I recently picked up a certain publication and was somewhat surprised since I had not purchased a copy in some time, as to how long it took to digest…quite abit of text, which as an avid reader of anything railroading was very enjoyable. Maybe my perception is slipping and I’ll be the first to admit that possibility but has photography spreads in general, increased in Trains? I like photographs as much as the next person but a couple of issues were more like a Morning Sun photography book…bear in mind Im biased…David P Morgan was and is one of my favorite wordsmiths…perhaps even a poet in some sense…Does anyone else perceive this? I realise that one man’s beef is another man’s cracker…I am one of those oddballs that only buys a copy when it’s contents interest me…Lately being retired…I have alot of time to read these threads…does anyone else notice that major stories seem to get scant coverage or none at all. Even the editorial side seems abit skinpy…ie: Canada’s railroads going to scheduled freights. the STB stance on mergers…etc. I won’t go on and on…the Nola post in this forum is another example…Don’t get me wrong… I have been reading this mag for decades…How about a essay contest instead of a photo contest One other observation before I get pelted with flying tomatoes…I have actually learned more from this forum than the magazine, I really appreciate the quality of a majority of the posts…alot of diverse opinion. There’s a related thread in the MR forum on magazines vs the internet…very interesting stuff…“We have Discovered The Enemy and He Is Us.”
I’ll agree with you.
I prefer the Trains magazines from the 1980s, I seemed to learn a lot more from reading them. Things changed when KPK became Editor. I got the feeling he likes steam locomotives and passenger trains, but was not interested in freight or diesels.
The Mark Hemphill issues were terrific, just as good as the DPM and JDI issues. The Mountain Railroad special issue is one of the best ever.
Now we have JGW as editor, and he seems a lot like KPK to me. He shows a lot of interest in steam locomotives, preservation and people, but that’s about it. I did not find either of Jim’s special issues interesting, one on Dinner Trains and the other ranking the States.
Kathi seems very much like Jim as well. I was looking forward to her article on the MM&A, but found it very disappointing. She went on a tour of Randy’s shop, and told us a Red Sox game was on the radio, and all three guys working were named Dave. That’s it ?
…Just a few comments: I like to see good articles of the physical plant of RR’s in the magazine. Such as “Mountain Railroading”…Articles of any commerical RR that addresses the items of their route, problems the trains must face in running that line, etc…
But I too like good photos even along with such above articles. Like to have the human side of the operations included in such above articles.
For me, it’s almost a perfect mix between photos and text. I enjoy reading and often times really get absorbed in the text, but the photos kind of lighten things up and provide a good addition to the text, at least for me.
Regarding how much I learn from each issue… that would be a whole lot. I think part of it is due to the fact that I’m just 16 and so I still have a lot of information waiting to be absorbed while other folks are already more knowledgeable
Just my [2c]
David P. Morgan was a wonderful writer, he had a way with words that was special…plus a passion for railroads that made Trains a very special magazine.
Mark Hemphill’s tenure was very special. He took a very serious look at the issues of railroading in the five years or so that he was here. The “mountain” issue was good, but the November 2001 issue on freight might have been the best Trains ever published (IMHO). The map of the month feature is great.
Currently, I find there to be a good issue followed by a so-so issue. I am not complaining. There is so much to this hobby (and industry) that it is pretty hard to please everyone. Personally I would like more about the industry rather than the hobby, but I have evolved on that the past 10 years.
This forum is perhaps the best feature of Trains. The vast amount of information passed on this forum is worth the price of the subscription.
Thanks to everyone for making it happen.
