I went to mailbox today and received a card from "Outdoor Photographer." The card stated that they were converting to a digital format. The reason cited was the risk due to COVID-19. This is interesting, since all the evidence points to COVID risks from mail as being minimal. Furthermore, if the magazine were delivered in an envelope or plastic bag, the risks would be reduced to practically zero. I have a sense that there were other factors, namely costs, that were involved here. Interestingly, I was receiving "Outdoor Photographer" to fill out my subscription to "Shutterbug," another venerable paper photo publication that had folded. This is disappointing to say the least. Although I have no objection to sharing and viewing photographs digitally, I enjoy them in the traditional paper format as well. To my knowledge, this leaves only "Click" and "Lens Work" as the only existing paper format American photo magazines, assuming that they are not planning to switch to digital formats as well.

Caveat- ads pay for the publication. Good quality means good income.
You're basically paying the postage.

There seems to be a very common evolutionary branching path at work.
A group of gung-ho enthusiasts decide to make an organization catering to their specific needs.
A magazine is born. Some volunteerism, some unpaid overtime, lots of inspired work.
Time happens. Old timers drop off. More business, less progress.
Article submitters become contractors. "Assets". "Talents". Disposable, and replaceable.
Corps policy leans toward edutainment.No disparaging reviews. No comparisons with product rankings.
More fluff, less stuff. More ads look like articles. More articles like branded tour guide recommendations.
The business of business is business. Less costs = more profits. Corps culture "suggests" conform culture.
Lower pay for photog articles means lower experienced "field" personnel. And less of them.
"Class" separation grows. All business, all the time. Good enough is good enough.
Perfectionists and enthusiasts have been quietly rebelling, and disappearing.
And then it finally comes down to this. Modern, efficient, profitable, sustainable. Supposedly.
Digital only. Get rid of EVERYbody. A couple execs, secretaries, marketeers and sales, girls doing markup.
EVERYbody else is a contractor. New "gig" type economy. We're already legends in our minds.
Just like digital Penthouse. Computer Shopper. Pop Photo. Playboy. Etc. Even the "Weekly World News".
Anybody here actually take the time to peruse these publications online?
I'll give them a year before the golden parachutes deploy.

I went to mailbox today and received a card from "Outdoor Photographer." The card stated that they were converting to a digital format. The reason cited was the risk due to COVID-19. This is interesting, since all the evidence points to COVID risks from mail as being minimal. Furthermore, if the magazine were delivered in an envelope or plastic bag, the risks would be reduced to practically zero. I have a sense that there were other factors, namely costs, that were involved here. Interestingly, I was receiving "Outdoor Photographer" to fill out my subscription to "Shutterbug," another venerable paper photo publication that had folded. This is disappointing to say the least. Although I have no objection to sharing and viewing photographs digitally, I enjoy them in the traditional paper format as well. To my knowledge, this leaves only "Click" and "Lens Work" as the only existing paper format American photo magazines, assuming that they are not planning to switch to digital formats as well.

I went to mailbox today and received a card from "Outdoor Photographer." The card stated that they were converting to a digital format. The reason cited was the risk due to COVID-19. This is interesting, since all the evidence points to COVID risks from mail as being minimal. Furthermore, if the magazine were delivered in an envelope or plastic bag, the risks would be reduced to practically zero. I have a sense that there were other factors, namely costs, that were involved here. Interestingly, I was receiving "Outdoor Photographer" to fill out my subscription to "Shutterbug," another venerable paper photo publication that had folded. This is disappointing to say the least. Although I have no objection to sharing and viewing photographs digitally, I enjoy them in the traditional paper format as well. To my knowledge, this leaves only "Click" and "Lens Work" as the only existing paper format American photo magazines, assuming that they are not planning to switch to digital formats as well.

I went to mailbox today and received a card from "Outdoor Photographer." The card stated that they were converting to a digital format. The reason cited was the risk due to COVID-19. This is interesting, since all the evidence points to COVID risks from mail as being minimal. Furthermore, if the magazine were delivered in an envelope or plastic bag, the risks would be reduced to practically zero. I have a sense that there were other factors, namely costs, that were involved here. Interestingly, I was receiving "Outdoor Photographer" to fill out my subscription to "Shutterbug," another venerable paper photo publication that had folded. This is disappointing to say the least. Although I have no objection to sharing and viewing photographs digitally, I enjoy them in the traditional paper format as well. To my knowledge, this leaves only "Click" and "Lens Work" as the only existing paper format American photo magazines, assuming that they are not planning to switch to digital formats as well.