Do you purchase any photography magazines?

[Bear Dale]

Do you purchase or subscribe to any photography magazines?

[ameerat42]

No. -- But I used to regularly buy them about 25 yrs ago.
(Though now I still subscribe to APC magazine.)

[Gazza]

'The Picture Magazine'...does that count

[Geoff79]

'The Picture Magazine'...does that count

Lol.

I’ve only bought less than five in my lifetime, around holidays, but I scored a few from a doctor’s waiting room when they were getting rid of a bunch of old magazines and I expressed interest in the photography ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bear Dale]

Lol.

I’ve only bought less than five in my lifetime, around holidays, but I scored a few from a doctor’s waiting room when they were getting rid of a bunch of old magazines and I expressed interest in the photography ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you Glen 20 them

[jim]

Used to subscribe to Outdoor Photographer, but I let it lapse after Galen Rowell died.

[Tannin]

What exactly do you mean by "a photography magazine?"

(runs and hides)


________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ahem. I'd better start again.

That's a sign of the times isn't it. Crikey, I almost replied "what is a photography magazine?" in the other sense - i.e., in the same way that one says "what is a fax machine?" or "what is a slide rule".

Decades ago, I used to consume magazines on a daily basis, mostly on other subjects: aeroplanes, rock climbing, cars, computing, wildlife, current affairs, science, electronics, you name it. I've had more different interest over the years than roast dinners. Back then, most people used to read at least two or three magazines every week, even if it was only Post or The Bulletin. And at least one, often two, and not unusually three printed newspapers every day. These days, the only magazines I see regularly are Royalauto (for as long as it takes to strip the plastic envelope off and drop the remainder in the recycle bin), a vegetable seed catalogue every second month (which I either pore over in loving detail or ignore, depending largely on the season), the Birds Australia magazine, and Emu (which is actually a scientific journal but might almost count as a magazine of sorts).

Once in a while I pick up one of the science magazines my parents subscribe to and decide to send off a subscription 'coz they are interesting. But I always forget.

Oh, and there are the women's magazines which one reads in the fish shop or the pizza place. These never fail to amaze me, but not in a good way. I mean, at least men's magazines are actually about something (cars or woodworking or golf or some such), but women's magazines are entirely pointless all the way through from front cover to back, and contain more appalling sexism and shameless gender role conditioning per kilogram than a porn movie or a Trump tweet. After I have made two complete laps of the fish shop, reading every ad and every poster twice, there is nothing else left except the women's magazines, which never fail to appall me and depress me about the shape of the world. Honestly, they are worse than commercial daytime television.

</rant>

I don't think I'm unusual. Very few people seem to read magazines much these days. It's a dying institution. The long-established behemoth of the Australian magazine publishing industry, Consolidated Press, which had something like 70% of the market, is now just a minor sub-division of a company called PMP, which survives by printing supermarket catalogues. PMP traded for $1.55 ten years ago. By 2012 it was worth 12 cents a share. It would be very interesting to see an age-breakdown of magazine readers: I suspect that by the time people now in their 50s and 60s fall off the perch, magazines will be rarer than fax machines.

There seem to be three main causes: the rise of the Internet, the poor reading skills of most people born after about 1960, and above all the blitzkrieg progress of mobile telephones as a way to waste time conveniently.

What about on-line photography magazines? Most magazines seemed to see the headlights of the Internet coming down the tunnel of extinction and tried to morph into on-line versions of themselves. With very few exceptions, it hasn't worked. How many are left? Just a handful, I suspect. They couldn't compete with start-up sites like DPR and this place here. And now the traditional website itself is under heavy pressure from the relentless march of gigantic quasi-monopoly organisations like Facebook (which sucks the blood out of everything and sells your soul for pennies) and Google (which hoovers up gigantic amounts of information an re-presents in in a way such that Google gets all the revenue and the originating site get nothing), and Wikipedia (which maskerades as a charity and is now worth many millions).


So, printed photography magazines? Not for many years. On-line ones? Well, yes, but only if you count places like DPR and The Digital Picture as a magazine.

[Mary Anne]

I had a subscription to a paper Photography Magazine for three years then I joined AP and found all I wanted to know here for free.

Off Topic but......

I still read a lot *It is a sign of the times* and if you do go anywhere before you fall off your perch it's always to those waiting room places, now days I take my own book.
Reading a paper book is something I enjoy, and QLD Xray waiting room has great magazines, Outdoors, Photography and National Geographic, plus others I have no interest in.
Today was Library Day and Hubby and I got our books for the fortnight, reading helps the time go by when I cannot sleep, I would rather read from a book than my iPad or iPhone.


And Tony, Younger Folks must be able to read how else do they communicate on Social Media sites.
Three of my Children born in the sixties and one in the seventies can all read.
I have 14 Grandchildren ranging in age from 39 down to 3 years old and apart from the two youngest who don't go to school yet, they all know how to read.
So where you got the idea that most people born after about 1960 have poor reading skills is beyond me, maybe some though certainly not most people.
And interesting to know that you read Women's Magazines that are entirely pointless all the way through from front cover to back.