ed
What can I say? I was looking for some more varied railroad reading. I went poking around on the internet, and found this place![:D]
I like pumpkin pie. I mean, really like pumpkin pie. Some pumpkin pie is better than other pumpkin pie, but in the end, it’s all good.[^]
I have to agree that photos seem to have trumped text since the DPM era-but, as has been pointed out, that was a hard act to follow. Just thumbing through a few past articles, the man could pack more information into a few paragraphs than most people can in 2 or 3 pages! Reading a magazine article of his was like reading a small book. A picture is worth a thousand words? I think DPM’s articles beat the spread…
That being said, I must add (in the interest of full disclosure) that I’m a reader, not a picture person. I’ll agree that the “Mountains” issue of Trains must surely be one of the best in the last 35 years (my subscription tenure) but a large part of that was the profile diagrams. To me maps, plans and charts aren’t the same as photos. I really don’t find photos of trains that interesting (OK, OK, calm down! It’s just that the static nature of a photograph doesn’t capture the dynamic of a moving train for me). For others, it’s different so more power to them, I say. Rather than pumpkin pie, let me draw the analogy of chocolate. I like the dark-but it’s all good…
I’ve been reading TRAINS since around 1988 / 1989 and have enjoyed the vast majority of the issues. Yes, the “Mountain” issue was the very best all-round treatment of any single problem facing Railroaders, ancient and modern, but I would suggest that Mark Hemphill’s article on the development of Chicago as the US’s foremost rail centre will be the most plagiarised article ever.
Shame that, as he certainly deserves some royalties for each if his masterful works.
Hwyl,
Martin
I’d given up getting Trains, but started getting it regularly again when Mark H was editor. He was a good contributor on the forum too!
It’s not as good now, but so far still worth getting. The words “dumbed down” come to mind, but its not all the magazine’s fault. GE used to publish cross section diagrams of their locomotive engines on their website - now they don’t even tell you the bore and stroke or maximum RPM!
When did locomotive characteristics become secret?
M636C
I know what you mean. I think that this is especially true for steam because the typical lens speed freezes the exhaust motion. Photographers always want the sharpest photo possible, so they probably welcomed the ability to freeze the action as it became available. In the case of exhaust, freezing it offered the chance to see what it actually looked like for the first time. But in reality, exhaust is not a column of stationary chunks, but rather, a seamless geyser of erupting smoke. The exploding speed of the smoke column is in stark contrast to the advance of the locomotive, which always appears to be moving forward slower than expected.
So, photographically, it is not difficult for the lens to stop the locomotive for sharpness. Stopping the smoke is a far greater achievement, but one that truly distorts the visual experience. I have seen a few photos from the early 1900s where the locomotive was as sharp as one would want, while the smoke was not robbed of its action. I think it is a far more satisfying and realistic portrayal.
…Enjoying the articles in our hobby’s magazines goes back {for me}, to the old “Railroad Magazine” days…Humor spread through those writings {of railroad stories}, and the illustrations {drawings}, were excellent.
Photos were a bit on the scarce side back then in such magazines.
I agree with a poster above…we get a great issue and sometimes then a let down with the next one being just average. I’m not really complaining though as it must be a difficult task to assemble extreme interest to most in each issue.
One thing I had noticed and this experience with the magazine goes back to the 1950’s…is more of a editorial style a trend…that tries to appeal in a buffet style…something for everyone…newbies, preservationists, motive power junkies…alot of operational data…scattershot…based on other posters and my own experience aka the mountain issue, those issues with a clear focus are very good…I think they could publish a basic book in their book division on basic railroading for newbies and scrap that for many…total pages of… redundant info…I see this website as underdeveloped with alot of potential untapped. Do some in-depth interviews and pod cast them for subscribers…same for daily news…leave in depth for the magazine…four page spreads of old yard photo shots…ugh…Classic Trains has a more focused approach…in depth…a great read…photos are everywhere on the net…it absorbs a couple seconds of time…when digesting an issue…I can read most pretty quickly…more like a Look Magazine format…voting on photos have no appeal to me…from a personal view…Anyone remember Trains Illustrated?…short lifespan…is this a photography magazine or a railroading magazine? I think the key is to make TRAINS invaluable…not a hit and miss value. This is meant as constructive not bashing…
Disclaimer.
The following is a personal opinion, and in no way is intended to be read as anything other than my opinion, nor does it render any other person’s opinion any less valid.
Point is, this is a totally subjective opinion poll…you like green beans, and I despise them, so who is “right”?
In reality, there is no “right” look or content to the magazine.
Unless of course, they want to sell only to a static group of selected individuals with a narrow window of interest.
When I first began reading Trains, I was bothered by the fact that the magazine seemed overly focused on Northern and Eastern railroads, and very heavy on passenger service.
