I don’t make many comments on MR content (or lack thereof), but two things hit me in the July issue that I think deserve noting.
First, with the “not enough room to keep listing Coming Events in the magazine / better service to our readers to put it on the website and remove it from the magazine” decision, it seems a little bit inconsistent to have several pages that are 1/4 to 1/3 blank!
I’m talking about Trackside Photos. In the July issue, there’s a heck of a lot of wasted space around the photos! Why is that? Because it “presents” well? A few smaller photos would fit in those blank areas, providing more content in the space alotted for Trackside Photos. Or the existing photos could have been re-sized somewhat, a caption that itself wasn’t mostly white space used, and probably an entire page would have been gained for other uses (such as, maybe, Coming Events?).
Come on, MR! If I want lots of untarnished white space, I can get it a lot cheaper at Staples!
The second thing that hit me is in a topic called “July MR Workshop.”
I also noticed MR cut the Coming Events and used the space for more advertisements.[}:)] How does this help the clubs and readers that doesn’t have a computer? I say shame on the powers that be at MR for their lack of concern for the readership.Any wonder why I now look at MR before I buy it? Just think at one time I could not wait for the latest issue of MR.
[:O][:O][:O] WOW !!! I thought you were talking about a few inches, untill I opened
MR to pages102-103. Surely MR can do better. The magazine gets thinner and
thinner, but not the price. I’m sure this sort of thing is considered “artistic” by
those in the business, but not in my book. We are basically subsidising
Kalmbach advertising, because there’s plenty of that !
That’s called “white space”, and it is supposed to make the photos more eye catching.
I agree that it was a poor decision to remove the show listings from the magazine, and that the internet version is no substitute. In a recent topic bemoaning the loss, I suggested dumping RPO, and reinstating the timetable. The magazine is slowly deteriorating to the point of worthlessness.
I have 55 years of MR in binders on my shelf, and 30 of that was by subscription, but this may be the end of the tradition for me. I no longer look forward to receiving my copy in my mailbox. I think that some of the modernization that the editors have been introducing over the last few years has upset many of the long time readers. This may be an attempt to try to attract new young readers, but in general, the hobby business is dying, and jazzing up the magazine isn’t going to change that fact.
Get rid of RPO,it’s nothing more than self appreciating for the magazine,other mags usually have important feedback about previous articles, etc.As for Trackside Photos, they just rehash old.unused photos from previous articles most of the time,once in awhile there is a decent shot,check it out,you’ll see.Also ,to save space, I just tear out the sections or page from all the magazines, of articles of interest to me,I don’t need thirty years of advertising.
I think I’m seeing both pros and cons are far as RPO goes. If RPO is filled with “The editors did a terrific job once again” then yes I would say get rid of it. On the other hand I think that RPO does serve a purpose - although not for the reader. I’m thinking of the letters that discussed Pelle’s modeling efforts after his article was published. I bet Pelle was tickled pink to read the letters and that reading those letters probably meant more to him than seeing his article in print and even the check that he received from Kalmbach. Pelle is a modeler just like us - ok he’s a modeler who is much more accomplished than a good number of us - and I’m sure that the amount of the check when divided by the time he spent in writing the articles and taking the pictures turned out to be somewhat south of minimum wage. Hopefully reading the letters will convince him to write more. Same with the other authors. After all the only way to get a more diverse group of articles is to get a more diverse group of modelers to write 'em.
I am hoping that someday I can actually do something modeling wise that would be published. I do know that for at least me the most cool thing would be to read a letter in RPO that says “Hey - loved Dave’s article - helped me big time with layout.”
Dave, to me, if I ever got published in MR, that would be quite enough; it would already be a big bonus. So, the letters that gush are just a waste of space, unless they offer a prespective that sets a given layout apart in a defined way. I doubt, for example, that MR would publish a letter that effectively trashed their selection for layout-of-the-month.
