or a Bear hunt and the weather is crap, or the Musky Bears dont co-operate. You still dont have the images you’d really like to run with the article.
if in the end you still dont have want you really want do you settle for “less”..meaning images that might have exposure problems? Put the article on hold? Ouch…..deadlines, budgets et al…
Any idea what images cost when you have to source them? Well depending on the publication hundreds, per image, depending on size and Im not talking covers or full page. That can put a real big dent in your budget mightn’t it? Especially if you want to run a handfull of images for the article.
On the other hand you have images that can easily be the meat of a good article, what you dont have is said article. However, currently, articles drive the car
Call me wrong but I think theres room for both……or should be
John –
You’re dealing with slightly higher levels of the outdoor press than the fly fishing industry, but generally speaking, fly fishing magazines prefer to have the author turn in the photos with the copy and for both to be good enough to run. One of the reasons you see a lot of the same names in fly fishing magazines is that there’s a limited number of people out there who are (a) decent writers (b) decent photographers and (c) willing to do both more or less for love, since the pay is insufficient to make a full-time living. Fly fishing magazines have the luxury of tons of people wanting to be published, so naturally out of hundreds of potential applicants, a few are going to be qualified in all respects.
If you were editing a turkey hunting magazine, maybe there wouldn’t be so many qualified, literate people trying to submit (especially on the writing side), and you’d be forced to use stock or assignment photographers to match what your handful of writers could turn out. Ironically, that would probably lead to better photo support overall. But, with the rise of digital photography, there’s less and less difference between the output of a qualified pro and the output of a decent amateur, especially if you only have room to run maybe 4 pictures in the entire article. I would argue that anyone can produce acceptable images a few times in an outing, and the main difference between a pro and a skilled amateur is the number of quality photos you get out of a pro.
Thus, yes, the article drives the bus, not the photography. I’m afraid photographers are a dime a dozen compared to qualified writers (speaking as someone who has edited a section of a magazine for the last three years).
Zach
I agree completely Zach and it makes all the sense in the world and its pretty common.
One thing I’m noting though is that alot of magazines still use or require images that aren’t supplied by the authors. Maybe its that one or two images to go with, whatever..A scan though any number of magazines (photo credits) and you’ll find a good number of images that are Freelance or from Stock agencies.
Obviously the best case scenario is a writer willing to do both and do both well. Even this though requires some sacrifice depending on the subject matter. Again overly simplified but it’s not easy to do both well.
Meaning (greatly over simplified) you cant very well shoot ducks, and call ducks and take pictures of your self at the same time.Trophy Bucks?
Ask a writer which hed rather do any given Saturday morning.Carry 30 pounds of camera gear into the bush to “photograph” them and himself…..or his muzzleloader, rifle, bow…
Most unvisersally wil perfer to actually “hunt” the Buck, rather than photograph it. If oyu get busted trying to photograph the Buck, you might not get another shot at it, that fall.
Trust me somewhere down the road possibly a 2 to 5 years from now I’m toying with the idea of going back to school and take some writing coarses.
;D/edit
I just wanted to add and it’s line with what DA originally said and “topical” to the degree that we’re discussing why are magazines losing people, finding it hard(er) to survive and his point that perhaps the “imagery” going along with various types of articles should be as important.The one Fly Fishing magazine I still buy is ” Fly Fusion” out of Canada.
Why?I love their photogrpahy in large part.
John –
Your scenario is completely true if we posit that the author/photographer only visits a location a single time.
Ah jeez Will. I just meant I think you missed you point 🙂
One reason (but certainly not the only) why I’m not a writer..Conveying thoughts to paper don’t come easily to me.I have done alot of research on it. One reason is I’m trying to identify magazines that can use my images to make the most of my time and efforts. It takes alot of time and effort to produce certain images..You just don’t walk into a field and get a buck every day, or a great Brown…whatever.
Ive also come to the conclusion that if I’d like to see certain images get used, I need to determine which magazines (of those I want to try and contribute to) haven’t run an article ABC recently.
So that the images in question end up in the hands of a magazine that give me the best chance of seeing them used, rather than sitting in someones library indefinately..waiting for an article (thats needs a good image or two)
Just got through hoofing through this thread…interesting discussion…for my two cents, I get a number of the magazines and pretty much enjoy them all…it is a diversion from the work a day world and the news and I don’t take any of it too seriously. For a C-note, I get lots of enjoyment and if nothing else, something to read in “my office” at home.
Shameless plug – I alwasy enjoy Zach’s columns in AA…
When not fishing, I live vicariously through the rags…
Kevin
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.