Jump to content
 

BRM May '17 + DVD


SteveCole
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

 

Let me pick up on a few points. BRM (and MR, HM, RM) is a commercial magazine so there will always be tweaking to the publication to increase sales. If there is one constant, it's that there will be changes. Possibly, the only other being that you can't please all the people all the time.

 

Commenting on other people's layouts IS a useful feature. What you read in the article is the modellers own words. They will be sub-edited but then everything you read goes through that process, what we don't do is put words in their mouths. Most modellers are reticent to blow their own trumpet so the extra team comments allow us to do this a little but more importantly, highlight aspects of the model that deserve greater mention. You will probably say that we should go back to the modeller and get them to add stuff in, that happens but in reality there isn't time to coach every writer personally so the team comment offers another avenue.

 

More “ballsy” articles? The guide at the moment is that most of the practical pieces should be attainable by most readers and be something that are actually going to do. Working over a newly produced model is fairly typical but why is a tank engine a worse choice than a Class 68? Big diesel weathering is just as common and arguably, the Heljan 1361 presents some very specific challenges, such as the dome. Converting a 68 to an 88 would be interesting, but how many readers are really going to take a saw to £140 worth of model rather than wait for the RTR version to appear? That said, if you want to do it and submit an article, the door is always open.

Phil, thanks for taking the time to provide a comprehensive response :)

 

I fully appreciate you need to sell magazines and it's a business, hence caveating my comments as purely mine as a consumer and probably not representative of what drives sales.

 

The "ballsy" reference was a bit tongue in cheek, weathering steam engines seem to be a staple for magazine articles (not just BRM). No doubting the skill involved however. I'd definitely submit an article on converting a 68 to an 88 if I thought it would get published. Not sure you want an article on how to butcher a 68 and just be left with a pile of bits though!

 

Change is a constant. We live in multi media fast changing world, but do we necessarily want our model railways and specifically model railway magazines to reflect that. I'm not sure we necessarily do. I use my model railway as an escape from the real world

Amen to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I'd definitely submit an article on converting a 68 to an 88 if I thought it would get published. Not sure you want an article on how to butcher a 68 and just be left with a pile of bits though!

 

We definitely would if the illustrative images are of publishable standards and the process is appropriately written (and all the bits fit back together ;)). If any further information or guidance on those points is needed don't hesitate to get in touch with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Change is a constant. We live in multi media fast changing world, but do we necessarily want our model railways and specifically model railway magazines to reflect that. I'm not sure we necessarily do. I use my model railway as an escape from the real world.

 

Sales would seem to indicate readers don't want a 1950s magazine any more, they want something in colour for a start, and with realistic viewpoints for the photos not helicopter shots. They also want modern topics covered.

 

Much as a I love a really old mag, we live in a different world. For example, there isn't much call for freelance standard gauge modelling where UK and foreign prototypes are mixed, like Beal did for years. No one is using shellac on cardboard much (although I'd like to try it) nor could we ignore DCC in preference for layouts wired to war surplus Lancaster bomber swtichgear (I have someone tracking some down for me). The need for loco kitbuilding has diminished too, you can nearly buy RTR British trackwork too, another couple of staples gone.

 

I haven't bought BRM for a good while now so I can't comment on specifics. I would , however , refer you to Railway Modeller which had updated it's output with some superb photography. In addition it has innovated with features such as "Talking Points " and "comment" this month with Ian Futers and Tony Wright respectively. Certainly I would regard them as model railway celebrities , yet the articles are well written and not thrust down your throat. Understated celebrities ,not at all patronising, which is always a danger when a celebrity professes a view telling you what you should think. Railway Modelling Explored has successfully evolved from Junior Modeller. Again the emphasis there is evolved, not a dramatic change. So Railway Modeller has changed yet retains it's old familiar look. No gimmicks just a lot of beefy articles.

 

Sorry, when I mentioned all mags looked at other publications, I didn't specifically say RM, but I can assure you that we do look at it. They also look at us. We both look at Model Rail and Hornby Mag. We're all aware what each other is doing, even talking to each other at shows and press events.

