[SharpByCoop]

Fantastic discussion. Illuminating, as this subject is worthy of hours of discussion and learning points.

I advertise in EVERY knife magazine and periodical all the time. Part of the legal responsibility of the publishers is to give photo credits to the submitted images IF THEY WEREN'T PRODUCED BY THE MAKER THEMSELVES, OR THEIR OWN STAFF.

To that end Buddy and I have a credit or 'ad' listed at the bottom of any qualified photo. You have seen my work everywhere.

It's this reason that I don't go further with ad submissions beyond this. For the amount of work I need (and can handle) at present, I'm covered enough. That's me. Make no mistake, a SharpByCoop name credit is an ad.

As much as the web is impacting exposure and offering free 'ads' through searches and viewed posts, I am finding that knifemakers, in particular, still think that seeing their photo listed in a PRINT magazine is the Holy Grail to them. Like it, justify it, or not, this perception is real.

To this end, it is imperative to my clients that I ensure I submit their images to the magazines. Part of the cost of my work is the extra time for this time-consuming inclusion.

On one hand I am completely in agreement with Buddy that we are 'giving' it away to the publishers. They truly benefit from this library of selections.

On the other, I am paid by every single maker, whether they make it in or not, for this service. (This is part of the discussion that Alex mentioned is valid, but deserves a separate topic. I'll finish this here.)

A few things I've learned in observing ads in magazines: eye-grabbing images and short, quickly-readable text are paramount to a successful ad. We skim through and are given microseconds to focus in on effective displays. Or, we flip the page.....

The person in charge of the layout has FAR more control over its effectiveness than we are aware.

This also brings about an important point: Will an editor pay closer attention to a maker for an article inclusion if they advertise with them? There are plenty of sharp makers and images to choose from.

I say ABSOLUTELY yes. In fact I have had private notes from one editor in particular who grouses when I send him photos from makers who never ever step up and pay. Unfair? They are also human and territorial and have corporate mucky-mucks to report to.

Those that do advertise will probably get more traction. This is business, not philanthropy.

Getting ink with no ads: Yes. It boils down to generated interest. I suggest to any maker that my submissions is 'leading the horse to water'. If they follow up on their own with a personal note and show why they are unique, which separates them from another equal maker, then they will get the interest of the editor, and ultimately the selection/inclusion process.

More thoughts later.

Coop