Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 ...or you could work for a living... Anyway, how much can 6 employees cost a magazine?? This is really going to save SI? Strange move. They are planning to have the same guys continue to take and sell them photographs, but as free lancers. It's in between the lines of that article. Even if they pay highly for photographs, it will save them all the benefits and overhead. Print magazines are on the way out. They haven't successfully adjusted or marketed themselves to the digital age. This is a desperation move to stay afloat.
North Buffalo Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 ...or you could work for a living... Anyway, how much can 6 employees cost a magazine?? This is really going to save SI? Strange move. As a former professional photographer, you have no clue what it takes to achieve printable images that are worthy. Knowledge of lighting, angles, the gear you use, different styles of shooting, depth of field. Yes taking pictures of models seems ... whatever. Still, in order to do it well, you have to put your balls on ice and work with all your skills with your gear and then you have entertain the models or whatever subject you are shooting in order the achieve the desired look and image. Then there is the business side. What you do has to be able to make money and operate under a budget. The gear needed to take the quality of images produced in a magazine can often cost over $100,000. The cameras cost $40,000-$50,000 before lenses and lighting. So its not the employees that cost, but the gear and the people involved in a shoot set up. Internet postings don't require the same level of expense, but newer monitors are starting to allow greater definition and therefore better gear and knowledge of photography. Too bad SI is unable to bridge that gap:(
Ted William's frozen head Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 As a former professional photographer, you have no clue what it takes to achieve printable images that are worthy. Knowledge of lighting, angles, the gear you use, different styles of shooting, depth of field. Yes taking pictures of models seems ... whatever. Still, in order to do it well, you have to put your balls on ice and work with all your skills with your gear and then you have entertain the models or whatever subject you are shooting in order the achieve the desired look and image. Then there is the business side. What you do has to be able to make money and operate under a budget. The gear needed to take the quality of images produced in a magazine can often cost over $100,000. The cameras cost $40,000-$50,000 before lenses and lighting. So its not the employees that cost, but the gear and the people involved in a shoot set up. Internet postings don't require the same level of expense, but newer monitors are starting to allow greater definition and therefore better gear and knowledge of photography. Too bad SI is unable to bridge that gap:( You stated this better than I.
Mr. WEO Posted January 24, 2015 Posted January 24, 2015 As a former professional photographer, you have no clue what it takes to achieve printable images that are worthy. Knowledge of lighting, angles, the gear you use, different styles of shooting, depth of field. Yes taking pictures of models seems ... whatever. Still, in order to do it well, you have to put your balls on ice and work with all your skills with your gear and then you have entertain the models or whatever subject you are shooting in order the achieve the desired look and image. Then there is the business side. What you do has to be able to make money and operate under a budget. The gear needed to take the quality of images produced in a magazine can often cost over $100,000. The cameras cost $40,000-$50,000 before lenses and lighting. So its not the employees that cost, but the gear and the people involved in a shoot set up. Internet postings don't require the same level of expense, but newer monitors are starting to allow greater definition and therefore better gear and knowledge of photography. Too bad SI is unable to bridge that gap:( SI has always relied heavily on freelance photographers--so the cost of a major shoot will simply be charged to SI by the freelancer. That leaves the salary and benefits for a handful of staffers. I would guess these guys make not much more than 100K a year. The magazine has 3 million paid subscribers. The swimsuit edition alone brings 7 million on the newsstand, over 40 million in ad revenue. I still don't understand how shaving a few hundred thousand (minus the added cost of freelance photos yet to come) off of a business bringing in 146 MILLION in ad revenue in the 1st Q of 2014 alone will save this magazine.
North Buffalo Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) SI has always relied heavily on freelance photographers--so the cost of a major shoot will simply be charged to SI by the freelancer. That leaves the salary and benefits for a handful of staffers. I would guess these guys make not much more than 100K a year. The magazine has 3 million paid subscribers. The swimsuit edition alone brings 7 million on the newsstand, over 40 million in ad revenue. I still don't understand how shaving a few hundred thousand (minus the added cost of freelance photos yet to come) off of a business bringing in 146 MILLION in ad revenue in the 1st Q of 2014 alone will save this magazine. Agreed, but some button pusher, er bean counter justifies it to increase minorly the bottom line so useless middle thru top management can justify their outrageous raises. And we complain about government incompetence... A guy I play hockey with works for a company that comes in buys companies then reorganizing them by firing middle management and restructuring CEO pay while supporting key personnel.... Novel idea, support the guys that actually do the work. Don't be surprised to see SI bought out again... forget who their are owned by? Edited January 25, 2015 by North Buffalo
thronethinker Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 If I subscribe do I still get a free football phone and the year in sports 1991?
KD in CA Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 Most publications have gone to freelance photographers. Yup; I don't see the big deal. There were only six guys and most if not all will probably continue on a freelance basis. The days of employees being able to stay at a company for 25-35 years are over for the most part. It is too expensive for companys to keep giving raises and pay retirements. Sports Illustrated will survive. There is plenty of good photagraphers, graphic designers, and editors out there. A lot more than you think. They will hire a new crop and not miss a beat. In about 9 years they will all be gone too. Corporate America at its finest. If by "Corporate America at its finest" you mean taking sensible steps to maintain a balance between costs and declining subscribers, I agree.
MattM Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 Agreed, but some button pusher, er bean counter justifies it to increase minorly the bottom line so useless middle thru top management can justify their outrageous raises. And we complain about government incompetence... A guy I play hockey with works for a company that comes in buys companies then reorganizing them by firing middle management and restructuring CEO pay while supporting key personnel.... Novel idea, support the guys that actually do the work. Don't be surprised to see SI bought out again... forget who their are owned by? I think they're still owned by Time Inc, which got spun out of TIme Warner a few years back when Meredith wouldn't buy them (but I think they did buy some of their more niche mags). Very tough business these days. I have a number of writer/editor friends working in publishing (including some at former TW mags) and it's an increasingly brutal business. No one seems to know how to make $ since we all expect free web content. I also play cards every now and then with one of the very senior guys on the business side there--I missed the game at his house, but from descriptions I got it sounds like for some folks the uncertainty has paid dividends.....
SoulMan Posted January 25, 2015 Posted January 25, 2015 Yup; I don't see the big deal. There were only six guys and most if not all will probably continue on a freelance basis. If by "Corporate America at its finest" you mean taking sensible steps to maintain a balance between costs and declining subscribers, I agree. It's capitalism......adapt, innovate, grow.
Recommended Posts