Forums > Model Colloquy > The new "published"

Model

amandawebster

Posts: 4

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Is anyone else annoyed by the cropping up of dozens of print on demand "magazines." Kavyar has made this process quite common now and I swear I see new magazines every day online.

Models and photogs pay (sometimes significant) fees to be featured in or be on the cover of them. They are typically $25-40 an issue and you know dang well the only people buying them are those who have been featured in them. They'll accept any halfway decent work.

Is this vanity? Do some people get some kind of professional value from this? What the heck?!

May 10 21 05:38 pm Link

Photographer

Richard Majerski

Posts: 523

East Hartford, Connecticut, US

In my humble opinion this is just another way someone on either end of the camera can say "published" on their social media pages.To me being published means in a hard copy item which you had no control over and not self published either.I'm old school.I had to school a few younger people on being wary when someone uses roundabout language of their credits.As an example I physically appeared in the background of some NHL hockey photos printed in Sports Illustrated.Can I say I was in Sports Illustrated and not be a fib-yes.That's the kind of  statement that needs further clarification.That way I can say hey I never said my pictures were in SI just me.

May 10 21 08:27 pm Link

Photographer

SayCheeZ!

Posts: 20282

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

I find it kind of strange that a certain model/friend of mine will drop everything and shoot TF for photographers that will feature her in some fake magazine to the point of bragging to her friends and family.

When she was trying to get listed with an agency she asked me for advice on what to do.  Among the few suggestions I gave her was not to brag or even mention the fake magazines she appears in.  I told her 'they'll see right through it' which could go against her.

The funny thing is I recently had a casting call for a model to appear in a REAL magazine, a travel publication that's been around for several decades and can be ordered by subscription of purchased at news stands,  This particular model was the  first person I thought of, and yes she did apply for the casting.

The problem is that the magazine wanted the photos taken at a specific location for an article they were doing about the unusual but relatively unknown historic markers.  The model wanted me to do the shoot at a cliche, overused location that every photographer and their brother shoots at.  When I told her that's not a place that the magazine wanted photos of she discontinued communications.

She would have gotten paid fairly well plus a tear sheet in a REAL publication.

May 10 21 08:43 pm Link

Model

amandawebster

Posts: 4

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Richard Majerski wrote:
In my humble opinion this is just another way someone on either end of the camera can say "published" on their social media pages.To me being published means in a hard copy item which you had no control over and not self published either.I'm old school.I had to school a few younger people on being wary when someone uses roundabout language of their credits.As an example I physically appeared in the background of some NHL hockey photos printed in Sports Illustrated.Can I say I was in Sports Illustrated and not be a fib-yes.That's the kind of  statement that needs further clarification.That way I can say hey I never said my pictures were in SI just me.

The people I know who get legit published did have some control over it, but they didn't buy their way in. I 100% agree that it's just bragging rights for social. I did a couple of less popular magazines for fun and sure I post the pics on social, but I don't get the paying and going out of your way for a bunch of these.

May 10 21 08:53 pm Link

Model

amandawebster

Posts: 4

Phoenix, Arizona, US

SayCheeZ!  wrote:
I find it kind of strange that a certain model/friend of mine will drop everything and shoot TF for photographers that will feature her in some fake magazine to the point of bragging to her friends and family.

When she was trying to get listed with an agency she asked me for advice on what to do.  Among the few suggestions I gave her was not to brag or even mention the fake magazines she appears in.  I told her 'they'll see right through it' which could go against her.

The funny thing is I recently had a casting call for a model to appear in a REAL magazine, a travel publication that's been around for several decades and can be ordered by subscription of purchased at news stands,  This particular model was the  first person I thought of, and yes she did apply for the casting.

The problem is that the magazine wanted the photos taken at a specific location for an article they were doing about the unusual but relatively unknown historic markers.  The model wanted me to do the shoot at a cliche, overused location that every photographer and their brother shoots at.  When I told her that's not a place that the magazine wanted photos of she discontinued communications.

She would have gotten paid fairly well plus a tear sheet in a REAL publication.

