Production costs have gone up significantly in the last year due to two things:
• The drop in the exchange rate following the EU Referendum increased Time Inc's annual paper bill (all of which is imported) by a seven figure sum overnight. The pound remains low.
• One of the UK's largest printers went into administration last year and as a result of the laws of supply and demand, the remaining operators put their prices up.
• The dramatic switch in advertising budgets from print to online over the last couple of years means a greater proportion of the production costs have to come from copy sales.
(see below).

 

Our audited ABC readership figure for 2016 is 13,067, which is a fall of -4.3% over the previous year (13,673 was for 2015). This is one of the best performances in the market. The photo magazine sector is, like most other sectors, in double digit decline overall.

 

Just my opinion so Mr Atherton so you can tell me to get lost LOL

But I don't feel AP highlights it's history enough.

Not sure "Passionate about photography since 1884" on the cover does enough.

I think a rethink about placing the 1884 larger on the cover to show the reader and new buyers that you are the original photographer's friend.

Maybe even a newer tag line.

Because of the 1884 history AP is a brand. Possibly adding a extra section on page 2 with "about" panel. Then you can do some name dropping of past columnists like Bailey etc.

So when someone is thinking of improving their photography and browsers in a shop or gets hold of a copy of AP they see you have been helping and support shooters along time.

The history is a asset of the brand. Should be shouted about every week.

Here is serious problem I think with the website front door it does not say a thing about 1884 or the magazine.

Should have a few lines about what the person has come across.

Yes there is a about tag at the bottom of the page.

 

Thanks for your suggestion. We are looking at ways to trying to make more of our heritage.

 

Readership and sales aren't the same.

Former is number of readers - could be multiple readers per mag, and also includes magazines given away (to industry etc).

 

Anyway, going to back to APOY....

Nigel, I assume the judges don't go through all 2000 entries? God help you, if you do.

So do you have a set number you look at - say, the top 300 voted by Photocrowd users?

(Apols if you've answered this before)

 

Does anyone on this thread know where the Hit the Streets result were published because not in 08/07/2017 issue

 

BTW, my entry has had 60-something ratings for four days.

In that time, it’s dropped from 150-something to 190-something.

Funny old system...

 

"Nigel, I assume the judges don't go through all 2000 entries? God help you, if you do."


I don't know if I already answered this but yes, our judges do go through and rate every image. We don't actually get to see the crowd vote results until after we have completed ours.

 

The Round Two results were published in the 15th July issue. Sorry for any confusion. The Round 3 results are in the 12th August issue.

 

Thanks Mr Atherton

Are the other dates correct in the list?

 

seem to be this month , my guess is they moved it due to the large Nikon anniversary article.

 

To return to the 'Rip Off Apoy 2017' subject of this forum thread... is 'pay and display' the real APOY winner this year?

Marco Tagliarono (from Italy or India depending on the picture) has 2 pictures in the AP issue with round 2 results, and Elena Paraskeva from Cyprus has 3 pictures in the AP issue with round 3 results. In the days when I sometimes entered APOY, I used to agonise which single image to submit. Also, Elena's pictures are all 'exposure unknown' with no camera or lens details. Since AP is a photographic magazine, and not an art magazine, should the APOY rules insist that these details be supplied? I like to know if an image has been created using hardware costing many thousands of pounds (the popular combination of full frame DSLR and 500 mm F4 or 400 mm F 2.8 lens used for wildlife photography, for example), and I am much less impressed than if it was created by hardware costing a fraction of the price. Most of us are doing the best we can with what we can afford.

 

naughty, should wait until Tuesday when AP hits the streets! Take a look at the leader's score this round.

 

I don't understand this comment - my AP arrived by post today.
Is Flickr where AP puts all the stuff that should be in the magazine?

 

I agree that is very useful to know what kit has been used.

I visit photo exhibitions and do take pleasure from see side by side images for high end kit against more modest kit and seeing that both works stand well against each.

For me it is further evidence that image making is reach a leveling off position in the consumer market.

High end is chasing the MF sector now. In time that too will level off. There is just only some much you can tweak in a stills camera.

When the fps reaches say 30 and the MP is 80 or 100+ and the EVF is mega sharp and clean with zero black out.

The AF is very fast and clever at tracking etc. Exposure too is super clever. Then what?

 

Subscribers get it early. It isn't available retail until Tuesday. Raising issues in Forum before all the readership can be aware is not reasonable or fair.

 

Then the thing that's always been the heart of photography will remain. Composition, content, emotion, story, the moment.

 

Not sure but I think the website leader board has been updated.

The 15/07/2017 results had Marco Tagliarino in 1st with 101. Website says Henrick Spranz is top now with 175.

So apart from number of images in current issue the AP website seems to have spilled the beans before Tues not Chester AP LOL

 

Well exactly so when a shooter performs the craft on low end kit it confirms that position.

We get many newbies asking what kit should I get etc? It's great to point to a winning image and say that was taken on a compact or bridge camera etc. Not £3000 of pro kit. LOL