|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 6, 2005, 10:38 PM
Post #51 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: I think the "better photos" line is pretty weak. Sorry. The only thing that really makes Alpinist's photos better is that they're bigger and on nicer paper.
All other things being equal, better paper & bigger format generally = better photos to me. I'm not talking about the quality of the composition or the exposure, I'm talking about the viewing experience as a reader. Thus, better photos. +1 to Alpinist.
In reply to: And that brings me back around. "Alpinist" is for alpinists, and all cute jokes aside, they're not superior beings pursuing a superior type of climbing. The mag just represents a different genre of climbing and climbers. No need to set up this affected dichotomy.
Nice job ignoring the fact that R&I and Climbing are absolutely cluttered with ads, and that the gear reviews are dressed up ads. It may cost Alpinist the ship, but from an aesthetic viewpoint fewer ads are nice. Fewer ads. +1 to Alpinist.
These points have nothing to do with the subject of the substantive content (articles & photos), rather they are format issues, so no crusty old alpinist vs. young beanie-wearing boulderer issues here.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 6, 2005, 10:52 PM
Post #52 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
Too many ads definitely suck, but R&I & Climbing need to pay their staffs, which are significantly larger than Alpinist's staff. (R&I & Climbing also pay their contributors more).
I wouldn't know for sure, but I suspect Alpinist is still a ways away from actually being profitable, whereas those other two mags are surviving, have survived, and will likely continue to survive and provide a number of climbers with jobs well into the future.
The Alpinist is nice to look at & read. One can only hope that more people subscribe so it also continues to exist.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Oct 6, 2005, 11:31 PM
Post #53 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
In reply to: (R&I & Climbing also pay their contributors more).
Last I heard they were both paying 35˘/word and Alpinist was paying 40˘/word. Photo rates were comparable, all on the low end of the scale. Sure they have larger staffs but they're putting out twice as many issues (each with three times the ad content) and have around six times the circulation. I'd guess in 2 years Alpinist, Urban Climber, and SheSends will be gone and in 5 years one of the other two will be history.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 11:38 PM
Post #54 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: Nice job ignoring the fact that R&I and Climbing are absolutely cluttered with ads, and that the gear reviews are dressed up ads. It may cost Alpinist the ship, but from an aesthetic viewpoint fewer ads are nice. Fewer ads. +1 to Alpinist.
Climbing/R&I -v- Alpinist. Like Starbucks -v- Neighborhood Coffee Shack. God help you when you discover a model that will make your business profitable and sustainable.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 7, 2005, 12:51 AM
Post #55 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: Absolutely cluttered with ads, or good business sense?
Ads may make good business sense, but they detract from the quality of the product which, after all, is what we were discussing.
Remember, you asked:
In reply to: I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash and Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin?
If you wish to believe that Alpinist has a cult following solely because of its subject matter, then by all means continue.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 7, 2005, 12:54 AM
Post #56 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
If you wish to think that I can't tell the difference, go on witcher bad self.
I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 7, 2005, 12:57 AM
Post #57 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: Too many ads definitely suck, but R&I & Climbing need to pay their staffs, which are significantly larger than Alpinist's staff. (R&I & Climbing also pay their contributors more). I wouldn't know for sure, but I suspect Alpinist is still a ways away from actually being profitable, whereas those other two mags are surviving, have survived, and will likely continue to survive and provide a number of climbers with jobs well into the future. The Alpinist is nice to look at & read. One can only hope that more people subscribe so it also continues to exist.
Yup.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 7, 2005, 1:00 AM
Post #58 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody.
A show of hands from the people who, all things being equal, prefer a magazine with more ads would put the issue to rest.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 7, 2005, 1:06 AM
Post #59 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: In reply to: I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody. A show of hands from the people who, all things being equal, prefer a magazine with more ads would put the issue to rest.
Ads don't bother me significantly, so all things being equal... well, all things are then equal.
|
|
|
|
|
backclipped
Oct 7, 2005, 1:54 AM
Post #60 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Posts: 137
|
In reply to: Your Noobness is showing. Only folks that are fairly new to the sport read everything in sight.
