Posted by Luke Ormand on December 28, 2010 at 2:05 PM
I was given an issue of Nature Photographer Magazine as a stocking stuffer and was interested in how they approach their magazine in that it is quite different than many other photography magazines (and not bloated with page after page of ads in the middle of the good content. I also saw some workshops by NPN'ers advertised.
Anyway, I was wondering if any of you out there are or were 'Field Contributors". Basically, I'm wondering if it's worth it in an attempt to get published and make a little money. Obviously you have to provide quality content and there are no gaurentees (especially with just 4 issues each year) but I'd be interested to know of others sucecsses (or failures if you would be so humble). Thanks..
Posted by Mike Moats on December 28, 2010 at 6:44 PM
Hey Luke, I have been a field contributors in different years, and had a lot of images and a couple articles published there, and yes you have to pay like seventy five dollars a year, but I always made enough money to get my seventy five dollars back plus some.. As you said, they have very little advertising so the contributors pay the cost, kinda like public TV. The paper they use is better than Outdoor Photographer uses, so the images look better.
Posted by Jim Sabiston on December 29, 2010 at 6:08 AM
Luke,
I was a field contributor for two years. I did not renew about a year ago. Mikes observations are spot on. It is a good quality mag and I still have all my copies - the only mag I saved. I submitted one article for publication and it was accepted - On Harriman State Park (Fall 2007 IIRC). The income was a bit more than the annual membership, so don't look at it as a profit center.
As you said, there are no guarantees, but your photo work is certainly up to par. I'd give it a go just for the experience.
Posted by John Tobias on December 29, 2010 at 8:06 AM
I have been a reader of NPM for years, but have never subscribed or became a field contributor, and now that it is down to two issues a year plus one double issue, I doubt if I ever will. However, I really enjoy the magazine and have only recently started recycling the older issues as I am simply running out of room. There are good articles and some no so good, as with any magazine. I doubt if anyone will make much off of it with the limited issues, but go for it, why not!
Posted by Bill Maile on December 29, 2010 at 8:08 AM
Funny you mention this Luke, I looked at this publication online last week for the first time, and had the same questions regarding "Field Contributors" and its value. Personally, I'm not sure just how much I could "contribute" yet as my work needs work, but it sounds like a great idea, go for it! And excellent feedback Jim and Mike.
Posted by Kate Silvia on December 29, 2010 at 8:40 AM
Hi Luke,
I've been a field contributor for about 5 years. It was my first publication which encouraged me to try other magazines. I've had 3 articles and several more stand alone images published with the magazine. I also love that they are not stuffed with advertisements. Even if I do not submit articles or photos for a while, I maintain my "Field Contributor" status strictly to support the efforts of the magazine. I believe they provide a good product and encourage others to support them as well. Good luck in your efforts! Kate
Posted by Nancy de Flon on December 29, 2010 at 9:19 AM
Hi Luke,
Thank you for starting this discussion and thanks to all for contributing. It is a great mag though I've never gone to field contributor status, not yet. But you, Luke, you should go for it, I think they would have a market for your work because -- and I say this as a native Long Islander now living in the Hudson Valley -- let's face it, how many top-notch nature photographers are there on Long Island? There are beautiful places on the Island but it takes someone of your calibre to envision and realize images that go beyond the usual cliches. Go for it, Luke.
Posted by John Reed on December 29, 2010 at 10:23 AM
I have been a Field Contributor for so long I can't even remember how long it's been. I too have had work published in the magazine and online. I have not submitted anything for quite a while simply because of attention on other outlets but I have maintained my Field Contributor status and plan to continue to do so. The reason is quite simple. Much like this site is "our" site, I consider that magazine "our magazine" when it comes to nature photographers. It is for, by, and about those of us pursuing this activity regardless of name or fame. Helen and Marty are "real" people. You can call them up and talk to them. You can write and they will answer. The philosophy towards the earth, the creatures on it, the environment, and how we fit as put forth in the magazine resonates with me personally. So for all these reasons, I love the magazine and will continue to support it whether I ever make another penny from it or not. I think it rare and worthy of support.
John
Posted by Arnab Banerjee on December 29, 2010 at 7:48 PM
Luke - I am like you. I have considered a few times to become a field contributor, but the idea "to pay to get published" was not what I was looking for. But the other points that others mentioned - about the quality, the content, "our magazine" - all are true. I also did not know that they actually pay if they select your article/photos. But I think that it has very limited circulation beyond the photographers - so if you are looking for a wide promotion, it's probably not the ideal publication
Discussion
8 repliesAnyway, I was wondering if any of you out there are or were 'Field Contributors". Basically, I'm wondering if it's worth it in an attempt to get published and make a little money. Obviously you have to provide quality content and there are no gaurentees (especially with just 4 issues each year) but I'd be interested to know of others sucecsses (or failures if you would be so humble). Thanks..
I was a field contributor for two years. I did not renew about a year ago. Mikes observations are spot on. It is a good quality mag and I still have all my copies - the only mag I saved. I submitted one article for publication and it was accepted - On Harriman State Park (Fall 2007 IIRC). The income was a bit more than the annual membership, so don't look at it as a profit center.
As you said, there are no guarantees, but your photo work is certainly up to par. I'd give it a go just for the experience.
I've been a field contributor for about 5 years. It was my first publication which encouraged me to try other magazines. I've had 3 articles and several more stand alone images published with the magazine. I also love that they are not stuffed with advertisements. Even if I do not submit articles or photos for a while, I maintain my "Field Contributor" status strictly to support the efforts of the magazine. I believe they provide a good product and encourage others to support them as well. Good luck in your efforts! Kate
Thank you for starting this discussion and thanks to all for contributing. It is a great mag though I've never gone to field contributor status, not yet. But you, Luke, you should go for it, I think they would have a market for your work because -- and I say this as a native Long Islander now living in the Hudson Valley -- let's face it, how many top-notch nature photographers are there on Long Island? There are beautiful places on the Island but it takes someone of your calibre to envision and realize images that go beyond the usual cliches. Go for it, Luke.
John