Pro Photo Show welcomes relevant contributions that help photographers, imaging specialists, visual creators, developers and technology professionals understand the tools and systems shaping modern visual work. Our coverage includes photography, cameras and lenses, imaging software, colour management, displays, artificial intelligence, digital asset management, storage, creative hardware and professional workflows. These Contributor Guidelines explain the subjects we consider, the standards submissions must meet and how our editorial review process works.
We value clear thinking, original insight, accurate technical explanation and evidence that readers can examine. A contribution should do more than repeat a product announcement or assemble general information. It should answer a meaningful question, explain a development, evaluate a practical problem or provide a well-supported perspective that is useful to the publication’s audience.
1. Who can contribute
We consider submissions from photographers, editors, designers, engineers, researchers, software developers, educators, experienced practitioners and writers with relevant subject knowledge. A formal qualification is not required for every topic, but contributors must represent their experience accurately and be able to support the claims they make.
Contributors should provide a short, factual biography describing relevant experience, areas of expertise and any professional affiliations that help readers understand their perspective. Do not claim certifications, employment, awards, client relationships, testing facilities or technical credentials that cannot be substantiated. If a submission is written on behalf of a company or agency, that relationship should be disclosed at the point of submission.
Previous publication experience may be useful, but it does not guarantee acceptance. We assess each submission on relevance, originality, accuracy, evidence, clarity and suitability for our readers.
2. Suitable topics
We are interested in original contributions across the publication’s subject areas. Suitable topics may include:
- Photography and imaging: camera systems, lenses, sensors, exposure, image quality, photographic technique and professional production.
- Computational photography: image processing, multi-frame capture, computational optics, denoising, image reconstruction and related technologies.
- Creative software: editing applications, raw processing, colour grading, graphics tools, automation and interoperability.
- Artificial intelligence: AI-assisted editing, image generation, enhancement, model evaluation, provenance and responsible creative use.
- Displays and colour management: calibration, profiling, colour spaces, soft proofing, print workflows and visual accuracy.
- Hardware and infrastructure: workstations, processors, graphics hardware, storage, networking, backup and performance considerations.
- Digital asset management: metadata, cataloguing, archiving, collaboration, access control and asset lifecycle management.
- Professional workflows: production pipelines, studio operations, collaboration, delivery, security and business systems for visual creators.
We may also consider wider technology developments where their relevance to imaging or creative work is clearly established. Generic marketing articles, unrelated business promotions, thin product round-ups and submissions designed primarily to obtain a backlink are not suitable editorial contributions.
3. Originality and exclusivity
Submissions must be original work or material that the contributor has the clear right to submit. We do not accept copied articles, lightly rewritten material, scraped content, spun text or work that reproduces another publisher’s structure and wording without an appropriate basis. Previously published material must be disclosed, including where it appeared, when it was published and what changes are proposed.
Contributors must identify any use of generative AI or automated writing systems that materially shaped the submission. Automated assistance does not remove the contributor’s responsibility for originality, accuracy, permissions and factual verification. AI-generated citations, quotations, data, interviews or first-hand experiences must never be presented as genuine. We may request source notes, drafts or clarification where authorship or provenance is uncertain.
Submitting an article does not transfer copyright automatically or guarantee publication. Any licence, exclusivity arrangement, editing permission or other rights requirement will be discussed and agreed separately where relevant. Contributors must not submit work that is subject to conflicting contractual obligations.
4. Evidence, references and technical claims
Technical statements should be supported by evidence appropriate to their importance. Useful supporting material may include original research, academic papers, standards, technical manuals, official documentation, release notes, independent testing and clearly documented practical observations. Important claims should be traceable to the source that supports them.
Do not rely on an unattributed statistic, an unsourced social media post or a manufacturer’s promotional wording as proof of independent performance. Distinguish clearly between a manufacturer claim, a measured result, a reported finding and personal opinion. Where sources disagree or the evidence is incomplete, explain the uncertainty rather than presenting a disputed claim as settled fact.
Contributors should provide working source links and enough information to identify the relevant document, author, organisation, date or version. Our Sources & References page explains the principles used to assess and attribute evidence. Our Editorial Standards & Ethics set out the broader requirements for accuracy, independence and transparency.