How silly is that?! Well I love history and I love traveling, so I'll step up and take her place next time big_smile

May 10 21 08:54 pm Link

Photographer

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY

Posts: 6541

Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US

amandawebster wrote:
Is anyone else annoyed by the cropping up of dozens of print on demand "magazines." Kavyar has made this process quite common now and I swear I see new magazines every day online.

Models and photogs pay (sometimes significant) fees to be featured in or be on the cover of them. They are typically $25-40 an issue and you know dang well the only people buying them are those who have been featured in them. They'll accept any halfway decent work.

Is this vanity? Do some people get some kind of professional value from this? What the heck?!

Very annoyed. lol

There are several local amateur Models and Photographers who tout themselves as being 'Published' in this manner with prospective Models buying into the 'I can get You published' bullshit and the consumer, the 'fans' eating it up as both are clueless.

Is it vanity?  Partly, part ignorance and knowingly or unknowingly part deception.

May 11 21 02:13 am Link

Photographer

Znude!

Posts: 3118

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, US

Reminds me of all the times mothers would bring their kids into my studio back in the day to do some shots for a "casting call" they were paying to attend at some crappy hotel. I would always point out that you shouldn't have to pay for an interview.

But now I also can be published. I can actually be featured in a hardback book for less than a hundred bucks. I can just print it straight from my flickr account. I can print a few hardbacks and have them laying on a coffee table out in the waiting room.

May 11 21 06:06 am Link

Photographer

Al_Vee Photography

Posts: 56

Asheville, North Carolina, US

*shrug*

It's not my place to judge how other people use their work, print it, or promote it. Sometimes it is gratifying for people just to see what their work looks like printed. That is a positive experience to some, and in that way, the experience carries value.

"Published" in general is a very diffuse term today, in various arts. A good many new authors, for example, must self-publish their first work, no matter how good (or bad) it may be. If they can get enough of an audience online and a solid fan base after self-publishing, they may eventually get mainstream representation, and more traditional publishing opportunities.

I'd imagine this mentality makes a lot of sense for some folks in visual arts as well. Being pretentious about it doesn't change the fact that self-publishing art, and self-producing music, is a key aspect to finding mainstream acknowledgement now, in many creative ventures.

May 11 21 01:48 pm Link

Photographer

Mark Salo

Posts: 11194

Olney, Maryland, US

Richard Majerski wrote:
In my humble opinion this is just another way someone on either end of the camera can say "published" on their social media pages.

I've been mystified when I read that a model wants a photographer who can guarantee published images. Now I understand how that works.

May 11 21 02:30 pm Link

Photographer

Richard Majerski

Posts: 523

East Hartford, Connecticut, US

Unfortunately for models these days there are fewer chances of being published what with magazines changing there policies or just going under.Unless you win some crazy contest for SI or Maxim or something.Might be better off researching foreign magazines and such.If you're a model out there getting a healthy amount of bookings and being paid and are pleased with what you are doing then who cares about being published.

May 11 21 05:03 pm Link

Clothing Designer

veypurr

Posts: 389

Albuquerque, New Mexico, US

Al_Vee Photography wrote:
*shrug*

It's not my place to judge how other people use their work, print it, or promote it. Sometimes it is gratifying for people just to see what their work looks like printed. That is a positive experience to some, and in that way, the experience carries value.

"Published" in general is a very diffuse term today, in various arts. A good many new authors, for example, must self-publish their first work, no matter how good (or bad) it may be. If they can get enough of an audience online and a solid fan base after self-publishing, they may eventually get mainstream representation, and more traditional publishing opportunities.

I'd imagine this mentality makes a lot of sense for some folks in visual arts as well. Being pretentious about it doesn't change the fact that self-publishing art, and self-producing music, is a key aspect to finding mainstream acknowledgement now, in many creative ventures.

I think you made some very good points

May 11 21 06:59 pm Link

Photographer

SayCheeZ!

