Too many photo mags?

[ABERS]

Mr Harris, you asked a question and have received several replies but all we get back is some feeble protestations about what cameras, as if anyone gives a damn, you were holding and some unsubstantiated figures about your magazine.

Percentages mean nothing, figures are what matters. What was your circulation and readership prior to the 'new look' and what is it now. The same question can be applied to advertising revenue, but it's understandable that this would be a commercially sensitive matter.
So have you gleaned from what has been said on these threads that most, if not all digital camera magazines, appear very similar.

Do you attribute your declared +60% increase since June just to the 'new look' or would you think that the run up to the 2010 POTY may have something to do wiith it?

[Geoff Harris]

I put the question out in the public domain and wasn't expecting to make a reply. I was genuinely interested in what people think. I replied to the posting about what camera I was holding as it was factually incorrect - saying that I am the editor of PhotoPlus (which I am no longer) and implying makers pay me to hold their camera (which they don't)

I wouldn't regard correcting factual inaccuracies as "feeble protestations".

Anyone can check out our circulation figures for the period Jan - Dec 2009. It's 45,182, as audited by the Audit Bureau of Circulations

This figure comprises UK news stand copy sales, subscriptions and some overseas sales. The figure for Jan - Dec 2010 will be published in February, so everyone can see how we are doing.

While I am not going to publish sales figures that have not been officially verified by ABC on this forum, it is the case that our sales have increased since the redesign. Obviously I cannot publish advertising revenue information for precisely the reason you mention.

Based on the overwhelmingly positively feedback I have had since the redesign, yes, I think the new look has played a major role. People seem to like it. POTY obviously played a part but we have not shouted about it on the magazine cover or bags, so while it's a factor, it's not the only one

I certainly take on board the feedback from people that photo mags all tend to look the same, and I am doing my best to differentiate Digital Camera. Everyone's feedback - positive or negative - is greatly appreciated, and I don't have any problem with feedback, but I will correct factual errors

Rgds

[ABERS]

Many thanks for your prompt reply. Extrapolating your circulation figures an average month of 3750 has now turned into 6000, a figure any CEO would be pleased with.
Congratulations, don't spend all the bonus at once

[Geoff Harris]

you can see the whole year's figures soon when the audited circulation (ABC) figure comes out - as I say, the sales increase I am referring to is for the redesign issues, and we only brought out the redesign in June (ie, half way through the year). So we'll see how it all boils down in the final figure

but it's all very encouraging

[Cutter]

Originally Posted by Geoff Harris

"Most will try and bring people back into the readership due to the mag being advertised as "new look" but unfortunately that is a trait of a stagnating magazine that has lost readers due to the usual problem of repeated and boring/basic article"

Hi, I'm glad to say that we definitely are offering a new look, and we definitely aren't stagnating. Since our redesign in issue 101 (onsale end of June), sales have increased by over 60% and advertising revenue is soaring.
I respond to your points about lastolite softboxes on a previous thread

Rgds
Geoff Harris, Editor

Nice to know you are getting the rewards for a great new look mag, keep it up LUV IT

[James Blonde]

I'm subscribed to (I think) 5 or 6 magazines (the fact I can't remember tells you a lot...! :cP). The reason being that I was buying them all in the shops at full price to compare them over a few months, and a subscription simply worked out a lot cheaper.

Having experienced a very poor issue of one of the magazines (many many factual errors, important ommissions, poor repeated content, no detail etc) and an "odd" issue of another, I'm now working on a "3 strikes and you're out" basis - if I can find 3 issues of that magazine with big enough problems, then I'll stop subscribing - simple as that! I'll also Email the magazine to let them know why I'm stopping the subscription.

It is quite clear though that I'm effectively reading the same article month after month in different magazines by different contributors - I mean how many times now in the last few months have I seen articles about light painting round objects? Or a poorly written piece on HDR/ DRI / IR that barely even tells you how to do it, let alone why you might want to, how it actually works and what things to avoid!

and MY GOD how many articles recommend you go out and buy a D3X as the ideal camera for black and white photography, and its ideally mounted on a gorillapod?! Oh yeh, and buy a macbook pro, cos you're clearly made of money!

[GeoffWessex]

The three stages of magazine readership.....

1. When you buy a couple of magazines as a newcomer, it's all fascinating, exciting stuff and makes for a good read, lasting the full month.

2. Once you've become reasonably accomplished with various techniques you start to look at equipment reviews because you've probably found a few weaknesses in whatever kit you first bought.

3. A year or so after that, it's all become a bit 'old hat' and the reader finds that articles on techniques don't go deep enough, while the kit reviews are of no real interest. In the meantime, we've bought a few books on the various techniques and/or followed online for trends and styles.

4. You move on to some other 'niche' magazine or just follow online.

All the above is the same cycle, whether it's photography, computers, knitting, cooking or anything else. Our interest might occasionally be re-ignited by a major make-over of a magazine but it's just a brief flicker...... Most of us, having filled our houses with piles of magazines (that we say are 'for future reference') either stick with a limited number of 'niche' magazines or follow a few websites. Or, simply, 'move on'.

[wavemachine]

Personally I subscribe to 4 photo magazines and certainly find similarities in articles between DCM and Photo Plus on the same month also as others have already said the same seasonal articles definately re-appear and don't seem to be much different from the prior year.

I don't think to many magazines is a bad thing though as it gives people choice, however my biggest frustration is the photoshop articles where as said previously they don't explain why certain values have been used and also when they cut out objects it is always on a simple plain background and there are not complex selections to deal with like hairI think it would be better if these articles dealed with a simple case and a complex case.