I am in the process of working on a project that may have some interest to the rest of the model railroading community. How would I go about getting an article published in MR? What kind of information does MR need to print an article from a contributor? How about photos, what is needed for them? How is all the data submitted; hardcopy, e-mail, CD, or other? Any other important information? Thanks in advance for the input, hopefully it will help more than just me.
You can find the info you’re looking for right on this site. The URL for MR’s submission guidelines is:
http://www.trains.com/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/003/103ohnbr.asp
Good Luck!
I’m rather amazed that MR’s publishing guidelines only refer to photos submitted by color slides. No mention at all of using digital photos. With the proliferation of better digital cameras these days, I would assume they would at least mention some requirements for digital images.
I’m currently working on several items for submission to magazines, and will be using digital photos only. My submissions will be to other magazines as I would like to see them published while I still remember doing them!
Bob Boudreau
[:0]
They sure don’t pay much for the amount of circulation? $90 per page, you godda be kidding me. The 1:64 Modeling guide pays $30 per page and pays for the pictures. With that pay scale I guess I will continure “vanity” publishing articles on my website.
http://www.modelingguide.com/material_submitted_reward_scale.htm
Just a thought[:D]
Harold
Well that’s about the standard for our hobby - RMC, Model Railroading, Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette, etc. A four page article would be $360.00, not bad for a hobby matter. MR used to pay $125.00 for cover photos, I assume this is more these days. It does add up! I’ve personally probably made more from my submissions to magazines than I’ve spent in the hobby. (Over 800 photos published, and 25 covers).
Bob Boudreau
Fundy,
You have a site where we can see some of your photos (the rejected ones of course)?
Slightly OT but,
Despite the increase in pixel count on digital cameras, a number of magazines will still request a real photo negative over a digital camera file. Real film has a resolution close to 20+ Megapixels (equivalent). Only the very best digital cameras today ($5000+) are even getting close to that. So you might want to check your magazine’s requirements before putting all your shots on digital.
~Just trying to be helpful.
~D
My web site is in the link at the bottom of my messages. Check out the “Published” page which lists my magazine photos.
Bob Boudreau
I attend a clinic presented by Lane Stewart, a professional photograper, on model photograhy and he only uses a 3 megapixel Nikon. The same camera he used for Sports Illustrated articles. He is a regular in Narrow Gauge and Short line Gazeete.
Harold
Hey! I was there too - in Denver 2003? Yes Lane’s had some great photos printed in the Gazette. I’ve had some photos published using my 1.3 and 3.3MP cameras too. Now I have a 6.3MP camera and don’t think I’ll have any problems getting them accepted.
Bob Boudreau
Oh, so that’s what that button is for. [:o)]
Nice site. I bookmarked it for study.
As to digital photographs in MR, I talked to Andy Sperandeo this summer and they like at least 4.5 megapixels. The more the better, of course.
I also talked to Tommy Holt as year or so ago (he’s a professional photographer and is regularly published in MR) and he’s using 14 megapixels for his submissions, although his first published digital stuff was about 6 megapixels.
And the submission guidelines here also discuss digital photos, but they discourage their use (scroll down to see the digital section in this link):
http://www.trains.com/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/003/103ohnbr.asp
So MR is using digital photos, but you’ll need a good digital camera to take them. [^]
Seems easy enough. But I’m lacking 2 things…
- A proper cambra
- Guts to even try [xx(]
This is true, to a point. I used my Canon 2.1 megapixel point and shoot digital camera for progress shots for an article I wrote for MR last year (renumbering a Kato SD70MAC).
Keep in mind the photo’s purpose. For overall layout photos or cover shots, yes, you’re going to need a good digital camera. However, if they’re progress shots that are only going to run a column or two wide, something along this lines of a 2 or 3 megapixel camera will suffic.
My advice, keep great notes and take plenty of photos (and multiple exposures) along the way. You can do it, and it’s a great way to justify future acquisitions for your railroad!
Good luck,
Erik
From my experience, the best way to get published in MR is to find out in advance what they (the editors) are hoping to see. Two main requirements I know of are:
(1) the topic has to have broad appeal to the general modeler population, and
(2) it cannot be too similar to anything else they have published within the last few years.
I got an article printed in a smaller publication (Model Railroading) because my topic was unusual (building a scale-model Great Lakes ore boat), but it didn’t meet Requirement #1 – i.e., it never would be “mainstream” enough for readers of the Kalmbach magazine.
Requirement #2 would [hopefully] preclude a lot of wealthy modelers from simply ‘buying’ their way into MR.
So before you shoot and submit a lot of photos of your beautiful layout, email the MR editors to be sure that your proposed article contains a subject they are likely to publish.
here is a good 6 megapixel camera to use and submit photos to MR, camera is only $230. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7046212/
My article in Railroad Model Craftsman materialized because the editor modeled California and needed realistic 1/4" scale grass. I was at the right place and time with my faux fur article on my website. You never know where your break will come.
I used a 3.1megapixel camera for my article, a Fujifilm Finepix S602 Zoom.
The original article is at:
http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/fur_grass/
Just a thought
Harold
Megapixel count isn’t always an indication of quality or usefulness for magazine submissions. Smaller cameras like the one illustrated have smaller sensors, so the pixels are therefore smaller. A larger digital SLR (Single Lens Reflex) camera with the same amount of pixels will produce better photos because its sensor is physically bigger, with bigger pixels.
There is also the quality of the lens, ability to stop the lens down for better depth of field, etc. to take into consideration.
I have a small Canon Elph S500 digital camera with 5.0MP. I also have a Canon Digital Rebel SLR with 6.3MP. There is quite a difference in the quality of the images from these two cameras, although their pixel count isn’t that far off. I use the Elph as my carry around snapshot camera, the Rebel for “serious” photography.
Bob Boudreau
If you scroll way down on their submission page, they talk about digital photos.
For large pictures, they want you to use a 10 megapixel camera! Holy cow - do those even exist?
Wow!
My 3.3 Megapixel camera still has some of its original stickers on it!!!
I’ve read the article submission guide lines. It was written in 2002. How many of those rules still apply?