Posts: 20282

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Kinda reminds me of the classic thread where a photographer from Wisconsin was bragging about an award he won, however anyone that participates (and even people that don't) win the award.  The scheme was the company was selling trophies to the suckers .

He was bragging and using it to promote himself.
Most everyone else was laughing about it.

May 11 21 09:27 pm Link

Photographer

Camera Buff

Posts: 853

Maryborough, Queensland, Australia

Al_Vee Photography wrote:
*shrug*

It's not my place to judge how other people use their work, print it, or promote it. Sometimes it is gratifying for people just to see what their work looks like printed. That is a positive experience to some, and in that way, the experience carries value.

"Published" in general is a very diffuse term today, in various arts. A good many new authors, for example, must self-publish their first work, no matter how good (or bad) it may be. If they can get enough of an audience online and a solid fan base after self-publishing, they may eventually get mainstream representation, and more traditional publishing opportunities.

I'd imagine this mentality makes a lot of sense for some folks in visual arts as well. Being pretentious about it doesn't change the fact that self-publishing art, and self-producing music, is a key aspect to finding mainstream acknowledgement now, in many creative ventures.

Yes I agree ... well said too!

May 11 21 09:47 pm Link

Photographer

Dan Howell

Posts: 3362

Kerhonkson, New York, US

I might be dating myself a little but I remember back in the old days of the early model/photographer message boards like Webmodels, FashionOnlyForum, and Glamourmodels. At that time I noticed a phenomena that most photographers who operated solely in and around the web would get one image published by hook or by crook and make it seem like they had done it ten times. Whereas, my fellow photographers in the land-based world were more likely to do something ten times before they announced that they had done something.

I don't know if that makes real world publishing 10x more impressive or 100x more impressive than fleeting vanity online magazine. Now it seems like the print world is in its last gasp. Social media and on-line publishing just has not filled the space with equivalent, quantifiable criteria and esteem for what constitutes publication.

I can truthfully say that I have had more than 150 layouts published including dozens of covers in several national and international printed men's magazines in addition to my regular commerical/fashion work. While still impressive to some, what it really means in 2021 is that virtually all of that work was done prior to 2016 when the bulk of men's magazines folded. I couldn't really say if it is still impressive. What it does say is that opportunities for me to hire professional models for editorial publication have simply gone away. Emagazines and vanity publishing is simply not generating enough money to justify a serious production. For me, it is not a credential.

Maybe it means people will have to actually look at a model or photographer's individual images and make their own judgement. How old school...

May 16 21 04:06 am Link

Photographer

ROUA IMAGES

Posts: 226

Phoenix, Arizona, US

I have open submissions available for the following magazines: Standard submission fee: $50  (Make the cover for only $150!)
Submit to any, or all, conveniently from one website!  Get your name out there!

"No Filter Mag!"
"Mid-day Majestic"
"Pimp Lee Cheex"
"HARSH! Light and Shadow"
"Same Outfit / Same Pose" (12 image submission minimum)
"FOCUS SHMOCUS!" (Prestige)
"I Took This!"
"Rolled My Aperture Didn't Look!"
"Oily and Tired"
"Deez Props Doh!"
"Moodless Beauty"
"MEH Magazine" (Prestige)

May 17 21 06:25 am Link

Photographer

Dan OMell

Posts: 1415

Charlotte, North Carolina, US

Good observation! Yes, I'm absolutely annoyed by this. In this era, it costs and worth  peanuts to create this type of "magazines", there is no any entry barrier big enough in expenses, etc. So, it's worthless. Just pure vanity and total stupidity.
But it's Ok, as far as the "established" and "published" are more or less reasonable in their demands and pretenses, Well, usually after the harsh  reality check only..
So, no need to be not very nice to them. It's the reality job to teach them! smile

if you need to check the real models and real publications, incl. ranking, go to
MODELS.COM

Jun 05 21 10:42 am Link

Photographer

goofus

Posts: 794

Santa Barbara, California, US

first off: those POD zines do not count as 'being published' ...at all

and most of them are just like bonkers... they do not pay you.... AND.. they want a guarantee that your images have not  been published anywhere else.. and you can't submit them anywhere else for 6 months a year after they publish you.. and if you are lucky..you may get an issue your photo(s) appear in

are they fucking whack???

giant PASS on those fools

Jun 07 21 09:58 am Link

Photographer

Jefferson Cole

Posts: 87

Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

Some unpublished members desperate for a credit have fronted their own "publication" to be featured in, no ads, no distribution, no editorial, no other contributors, no subscribers.

