1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Rip Off Apoy 2017

Discussion in 'AP Magazine Feedback & Suggestions' started by barry_scott, Apr 22, 2017.

  1. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    For years I've called myself a "paid amateur".

    Enough people love what I do that I get paid for it, though admittedly less and less as magazines fall by the wayside, e.g. American Photo and Popular Photography in the last year alone. This includes technique, history, critique and even the occasional picture. The problem is that today, everyone wants everything for free on the internet, i.e. wholly paid for by advertising (and data harvesting) instead of partially paid for by advertising as magazines have always been. And all too many books today replace the manuals that digital camera manufacturers should provide.

    Quite a few hate what I do as well, but at the least I make them think about what they want from photography, both as readers and creators.

    I've not entered APOY (or any other major magazine competition) since about 1975, though, partly because it seems sort of dishonest and partly because it's not a rational path for anyone who can actually earn money from their photography. Why invest time and effort in gambling on a prize when you can persuade paying clients to part with their money? Yes, there's the glory, but once you're calling yourself "professional" (or even "paid amateur"), it's a bit of an admission that you ain't in it just for the glory. Or at least, that you're pretending not to be, even though a lot of self-described "professionals" earn little or sometimes nothing from their craft. I'd rather earn my money as an honest professional (or at least "paid amateur"), from paying clients.

    Most professionals I know (and I know a lot, and have known even more) have the very highest respect for APOY. Many (including me) will say that the best amateurs are often better than most professionals. But they wouldn't enter APOY because they know that they'd be regarded as having an unfair advantage, even when they haven't. They may also be afraid of not winning...


    Doom, Trannifan, Benchista and 2 others like this.
  2. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    If you want to go by the Oxford English Dictionary, then you need to go by the full version, not the notoriously stripped-down online version. Even my Concise version lists the definition of "a person who is fond of a thing". If you bothered to search on here, you would find quotes from past editors explaining the usage of the word as applied to the magazine.

    And if you bothered to read the current Editor's posts in this very thread you would have very clear answers to the 10% question.

    Finally, if you believe that you can use the magazine's own web forums to encourage legal action against the mag, I can tell you that the lemon juice isn't working.
  3. Jimbo57

    Jimbo57 Well-Known Member

    Then, I suspect, you lie somewhere in the middle of a continuum which has diametrically opposed extremes.

    From reading a wide variety of posts on this forum, I get the impression that, at one end of the scale, we have amateurs who enjoy their hobby but, at the same time, would not mind earning some additional pocket-money if they could. At the other end, we clearly have many who despise such behaviour as prostituting art in the pursuit of money. In the middle we have "live and let live".

    But, really, that is not what this thread is about. Is it not more about changes in the rules and administration of a competition which, perhaps, make it less attractive to its original target group - readers of the magazine?
  4. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    My humble apologies Nick and to AP staff :(

    My fault for not reviewing the thread after posting sometime ago. :(

    I have now taken the time to read all of the editor's posts concerning the competition.

    So I fully understand AP's position.

    It's clear AP's staff have had to make some very tough and awkward decisions to maintain the survival of the magazine.

    At the end of the day I fairly sure we all want the magazine to continue into the future.

    So I will just accept APOY as it is. I can only try my best and see how it goes. :)

    I do my photography for just enjoyment. So I not going to stress myself if AP have had to redesign APOY because of costs etc. Things change you either accept that or sulk. :p LOL

    Once I again I am very sorry for my posts on here Nick and AP staff.

    congrats to anyone who has done well in APOY so far :)

  5. Doom

    Doom Member

    I understand it is very hard to police and sadly we just have to take peoples word on it but it does strike me odd that someone that calls themselves and Amateur still entered last years IPA as a Professional as well as a number other international competitions that had both Amateur and Pro including the International Monochrome awards , maybe for better publicity sure but does strike me as a little odd.

    She probably is telling the truth and earns a fortune from property but therefore the old 10% rule could still be £10,000 a year so will APOY consider bringing back the 5K rule and was this changed after the competition began to the new rule?.
    Sure its hard to police I agree but at least by having the 10% and 5K rule it might make someone think twice in view of damaging their reputation which in the art world can be a big thing.

    I like to also apologise for jumping in a bit heavy handed but after recognising her name from various international pro level comps I became very suspicious.
  6. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    The only way maybe a very low % rule like 1% or 2%?

    But as the editor has said quite hard to police.

    You could be very much published but you might have submitted the work for low or zero rate to get the PR.

    It's not like the film days, photography has very low overheads now.

    You charge your batteries and way you go :)

    Where as before you had raw stock costs, processing costs, darkroom costs etc

    I only do my shooting for love. But even I have had work published and exhibited by other organisations. So am I still a AP?

    AP is fighting for survival as a magazine. They run the magazine and its competition on every tightening budget.

    If the shooter feels they are at heart a AP then we should just accept that.

    One thing is sure they are a pretty good photographer. :)

    All photographer's start out as AP and in some cases still carry on only making the quid here and there. Some do go full pro in that they take the big gamble to make it a career.