 

As you've not read BRM, I'm not sure where the inference that articles are anything other than "well written" come from. To quote an earlier poster, the latest issue contains, "Great articles on great subjects" with comments being largely on presentation. None of the comments are "patronising" or "thrust down your throat" either, we do our best to ensure they add to the main article and add value.

 

Sorry for the reference to another magazine but to me it just highlights a different approach to change is possible.

 

No problem mentioning other mags in the context of a discussion, you will find active topics for all the other publications elsewhere on this forum. BRM takes a different approach from RM in that the team are much more visible both on the page, electronically and in person, hence the mag looks different too. It would be a dull world if all railway publications looked the same. In the UK, there is the benefit of choice, unlike the US where only one truly national mainstream title exists. I'd say this is a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

The "ballsy" reference was a bit tongue in cheek, weathering steam engines seem to be a staple for magazine articles (not just BRM). No doubting the skill involved however. I'd definitely submit an article on converting a 68 to an 88 if I thought it would get published. Not sure you want an article on how to butcher a 68 and just be left with a pile of bits though!

 

This highlights a challenge for all magazines. You can have to look at any subject in detail to generate enough articles to fill 13 issues a year. Is weathering steam locos really covered in 2 pages? I'd suggest not, there are many different techniques for a start. Whole books have been written on the subject after all. In the same way, people have said "I don't want anything on coaches" which would preclude a huge number of topics, especially when someone else says "I don't want anything on wagons" followed by "I don't want to know about kitbuilding". In fact if you listed all the topics one person or another doesn't want to hear about, there would be a lot of blank pages.

 

Our role is partly to find new ways of covering old topics. We are lucky in that models and materials evolve over time so techniques used 5 years ago aren't appropriate for today, or at least have been superseeded. Scenery for example, has been revolutionised by electrostatic grass. We don't need to mess around with dyed lint so much, although it still has it's place.

 

And as Andy Y says, yes to the 68 to 88 conversion. One of the benefits of model railway publishing is that it's very open to newcomers who want to write articles, one of the few places you can see your name in print and even earn some money. It's how I started back in the 1990s!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i purchased latest issue of brm on Friday at normal price 4.75

Was annoyed to see same mag and dvd on sale at warwick services on the M40 for a special price of 99p, wonder why all shops don't get this offer

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

No problem mentioning other mags in the context of a discussion, you will find active topics for all the other publications elsewhere on this forum. BRM takes a different approach from RM in that the team are much more visible both on the page, electronically and in person, hence the mag looks different too. It would be a dull world if all railway publications looked the same. In the UK, there is the benefit of choice, unlike the US where only one truly national mainstream title exists. I'd say this is a good thing.

 

I take it that you mean Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette - or was it Railroad Model Craftsman? Perhaps it might even have been the online Model Railroad Hobbyist?

 

Joking aside, I strongly suspect that you're actually referring to Model Railroader - which seems to have been the dominant US publication for a number of years.

 

Some people might see this as a good thing - after all, it usually seems to be a decent read (as do a number of other publications from the same stable). I'm not so sure - as, for a number of years, it seemed to go "off the boil", with a less than ideal mix of content and US forum site complaints of "chequebook modelling". I suspect that the fact that there is some competition in the UK helps keep magazines "honest".

 

 

This highlights a challenge for all magazines. You can have to look at any subject in detail to generate enough articles to fill 13 issues a year. Is weathering steam locos really covered in 2 pages? I'd suggest not, there are many different techniques for a start. Whole books have been written on the subject after all. In the same way, people have said "I don't want anything on coaches" which would preclude a huge number of topics, especially when someone else says "I don't want anything on wagons" followed by "I don't want to know about kitbuilding". In fact if you listed all the topics one person or another doesn't want to hear about, there would be a lot of blank pages.

 

Our role is partly to find new ways of covering old topics. We are lucky in that models and materials evolve over time so techniques used 5 years ago aren't appropriate for today, or at least have been superceded. Scenery for example, has been revolutionised by electrostatic grass. We don't need to mess around with dyed lint so much, although it still has its place.

 

And as Andy Y says, yes to the 68 to 88 conversion. One of the benefits of model railway publishing is that it's very open to newcomers who want to write articles, one of the few places you can see your name in print and even earn some money. It's how I started back in the 1990s!