Is anyone fooled by such lame stunts?

Does serious harm to mayhem gaining any kind of credibility.

Jun 08 21 12:25 am Link

Photographer

SayCheeZ!

Posts: 20282

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

On a similar note, a photography website just awarded me a new badge!

https://www.viewbug.com/media/images/layout/badges/fantastic.png

I feel so honored, especially since I don't use the website at all and don't have any pictures or any information about me on that site, but hey, maybe I can display it on my portfolios, brochures, and business cards.  I'm sure i can impress someone with it.

Jun 08 21 09:50 am Link

Photographer

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY

Posts: 6541

Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US

SayCheeZ!  wrote:

Congrats!

Jun 08 21 04:12 pm Link

Photographer

Studio NSFW

Posts: 461

Pacifica, California, US

SayCheeZ!  wrote:
I find it kind of strange that a certain model/friend of mine will drop everything and shoot TF for photographers that will feature her in some fake magazine to the point of bragging to her friends and family.

When she was trying to get listed with an agency she asked me for advice on what to do.  Among the few suggestions I gave her was not to brag or even mention the fake magazines she appears in.  I told her 'they'll see right through it' which could go against her.

The funny thing is I recently had a casting call for a model to appear in a REAL magazine, a travel publication that's been around for several decades and can be ordered by subscription of purchased at news stands,  This particular model was the  first person I thought of, and yes she did apply for the casting.

The problem is that the magazine wanted the photos taken at a specific location for an article they were doing about the unusual but relatively unknown historic markers.  The model wanted me to do the shoot at a cliche, overused location that every photographer and their brother shoots at.  When I told her that's not a place that the magazine wanted photos of she discontinued communications.

She would have gotten paid fairly well plus a tear sheet in a REAL publication.

I may know exactly who that is....but in any event, I recently got in a bit of a legal tiff with a POD bottom feeder who received my work from a model I have worked with extensively and “Published” same without anyone checking on actually securing a license from me to do so.  When I learned of it because my brand got tagged on Instagram and called them out on it,. I received the license agreement....and a quick scan of it quickly said “There’s no way in hell I would agree to this”....but then I research the magazine a bit....as said before, no advertising, no editorial to speak of,  no audit numbers re distribution, no MASTHEAD for Gawds sake.  As for the content....most of the “Models” looked like the day shift at the second best strip club near the airport, shot by uninspired GWCs. No way I would let my content appear in such a rag, Frankly I would view any association with it to be injurious to my brand and business.

So, I did the needful.  Hit em with a DMCA takedown.  This parasite, who is not paying models or photographers but wants free exclusive lifetime rights to the images WE create and the ability to sell them in his magazines and calendars, actually tried to make a case that this was fair use of some sort.    My response basically was “OK, lawyer up, muthaphucka, I know where I sit here, exactly, and I will bankrupt your ass for spite”.   

The whole experience led me to start thinking about publishing a small, ethical, real, model and photo magazine, with at least local distribution, real editorial copy and advertising, audit numbers, masthead, the whole thing. I dunno if I want to take that on, (Could be a real money loser as I would need to make sure models, photographers and other contributors were equitably treated) but the POD guys, at least THAT guy, are about the lowest form of publishing I could imagine. I would consider credits listing a bunch of POD publishing means nothing more than you are gullible.

Jun 09 21 08:51 am Link

Photographer

SayCheeZ!

