But what's your problem with 30 pages of ads? There's not a set number of pages that can be either ads or editorial content - there's a set amount of editorial content, and then the ads on top. If you don't want to read them, well don't - meanwhile, they're there for those of us that do. Personally, I think the more ads the better and would prefer at least 50 pages of them, as (a) I enjoy them, and (b) it helps keep the cost of the mag down. Taking all that together, I don't really see what possible objection you (or anyone else) can have to them, to be honest.

 

When I finish reading the content and reach the ads, I simply skip to the back page to see what Roger has to say. As I do with the three other magazines I buy each month. And your problem is ...... ?

 

No i can understand WHY you cant see my point *laughs* well obviously you & many no doubt are happy with 30 pages of ad`s & they clearly take priority over the actual supposed main content of the magazine & if your happy with that *Clearly are* then who am i to say otherwise & further more there is a mag out there that does have ad`s but the cost is just £3.49 but does contain far more detail about real photography than AP. & i would rather pay out £4.99 to £5.99 for mags that give in depth advice like N-photo, Digital camera etc who yes do have ad`s than 1 that prefers to drown readers in ad`s
obviously AP is happy to be mostly an ad`s mag than a photography mag. guess i should leave armature photographer to the armatures & move on to more detailed mags that cater for the serious photographer.

 

lol well if you have not worked that out already i guess you should take a look at other mags & how seriously they take actual photography
& while we are on the subject of content
it would not hurt for AP to make more of an effort with it then just put what they are currently are.

If you bothered to look at many mags you will see how much though is put into the mags & actual involve the readers than give just a lot of text.
sorry if that confuses you

 

Then maybe AP should redirect the mag such as a mag just with ad`s & throw in the odd bit of camera info
of maybe better still change the name to
AP ad`s mag
is the yellow pages still in print
might buy that instead

 

I'm sorry, but that's bang out of order - that's not at all what I've said, and you're twisting my words. Wouldn't be so bad except I had stood up for you when someone else was doing that to you...

The mix of AP is far more eclectic than any other mag. From what you're saying, looks like you need one of the monthlies that are aimed more at beginners, and repeat more or less the same technique articles each year. AP goes way beyond that sort of thing in content - it includes some technique stuff, but to have nothing but that would be terminally dull for those of us who learned it all years ago, so the mix of stuff suits people like me far better.

I think "armature photographer" would be a very specialised magazine indeed - not many are interested in photographing electrical motor components. As for "Amateur Photographer", it's a mag for true amateurs - that being lovers of the subject. As such, we tend to be a lot more serious than most, which is why the mag deals with the range of stuff it does - none of which has anything whatsoever to do with ads, which help support the weekly format.

 

haha ;D Oh you are hilarious other mags aimed at beginners ?

well that`s just a badly thought silly comment so your saying that Digital camera,
N-Photo, Practical photographer are far from that & compared to AP fine if you are pleased the amateur minor points then that`s your prerogative & wish to stay at a standard level then so be it obviously i look beyond the amateur levels as i happen to know a great deal about all that & wish to progress my photography
& obviously AP is more aimed at your level A beginner

You see i prefer a more sensible mature mag & also delight in actually doing photography than just talking about it in a forum which it seems quite a lot do here ? I slaos have plenty of books which not only talk about the practical side of photography but go further to talk about the theory side which is why i enjoy those you see i like to engage my brain on all levels

I don`t know what else you enjoy doing but the reality is any mag must be a delight if the content is a majority of ad`s then compared to the main subject matter.
you obviously don`t read other photography mags then in order to give that comment which really is quite silly or read if you do read then in depth.

 

Yes, I do think the mags you name are aimed at beginners and not very advanced amateurs (although I've never heard of N-Photo, that might be an exception) and certainly aren't aimed at as mature and advanced photographers as AP - it seems to fit precisely the bill of what you're asking for in terms of intellectual challenge.

What possible difference does the proportion of ads to content make? It's entirely irrational. The only thing that matters from a content point of view is, er, the content, in terms of quality and quantity. If you don't think there's enough, that's a point of view, but I think there's far more in a month's worth of AP than in one of the monthlies. YMMV.

Oh, and there isn't an apostraphe in "ads" - the apostraphe would make it possessive, not plural.

 

At least these days the front cover is respectable - remember the embarrassing soft-porn covers of the 70s?

 

There really is not much point in trying to compare the monthlies with AP. Most of them have been around for only a few years, whereas AP has more than a century's worth of experience in writing about photography. Also, if you aggregate the content in a month's worth of APs, you will get more photographic content than in any of the monthlies.