 

Coaches? I'd say "yes please" - especially if I can read some "how to" articles on "cut and shut" conversions, kitbashes and the like - but then, anyone who knows me (or whom I spoke to at "Ally Pally" this year) probably wouldn't be too surprised by my viewpoint.

 

A number of people who contributed to my recent MM&M thread - in which I asked if people had started building models, even if they knew the final product would be flawed - probably also wouldn't be too surprised.

 

Any of these people would have been left in no doubt that I enjoy build projects of this nature - "cut and shut" and other conversions, preferably with starting points that lend themselves to adaptation (it also helps if they're not too expensive in the first place).

 

They might also have sussed that I'm planning to build a model inspired by an early petrol railbus (but using coach kit panels, or a home-brew equivalent) - even if (thanks to an external hard disk crash on my home PC) it might be slightly longer than planned before I get chance to build anything - but then, how many practical projects go ahead and get completed, without a hitch?

 

While on the subject of stuff I'd like to see covered, I could also add multiple units (diesel or electric - I don't really mind) - building them from kits or converting them from cheap coach bodyshells - sorting out the interiors - and then adding and wiring internal lights. (OK - with my background, I might know a thing or two about wiring LEDs - but that's neither here nor there.)

 

Then there's one aspect of railway modelling that everyone* really likes - that's right - layout wiring!

 

(*OK - perhaps not - but it can be enjoyable, if you make a decent job of planning ahead and designing things properly.)

 

 

Seriously though, I suspect we could all come up with our own personal lists of what we want to see in a model railway magazine - and what we don't want to see. I also suspect that everyone's lists would look rather different - which inevitably makes it a lot harder for the people who edit magazines to set the correct balance.

 

All I know is that I'm not expecting to see any articles with my name on them any time soon - I'm in no rush to write them - and I suspect most people are in no rush to read them - not that this worries me, you understand. I'm quite happy to leave stuff like that to people who know their stuff.

 

 

Huw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Then there's one aspect of railway modelling that everyone* really likes - that's right - layout wiring!

 

(*OK - perhaps not - but it can be enjoyable, if you make a decent job of planning ahead and designing things properly.)

 

 

New Andy is very keen on us covering this. I'm just trying to work out a way of doing it that hasn't been done to death in the past. We have a few ideas in the direction so watch this space...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I've gotta say I actually really liked this latest issue.

Although I'm a subscriber I had gone off it a bit recently, just flicking through it when it arrived and then bunging it in the model mag pile. (its a big pile I really need to throw some out).

But there was plenty for me in this latest issue. I especailly liked the article on Buttermere Mining Co, and Central Works and would like to see more 'different' layouts in different styles. Big roundy roundys although nice aren't the be all and end all

I actually like the little comment boxes.

Plenty of other bits in there for me as well.

 

As for suggestions what about an article on what to do with all the old modelling mags we all seem to have lying about... How do you know what to cut out and save ? (The Mrs is starting to get tetchy about the amount I have lol)

 

Good job.

 

Owen

Edited by Hippo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Then there's one aspect of railway modelling that everyone* really likes - that's right - layout wiring!

 

(*OK - perhaps not - but it can be enjoyable, if you make a decent job of planning ahead and designing things properly.)

 

New Andy is very keen on us covering this. I'm just trying to work out a way of doing it that hasn't been done to death in the past. We have a few ideas in the direction so watch this space...

 

Well, there's always modular baseboard construction - and wiring running in rectangular trunking.

 

Colour coded cable markers (with numbers) might also come in useful.

 

Seriously though, I'm looking forward to seeing whatever you come up with.

 

 

Huw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Glad you liked Buttermere - We've a couple of similar models lined up for the coming months. They are much more my kind of thing, small and interesting projects that more people have both space and time for. The big problem with this sort of thing is it's difficult to justfy a full photo shoot, but I was able to snap this at a show along with others. Lighting was tricky but thanks to Andy Y and our designers working on the pictures, it looks good on the page.

Edited by Phil Parker
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you been out to buy the new issue yet? Thoughts?