Posts: 20282

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Studio NSFW wrote:
[The whole experience led me to start thinking about publishing a small, ethical, real, model and photo magazine, with at least local distribution, real editorial copy and advertising, audit numbers, masthead, the whole thing. I dunno if I want to take that on, (Could be a real money loser as I would need to make sure models, photographers and other contributors were equitably treated) bu....

I'm not sure how old you are or how long you've been in CA, but Western Photographer magazine was THE publication to go to.  It was sort of like Model Mayhem but in print way before WWW was around, and it was pretty much limited to activities in So. Cal but did have appeal to people in No Cal, NV,and AZ. 

It was around for about 25 years and folded in the 90's.  It started off as a small, black and white tabloid and evolved into a larger size magazine with color on the cover. 

I really wish it was still around, and sadly no modern website can match the influence WP had on Models and Photographers in the locations they were geared to, and it's improbable that any publication can duplicate the readership,subscibers, or influence it had.


https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51VENwdUh8L._SX382_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Jun 09 21 11:35 am Link

Photographer

Studio NSFW

Posts: 461

Pacifica, California, US

I was in Nashville in those days, but interesting. I guess the eventual closing of a similar established magazine speaks much for the viability of the business model....

Jun 09 21 03:04 pm Link

Photographer

P R E S T O N

Posts: 2453

Birmingham, England, United Kingdom

I know a couple of very good photographers who regularly pay for publication and who have enjoyed international opportunities which they would not have received without those publications. However they're very particular about where they spend their money, and equally the publishers concerned are very particular about who they take money from. These guys aren't on MM - their models are provided to them by agencies.

Jun 09 21 03:29 pm Link

Photographer

ultimax

Posts: 16

Orenburg, Orenburg, Russia

This is the reality of our days.
There are many photographers and "models", and many of the cool glossy magazines are a thing of the past.
And what should poor photographers and models do, how can they declare themselves to the whole world if you are an excellent photographer, but you have 100 subscribers on Instagram, of which half are bots, and half are your friends and relatives?
The Kaviar aggregator simply could not but appear, since it is potentially in demand.
I myself used this services when I wanted to. I paid for some publications (for example, Vanity Teen), but most of them published for free (they even refused money)
And some - refused to publish, mainly due to inconsistency to their requests (cause of necessarily 5 looks, etc.)
About 500 publications are currently represented on Kaviar. And believe me, many of them have a very high level of publications. And sometimes I look at some covers of SuperMags with photographs of supermodels, with their identical indifferent faces, and I think - what is this?: (((
Most of the magazines on Kaviar are quite uncompromising and don't publish junk even if you pay them.
In any case, this is just the business of our days. Vogue makes money from advertising brands, Vulkanmagazine - from photographers.
And as long as there is demand for it, there will be supply.

And by the way, don't think of it as an advertisement, but if you have art photography of children and teenagers in fashion, or other genres, you can make a submission to my magazine:

www.epixkids.com
Publication via Kavyar: https://kavyar.com/epix-kids-magazine/s … l-networks

Aug 17 21 08:07 am Link

Photographer

Brooklyn Bridge Images

Posts: 13099

Brooklyn, New York, US

amandawebster wrote:
Is this vanity? Do some people get some kind of professional value from this? What the heck?!

Its actually called Vanity Publishing....Lol

Aug 17 21 02:00 pm Link

Photographer

Abbitt Photography

Posts: 13503

Washington, Utah, US

Vanity publishing is nothing new, and I would say that paying someone to “publish” something you have created, knowing it’s unlikely you will make a profit is the very definition of vanity publishing.   

I think that’s different from self publishing.    In self publishing, one is doing the publishing (at least most of it) themselves, with the intent of selling and profiting from their creation.   

That said, I don’t think it’s always clear.    One could argue $25-40 is a great deal for advertising if it draws even a little attention to one’s work.   One could argue that people who pay for a social media site or a week site simply to display themselves or their work are being vain.   I paid to have prints of some of my travel photography made that are hanging on my walls as art.    Is that vanity?   