    If they are earning good probably don't have the time for APOY :p LOL

    I know a creative wedding shooter he does not have time for his own projects between bookings and workshops let alone time to enter competitions. :p LOL
    Nigel_Atherton likes this.
  7. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    'Ere mate - set me up a sock puppet, will ya? I need to 'like' this again. :cool:
  8. Nigel_Atherton

    Nigel_Atherton Group Editor

    No. There is no way whatsoever that we can verify the 10% rule has been followed without demanding to see tax returns. So we changed the wording to say that photography must not be their primary source of income. Still hard to prove, as we've discovered.
    Catriona likes this.
  9. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    I had really long think about this.

    I think we can say with some confidence that whether you are a amteur or pro we all as shooters love capturing and creating art hopefully for our own wall and maybe others.

    The best name for the competition is Artist Photographer of the Year (APOY) LOL

    Because whether is a record shot or some other capture its all art, its all a expression of humans view of the planet and the life etc on it.

    Today photography is even more art than in the past with the tools that all shooters have now.

    If you are a "amateur" and you do win a round or even the whole thing must be pretty sweet knowing you have topped pros :p LOL

    dear editor, sorry where are the rules please? :eek:

    I looked in magazine on page 30-31
  10. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    Well, I knew one artist whose wife supported him with her earnings as a whore (literally). He reckoned his principles were higher than mine, because I prostituted my talent. I still prefer my principles...

    Given how many non-readers of the magazine frequent the forum, it's a bit rich when some of them complain about the competition.


  11. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

    ....but that does not negate the views of several contributors, who are magazine readers, who would like the competition to be focussed towards readers, rather than just being an all-comers internet thing.
    Roger Hicks and Jimbo57 like this.
  12. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    I sure the AP editor and the staff went through all this when looking at the APOY situation.

    I can't see how that can be achieved easily. The magazine is not just in a physical form anymore.

    You'd probably have to supply some kind of entry code with every magazine physically and electronically sold?

    That would take money out of AP's tight budget.

    Its still would be possible for pros to enter because anyone can buy the magazine.

    Do you have idea that might work which is zero cost to AP?

    I remember when you had to either use the form or a photocopy from the magazine.

    Its clear even with that system it's a cost as the editor has explained.

    They have not really changed the format that much, Photocrowd as the editor explained saves them the time and energy of dealing with the data.

    Yes in the past they used to accept prints and even slides but that is too damn costly :(

    If AP raises it's shelf price to deal with that cost it will price itself out of the market place altogether or end up monthly. :(
    Benchista likes this.
  13. Nigel_Atherton

    Nigel_Atherton Group Editor

    Thanks to everyone for their supportive messages as well as constructive criticisms on this topic. I think its safe to say that the days when you could make a viable business from a print-only consumer magazine are pretty much over. We're all 'brands' now, not just magazines, and need to reach people in print, online, through social media, events and other channels, and find other ways to gain revenue besides just ads in print. Our audience is no longer just magazine readers its everyone who interacts with us though whatever channel. The changes to APOY reflect that.
  14. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    That's the way it is - see my signature line
  15. Doom

    Doom Member

    Been a reader of the magazine for around 3 years now.
  16. Jimbo57

    Jimbo57 Well-Known Member

    I am not sure how much involvement editorial staff have in the production of magazines, but I hope that I am not teaching Grandma to suck eggs if I explain that the only reason that many magazines have survived is that production costs have dropped at an even greater rate than readership. I could name many magazines that, 30 years ago, had circulation figures in the 50,000 - 100,000 range that are now struggling to sell 15,000 - 20,000 copies per issue.

    Fortunately, advances in technology over that period have enabled magazines to remain viable with much lower circulations than were once the case.This applies not only to print technology but also to editorial costs (magazines that previously might have had a dozen editorial staff or more, may now get by with three or four), communication costs and, a sore point with some backward-looking photographers, picture costs. Magazines (although possibly not photographic titles) that used to have a picture editor and a picture library, now merely give journalists small budgets to illustrate their articles from online stock libraries.

    It is difficult to see where this trend will end. Print magazines attempting to supplement their circulations with online editions are currently having some success but those online editions are increasingly in competition with a plethora of free online magazines of variable quality. In the photography field, for example, there are dozens of free magazines, the most popular UK one possible being ePhotozine which has a very large readership although the quality of journalism can be somewhat variable.

    But the question that exercises my mind is whether supplementing a printed magazine with an online edition will ultimately assist survival or may, on the other hand, lead to the ultimate demise of the printed version, quickly followed by the demise of the online edition?

    I don't know.
  17. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    Another side of the lower production costs coin is the bigger and glossier old school (plus college) magazines that I keep getting as they attempt to woo me into leaving them a bequest
  18. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    Time Inc UK claim a readership of 30,380

    I have seen figures of 13,673 even as low as 14,000 :(
  19. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

  20. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

Share This Page