Mine came through the door a few days ago.

 

There are a few things that have crept in recently I don't like. One being the extra large comment text on pictures in two of the layout features, which is just repetition of the main body text. So I end up reading the same thing twice. I also am another who doesn't like the little "what we think" boxes.

 

You also missed a couple of opportunities too, in the text of central works there is a mention of the signal box which I thought sounded interesting, but I couldn't find a more detailed description nor any photos. There was something similar in another of the layout focus sections, a small description of something I found interesting, that again wasn't expanded on.

 

End of the line was really good, that sort of article is always right up my street. Same goes for the bridge article.

 

What would be interesting, at least to me, would be an article on building and painting a Road Transport Images kit of parts, or modifying/weathering rtp vehicles.

Edited by Norm81
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Mine came through the door a few days ago.

 

There are a few things that have crept in recently I don't like. One being the extra large comment text on pictures in two of the layout features, which is just repetition of the main body text. So I end up reading the same thing twice. I also am another who doesn't like the little "what we think" boxes.

 

You also missed a couple of opportunities too, in the text of central works there is a mention of the signal box which I thought sounded interesting, but I couldn't find a more detailed description nor any photos. There was something similar in another of the layout focus sections, a small description of something I found interesting, that again wasn't expanded on.

 

End of the line was really good, that sort of article is always right up my street. Same goes for the bridge article.

 

What would be interesting, at least to me, would be an article on building and painting a Road Transport Images kit of parts, or modifying/weathering rtp vehicles.

 

The large comment text is called a "Pull Quote", and is "They are a quote or piece of text that has been written in the article but have been put in a larger font to draw the readers attention to that quote so the reader wants to know what the quote is about.   Sometimes the pull quote will be put in brackets to make it easier to read. Some magazines put the pull quote in a different font or colour to draw more attention to it. The pull quote may catch the readers eye as they are flicking through the magazine, which then urges them to read the article or buy the magazine/newspaper." - I've lifted this from this handy explanation of other magazine terms. It's standard practise in all mags, basically to drive interest in an article and entice the casual browser in.

 

30987371810_86f7c5d970_z.jpg

 

We'll doubtless do both Road Transport Images kits and modifying RTP vehicles again, but the last time it was covered was January 2016 when I went through the Ruston Quays models so you might like to pick up a back issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a quick look today whilst in supermarket. Not sure why it was not there when I looked a few days ago. Anyway, I noticed Phil had finally discovered the excellent and well priced Tomytec motor chassis to remotor his own Tin Turtle. I have been using that same Tomytec motor for at least 2 years, for my own 3d printed model. Like many of there low cost motor units, this one being designed for a Japanese promotional toy train, they can suddenly disappear , so are sometimes worth while stocking up on.

I am worried that the style of many of the current magazines means that I am less likely to go back and search out old copies for inspiration, being mainly layout articles and product reviews. That might be what sells magazines now, but is it good for the hobby long term. I have said it before, but more scale drawings would be useful. Even if it was just for new r2r models, so that we can all check for accuracy, and possibly be inspired to build a model in a different scale. It does not have to be complex detailed drawings, just something good enough to use as reference and help build a model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

New Andy is very keen on us covering this. I'm just trying to work out a way of doing it that hasn't been done to death in the past. We have a few ideas in the direction so watch this space...

 

One thing I'd like to see described and illustrated in some detail is options for making the connections between the layout wiring and the control panel (especially where the latter is not directly built onto the baseboard, but is free-standing, so there has to be a "join" at the point where the wiring all comes together).  Authors often seem to hint at using Scart leads or other multi-pin sockets, without ever explaining how you do the soldering (or whatever) in such confined spaces without melting what you've already just done.  So that's something that hasn't been 'done to death'!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Had a quick look today whilst in supermarket. Not sure why it was not there when I looked a few days ago. Anyway, I noticed Phil had finally discovered the excellent and well priced Tomytec motor chassis to remotor his own Tin Turtle. I have been using that same Tomytec motor for at least 2 years, for my own 3d printed model. Like many of there low cost motor units, this one being designed for a Japanese promotional toy train, they can suddenly disappear , so are sometimes worth while stocking up on.

