Submitting Photos Into The Magazine

Having submited photographs in recent months to both Steam Railway and Railway Magazine, the 'read request' was, apparently in each instance, cancelled by the recipient!! Talk about lack of respect - all for for the want of the mere click of a button!!

 

Hello RM Staff and all I am unable to photo shop my digital photos or put them in low res because I don’t have photo shop on my PC apart from buying a copy of photo shop is there any think I can do before sending you my digital images too you. The only thing I do is to fill in file name with information about the photo.

Thanks

 

If a photo was used would it be possible to send the payment straight to a charity or cause the photographer supports?

 

I can assure everyone that (a) we look at EVERY photograph with a view to possible use, and (b) the message being returned to the sender is bogus, and incorrect. Also remember that big companies have sophisticated software to trap spam, and also filter out emails with inappropriate content - swear words, or attachments with large areas of the same colour (ie: skin tones).

We have had a number of contributors ask why their email was deleted without being read. In each case I investigated, and after the email arrived in the inbox, it was FORWARDED to one of the section editors without 'opening' the contents. It is here that I suspect the message is generated for the sender with 'cancelled' or unopened response. Let me explain further.

All Railway Mag staff use Macs, and our email software is Microsoft Entourage.

Within Entourage is a "split pane" facility allowing us to see a list of emails and senders in the in box at the top of the screen, with date and time sent/received, but a lower window allows the content, including words and photos to be viewed without 'opening' the email in a conventional way. Just selecting the email changes the status within Entourage from unread to read.

Using the slider bars we can immediately see the content of the photos, so we know which section editor to forward the images to. Entourage is a far better product than Outlook, and eliminates the need to double-click each image to open it.

I am happy to expand on this if anyone is unclear - just PM me.


To answer the question by dace83, yes it possible to have your repro fee sent to a charity or loco group, and this already happens with the work of a number of contributors.

 

I understand that this may be a problem for some people, and we are flexible. After all, we wont turn away a stunning news image because you cant photoshop it.

The options are, rather than pay silly money for the full version of Photoshop CS3, is to either try and buy a copy of Photoshop ELements 6 or 7. Elements 7 is around £55, and needs less than 3 photos published to recover your outlay. (see: http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/ViewProdDe ... ements%207)

Alternatively, Tesco (bless 'em) do their own image manipulation software for under £10 - see http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.200-9004.aspx Also available in the bigger stores.

And if you are really budget conscious, there is GIMP - which is a free download. See: http://www.gimp.org
I am just about to download this to the family PC to see what it is like.

These may not have the 'File Info' feature (we can make exceptions), but you will be able to use them to get the best from your images.

As always, any questions, please ask.

 

Should that not read 'family mac'? :-k

 

No ! The company provide me with a Mac laptop - and lovely it is too. My family have to suffer using one of those awful PC contraptions............ =P~

 

Further to an earlier posting, copies of Photoshop Elements 5 are available for £39, and for those wanting something a bit more than the budget priced software, this is a bargain price.

Details: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product ... ku=1022049

 

I noticed the picture of Sir Lamiel with the puddle reflection on the second page of RM and in the gallery of SR. [-(

 

... and no doubt Mr Docwra will be finding future submissions being given a little less consideration in future - methinks.

 

I thought this too - touting the same material to multiple titles is a bit of a faux pas - especially when it results with the situation evidenced here! [-X

 

Those of us who have been around for a long time know it's a strict no-no to submit the same image to several titles 'just in the hope one may use it', and it's a rule many new contributors fall foul of.

Just the once, mind you !

However, some photographers are blatant about it and the give away is the email addresses of competitors which you spot as you read it. This is one case where the delete button does get used - probably by all of the recipients.

 

Those of us who have been around for a long time know it's a strict no-no to submit the same image to several titles 'just in the hope one may use it', and it's a rule many new contributors fall foul of.
This is one case where the delete button does get used - probably by all of the recipients.[/quote:17q1woyg]
And, doubtless, in your inimitable manner, even THAT will go totally unacknowledged! 'Tis a pity YOU don't have a "Delete" button, some others who have been around for an equally long time might suggest!

 

[/quote:23fl021m][/quote:23fl021m]
So what you are effectively saying, Mr Milner, is that, if you don’t like a particular picture, or, if, perhaps, someone else has already submitted a similar one, you just hit the ‘Delete’ button and your contributor is then left totally in the dark as to whether his work might or might not be used and, far more importantly, if that contributor is as honourable as I feel the majority of contributors are, then this does deny him the opportunity to submit that image or images elsewhere.

Although I must confess to being as irked as you clearly are (and rightly so) at seeing the identical picture appearing in two rival publications, I might put it to you that ‘placing all one’s eggs in one basket’ is NOT a sensible idea (for the contributor), whereas another editor might have bitten-off that same photgrapher’s arm merely to get hold of the picture, but which is now lost for ever, or, at least, lost as a newsworthy item!

Further to that, I might add that, with the attitude that, some might argue, you clearly appear to possess with regard to contributors in general, my supplying you with my own real identity would achieve little other than finding myself being ‘black-listed’ from having any further work accepted by the “Railway Magazine”. Fortunately, unlike most other contributors I am lucky in that I do already appear to have established a relationship with one particular editor in particular and to the extent that I actually am informed fairly immediately if my work IS going to be used and, if I do have that information to hand, I can then advise other editors of the situation. Result? Everyone is happy!

