Forums > Model Colloquy > The new "published"

Photographer

SayCheeZ!

Posts: 20282

Las Vegas, Nevada, 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.

Dan Howell wrote:
Actually you can put a barcode on any home printed publication...

Once in awhile I come across one or two of those print on demand 'magazines' with a bar code on them.
The funny thing is that legitimate bar codes are registered (just like car license plates) so that the Filet Mignon you're buying at the supermarket doesn't ring up as a box of paper clips because another company is using the same bar code.

It drives me CRAZY because my day job involves creating bar codes for some of our products, then after a few days of being online we get orders for a completely different product because someone is using fake bar codes that match the number we're legitimately using.

With that being said, one of those 'magazine' barcodes that I mentioned traced to a store brand of butter, not a publication.

Nov 16 21 06:05 pm Link

Photographer

C.C. Holdings

Posts: 850

Los Angeles, California, US

Is anyone willing to name the magazines? I have no clue what you all are talking about, but I do wonder if some of the mailing lists I'm on count as these kind of publications (they are mailing lists for print editions)

Nov 16 21 07:12 pm Link

Photographer

SayCheeZ!

Posts: 20282

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

C.C. Holdings  wrote:
Is anyone willing to name the magazines? I have no clue what you all are talking about, but I do wonder if some of the mailing lists I'm on count as these kind of publications (they are mailing lists for print editions)

You can find many of them on the printers websites:
Issuu
https://issuu.com/search?q=photography

Flipsnack:
https://www.flipsnack.com/categories/art-crafts

Peecho:
https://www.peecho.com/how-it-works/photographers/

Blurb:
https://www.blurb.com/bookstore

MagCloud:
https://www.magcloud.com/shop/category/photography

Nov 16 21 09:14 pm Link

Photographer

Dan Howell

Posts: 3362

Kerhonkson, New York, US

C.C. Holdings  wrote:
Is anyone willing to name the magazines? I have no clue what you all are talking about, but I do wonder if some of the mailing lists I'm on count as these kind of publications (they are mailing lists for print editions)

https://kavyar.com/home

Nov 25 21 11:33 am Link

Photographer

C.C. Holdings

Posts: 850

Los Angeles, California, US

SayCheeZ!  wrote:
You can find many of them on the printers websites:
Issuu
https://issuu.com/search?q=photography

Flipsnack:
https://www.flipsnack.com/categories/art-crafts

Peecho:
https://www.peecho.com/how-it-works/photographers/

Blurb:
https://www.blurb.com/bookstore

MagCloud:
https://www.magcloud.com/shop/category/photography

ahhhh, thanks, yes different than what I was worried about

okay, the only one I'm familiar with is Blurb and yeah I don't have a problem with self publishing a book and selling a few copies and saying thats published - or more so using that as a tool after someone else commissions you.

As far as a *signal*, I think there is limited utility but some. Like, what we are really looking for here is validation. For models - you are either signed with a big agency or you aren't. Internet freelance models are not. There is no validation except the credits from people that book freelancers. It's a different world and I'm glad it exists. Agencies can be tough to work with.

As a signal of seriousness and willingness to hone this craft, all forms of publishing broadcast that pretty well.

As far as a signal *legitimacy* it means nothing. I don't think any form of published makes someone safer than someone else. Self published, paid publishing, and a large publication begging that person to make work to publish in it all means *nothing*. All people are capable of taking advantage of others no matter of that kind of validation. Fortunately I don't think thats what this thread was discussing but I do think its factor (misplaced factor) in why anybody cares so I wanted to mention that.

Ultimately I'm in the camp that this doesn't bother me, for the above reasons. I don't find pure vanity to be a problem either. I am fine acknowledging that it dilutes the gravity of saying "published", I can also acknowledge that "published" is not nuanced enough to matter at all. Published in matters. Signed by matters. But the only thing I would use it for is to determine if this particular content creator was reliable at some point in time, and prioritized this craft, and whether that justifies their rates or lack thereof. For now it is still an okay signal for that as not many people do this for vanity and to then flake on everyone else.

Nov 26 21 09:34 am Link

Photographer

Noah Russell

Posts: 599

Seattle, Washington, US

Noah Russell wrote:
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

I just found out that one of photos from this shoot will be used as an advertisement for Style Craze Magazine https://www.stylecraze.com/ and will be on the digital billboard above Forever 21 boutique in New York around Dec 11 2021. It will make a great backdrop for a photo of a rat eating pizza or a cigarette smoking cockroach. smile

Cheers,
Noah

Dec 05 21 07:39 pm Link