My experience of the monthlies, and I do buy a few, is that they print similar content each year depending on the season, and there really is very little that is 'new'. I used to buy Practical Photography until I realised that I could read the lot in about 45 minutes; N-Photo is a fairly new publication, aimed at Nikon owners, I believe, and only time will tell whether it will survive for more than a few years; Digital Camera is one of many digital-based magazines that have come to the market over the past 10 years or so, and, to be perfectly honest, when you have read one, you have read them all, they are that similar.

AP does try to vary its content, and is very strong in bringing the readers' attention to past photographers and processes, as well as having a strong technical side. OK there are 30 pages of adverts, many of which are repetitive week to week, but on the whole, I enjoy reading through the secondhand equipment ads.

Finally, I would like to say that all this slagging off of other members of the forum is not good manners; by all means have a different point of view, but please, don't get personal, and don't try to force your opinions on others. There is room for all types of photographer on this forum.

 

I'm surprised you can find the time after reading all those magazines!

 

I do, and they were both embarassing and enticing for a teenage boy...

 

in the 67 years I have been reading the AP, and during periods I have not had a subscription, I have often bought it only for the back pages.

In days gone by dozens of independant photoshops and many pages of private ads, have provided endless happy hours of brousing for bargains.
To day there is far less choice, but the ads are still interesting and contribute to the enjoyment of the magazine. Manufacturers pages could give more clear details rather than waffle, but that is their problem, but it means that there is rarely any reason to read them.

 

True.

But to be fair, Roy, I'm sure there's much point to this thread either.

 

Do you mean "there's NOT much point to this thread"?

 

I do, indeed.

Erm, just making sure everyone is giving their full attention as some salient points seem to have been overlooked.

 

lol you really are an IDIOT your clearly someone who is stuck in the dark ages who dare not say anything wrong about AP why ? because you simply suck up to them & obviously want to win favour with the editor or publishers lol.
yes you think but maybe you should think in a more logical way & stop talking nonsense which is what you are doing.
i`m happy for you if your pleased to get your AMATEUR weekly read shame though your not able or willing to stretch yourself more.

If you had a brain which is becoming more & more IMPOSSIBLE to believe then you would understand about photography more & see the clear difference in the mags i have mentioned
so you think that just because AP has been around for so long it`s better than the other mags? lol oh my you are troubled my dear friend.

I know 1 thing & that is i`m more intelligent than your ever be YOU HIDE HERE because you cant hack in the real world as a snapper & as for pointing out that typo about ads is that really the best you can do ?
you should talk when you spelt AMATEUR wrong in an earlier post *laughs* HYPOCRITE
REASON why you cant GRASP the point i`m making is because your unhinged & most definitely do not have the grey matter or GUMPTION to take it in or should i say UNWILLING to do so as the truth hurts in this case.

So glad you enjoy the £2.70 mag which has more text & ads in it than actual photography & if you had any sort of of a brain cell you would know that AP is WAYYYYYYY behind all the other mags out there.

Keep going dear as i can carry this on for months if you choose to do so
i have sadly come across some fools in my time but you are a gold medallist & will keep your title for many years to come
& ps when ppl type fast they sometimes makes typing mistakes so don`t jump for joy & start thinking your smart because that you will never be

 

The pertinent point that appears to have been missed (other than the erroneous ed v ad split mentioned here and elsewhere) is that no newsstand magazine I have ever worked on, or know of, has a publishing policy of turning away reader relevant advertising.

The reason that some magazines have a greater number of ads than others is that it is specifically these magazines that the advertisers wish to advertise with. They know that by spending their ad budget with them they will be presented to the largest (most discerning & eloquent ) readership. Should said readership then choose to engage with or ignore such ads is personal choice.

It is not a publishing decision that mag A has more ads than mag B. It is simply that for whatever reason be it content, poor circulation figures or the particular mags readership profile etc., mag B cannot attract the advertisers, sell the advertising space.

Fewer ad pages and accompanying low revenue is not a good sign in publishing.

It drives up cover prices (which will never compensate for lost ad revenue) which in turn can lose readers, less readers, less reason to advertise, higher cover prices, less readers... which leads inevitably to the publishers of mag B saying "So long, and thanks for all the fish"

 

Congratulations.

That is the most objectionable, ad hominem post I have ever read on this forum.

 

Referring to my previous post, I really do think this type of rant is objectionable, and not worthy of any further comment.