Fandom

Humanities Journals Wiki

Art History and Visual Culture Studies Journals

28pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Comments0 Share

Please share your experience of submitting an article to a journal. What was the length of the evaluation process from submission to decision? Did you receive useful feedback? Was the editor responsive to your queries? Etc.

Please add new journals alphabetically. 'Journal of' goes under 'J', while preceding articles A/The are skipped over in favour of the first word of the title.

Ars Judaica Edit

The Art Bulletin (journal of CAA) Edit

  • Any reflections on or sense of the timeline--from submission, acceptance, and publication?
  • Two months for a rejection (wasn't sent to reviewers, no indication as to reason which is unusual in my experience)

Artibus et Historiae Edit

Art History (journal of AAH) Edit

  • (Updated) The journal staff is extremely professional and responsive. Waited 9 months for acceptance: second reviewer had bailed, not journal's fault, but a replacement was quickly secured. There seems to be a bit of a backlog, so I imagine it will take 2 years from date of initial manuscript submission to date of publication.
  • m/s rejected but in a timely manner -- less than a month, though no feedback
  • Great experience. Quick turn-around and good feedback.

Art In TranslationEdit

Art Journal (journal of CAA) Edit

ARTMargins Edit

Art MonthlyEdit

AuroraEdit

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Art Edit

British Art Journal Edit

  • Good experience although the editor is a little distracted sometimes.

British Journal of Aesthetics Edit

Camera Obscura Edit

 Centropa Journal Edit

Critical Inquiry Edit

Design Issues Edit

Differences Edit

 Early Popular Visual Culture Edit

Eighteenth-Century Studies Edit

e-maj Edit

eSharp Edit

Gesta Edit

Grey Room Edit

  • This journal is going downhill fast. See all the ghastly (and consistent) tales of woe in the entry for this journal under "Film Journals": http://humanitiesjournals.wikia.com/wiki/Film_Journals#Grey_Room
  • Agreed. Avoid at all costs.
  • Ditto - terrible, do not even provide comments justifying a rejection after six months of waiting and prodding. Avoid indeed.
  • Disorganized. Bad communication among members of the editorial board. Avoid.

History of Photography Edit

  • Turnaround average. Note of rejection was perhaps more tersely worded than necessary.

I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance Edit

 IKON: Journal of Iconographic Studies Edit

 Immediations Edit

Inferno Edit

 International Journal for Digital Art History Edit

Invisible Culture Edit

Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism Edit

 Journal of Art Historiography Edit

Journal of Canadian Art History / Annales d'histoire de l'art canadienne Edit

Journal of Design History (Design History Society) Edit

Journal of the History of Collections Edit

  • Had a very good experience with this journal. Response received three months after submitting. Re-submitted with revisions, received proofs in a matter of days, and the article was available online just five months after initial submission. Communication with the editor was great.
  • I had a very positive experience with JHC. The review process took only a month, and the report I received was thoughtful, constructive and overall very helpful. As a result, the final manuscript ended up a much better essay than the original submission. The entire process from initial submission to Advance Access publication online took six months.
  • Excellent. Very fast review time, great feedback from the reviewer and very light editing. Highly recommended.

 Journal of the History of Ideas Edit

 Journal of Material Culture Edit

Journal of Early Modern Cultural StudiesEdit

Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies Edit

Journal of Popular Culture (The Popular Culture Association) Edit

Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (JSAH)Edit

Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld InstitutesEdit

The Journal of Visual Art Practice Edit

Journal of Visual CultureEdit

  • JVC are a 2-tier review journal. That is to say they first have your article read by the board to assess suitability then, if it is deemed suitable they pass it on to peer review. Editorial evaluation should take 4 weeks tops according to their website. I submitted an article in October. I got rejected by the editorial board, with no feedback, 4 months later and very suspiciously the very day I asked for an update...

Konsthistorisk tidskrift / Journal of Art HistoryEdit


Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft
Edit

Melbourne Art JournalEdit

n.paradoxa: international feminist art journal Edit

Nineteenth-Century Art Worldwide Edit

OctoberEdit

Object Edit

Open Arts JournalEdit

Oxford Art Journal   Edit

  • Reasonable turn-around time but absolutely no feedback given with rejections.

Papers of Surrealism Edit

Parallax Edit

Photographies Edit

  • Helpful feedback. Timely turnaround. Overall, a good experience.

Print Quarterly Edit

RACAR: Revue d'art canadienne / Canadian Art Review (Journal of UAAC-AUUC) Edit

Religion and the Arts Edit

Renaissance Quarterly Edit

Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics Edit

Renaissance Studies Edit

Representations Edit

RIHA Journal Edit

Rutgers Art Review Edit

Sixteenth Century Journal Edit

  • About 6 months turn around with very productive, professional, and thoughtful feedback. + 3 months revisions. From there, it took about a year to be published in print. Very satisfied with the process.

Sculpture Journal Edit

Source: Notes in the History of Art Edit

Studies in Iconography Edit

Umění/Art Edit

West 86th: A Journal of Decorative Arts, Design History, and Material Culture Edit

Word & Image: A Journal of Verbal/Visual Enquiry Edit

  • My review process took 2.5 months, which seemed very fast (especially since it happened around the holidays). Thereafter it took another 1.5 years to appear in print. I think there was some delay because of a change in the managing editor.

World Art Edit

Visual Culture in Britain Edit

Visual Resources Edit

  • My experience was very good. The waiting time for review was long but the reviewers were very thorough and helpful and the editor very attentive.

Visual StudiesEdit

  • I had a good experience with this journal. The review waiting time was long, I think it was 10 month turn-around all together, but the reviews were high quality and the editor was conscientous, professional and responsive to my emails.

Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte Edit

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.