The editorial staff could do what many do, and that is to paraphrase, or summarize, with a few selected quotes, what the majority had to say. This would be offered at the front of the RPO, and would be an ‘a priori’ acknowledgement for the benefit of the contributing modeler (Pele, in this case) and readers, alike.
Everyone needs validation, and that also extends to the editors. So, they need to publish some form of affirmation in order to keep the readership positive about the magzine’s approach and contents. The magazine would gain more credibility, however, if it was more generous about publishing contrary opinions. Surely they get them? I hope? Or are we all gushers?
I actually think a lot of the more interesting things from the past are gone, and replaced by more vague columns. What about “student fare” and “one reader’s opinion”? They both offered an interesting view on things and were both dropped on the grounds that this stuff is supposedly covered elsewhere anyway, at least with what was the student fare column.
I prefer trackside photos in the middle, with a full page dedicated to one photo. I put the center page in my room, on the wall if it’s like that. Same deal with TRAINS.
Matthew
P.S. I miss coming events too. My mom noticed it was gone before I did. I had thumbed through a couple times and I didn’t notice it, but then my mom asked me where it was. I said “Right after the product news” and then I tried to show her, but it wasn’t there!
What a surprise, and just when we were about to use it, too.
The best issue i have is from 1955, It is cover to cover with modeling projects a prototype stuff. There are only a couple of ads and there isn’t any wasted/“white” space.
Say what you will about MR but i like it, compared to one here in the UK called RAILWAY MODELLING, now this IS a crap magazine, it’s twice as thick as MR but it only had about 15 pages of stuff, the rest was adverts. The projects covered were very dated, some guy made a truck and painted it with old slow drying enamel paints and hand painted lettering, my five year old could do better, I will not be buying this tat again but will be sticking with MR
Interesting point. I do remember the back and forth in RPO when Walthers advertised a Penn Central steam engine decal set. Now that was some debate! I think you are correct about validation and being human I think the editors proably don’t want to place those up front in the magazine. How about a compromise. Perhaps Terry in his opening editorial can discuss some of the criticisms they have received and addressed them. Something along the lines of “we have received much correspondence concerning the elimination of the events column” and then he can tell us what has been discussed and the conclusion reached.
Steve,
Please don’t take my criticisms as saying that MRR is a stinky magazine. I love it. I think many of the folks here also love it. That could be the reason we are very critical of it. We all want it to remain the best mag in the market place. If we hated it we wouldn’t care one way or another.
I really do look forward to the next issue of MR every month, but the magazine could be much improved. I like RPO because people ask questions about things mentioned in previous issues and there are responses from the editors or whoever did the article. I think there should be more screening in RPO and get rid of all those “good job editors” and “last months was great” What I liked in the last issue are the articles about weathering and benchwork. That article about making a highway I did not like, but thats just opinion, i dont think it looks all that good at all. My suggestions:
filter letters to RPO better
get rid of from the editor
make better use of trackside photo space
by all means BRING BACK COMING EVENTS!
IMHO MR is the best magazine out there. but that is no reason not to improve.
The all-time best issue of MR was the 25th anniversay magazine, IMHO. But even today, I find many things through a year that are enlightening in MR and will continue to subscribe. There is no reason to belabor the changes in the magazine. MR used to employ model railroaders that liked to work on the magazine, hence lots of columns, lots of small detail blurbs and the like. Today Kalmbach advertises for people with degrees in journalism or some related branch of endeavor and asks that they have an “interest” in model railroading. Now we have a fancy, up to date publication, but lack the sophistication of the personal touch that used to be there. Also, the main articles in the magazine have always been submitted by modellers and have made up the meat of the magazine. If no one is submitting interesting stuff for publication, we all suffer, and we get yet another MR project layout built on a house door, on a foam slab, on a postcard, or whatever. No one wants to create an article on the ins and outs of assembling a difficult kit, or an article on any hands-on type creativity. This kind of article was the thing that set MR apart from the competition for many years. But no more. Perhaps never again. A shame it is. Still, MR remains the leader, but no longer the absolute King of the Hill.