Its after 1:30 am and here and I am wasting my reading time.

[ameerat42]

Boy, this thread will become a serial in itself, I reckon. - Lucky Jim!

the women's magazines... never fail to amaze me, but not in a good way. ... at least men's magazines are actually about something (cars or woodworking or golf or some such),
but women's magazines are entirely pointless ...they are worse than commercial daytime television.

There seem to be three main causes: the rise of the Internet, the poor reading skills of most people born after about 1960, and above all the blitzkrieg progress of mobile telephones as a way to waste time conveniently.

... and Wikipedia (which maskerades ...).

In subscribing t the magazine I mentioned heretofore, I do own to that sort of mental debilitation that afflicts all such readers.
- We pay for something that appeals to our interests, however good or bad the actual content may be

I read with some interest a lot of off-road/4WD mags at the Dr's betimes (while waiting for people. I'm OK, thanks) and though
I found some articles useful, one could not help to be swamped by the cliquish drivel of how overpaid big kids chose to waste the
major part of their wages... (You get the drift.) BUT, this is not to denigrate 4WDers as a group. It's just an example of what
might be considered "men's magazines". It's just that it showed up that what I'm interested in is no better or worse. It depends on
your point of view/what you consider important/another man's meat/etc...

I don't think that literary skills today are any better or worse than at any other time, and may even dare to say this will go on
being the case. I take it that "maskerade" is a nod to Terry Pratchett's creativity only and not a serious offering of the word it
refers to.

So in summary - Who are we mostly kidding?

1000 s for a long rave.

[merlin1]

I subscribe to Australian Photography and buy Australian Camera, both I find very interesting.
But I do most of my reading on the dunny.

Ross.

[Tannin]

AM, I have excellent grammar, perfect punctuation ... and a near-complete inability to spell. It takes me ages to post sometimes because I have to keep stopping to look up spelling. I didn't have to look up "maskerade" online because I just had to turn my head to see the word on the shelf behind me, which seemed easier. It was written on the cover of a book. I thought it looked a bit odd, but I know perfectly well that I can't spell and a printed book obviously would not be wrong.

Bloody Pratchett playing tricks again .....

Without the endless trouble I take to look words up (or sometimes even with it), my spelling is on a par with Captain Carrot's punctuation.

(I'll respond to MA later. Executive preview: most people under 50-odd can read about as well as I can dance. They grew up on TV and never learned to read properly (i.e., effortlessly and unconsciously, information flowing direct from page to brain). There are exceptions, of course, but most are only semi-literate by the standards of, say, the 1960s or the 1920s. And their concentration spans struggle with anything too long to post on Twitter. There are some wonderful exceptions, but they are indeed just that: exceptions. Hint: ever tried employing teenage staff? The good ones are great, but you have to sift a lot of sand to find a grain of gold.)

[Bear Dale]

What exactly do you mean by "a photography magazine?"

(runs and hides)


________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ahem. I'd better start again.

That's a sign of the times isn't it. Crikey, I almost replied "what is a photography magazine?" in the other sense - i.e., in the same way that one says "what is a fax machine?" or "what is a slide rule".

Decades ago, I used to consume magazines on a daily basis, mostly on other subjects: aeroplanes, rock climbing, cars, computing, wildlife, current affairs, science, electronics, you name it. I've had more different interest over the years than roast dinners. Back then, most people used to read at least two or three magazines every week, even if it was only Post or The Bulletin. And at least one, often two, and not unusually three printed newspapers every day. These days, the only magazines I see regularly are Royalauto (for as long as it takes to strip the plastic envelope off and drop the remainder in the recycle bin), a vegetable seed catalogue every second month (which I either pore over in loving detail or ignore, depending largely on the season), the Birds Australia magazine, and Emu (which is actually a scientific journal but might almost count as a magazine of sorts).

Once in a while I pick up one of the science magazines my parents subscribe to and decide to send off a subscription 'coz they are interesting. But I always forget.

Oh, and there are the women's magazines which one reads in the fish shop or the pizza place. These never fail to amaze me, but not in a good way. I mean, at least men's magazines are actually about something (cars or woodworking or golf or some such), but women's magazines are entirely pointless all the way through from front cover to back, and contain more appalling sexism and shameless gender role conditioning per kilogram than a porn movie or a Trump tweet. After I have made two complete laps of the fish shop, reading every ad and every poster twice, there is nothing else left except the women's magazines, which never fail to appall me and depress me about the shape of the world. Honestly, they are worse than commercial daytime television.

</rant>

I don't think I'm unusual. Very few people seem to read magazines much these days. It's a dying institution. The long-established behemoth of the Australian magazine publishing industry, Consolidated Press, which had something like 70% of the market, is now just a minor sub-division of a company called PMP, which survives by printing supermarket catalogues. PMP traded for $1.55 ten years ago. By 2012 it was worth 12 cents a share. It would be very interesting to see an age-breakdown of magazine readers: I suspect that by the time people now in their 50s and 60s fall off the perch, magazines will be rarer than fax machines.