Yeah, you pegged me right. I've only been climbing for a couple of years. Here, collect your cookie...but I've been skiing since I could walk and I still read Powder, Skiing, Freeskier, etc. I like to stay abreast the pass times that I'm into. Even the watered down pop culture mediums. Is there something inherently wrong with reading everything? Any how, it must suck being of the deflated old guard. Buck up little buddy, you might come across something funny or slightly interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Oct 7, 2005, 3:36 AM
Post #61 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: If you wish to think that I can't tell the difference, go on witcher bad self. I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody.
I'd agree.
I think a lot of people out there like to read about people with bigger balls doing crazier riskier stuff. I know I do.
The photos are spectacular, the articals to have a lot of devolepment, which is really nice to read, and the lack of adds is nice. I don't mind the sexier full page DMM, Charlet adds, it's those damn half page Shoreline Mtn, Sierra Trading post, Pika MTN, ect that piss me off.
If I had the money, I'd subscribe to Alpinist...but I don't. I'll pick up an issue when I see a story I'm really intersted in, same with R&I or Climbing.
Cheers,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 5:53 AM
Post #62 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: Do y'all realize that the same photographers and writers publish their stuff in all these rags?
Sure we realize this.
In reply to: I would argue that R&I editors Jeff Jackson, Alison Osius, and (former editor) Matt Samet, and Climbing editor Jeff Achey are, in fact, superb editors/writers who have had decades of experience between them. They've all got dozens of articles under their belts and a few of them have written books. But I guess it is just a matter of opinion, really
I won’t argue with you experience claim, but I think you might be making our point. The first quote might lead us to believe that it isn’t the writers! In truth though I do see writers I have not heard of before in Alpinist, and it is the average that I gives me an overall impression. Perhaps the writers you mention are not the ones I think so highly of? Not true either. Has Pete’s writing been in print recently? I remember enjoying his writing years ago.
So is it the editors! I am not sure, but if it is, you are making our point again because Alpinist is head and shoulders above the other two.
I’ll bet Alpinists standards are just higher. I think this is simply a corporate decision. It doesn't necessarily say much about the editors who might just be doing their jobs. Trying to attain and maintain those high standards is probably a labor of love – something those involved don’t mind putting extra effort into. Writers and editor(s)? are simply encouraged, allowed, and expected to produce better quality material – even when if they are the same people. You know, I bet I’ve got this right – it is Alpinists corporate culture that allows a superior product.
Whatever the reason it’s definitely not just the lack of ads that makes Alpinist a better magazine. For me it is the writing. The quality and pics are good but the writing is why I support it. The content is the best climbing stuff I have read since Ascent.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 7, 2005, 3:11 PM
Post #63 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
Alpinist pays less now. $.30 per word. Something about cutting costs. They let go of an editor, too.
To mheyman: All good points. Re: the writers. You missed my point. I have read excellent articles in both magazines by the same authors. It's true that one has to wade through more ads to get to the good content, but many R&I/Climbing articles are superb and thought-provoking. I think the audiences are different for Alpinist and for the other mags. Some people want the short clips and profiles, while others want lengthy features. I think it is more a matter of style preference, rather than quality of editing/writing.
To the person who suggested Alpinist, She Sends & Urban Climber would all be gone in two years. I sure hope not! I doubt either R&I or Climbing will be gone either. They are both going strong & have huge followings.
|
|
|
|
|
mack_north
Oct 7, 2005, 3:25 PM
Post #64 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2005
Posts: 74
|
I enjoy Alpinist because I am a dilletante with lots of disposable income. My night companion Amy and I get in bed (1000 thread count sheets), moisturize each other with designer olive oils, and luxuriate in the exploits of crazy Russians on the flanks of granite spires. Mmmmhhhhh!
|
|
|
|
|
troutboy
Oct 7, 2005, 4:11 PM
Post #65 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2003
Posts: 903
|
In reply to: Re: your statement "the editing is abysmal." Are you an editor? I suggest you give it a try sometime.