Great observations! I too still love MR, even though it’s not the magazine it was in the 60s when I discovered it.
Linn Westcott was the last of the “old timers” who knew the magazine from it’s founding days, and Linn was a model railroader first, then a journalist. Russ Larson was the first “journalist first, modeler second” to take the helm, and if you look at the magazine’s direction, it’s modern journalistic bent with less in-depth modeling articles began to take shape in the 70s under Russ’ leadership.
When Andy Sperandeo came to the helm, the magazine took a step back toward the modeler as opposed to the journalist and for me was a refreshing change – sort of a call back to the old days. Gordy Odegard was a fantastic modeling researcher as well as a prolific writer, and his loss was a big one. The current magazine feels different, and there’s less of a deep passion for the hobby in the writing – that’s the part I miss the most from the good old days of the 60s.
But it’s also true times-are-a-changing. I think fretting over loss of MR circulation is more a sign of the times than that MR has gone to the dogs. The hobby itself is shrinking and will continue to do so with ever increasing rapidity as railroads become less a part of the small town experience and more baby boomers head for the rest home – or the funeral home.
Finally, the face of the hobby itself is changing, and I have to agree with MR’s basic trend away from meticulous text-heavy scratchbuilding articles toward more visual methods of presentation.
Kitbashing ready-to-run stuff and clever techniques for doing things rapidly in layout construction will appeal to hobby newcomers the most. The more meticulous you make the hobby appear, the more you will limit your audience given the modern trends. True, you may lose some modeling die-hards by going away from hard-core scratchbuilding, but long term the health of the magazine will depend on the new blood readershi
I have tried on several occasions to get articles published in MR, without success. Nowadays the bar has been raised so much higher than 10-15 years ago, it is nearly impossible unless you have a PERFECT layout with the LATEST technology and it is not similar to something else that appeared there within the last few years.[:(!]
One of the basic rules in printing… DONT WASTE SPACE!!
I was wondering why there was so much white area in the photos area.
I am happy that I have been able to follow MR for the last 30 years or so. But times are certainly a-changing in the hobby.
There is a increasing flood of emails from my Sellers asking for advanced reservations on items that will not be produced if there are not sufficient demand. THAT I dont like.
The “Old Gaurd” will always be remembered and if MR would continue to follow thier lead and try to produce something for everyone it would be wonderful.
Sometimes I wonder if reading MR is to look at the new products that I have already heard about from websites, rumors etc… and then turn to these forums for the really thick gravy and steak of discussions.
I think your summary of the editorial staff is right on the money. I have been somewhat disappointed when I read what the mag is looking for when they have a position open. Gordy was fantastic and their was never an article he wrote that I didn’t absolutely enjoy reading but he would not meet the requirements of today’s job description. Andy comes in a close second - tied with Art Curren and closely followed by Jim Hediger. Looking at the size of the staff - you’d think they would have room for at least one, to use Tom’s phrase, model railroaders that liked to work on the magazine. Perhaps that was the thought behind giving Lionel Strang new responsibilities at the magazine. Maybe the should hunt down Rick Selby and offer him a spot. Let’s keep our fingers crossed. Hopefully someone on the staff is passing on what is written here for further discussion. If there is such a person - I’m available for work!
I can’t say I’m happy with the newer issues of MR either. Like for instance, on the cover of last months issue, there was an awesome pic of an HO C&O steamer pulling coal hoppers. I go to the article and what do I find? Ugly green diesels and 2 bad shots of steam. Now that’s dissapointing.
Or take this months issue, a great looking UP Gas Turbine in the west on the cover. Go to the article and, half of it’s about the east, and there’s on shot of UP, and it’s not even a Turbine. [:(]
I used to be wet-my-pants excited for the latest MR to come in the mail. Now I’m just “Oh, it’s here already? That’s good”. IMO, MR has been a drag the last few months.
CUT DOWN ON THE ADDS AND PUT IN SOME MORE ARTICLES AND PICTURES!!!