I am worried that the style of many of the current magazines means that I am less likely to go back and search out old copies for inspiration, being mainly layout articles and product reviews. That might be what sells magazines now, but is it good for the hobby long term. I have said it before, but more scale drawings would be useful. Even if it was just for new r2r models, so that we can all check for accuracy, and possibly be inspired to build a model in a different scale. It does not have to be complex detailed drawings, just something good enough to use as reference and help build a model.

 

I "finally" discovered the Tomytec chassis at Expo NG last year, it's just taken a while to get it in the magazine. Since the chassis is a mainstream product, it wasn't really time sensitive. As you say, it's been around a couple of years but the etched plate is newer.

 

Drawings are a perenial issue, Chris Leigh has covered the same topic in the past. Researching and drawing up a loco is very time consuming and it is difficult to find anyone willing to do this nowadays. It can be done, but would be breathtakingly expensive. That's fine, but would enough readers benfit? You can't really check a RTR model againast the plan because very few shops will let you take it out of the box for lots of prodding before a sale and if you buy mail order, that's definitely not an option. This is one of the jobs a reviewer should do for the reader anyway. As for making your own models, if kitbuilding is in decline, what about scratchbuilding? I'd suggest that the sort of models people like plans of are those they will then happily wait for RTR versions of. You might think that they should be willing to get the tin snips or 3D printer out, but we have to aim the mag at the majority of people who actually exist, not ones who we might wish existed.

 

Plans of buildings might be a lot more practical nowadays. Scratchbuilding a structure is a lot easier than a loco and so within the reach of more readers. Personally, I've a couple of pieces planned in that direction.

 

As far as the future of the hobby is concerned, we see it as important to get people doing some modelling. Any modelling. That's why the practical pieces you missed on your flick through exist and are written to be as accessible as possible. No point in telling someone to hack a loco body out of sheet metal or fire up a CAD package if they aren't even confident enough to tackle a cardboard building or plastic wagon. I grew up sticking plastic Spitfires together but many of today's modellers don't have that background.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

One thing I'd like to see described and illustrated in some detail is options for making the connections between the layout wiring and the control panel (especially where the latter is not directly built onto the baseboard, but is free-standing, so there has to be a "join" at the point where the wiring all comes together).  Authors often seem to hint at using Scart leads or other multi-pin sockets, without ever explaining how you do the soldering (or whatever) in such confined spaces without melting what you've already just done.  So that's something that hasn't been 'done to death'!

 

Nice suggestion. I fear the problem is that you assume there is some sort of clever trick to wiring up a multi pin plug. There isn't really, you just have to work carefully with the soldering iron. Having said that, I'm pretty sure I've done something on electrical soldering on a past DVD and there's definitely something more that could be done here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Moving the topic on a bit, Andy and I have been out recording stuff for the "Extras" section of the DVD. Do people like/hate it?

 

Our theory is that we can do some lo-fi but useful interviews and other films that the main camera crew can't get out to. It's all very relaxed, hence the "Extras" rather then main disk features, but does this matter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

. I grew up sticking plastic Spitfires together but many of today's modellers don't have that background.

 

 

They still exist. They're busy sticking together plastic Spitfires, spaceships and tanks rather than trains. And playing with LEGO.

 

 

I've often wondered whether a modern plastic kit railway range would be a success. Not one designed solely for use on layouts, but a range of locomotives to the standard of Tamiya for example. Aimed more at the general public than railway modellers.

 

Plenty of people like Flying Scotsman. Build your own model. Paint, glue, etc. included. If it's a success then you could try other locomotives.

 

 

 

Jason

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I've often wondered whether a modern plastic kit railway range would be a success. Not one designed solely for use on layouts, but a range of locomotives to the standard of Tamiya for example. Aimed more at the general public than railway modellers.

 

Both Andy Y and I have said this many times over the last few years to Airfix. Imagine a Deltic with the same interior detail they put into the current large scale aircraft. O gauge or above and unmotorised. Many model railway people wouldn't get it, but I reckon the plastic kit guys would go nuts for something like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Moving the topic on a bit, Andy and I have been out recording stuff for the "Extras" section of the DVD. Do people like/hate it?

