National Geographic has changed their printing process! (Page 2): Likely, AZ Highways lowered their standards significantly.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

davidrb wrote:

It seems NatGeo might have lowered the standards of what they publish. Are they reducing the standards for acceptance of photographs also?

Likely, AZ Highways lowered their standards significantly.

rlv567 Loc: Baguio City, Philippines

pithydoug wrote:

Just a Wild a** guess but I would assume the cost ... (show quote)

They don't shrink the packaging, they shrink the contents - and if it's dry food, say it's because of "settling".

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

jiminnee

I got something similar from my natural gas co. wanting to know if I'd be willing to pay a little extra to lower my "carbon footprint", whatever that was supposed to accomplish. I'm already overcharged in my view.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Jack 13088 wrote:

Good Golly Miss Molly!!! The gold standard of photography done right has changed, at least, the paper has a different weight and finish! I noticed it a bit slowly probably consistent with my age but… As with any change I don’t like it. At least not yet. Is nothing sacred? I pawed through the magazine looking for an explanation or apology but found nothing. Is there therapy if me? I have a BIG bookcase with every issue from January 1940 to present. This new magazine is a lot lighter. Sigh…

I have noticed that too. More ads less pages of articles, fewer pages altogether. I used to have every National Geographic issue since 1953, and a few random ones from before that.

But it was not feasible to take them when we moved in 2020 after living in the same house for 32 years. I had pulled a few special issues out to bring with us but my wife left those behind as well. So the only vintage NG mags we now have are a few that were stored with our books. A few issues about Sea Shells, and Pet Dogs & Cats. We have a huge collection of recorded music and I lots of Sea Shell, and many books so the NG mags had to go and most other magazines we had.

bamfordr Loc: Campbell CA

Of course in 2015 National Geographic Sociery sold their media to 20th century Fox, Rupert Murdoch.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/national-geographic-magazine-shifts-to-for-profit-status-with-fox-partnership/2015/09/09/7c9f034e-56f0-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html

BartHx

You might have had every issue back to 1940. I had every issue back to 1908 until I donated them to a needy library and replaced them with CDs.

gmontjr2350 Loc: Southern NJ

bamfordr wrote:

Of course in 2015 National Geographic Sociery sold their media to 20th century Fox, Rupert Murdoch.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/national-geographic-magazine-shifts-to-for-profit-status-with-fox-partnership/2015/09/09/7c9f034e-56f0-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html

Murdoch destroys every media he acquires.

I saw the latest issue at the supermarket - Dinosaurs!!!
$15.00!!!
Nope...

George

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

I worked for a very large commercial printer for many years and two situations came up fairly often with almost every magazine. 1) Falling circulation where the solution was to increase ads from about 1/4 to over 1/2 the content, decrease page count, use less expensive paper and ink, beat up the printer for make goods, and constantly shop around for the lowest cost printer. 2) New art director comes in and redesigns the magazine to keep it fresh. The solution was to increase ads, decrease page count, use less expensive paper and ink, beat up the printer for make goods, and constantly shop around for the lowest cost printer.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Here we go again. A company makes changes, almost certainly for financial reasons, and people start bitching because they can't, or won't, understand how declining sales and rising costs make those changes necessary. Those of you who still subscribe to the magazine better enjoy it while you can because in five years or so it probably won't exist and if it does I can guarantee you that more changes will have been made to cut costs.

Dannj

rlv567 wrote:

What it is: reducing everything to the lowest common denominator, so the lowest won't be "offended", and continue rioting, burning and killing!

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

Rioting over NG’s print changes😳?

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Wow, back when I first joined the NGS a lifetime membership and subscription was $100.00. That was too steep for me at the time, yet it is a good thing for them I did not take them up on it. They would have lost a ton of money on the deal by now. Now I'm getting reamed by them.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Probably a move motivated by finances.
--Bob

Jack 13088 wrote:

Good Golly Miss Molly!!! The gold standard of photography done right has changed, at least, the paper has a different weight and finish! I noticed it a bit slowly probably consistent with my age but… As with any change I don’t like it. At least not yet. Is nothing sacred? I pawed through the magazine looking for an explanation or apology but found nothing. Is there therapy if me? I have a BIG bookcase with every issue from January 1940 to present. This new magazine is a lot lighter. Sigh…

kpsk_sony

Dear folks, the glaciers will continue to melt (in reality AND metaphorically) . Continue to watch and comment if you wish, but the show goes on socially, corporately, and politically. To stand against it does not risk being run over, it only invites it. Whatever!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Jack 13088 wrote:

This new magazine is a lot lighter. Sigh…

When you consider the cost of printing the magazine and mailing it, and then you include the decline in the popularity of printed subscriptions, their decision makes sense. It will save them thousands in printing costs, and since it is lighter, it will probably cost them less to mail it.

Imagine the huge amount of paper and ink required to produce each issue. My subscriptions are now strictly digital.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

rmalarz wrote:

Probably a move motivated by finances.
--Bob