And I agree, it is an extremely difficult job; however, the folks at R&I and Climbing repeatedly make the same silly mistakes (and they have for 20 years) and always add a few typos, bad page references, and other gaffs in each issue.
As I said, though. I read and ENJOY each. I read them cover to cover. In general (IMHO), Alpinist does a much better job of editing than R&I and Climbing. Just because I think the editing could use some improvement does not mean I do not appreciate what they are trying to do.
And just so y'all know I'm not Mr. Negative, I admire anyone willing to try to produce a quality small-interest magazine in today's economy. For a comparison to the climbing mags, I suggest checking out some of the other "sports" magazines, such as those relating to mountain biking or skiing. That ought to make some people appreciate Climbing and R&I a little more. They are so much better (yes, even with the editing).
T
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 5:02 PM
Post #66 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: Alpinist pays less now. $.30 per word. Something about cutting costs. They let go of an editor, too.
And it’s a shame because they’re quality is already slipping. Once it is gone people like me will only pay for trying hard for so long.
In reply to: To mheyman: All good points. Re: the writers. You missed my point. I have read excellent articles in both magazines by the same authors. It's true that one has to wade through more ads to get to the good content,
I tried to make it clear that ads are not my primary beef with the normal rags.
In reply to: but many R&I/Climbing articles are superb and thought-provoking.
Guess I’m a little less lenient than you. I’ll agree that a few R&I/Climbing articles are very good.
In reply to: I think the audiences are different for Alpinist and for the other mags. Some people want the short clips and profiles, while others want lengthy features. I think it is more a matter of style preference, rather than quality of editing/writing.
Here we agree and then disagree. You bet Alpinist and the other mags are for different audiences! I do not think the public is as interested in quality as it is in ease of reading. What do you think the average reading level in the US is? You can’t use grade level anymore, cause just like currency and climbing, there’s been a lot of inflation in the last 25 years. That does not make the magazines equal. It means there are many readers who will not appreciate Alpinist. The public at large certainly will not appreciate how much better Alpinist is. As others have written Alpinist provides much more depth, and it helps to have to have some attention span to read it too. This paragraph may well have me labeled an elitist, and garner support here for your point view. So be it. It will change nothing.
In reply to: I doubt either R&I or Climbing will be gone either. They are both going strong & have huge followings.
You are probably right. But the funny thing about their business model if that while I still have a subscription to them, I spend very little time reading them. I carry them to places I will wait for something, say a doctors office and leaf trough it reading an article I it interests me. I really have little, time to read paper at home – and alpinist stays at home. I have 12 issues, but I have only read half of them. Why? Cause I am not one to remember titles, and I often forget exactly which articles I have read. So, I start reading one, and when I realize I have already read it, I am hooked – it is good enough that I do not care and want to read it again! I’ve read a few pieces several times. They were that good! Guess that really makes them good enough to pay for too!
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 8:19 PM
Post #67 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
Hm.
It is true that it is a matter of preference, a matter of opinion, it's relative, etc, etc, etcetera.
My two closest climbing friends only read 1 out of 5 articles in any of the mags. They are drawn first (and primarily) to the pictures. And if the article is lonnggg.... well, they're even less likely to read it.
Perhaps the folks at R&I and Climbing realize this and cater to it. Perhaps not. (this would explain the 1 pg given to Donini - more people will probably read that than a 2,000 word feature)
People love to see pictures of routes they've done... or places that they have been (or might go) - i.e. popular crags/bouldering areas. Not many readers are likely to go to Thalay Sagar (a mountain featured in an Alpinist). And most climbers don't care that much about the relatively obscure history of a mountain they've never seen or heard of.
And that is what it boils down to, really. As a kid, I always enjoyed the issues of Sports Illustrated that had stories about the past: "Three-finger" Mordecai Brown, Dizzy Dean, Bob Gibson, Jack Dempsey. The history, for me, provided the foundation and the color for the modern game.
