|
Forums >
General Industry >
Fashion magazine submission fee
Is it common for a print or online fashion magazine to charge a fee to publish a submitted pictorial? Feb 11 13 07:12 am Link I've never, ever even heard of this, but haven't submitted to soooo many places... is this something that you encountered? If so, which magazine was it? Feb 11 13 07:42 am Link It seems to be getting more and more common. I think it is the silliest thing I have ever heard. That's like a plumber paying someone to fix their toilet.  Feb 11 13 07:46 am Link I encountered it with InstituteMag on a pictorial I submitted .. their cost is about $300US. But that cost may well vary according to how well known the photographer & others associated with the shoot are. This was my first fashion pictorial submission so I was totally unaware of any costs being involved. I have had some of my non-fashion (travel, sports) photos published and usually received a few dollars for it. So I was very surprised to see a fee. Feb 11 13 08:12 am Link Not really "common" but it happens. It happens when your interest to publish this piece is bigger than the magazine's interest to buy it... Stuff from PR agencies is provided free of charge. Because companies want to get into the magazines with their stuff. So it was just a matter of time until the first publishing house got the idea to charge for publishing PR material. Those who are able to fill their pages with PR material for which they can collect cash do not need to pay you for your submission. It's just a matter of supply and demand. Feb 12 13 04:27 am Link A few are trying it on these days and if they're guaranteeing publication in return then I see it as a bad sign that the mag is valuing revenue over quality of content. It's one thing to be 'picky' about which free images you publish - that should hopefully at least provide a strong editorial voice and lead to good quality within the parameters set. However, asking people to pay to be published is no better than selling space to the highest bidder and quality will inevitably suffer. As for the mags who ask you to pay just to submit with no promise of publication, I guess it's a way of setting themselves apart from the thousands of other magazines which accept submissions but I'm sorry, even if it were Italian Vogue I'm not prepared to pay just for the 'privilege' of having somebody look at my work. NEXT!! Just my $0.02 Ciao Stefano www.stefanobrunesci.com Feb 12 13 04:36 am Link I'd rather get $500.00 for a Phone Book cover than pay to be in a fashion rag. ...and I'll be receiving that check in about 2 days! Feb 12 13 04:52 am Link I would be sceptical of any magazine requesting a submission fee. To me it sounds like they can't name any money from selling advertising space. Darren www.facebook.com/darrenbradephotograpy Feb 12 13 06:42 am Link Mike Mahoney wrote: Yes they pay me!!! I have never ran across this.. My work is done under contract, so there is no submitted fee or anything like that. Feb 12 13 06:50 am Link Mike Mahoney wrote: So did you pay? Feb 12 13 07:01 am Link Institute are pulling this all the time, without rhyme or reason. For me it was like 75€ for a whole series, at which point I said they have good design but absurd policy. I unliked their page, turn off notifications, and hope to not see much in the way of their online magazine. In any case never pay for online, if print, you might want to. I just got back from looking at all the glossy magazines. Many were >10€ and far beyond. Many are non paid submission. Some looked really good. Others no. I strongly recommend photographers at least on this policy to stick together and not support any venue doing so. Feb 12 13 07:14 am Link I've seen a blog charge a submission fee. The thing is, it has some really good work in it. Makes me wonder if those people are actually paying because if so, that's kinda disturbing. Feb 12 13 07:27 am Link Just another variation on "vanity" publishing. You can be an published author, play-write, movie screenwriter, exhibited artist, try out for pro teams, get a patent, and yes, a published fashion photographer. If you have the money to support the project, there are plenty of people who will make your dream come true. Feb 12 13 07:45 am Link So we're supposed to have the concept, do the makeup, assemble the wardrobe, do the hair, secure the location, shoot the images, edit the images, *and* pay for the privilege of allowing them to use our work to sell magazines and make money? That's crazy. lol Feb 12 13 08:08 am Link DOUGLASFOTOS wrote: No I didn't .. principles aside it really boils down to a business decision about spending $300 for what is essentially advertising. Feb 12 13 09:17 am Link 4 Easy Steps to "Getting Published": 1. Do a photo shoot, any shoot 2. Pay a magazine to advertise with the photos from the shoot 3. ??? 