Zach Matthews
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
John –
Your scenario is completely true if we posit that the author/photographer only visits a location a single time.
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
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.
Great post. Out of curiosity, how do you deal with the snakes? I assume many of them are attracted to the water? Do you wear snake gaiters, or is the density of them low enough that you rarely see any?
I will typically see 1-2 cottonmouths a year, usually while fishing in summer for warmwater species. In Arkansas, the cottonmouths infested the trout streams, too, so you had to be careful. A cottonmouth is the Southern United States’ most aggressive poisonous water snake. Unfortunately, they have a close mimic in the Eastern water snake, and few (including myself) can tell them apart at a distance/glance.
Cottonmouth (aka the Water Moccasin):
(So named for obvious reasons. This is the standard defensive posture, and this snake is ready to strike from that position).
Eastern Water Snake:
We also have rattlesnakes in the timber areas, but I have never encountered one. They are all hibernating by deer season.
Zach
P.J. –
Maybe you have just experienced what a lot of us have: when you were new, the magazines were full of new and exciting content because you lacked experience.
David –
If you are beginning, in all seriousness, the best line on the market for you is Scientific Anglers’ Mastery Headstart.
And I would also like to add that I think fly fishing editors really are interested in legitimate criticisms.
Keith I think that you’re right on the money. Again, though, we need to look around and do a head count. This board has 1,000 members. About 100 of you are “active.” That’s probably a pretty good analog to the proportion of “fly fishers” versus “active fly fishers” out there.
We have had polls before which can be pretty interesting about where you’d draw the line on calling someone a “fly fisher.” Is a “fly fisher” someone who fishes once a year? Once a month in season? Thirty days a year? When you think about it, thirty days a year is a ton – most weekends, in other words, and all of them in season.
Say there are 10,000 “active fly fishers” in the country. The number may be greater than that, but probably not much. There might be 100,000 people who fly fish often enough to call themselves fly fishermen. Those folks are buying magazines, though, because a lot of them really wish they could get out more. And, in fact, most fly fishing magazine circulations have historically topped out around 100,000.
If 100,000 give or take is the maximum number of subscriptions you can sell, but only 10% of your audience is dedicated enough to support a “Wall Street Journal” level of fly fishing, which group would you target? I’d argue that Tom Bie at The Drake is targeting that “Wall Street Journal” crowd, if not in social terms, then at least in terms of numbers days on the water per year. His readership is similar to the readership of this board (and I bet a bunch of you get the Drake, as I do). And Gray’s Sporting Journal is targeting the Wall Street Journal crowd from an education/social perspective (though I bet Gray’s readers have far fewer days on the water/year than Drake readers). The trouble is there’s only really room for one magazine that targets that “advanced” demographic. Manufacturers have a limited budget to buy ads with, after all, and the subscription sales won’t cover the costs.
Fly Fishing in Saltwaters magazine recently won out in its long battle with Saltwater Fly Fishing magazine. Both of them also fight over about 10% of the market. The difference between FFiSW and SWF magazines versus The Drake and Gray’s is that the first set fought over the exact same 10%, where The Drake and Gray’s only partially cannibalize each other’s sales.