Most of my friends, however, were not very interested in whether or not the ref had intentionally screwed up the count when Dempsey knocked down Tunney in 1927. To them, such an article was a waste of space.
Maybe it was.
As John Graves says, you're either made to care about such things... or you're not. I guess I'm made that way.
One of my favorite aspects of climbing is that (like baseball and boxing) it has an extremely colorful history. Knowing about it enriches my own climbing experiences.
So I don't knock R&I or Climbing because of the ads. In fact, I don't knock them at all; I simply state (for it's a fact) that Alpinist delves deeper into climbing history... and covers its subjects in a more intricate manner.
I wish that Climbing and R&I would do more of this. They do, sometimes. The feature a couple years ago on Dale Bard (by Crouch, I think) was excellent. Climbing is full of guys like that: people who's life was filled by climbing, then quit, then came back. Their stories are usually more interesting than those told about the new young hotshot (be he tradster, sport-o, boulderer, whatever).
And, for whoever inquired about Pete Takeda... The last long article in R&I/Climbing that I remember him writing was on Devils Thumb, bout 18 months ago (and he did contribute to the Alpinist that profiled The Titan). I think he's working on those damn-book-things now.
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 8:23 PM
Post #68 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
Hm.
It is true that it is a matter of preference, a matter of opinion, it's relative, etc, etc, etcetera.
My two closest climbing friends only read 1 out of 5 articles in any of the mags. They are drawn first (and primarily) to the pictures. And if the article is lonnggg.... well, they're even less likely to read it.
Perhaps the folks at R&I and Climbing realize this and cater to it. Perhaps not. (this would explain the 1 pg given to Donini - more people will probably read that than a 2,000 word feature)
People love to see pictures of routes they've done... or places that they have been (or might go) - i.e. popular crags/bouldering areas. Not many readers are likely to go to Thalay Sagar (a mountain featured in an Alpinist). And most climbers don't care that much about the relatively obscure history of a mountain they've never seen or heard of.
And that is what it boils down to, really. As a kid, I always enjoyed the issues of Sports Illustrated that had stories about the past: "Three-finger" Mordecai Brown, Dizzy Dean, Bob Gibson, Jack Dempsey. The history, for me, provided the foundation and the color for the modern game.
Most of my friends, however, were not very interested in whether or not the ref had intentionally screwed up the count when Dempsey knocked down Tunney in 1927. To them, such an article was a waste of space.
Maybe it was.
As John Graves says, you're either made to care about such things... or you're not. I guess I'm made that way.
One of my favorite aspects of climbing is that (like baseball and boxing) it has an extremely colorful history. Knowing about it enriches my own climbing experiences.
So I don't knock R&I or Climbing because of the ads. In fact, I don't knock them at all; I simply state (for it's a fact) that Alpinist delves deeper into climbing history... and covers its subjects in a more intricate manner.
I wish that Climbing and R&I would do more of this. They do, sometimes. The feature a couple years ago on Dale Bard (by Crouch, I think) was excellent. Climbing is full of guys like that: people who's life was filled by climbing, then quit, then came back. There stories are usually more interesting than those told about the new young hotshot (be he tradster, sport-o, boulderer, whatever).
And, for whoever inquired about Pete Takeda... The last long article in R&I/Climbing that I remember him writing was on Devils Thumb, bout 18 months ago (and he did contribute to the Alpinist that profiled The Titan). I think he's working on those damn-book-things now.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 7, 2005, 8:41 PM
Post #69 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
He finished the book. He did write something a few months back on climbing in Yosemite for R&I... maybe about 6 months. I can't remember exactly.
I think you about sum it all up.
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 8:42 PM
Post #70 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
Thinking back...
Does anyone remember the Climbing that had an article by Dougald MacDonald about Messner's 1960s Dolomite rock routes?
Dougald pondered whether Messner was obsolete in modern rock climbing... then went and met him and repeated some of his routes. An interesting premise, treated well and even-handedly.