Personally, I don’t really care much about how or why other people choose to display their work.  If someone is a hobbyist and $25 or so is a way to share some of their best work with other hobbyists, who am I to criticize?    It’s a lot less than many people spend on spirts cars simply to show off.   Fundamentally it’s not all that different from sharing photos on Flickr, social media or even here.

Aug 17 21 03:34 pm Link

Photographer

Znude!

Posts: 3118

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, US

I've had many images published in hardback editions.

Shot for my high school and college yearbooks.

TaDa!

Aug 17 21 03:50 pm Link

Photographer

Abbitt Photography

Posts: 13503

Washington, Utah, US

Znude! wrote:
I've had many images published in hardback editions.

Shot for my high school and college yearbooks.

TaDa!

Some would argue that  school enticed a minor into providing free labor for the school.   As someone who shot and did darkroom work for both my school newspaper and yearbook, I disagree.   It's an internship of sorts.  Same with my athletic contribution.

(back before digital photography was a thing.)

Aug 17 21 06:12 pm Link

Photographer

Garry k

Posts: 30033

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

From what i have observed this sort of thing provides a good opportunity for photographers who are trying to get ahead to work with models , makeup artists etc who are also trying to get ahead ( or vice versa )

but Ive not really seen anyone get ahead from being published in these on line " publications "

I have however seen a couple of photographers lose a lot of money with their own on line and printed glamour publications

Aug 17 21 08:45 pm Link

Photographer

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY

Posts: 6541

Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US

ROUA IMAGES wrote:
I have open submissions available for the following magazines: Standard submission fee: $50  (Make the cover for only $150!)
Submit to any, or all, conveniently from one website!  Get your name out there!

"No Filter Mag!"
"Mid-day Majestic"
"Pimp Lee Cheex"
"HARSH! Light and Shadow"
"Same Outfit / Same Pose" (12 image submission minimum)
"FOCUS SHMOCUS!" (Prestige)
"I Took This!"
"Rolled My Aperture Didn't Look!"
"Oily and Tired"
"Deez Props Doh!"
"Moodless Beauty"
"MEH Magazine" (Prestige)

This made Me lol

much appreciated!

Aug 18 21 04:51 am Link

Photographer

Thomas Van Dyke

Posts: 3181

Washington, District of Columbia, US

"... Do some people get some kind of professional value from this?" amanda and all others who have responded...

Publications are so yesterday... Unless you have over 50K IG followers you are invisible in a commercial paradigm...

Virtual all my commercial assignments come from IG and consist of primarily tweens etc whose moms are endeavoring to live vicariously through their children... Mom rewrites the check and I furnish the team (hair, makeup styling etc).
I'm loving my work... and so are my clients and team...

I have absolutely no need for a dinosaur such as Mayhem. 
I just stop by now and again to see who hasn't escaped yet.
My visual statement is completely "Family Friendly"... No nudes or implied...
Everything has migrated on-line... save the trees, forget publications...

Meet some of your competitors...
https://www.instagram.com/chrisknightphoto/
https://www.instagram.com/sagaj/
https://www.instagram.com/eps_photo/

All the best to those who haven't found IG yet...
Please come over to the sunlight... it's a beautiful place to be...

Cheers!

Aug 18 21 02:50 pm Link

Photographer

ROUA IMAGES

Posts: 226

Phoenix, Arizona, US

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:

This made Me lol

much appreciated!

There's still room for satire, humor, and parody out there!
Cheers, FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY.

*Though I am gunning for bragging rights for the cover of FOCUS SHMOCUS, myself.

"Did you see my shots?"
"- Sorta'."

Aug 18 21 07:54 pm Link

Photographer

JDedmonPhoto

Posts: 1

Matthews, North Carolina, US

Last I checked IG"likes" dont pay for camera equipment, etc. I know quite a few photographers who post quality work regularly, and get very little comparatively as a result when you consider time used, gear, etc.

Aug 19 21 10:58 am Link

Photographer

Dan Howell

Posts: 3362

Kerhonkson, New York, US

Dan Howell wrote:
What it does say is that opportunities for me to hire professional models for editorial publication have simply gone away. Emagazines and vanity publishing is simply not generating enough money to justify a serious production. For me, it is not a credential.