Clearly, problems exist on both sides of the table, but, argue as much as you wish, your ‘Press the Delete button – out of sight, out of mind’ attitude is never going to win you any lasting loyalty or real friends.

 

As someone who has never been published I can see both sides of this

If a photographer has a tacit understanding with an editor that his work will be considered, then merely sending to one title may be a reasonable scenario -but -

Why should a casual contributor who has obtained a one off masterpiece send to only one title, and risk being deleted without notification, which thus prevents him contacting other potential publishers by default - everyone loses.

Perhaps the answer is - "sent to SR / HR / RM" at the bottom of the email so that an editor knows he is in a competitive situation, the fotter can spread his risk - and if a response is received that the image is to be used from magazine "X" then the fotter will advise publishers 2 & 3 that the image has been taken up.

That will give freedom of market to the fotter, freedom of choice to the editor - "first come - first served" and anyone silly enough to try to get published on two mags would very soon be found out - and deleted.

Just a thought!

 

Loyalty works both ways - and sending an image ( irrespective of quality ) to more than one editor at a time is the absolute height of disloyalty. If that is your intent the send an image to editor #1 pointing out that if no reply is forthcoming within a specified ( but reasonable ) then it will be offered to another publication - better to give someone a chance to say "No" rather than presume it.

But we've had this discussion before and - as all editors agree - with over 2000 digital images of various qualities from the brilliant to the beastly being received per edition there is surely some responsibility on the photographer to deal as honourably with editors as he expects editors to deal with him and his submissions.

 

OK - my last word on this.

You can carry on the tedious debate without me.


In my earlier post today I thought I made it reasonably clear that if a contributor sent us an email, which was also sent to other magazines then it would almost certainly be deleted. Obviously if each magazine gets individual emails, then who's to know?

I think I also said that we endevaour to reply to emails, but sometimes it proves impossible, and I can only apologise if that disappoints. If I am emailed, asking if we are likely to use a picture then if it is in one of the sections I compile, then I give a yes or no.

If the submission is steam, classic traction or railtours, I do not select images for those sections, so contributors with queries should email the editor of that section - their details are in the mag.

I accept that this is not a perfect system, and it's impossible to devise one that is. In an ideal world, all the mags would have picture editors/researchers, but we don't.

Throughout this thread I have tried to give honest, practical, helpful advice and did invite K25 to PM me to discuss any issues.

K25 chose not to accept this invitation, so the offer is herewith withdrawn, and I am taking the ball home !!!

As Sidmouth said, I have a magazine to produce.

 

Okay, my own last word on all of this.......
Let’s just re-cap back to about 15 months ago, just to set out the clearer picture of what really has been rattling people's cages:

More recently, the tone of correspondence within this thread, clearly indicates that many are still far from happy - it all now being drawn to a conclusion with:

Thank you for that, Mr M, and, believe it or not, you have now made your position quite clear and to my absolute satisfaction.

The issues that I raised were, I believe, fundamental, non-negotiable and eminently sensible and that is the only reason why I considered that there would be no advantage in discussing them further. Whether I decided to reveal my identity, or not, quite honestly has very little to do with any of this ... although those such as "Sidmouth" possibly might tend to disagree, I like to think that I was merely representing the "voice of the people" (or, at least, the significant majority of them!)

Several of us (it's so very clearly not been only myself, by any means) have shared our views with each other on this forum and you have now at long last publicly set out your own stall on the particular matter in hand; this in a manner which your potential contributors can comprehend, if not even empathise with! I am grateful to you for that.

I think the bottom-line under all of this always encompassed a polite request that all contributors, irrespective of the quality or otherwise of their offerings, were each afforded an equal degree of mutual respect, rather than just being totally ignored. As "Fred Kerr" said, "there is surely some responsibility on the photographer to deal as honourably with editors as he expects editors to deal with him and his submissions". On the other hand, as I have already pointed out and “5596” has since underlined, “If a photographer has a tacit understanding with an editor that his work will be considered, then merely sending to one title may be a reasonable scenario -but - why should a casual contributor who has obtained a one-off masterpiece send to only one title, and risk being deleted without notification, which thus prevents him contacting other potential publishers by default - everyone loses?" As you say, you accept that this is not a perfect system, and I would fully accept that it may well be impractical, or even impossible, to devise one that is.

Nevertheless, in concluding that you have “taken your ball home”, I can only assume that you have considered all of this to have been a witch-hunt, or even an issue historically emanating on a more personal basis. Please be assured that that is FAR from the case!

I think so very many of us will echo my closing words (before I kick my own ball finally into touch), these being:
Please just afford the individual contributors a little more consideration when you hit that “Delete Button”! In the earlier words of "19D", "in my book, even a mere e-mail with pre-prepared ‘cut-and-paste’ text in response would be considered the absolute minimum in common courtesy. A message only takes a few seconds to write ...... and it costs absolutely nothing to send!"

 

I don't know the answer to this one, in fact I doubt there is one, but I do feel a great deal of sympathy with the editors and feel I must pull up this point:

Assuming that a message takes 3 seconds to compose (unlikely) and assuming the figure of 2000 photos which has been previously mentioned. 3 x 2000 = 6000 seconds = 100 minutes = 1 hour 40 minutes.
That time cannot be written off as costing nothing! It could also be a contender for the worlds most boring job.


Keith