5. Product reviews and hands-on claims
Submissions involving product reviews, comparisons or performance claims must describe the basis of the evaluation. If a contributor personally used a camera, lens, display, software package or other product, they should identify the model or version, relevant equipment, test conditions and tasks performed. If the work is based on desk research, documentation or a demonstration, it must be described accurately as such.
Do not claim laboratory testing, controlled benchmarking, long-term use or direct product access unless it actually occurred. A product supplied by a manufacturer, distributor or agency must be disclosed. Loaned equipment, complimentary licences, early access, travel, hospitality, employment and other relevant benefits should be identified so that readers can assess possible conflicts of interest.
Testing claims should include relevant limitations. A result from one device, one sample, one software version or one workflow does not necessarily represent every user’s experience. Contributors should retain notes, measurements, settings and source material where possible, because editors may request clarification or supporting evidence. The Research & Testing Methodology page explains the distinctions between hands-on evaluation, repeatable testing, documentary research and comparative analysis.
6. Structure, clarity and writing quality
Submissions should have a clear purpose and a logical structure. Use a descriptive title that accurately reflects the content. Introduce the question or issue, explain the relevant context, develop the analysis in a coherent sequence and finish with a conclusion that follows from the evidence. Use descriptive headings to help readers navigate longer material.
Write in clear, professional English. Define specialist terms where necessary and avoid unnecessary jargon, repetition, exaggerated claims and vague promotional language. Technical depth is welcome when it helps explain the subject, but complexity should not be used to disguise a lack of evidence. Tables, diagrams, examples and screenshots may be useful where they genuinely improve understanding.
There is no single word count suitable for every subject. A focused technical explanation may be concise, while a complex methodology or industry analysis may require more space. Contributors should aim for completeness without padding. Editors may request cuts, additional explanation, clearer sourcing or a different structure.
7. Images, screenshots and other assets
Contributors must have the necessary rights or permissions for every photograph, illustration, chart, screenshot, diagram, video or dataset they submit. Public availability does not mean an asset is free to reuse. Provide the creator’s name, source, licence or permission details and any required attribution. Do not remove watermarks or credits, and do not submit images that misrepresent another person’s work as your own.
Where images include identifiable people, private locations, confidential information or client material, contributors must consider privacy, consent and contractual restrictions. Screenshots should be relevant and should not expose personal data, account credentials, private correspondence or confidential business information. Product images supplied by manufacturers should be identified as supplied material where that fact is relevant.
AI-generated or materially altered images must be identified when their origin could affect how readers interpret them. Synthetic images must not be presented as documentary evidence of a real product, test, event or person. Contributors should explain any material manipulation of images used as evidence.
8. Artificial intelligence and automated assistance
AI tools may be used for limited assistance such as brainstorming, transcription, translation or language editing, but the contributor remains responsible for every statement in the submitted work. The final submission must be checked by a human who understands the subject and can verify its factual claims.
Do not use AI to fabricate quotations, interviews, citations, research findings, test data, credentials or personal experiences. Do not upload confidential, private or third-party material to an AI service unless you have the necessary rights and authority to do so. Where AI materially contributes to the creation of text, analysis, code or imagery, disclose the nature of that contribution to the editor. We may request further details to assess accuracy, originality and provenance.
9. Conflicts of interest and commercial relationships
Contributors must disclose relevant financial, professional or personal interests. These may include employment by a manufacturer, consultancy for a vendor, ownership of a product business, affiliate commissions, paid sponsorship, investments or a close relationship with a person or organisation discussed in the submission.
Commercially commissioned material must be identified before editorial consideration. Payment does not guarantee acceptance, a favourable conclusion, a particular link, a specific publication date or the removal of critical findings. Editorial decisions remain subject to the publication’s standards. We may decline work where a conflict cannot be managed transparently or where the primary purpose is promotional rather than informative.
10. Links and references in submissions
Links should help readers verify a claim or explore a genuinely relevant resource. They should be natural, limited to what the article needs and directed to useful destinations. Contributors must not insert hidden links, misleading anchor text, tracking redirects, unrelated commercial destinations or links to unsafe, deceptive or unlawful material.
Disclose whether a proposed link is commercial, affiliate, sponsored or otherwise connected to the contributor. Editors may remove, change or decline links that do not serve readers or that conflict with the publication’s policies. A link request is not a condition of acceptance.