Maybe it means people will have to actually look at a model or photographer's individual images and make their own judgement. How old school...

i'm going to update and modify my own statement in this thread instead of editing the earlier version. I have to admit to having an 'evolving' opinion about vanity publication. I recently completed an editorial styled shoot  which was planned and shot with the intention of my own portfolio/website and future promotions.

I was weighing various options on how to present it and I had even gone as far as talking to a graphic designer to do some presentation graphics that would have been in the form of a magazine layout. I then stumbled upon magazines associated with Kavyar and saw one that was taking submissions for the September Fashion edition.

I made my submission and was accepted immediately. I think that can mean either one of two things: it is not a high barrier for acceptance or my submission was within their interest area. Or possibly both. The interesting thing is that once I began my Kavyar profile I was contacted by three other magazine encouraging me to submit (for free) to their editions that had fast-approaching deadlines. Again, they may have been in great need for content or they saw content that fit their scope. Or both.

As far as my original submission, I feel like I had already been seeking to have a presentation in magazine layout form. I plan on using it on my Instagram, possibly my website and even printing it out as a mailer to targeted clients. I guess what I am saying is if you think that e-magazines/submission publication are simply vanity for the photographer to sit back and bask in their display, then they are truly a vanity. However, if you consider that it is a tangible image asset that a photographer can actively use as a part of their promotional efforts, then I think you have to consider however low the barrier to entry is 'vanity' publications can be a legit avenue for photographers to pursue--though possibly easy to go overboard with.

Aug 21 21 10:16 am Link

Photographer

RiverGrizzly

Posts: 692

Charlottesville, Virginia, US

There are some "real" online publications that live by ad revenue. I don't know how many, if any, pay contributors. I recall when Mother Earth News was young they paid contributors with free subscriptions.

This is a publication I respect: https://www.alistnation.com

Sep 21 21 06:39 pm Link

Photographer

Francisco Castro

Posts: 2577

Cincinnati, Ohio, US

Unless the magazine in question actually has a barcode, I don't really consider it "published". I have and know how to use Adobe InDesign. As long as I have the text and photos ready, I can layout a quick magazine in about 30 minutes. But that doesn't make me a publisher.

Sep 22 21 12:56 am Link

Photographer

Dan Howell

Posts: 3362

Kerhonkson, New York, US

Francisco Castro wrote:
Unless the magazine in question actually has a barcode, I don't really consider it "published". I have and know how to use Adobe InDesign. As long as I have the text and photos ready, I can layout a quick magazine in about 30 minutes. But that doesn't make me a publisher.

Actually you can put a barcode on any home printed publication. What you might be thinking of is a bipad number which refers to magazine rack space distribution. That is often put on by the distributor not the publisher. Mailed subscription issues often don't have the barcode on them.

Oct 04 21 10:41 am Link

Photographer

Randy Poe

Posts: 1606

Colorado Springs, Colorado, US

Haters.
Cat hiss "wrew!"

Many of my pinup clients live to do these pinup mag submissions. They all are sportive of each other and they have a ball doing it. Sometimes I get hired for a session I get told WE WANT COVERS!
I got 5 of the mags in the last month alone so shhh. Stop making trouble.

I am proud to have once got both front and back cover on one issue. Centerfolds and loads of features. Its fun and I love that they enjoy it.

As for GWC might I suggest we all try to suck as hard as many of the artist that get featured in these vanity rags. I know I still got my work cut out for me.

Oct 05 21 02:42 pm Link

Photographer

Noah Russell

Posts: 599

Seattle, Washington, US

A couple months back I did a TFP fashion shoot with a model. It was 5 looks and I shot about 700 photos.  The model has submitted different sets to a bunch(I have no idea how many) of kayvar magazines. The shoot has been published in over 10 magazines. 0 retouching, I did use a colorchecker correction. Straight from lightroom export to magazine submission. LOL

Noah

Nov 16 21 05:53 pm Link