 

Our theory is that we can do some lo-fi but useful interviews and other films that the main camera crew can't get out to. It's all very relaxed, hence the "Extras" rather then main disk features, but does this matter?

No the extras can be great, I enjoyed the ad hoc interview with Steve on the current one. To be honest I prefer that to the over produced gimmicks on the main features. I'd rather see more layouts but shorter clips and concentrate on features showing techniques and what's currently the extra info like interviews. There's plenty of entertaining people around, as an example how about a series of interviews with Kit about APT or Brian about Locomotion and the NRM, split them into natural segments so it's worth collecting. (Might help you sell mags the months there's not much in it for me).

Mind you in that theme you might interview Charlie . . . First BRM DVD to come with one of these

 

post-6968-0-29005400-1493920598.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

No the extras can be great, I enjoyed the ad hoc interview with Steve on the current one. To be honest I prefer that to the over produced gimmicks on the main features. I'd rather see more layouts but shorter clips and concentrate on features showing techniques and what's currently the extra info like interviews. There's plenty of entertaining people around, as an example how about a series of interviews with Kit about APT or Brian about Locomotion and the NRM, split them into natural segments so it's worth collecting. (Might help you sell mags the months there's not much in it for me).

Mind you in that theme you might interview Charlie . . . First BRM DVD to come with one of these

 

attachicon.gifIMG_7296.PNG

 

That's very much our thinking when Phil and I have gone guerilla and just gone and talked to people; you're right, there's a lot of potential and we've got a long bucket list. It also means we can be a bit more timely, I've just been doing some little extras over the last couple of days that have missed the DVD production but we can slip them into the digital edition of the mag. It also allows us to do some extended bits that wouldn't merit being on the DVD, in the June issue, for example, I show people how to build up a photo panorama, too niche for the DVD but it may be of interest to some. That along with chatting to layout owners means we've generated about another 90 minutes of content in the June issue. It won't all be of interest to everyone but if some bits are interesting to some then it's worth doing. July, on the DVD extras or the digital edition, will include about 30 minutes of slow TV on a ride so Phil and I really are trying to give some added value outside the scope of the printed page.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The large comment text is called a "Pull Quote", and is "They are a quote or piece of text that has been written in the article but have been put in a larger font to draw the readers attention to that quote so the reader wants to know what the quote is about. Sometimes the pull quote will be put in brackets to make it easier to read. Some magazines put the pull quote in a different font or colour to draw more attention to it. The pull quote may catch the readers eye as they are flicking through the magazine, which then urges them to read the article or buy the magazine/newspaper." - I've lifted this from this handy explanation of other magazine terms. It's standard practise in all mags, basically to drive interest in an article and entice the casual browser in.

 

We'll doubtless do both Road Transport Images kits and modifying RTP vehicles again, but the last time it was covered was January 2016 when I went through the Ruston Quays models so you might like to pick up a back issue.

Thanks for the explanation on pull quotes, I see their necessity but they're still not my "cup of tea".

 

Thanks for the tip on January 2016 issue - I can't find it so I have either misplaced it and forgotten I've read it or didn't buy it (pre-subscription), will have to pick up a copy. Maybe if you do revisit the RTI kits you could do a different class/era of vehicle to last time?

 

I subscribed as I was buying BRM far more often than others and this still looks to have been a wise choice.

 

I haven't even looked at the DVD's before, maybe I should get them watched!

Edited by Norm81
Link to post
Share on other sites

The large comment text is called a "Pull Quote", and is "They are a quote or piece of text that has been written in the article but have been put in a larger font to draw the readers attention to that quote so the reader wants to know what the quote is about.   Sometimes the pull quote will be put in brackets to make it easier to read. Some magazines put the pull quote in a different font or colour to draw more attention to it. The pull quote may catch the readers eye as they are flicking through the magazine, which then urges them to read the article or buy the magazine/newspaper." - I've lifted this from this handy explanation of other magazine terms. It's standard practise in all mags, basically to drive interest in an article and entice the casual browser in.

 

This works better if the magazine is not encased in a polythene bag ...

 

Chris

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...