There seem to be three main causes: the rise of the Internet, the poor reading skills of most people born after about 1960, and above all the blitzkrieg progress of mobile telephones as a way to waste time conveniently.

What about on-line photography magazines? Most magazines seemed to see the headlights of the Internet coming down the tunnel of extinction and tried to morph into on-line versions of themselves. With very few exceptions, it hasn't worked. How many are left? Just a handful, I suspect. They couldn't compete with start-up sites like DPR and this place here. And now the traditional website itself is under heavy pressure from the relentless march of gigantic quasi-monopoly organisations like Facebook (which sucks the blood out of everything and sells your soul for pennies) and Google (which hoovers up gigantic amounts of information an re-presents in in a way such that Google gets all the revenue and the originating site get nothing), and Wikipedia (which maskerades as a charity and is now worth many millions).


So, printed photography magazines? Not for many years. On-line ones? Well, yes, but only if you count places like DPR and The Digital Picture as a magazine.

Big quote above I know, but I agree with much of what you said Tony.

I was a voracious magazine reader as well, didn't matter what hobby I was into, there was at least one magazine published for it and usually a plethora to choose from at the newsagents.
I can't remember the last time I even browsed the magazine section at newsagent. I got burnt from subscribing because nearly always subscribers were delivered to after newsagents got their deliveries. There was always tons of complaining about this but the publishers never rectified this satisfactorily in Australia.

I think that the publishers were smart in going online, but there's two problems with that. Its not as immersive reading a online magazine in pdf form on a monitor (though an iPad goes someway to negate that) and piracy was and is rife. The magazines being such a small size and a tiny download were being and are being put up on pirate sites even before subscribers and newsagents get them in.

I suppose the whole industry from book publishing and newspapers is going through a huge upheaval and are desperately trying to find avenues to stay viable.

I still remember though the thrill of getting a new magazine and reading it from cover to cover, I might have a browse next time I'm in town.

[Cris]

Being at the retail end of magazines I can tell you that all the publishers and their idiotic distribution network couldn't run a nail up a dead pigs backside, they are in total disarray and are running around like chicken little waiting for the sky to fall. I feel sorry for the poor contributors and editors who pour their time into creating content to have it undermined by the industries own relentless non-acceptance that we are no longer in the 19th century. Why would you buy something when you can get online for only a % of the paper version, you can get backorders instantly online, hell, we can't even guarantee supply for our customers for the current issue, don't even ask about backorders. Couple this with the fact that prior to 2000, approx 1M Womans Day alone per week, now its more like 250k.
However, we are now at the bottom with tactile products seemingly enjoying a renaissance , not just for mags, but lots of stuff that has a digital equivalent, with one exception - newspapers are history though, those guys don't even know what day it is. If anyone goes into a newsagent and notices papers down the back, heres why- We make 10% on papers, we pay about $1500 per sqm rent, and about the same for wages, so they apparently do us a favour and give us another product to help an already loss making effort, at 5% margin, Duh, thats just insult to injury.

Anyway, in answer to the question, if you are over 50 and bored, yes you might buy a magazine, beyond that its just a novelty. Photography mags excepting Australian Photography are woefully overpriced (we have one mag at 49.95, US price was 12) and tend to just repeat content, or put an Australian Flag on the cover but forget to remove all the english pricing from all of the reviews.
Cheers
Cris

[Mary Anne]

I had a subscription to a paper Photography Magazine for three years then I joined AP and found all I wanted to know here for free

I take that back Jim, I looked at the first one on the Bookshelf and was dated April 2008 and the last one April 2015.
Reckon someone bought me the first subscription as a Birthday present
Amazing how time flies, or should that be amazing how you forget things as you get older

[Ross the fiddler]

I subscribe to Australian Photography and buy Australian Camera, both I find very interesting.
But I do most of my reading on the dunny.

Ross.

Must have more than one thing in common then, because I subscribe to Australian Photography & occasionally buy Australian Camera. Do I read them though? Not very much actually.

I must elaborate, I do NOT read them on the dunny though!

[jim]

What DO you read on the dunny then?

[ameerat42]

What DO you read on the dunny then?

Don't you know you can get toot-paper with interesting patterns to look at

[bcys1961]

I subscribe to Australian Photography Magazine and enter their monthly comp. Even managed to get a few photo's into the finals and printed . Yet to win it though.

[merlin1]

And for those born after 1960 we are talking about the Toilet, or Bathroom, although it is a bit small to have a bath in, but you could wash your hair at a pinch.

Ross.

[Ross the fiddler]

What DO you read on the dunny then?

Nothing! I don't want to dwell in there any longer than necessary thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

And for those born after 1960 we are talking about the Toilet, or Bathroom, although it is a bit small to have a bath in, but you could wash your hair at a pinch.

Ross.

Should we explain what a 'thunderbox' is too?