It almost seemed as if anything west of the Mississippi was not worth mentioning, unless it was in California.
Most of the articles written by Mark Hemphill were great, because they packed a tremendous amount of pertinent information into a small space.
But beyond that, I was bored by the remainder of the magazine…I don’t live in the northeast, don’t ride a commuter or passenger train, and am not a big fan of any fallen flag.
Note the emergence of Classic Trains, and the fact that is seems to have taken off quite nicely.
I like that, because it leaves more room in Trains for current railroading news.
But, along that vein, I don’t read Trains because I am looking for the latest words from Rose, Krebs or Davis…I read Railway Age for industry news, and I read Trains for the photos and the short articles.
It’s a fan magazine, not a technical publication.
With the new look and the new crew on board, they have managed to cover enough of the southwest and southeast to satisfy my interest.
That said, if you want the bore and stroke of a prime mover, look for the technical sheet on line.
At the time Morgan was at the helm, the internet was not here, and Trains,
Ed
I agree with most of your points but in fairness, DPM would have probably would have enjoyed this forum though it somewhat predated him. I just think the potential of the internet and this website and it’s content can be more fully integrated into the print version, exploiting each of their strengths…immediate versus more in depth…by the time the issue reaches the stands alot is outdated…I think if they expanded their range in this website…which is a pay for view basis outside of this forum…they could grow a larger share of internet traffic and revenue…I agree alot is pretty standard stuff…which could be covered in a Kalmbach book…Northeast railroading did dominate coverage…good observation…I missed that one. By the way, a classic dean of railroad books, William Middleton has just written a very definitive book on modern railroading published by Indiana University Press, if I recall the publisher correctly…I did take the poll but I think indirect feedback like yours and others rather than a poll is a more accurate reading…the last national election comes to mind…politics aside…
There are ultimate measures of success or failure …
Is Trains circulation trending up or down?
Do trends correlate with particular editorial regimes?
Is any particular trend fortified by either synergy or cannabilzation of sister publications?
Are there more or fewer such publications in the field which would underlie other trends?
I think I will withold judgement for another year. It is striking how many reincarnations the magazine has been through since I started reading it 50 years ago. It is very hard to take a succesful magazine and change it for something new. I like seeing the photo for photo’s sake content increase and hope to see more on the preservation stuff while maintaining the best from Mark, DPM, etc.
Afternoon guys & gals,
Big thanks for the good feedback on what we’re doing with the magazine.
Just as a point of clarity, our primary emphasis of the last two years has been to create a good mix of stories that appeal to both those who crave serious railroad journalism and those who relish more of the fun side of railroading. We’re looking for a balance between historical and contemporary (and futuristic) stories, steam vs. diesel, east vs. west, main line vs. short line, etc. Bottom line: We want to give you something each month that appeals to the heart and to the head from as many touchstones and points of interest as possible–the best of the best.
As always, comments, criticism, praise, etc. are always welcomed here or you may contact me personally at jwrinn@trainsmag.com. After all, as my favorite newspaper publisher of many years in Charlotte, Rolfe Neill, told me early on: “Remember, it’s good criticism that advances publications.” His words still ring true today.
Jim Wrinn, Editor
Personally, I would love to see Mark Hemphill write a short column and or editorial that would be posted here on the forum as a sticky topic…say once or twice a month.
Not a Q&A with Mark type thing, but simply his thoughts on whatever subject came to mind…followed by turning the forum members lose to dissect and discuss it.
Imagine the level of conversation that would produce, and how much misconception about the how and why trains do what they do would be dissolved.
Not to mention the raising of the bar for general conversation.
Add a once a month copy of one of DMP’s editorials, frosting on the cake.
I think you’re onto something Ed. I always liked the Professional Iconoclast (sp?) column of old. It wouldn’t be a big jump, to then put a “teaser” type link in the magazine…to read an expanded version of this story, log on to …[:)]
Great idea…thats exactly my point…expansion…I would still like to see some pod cast interviews…with real railroaders…and I didnt mean to infer just Presidential types…what would be interesting are some older heads talking about steam in the day…John Cosby comes to mind…