A more recent criticism:
Climbing just ran an article on rock climbing in the San Juans. Ogden did a poor job with it. I lived there briefly and so am familiar with the area.
Antoine Savelli lives at the base of the Ophir Wall and was integral in the development of hard routes there (in the 80s). Ogden doesn't even mention him (I wonder if this has something to do with Savelli's controversial rap-bolting...)
And the history of the Ophir Wall - something that merits a solid page minimum - was relegated to a single paragraph.
The big-wigs at a mag shouldn't let that slide. Craig Luebben's article on Vedauwoo is a better example of how you should write about a place. Good pictures and writing that encompasses both past AND present.
So I guess it is not that "the writing" is soo much better in Alpinist. It is that the writers are given more space... and a wider variety of people are allowed to write.
Let's face it, folks: none of the stories in the mags are going to be nominated for an O. Henry award (best short story) (not that they could, being 'non-fiction,' but you get the point...).
And you're right, Ms. Scully - Takeda wrote an article about the big storm in Yosem, I think. (and also something about going back there for the first time in many years... trying Astroman, etc)
Also- I sent my sister a gift subscription to She Sends a year or two ago. She likes it. :)
|
|
|
|
|
pitonpedro
Oct 7, 2005, 9:40 PM
Post #71 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 20, 2002
Posts: 9
|
after taking the time to read all these posts i figured i needed to put my 5 soles in.
i've been climbing for about 5 years now, and it seemed like both C and R&I went downhill a few years back. i used to love the articles (remember the R&I "Roadtrips" issues and "Superguides"?) so much good beta i continue to use them as resources for planning trips (and read backissues now and again). now they seem to mostly be full of ads, and the content just isn't interesting. so much is devoted to the sport and gym and competition scene, and that just isn't my thing. the aim of R&I and C has morphed from a climbers mag into an athletes mag. so if you like living vicariously through other people's achievements, then great. i just like reading inspiring articles and looking at awesome photography. R&I and C just don't make me want to quit my job and go climbing. occasionally theres a gem, but Alpinist for me always delivers.
and then there is that money issue that everyone seemed to be in a hubbub about. suppose you could say over the years C and R&I have gorwn into something like wal-mart or mcdonalds, where yes they are big and employ lots of people and have huge followings, but i would rather suppport mom and pop shops who give a sh!t about their customers, or dine at the Front Porch at Seneca or The Moat near North Conway or Dornan's in the Tetons. sure, they cost more, but they just taste better.
i mean, hell. everyone who posts here should spent less time talking and more time climbing. doubt i'll respond to further posts, i rarely check this site anymore. hope this stimulates further discussion.
ˇmucho suerte a todos de Peru!
|
|
|
|
|
jred
Oct 7, 2005, 9:47 PM
Post #72 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2003
Posts: 750
|
In reply to: In reply to: work on your grammar guys brutus excluded edited to exclude brutusofwyde ?? We're not writing articles here, dude. You're lucky to see intelligible sentances. |
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 7, 2005, 9:50 PM
Post #73 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
pitonpedro: I wish I could spend more time climbing, but am stuck in a cubicle now, working to pay off the debt I accrued while running She Sends (and wasting precious company time at the moment).
stickclipper: I don't run SS any longer (haven't for the last two issues). I turned it over to some women who are turning it into a non-profit. That's awesome you bought a subscription for your sister. All I ever wanted was to have more articles about women to read (much like the history buff wants more info about climbing history in the Alpinist and the boulderer wants short clips about elite climbers in R&I). But thanks for supporting the mag. I hope it survives. I love reading it. :)
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 10:43 PM
Post #74 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
I have used more than my share of space here, but I can sum it up my opinion in a two sentences.
I pick up Climbing or R&I and hope to find something worthwhile to read.
I pick up Alpinist and am disapointed if I do not read a great letter or article.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 10:45 PM
Post #75 of 82
(10100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
Just deleted duplicate post
|
|
|
|
|
|