4. Profit! (for the magazine) Feb 12 13 12:02 pm Link Neil Snape wrote: Agree. Feb 12 13 12:08 pm Link There's been 'pay to play' as a dubious practice for many many years, for vendors in the more corrupt business sectors (like government). So I'm not surprised that the magazine industry might try it. The only way to fight this kind of thing is 'just say no' - but there will always be those that have plenty of money and see it as actually a business benefit, that lowers the competition. But corruption by any other name... Feb 12 13 12:12 pm Link Slightly Off-Topic but I know Supermodels Unlimited (or SU) magazine actually charges llamas to appear - lots of girls on the Pageant circuit here have paid about £400 to appear in a magazine that's actually not all that 'known' here. Is SU quite well known stateside? If it is and they have designs on conquering America I could maybe see why they did it, but for £400 i'd rather pay a bloody good photographer to get some amazing shots of me for my portfolio to use to submit to agencies there. Or put it to the flight money to attend open calls. Feb 12 13 02:18 pm Link I just came across this with Institute magazine. They said that my work fits their design aesthetic and they like to publish it BUT there is a "design fee". *sigh* Dec 18 13 04:19 am Link Mike Mahoney wrote: Pay to play Dec 18 13 05:00 am Link Wilde Hunt Corsetry wrote: It's the new business model especially for the Internet. Dec 18 13 05:15 am Link Abigail Rose Hill wrote: In effect the llama is paying them as an advertiser. Dec 18 13 05:20 am Link J O H N A L L A N wrote: For some it's not even a "business" benefit it is the mental masturbation of being able to claim that they are a "published" model, photographer, or whatever. Even rank amateurs with cell phones can play at that game. Dec 18 13 05:25 am Link Not surprising at all - pay them so they can profit from the fruits of your labor just so you can say you are "published". There are plenty of other places you can submit images for free. Those that want a fee, just pass on them. They will get the message eventually... Dec 18 13 05:46 am Link That is backwards and nobody places much if any value on the work in pay for magazines, so there is really no value to you at all. You pay for your own advertising and get paid for theirs; not pay for both. Dec 18 13 05:52 am Link Isn't it a bit like IB ... people post images on MM and IB reap the profits from the advertisements. Esp the ones with VIP ect payment to IB. Dec 18 13 06:06 am Link That Italian Guy wrote: +1 Dec 18 13 06:37 am Link Dean Johnson Photo wrote: Common practice now to charge "Entry Fees" for Group shows. I even got a nice sounding Email from Photo LA saying how my work would be a nice addition and it would nay cost me X$$. I've happily given my work for exhibitions and magazine publications for free but never have and never will pay for the Privilege. So when I saw this topic my first thought was..it's spread to the magazines now. Guess we have been told our worth again. Dec 18 13 06:49 am Link Mike Mahoney wrote: It's not normal at all... Dec 18 13 07:30 am Link I just heard back from them. Seems all it will cost me is @ $300 USD for the privilege of having my work shown (guaranteed) in their online magazine and social networks. *double sigh* Dec 18 13 09:38 am Link There are a few "magazines" that do this (Institute being one of the most hotly debated ones it seems). Honestly, no matter how some people try to explain or justify it, I think it's pure and utter horse shit. Dec 18 13 01:58 pm Link I cracked up when I got this response from Fault Magazine FAULT Dec 18 13 02:42 pm Link Neil Snape wrote: Agreed. I refuse to pay a submission fee. Dec 18 13 02:44 pm Link Sal W Hanna wrote: I can see where they'd charge for an advertorial. Maybe it's just a problem with an intern sending the wrong document I wonder. Because I didn't get the impression that we were talking about an advertorial, simply an editorial. Dec 18 13 02:53 pm Link Dec 18 13 02:56 pm Link J O H N A L L A N wrote: You are correct, as this was a post script they added to the email upon my submission. P.S: We are offering selected creatives promotional opportunities on FAULT Online - including full interview features with images showcasing the artist's work. To me it just seems like you can buy your way in and they will make it look like a feature rather than an advertisement. Hence, wrong impression. Dec 18 13 02:56 pm Link udor wrote: I remember that. A discussion very much like this thread ensued. He got roasted for about 6 pages. Dec 18 13 03:39 pm Link Sal W Hanna wrote: And they want to put THEIR NAME on your work? Mind boggling! Dec 18 13 03:42 pm Link Sounds like the Ben Trovato blog. Dec 19 13 12:49 am Link |