11. Editorial review and revisions
Every submission is subject to editorial assessment. Initial review considers relevance, originality, quality, evidence, conflicts of interest and suitability for the publication. We may request source documents, test details, image permissions, author information or clarification of specific claims. A submission may be declined without entering a full editing process.
Where a contribution is considered suitable, editors may revise structure, headings, wording, captions and presentation to improve accuracy and readability. Material changes to meaning or conclusions should be discussed with the contributor where practicable. Contributors should respond to reasonable editorial questions and meet agreed deadlines. Approval of a draft does not prevent correction of a factual error identified later.
Our Corrections Policy explains how we handle significant errors and updates after publication. The publication may update, annotate or remove material where necessary to protect accuracy, legal compliance or reader trust.
12. How to submit a contribution
Use the Contact page to direct a proposal or submission to the editorial team. Include a proposed title, a short summary, the intended audience, the main points, relevant experience, source links and any commercial or personal interests that may be relevant. For product evaluations, explain whether the product was directly tested, supplied for review or assessed through public information.
If you are proposing images, charts or other assets, include a note describing their origin and rights status. If the work has appeared elsewhere, disclose its publication history. Do not send confidential documents or sensitive personal information unless the editor has agreed a secure and appropriate way to receive them.
Sending a proposal does not guarantee a response by a particular date or publication. Please avoid repeated follow-ups over short periods. If an editor requests additional information, respond with clear, factual details rather than unsupported promotional claims.
13. Reasons a submission may be declined
We may decline material that is copied, substantially duplicated, inaccurate, unsupported, misleading, irrelevant, excessively promotional or outside our subject scope. We may also decline submissions that contain undisclosed conflicts, unauthorised images, fabricated experience, manipulated test results, misleading links, defamatory claims or material that breaches applicable rights or safety requirements.
A technically interesting subject may still be unsuitable if the evidence is not available or the article cannot be made clear and fair. Declining a submission is an editorial decision and does not necessarily represent a judgement about the contributor’s wider expertise.
14. External reference
Contributors who work with research, data and technical evidence may find the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations useful as a reference for principles such as authorship, disclosure and publication responsibility. The recommendations are designed for medical journals, so they are not a direct rulebook for photography publishing. We link to them as an additional example of formal publication guidance, not as a claim that Pro Photo Show is governed, approved or accredited by ICMJE.
Our expectations
We want contributions that respect readers’ intelligence and help them make better-informed decisions. Strong submissions are specific, well sourced, transparent about their methods and honest about uncertainty. Contributors should be prepared to explain how they know what they claim to know, distinguish evidence from promotion and correct errors when they are identified. By following these guidelines, contributors help us maintain a useful, trustworthy publication for the professional photography and visual technology community.
Submission checklist: what a strong contribution contains
Before submitting a completed article, contributors should be able to answer several practical questions. What is the central reader benefit? Which statements are original analysis, direct observation, sourced fact or opinion? Can the important technical claims be checked? Are model numbers, firmware versions, software editions, dates and regional qualifications accurate? Are images properly credited and cleared for the proposed use? Have relevant commercial, employment, ownership or personal interests been disclosed?
For a hands-on review, explain what was actually used and tested. Identify the sample or version, the tasks performed and the conditions that materially shaped the result. Do not imply long-term use from a short evaluation period, or laboratory measurement where only subjective observation took place. For a research-led feature, provide source links and distinguish primary documentation from commentary. For a comparison, explain why the selected criteria are relevant and where the products are not directly comparable.
Contributors should also check the presentation. Headlines must represent the article rather than overstate its findings. Images and captions must be accurate. Tables should identify units and relevant test conditions. Affiliate, sponsored or supplied-product relationships should be disclosed to the editor and handled in accordance with the publication’s editorial independence requirements.
Editorial review and publication lifecycle
Submission is the beginning of review, not a promise of publication. Editors may request supporting evidence, clarification, revisions, rights information or a more precise explanation of the contributor’s experience. A piece may be held while a material claim is checked, revised to reflect the available evidence, or declined if it cannot meet the publication’s standards. Contributors should not publish confidential editorial correspondence or imply that an unpublished draft represents the publication’s final position.
Our Editorial Standards & Ethics describe the principles behind editorial decisions. The Research & Testing Methodology and Sources & References explain evidence expectations. If a published contribution contains a material error, the Corrections Policy applies. Initial enquiries and pitches should be sent through the Contact page.