Modern Image split

[Dagworth]

There is a modern era magazine that has been published for a long time, four(ish) issues a year. It's call UPDate and published by DEMU. http://www.demu.org.uk/update.php

 

Andi

[MartynJPearson]

In 30 years time, I wonder if someone will start a thread suggesting that the current magazine (or whatever they morph into by then) have a split between Modern Image and anything up to and including EWS!

[Huw Griffiths]

In 30 years time, I wonder if someone will start a thread suggesting that the current magazine (or whatever they morph into by then) have a split between Modern Image and anything up to and including EWS!

 

No - 1950!

 

After all, isn't that the "official" cutoff point - as suggested by Mr. Freezer?

 

Anyway, by that reckoning, anything in my lifetime would count as "modern image". As I'm in my early 50s, I can just about get my head around that sort of reasoning ... .

 

 

There is a modern era magazine that has been published for a long time, four(ish) issues a year. It's call UPDate and published by DEMU. http://www.demu.org.uk/update.php

 

Andi

 

I'm sure you know the fatal flaw with that suggestion, Andi.

 

Reading UPDate on a regular basis would involve people joining a "special interest" group.

 

That would never do ... .

 

Joking aside, when I've come across UPDate - and the DEMU stand - at shows, I've liked what I've seen.

 

 

Huw.

[The Fatadder]

From memory towards the end MRM seemed to have an awful lot of very similar articles (written predominantly by Nigel Burkin) along the lines of fit Kaydees to xyz or fit DCC to abc. Which all got rather repetitive

 

Possibly a sign that there wasn’t sufficient quality of articles on a diverse range of topics available.

 

That said some issues were absolutely top quality, the reference articles on prototype operation in particular. I really need to dig out my copy’s and find the article on GWT loco hauled operations for a summer project...

 

As for a split, I prefer to see a mixture in a magazine. There is always a lot to learn from different scales or periods.

[Chamby]

No - 1950!

 

After all, isn't that the "official" cutoff point - as suggested by Mr. Freezer?

 

Anyway, by that reckoning, anything in my lifetime would count as "modern image". As I'm in my early 50s, I can just about get my head around that sort of reasoning...

 

Huw.

Modern essentially means that it is current, contemporary. When Mr Freezer made his suggestion of 1950, it made sense at that point in time: he was referring to around the last 15 - 20 years? So using his benchmark, that would surely mean that modern image is now post-millennial??

 

We have had a good old debate about this in our club, with a significant majority believing that modern image is a moving window of time. Models that are modern image now, will in their turn become historic. Like green and blue diesels did, and NSE and Thames Trains.

 

The blue diesel era was around 40-50 years ago now. When Mr Freezer came up with the term ‘modern image’, 40-50 years previously would have been around grouping! I think that puts things into perspective?

 

Phil

Edited February 21, 2018 by Chamby

[F-UnitMad]

We have had a good old debate about this in our club, ...

It's been done to death on RMweb, too

Whatever people might want it to mean, it seems like the term "Modern Image" is now forever stuck as an alternative description of the catch-all 'Diesel & Electric' or 'Post-steam' railway era.

[Clive Mortimore]

Modern essentially means that it is current, contemporary. When Mr Freezer made his suggestion of 1950, it made sense at that point in time: he was referring to around the last 15 - 20 years? So using his benchmark, that would surely mean that modern image is now post-millennial??

 

We have had a good old debate about this in our club, with a significant majority believing that modern image is a moving window of time. Models that are modern image now, will in their turn become historic. Like green and blue diesels did, and NSE and Thames Trains.

 

The blue diesel era was around 40-50 years ago now. When Mr Freezer came up with the term ‘modern image’, 40-50 years previously would have been around grouping! I think that puts things into perspective?

 

Phil

I have said this before. Cyril Freezer commented on both my 1960s diesel layouts saying they were real modern image. So if the person who is credited with "modern image" says 1960s diesel layouts are "modern image" that is where it stays.....I personally hate the term and think it should be left in the 1960s along with greasy haired rockers.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[Ravenser]

From memory towards the end MRM seemed to have an awful lot of very similar articles (written predominantly by Nigel Burkin) along the lines of fit Kaydees to xyz or fit DCC to abc. Which all got rather repetitive

 

......

As for a split, I prefer to see a mixture in a magazine. There is always a lot to learn from different scales or periods.

 

Er, yes. That was part of the problem with MRM. Add in some "we detailed a class XX in the usual way" photo features, and you have accounted for a lot of the content. It was not a bad magazine, and I seem to have decided that most of the individual issues were worth buying, but it was mediocre in the original meaning of that word - neither good nor bad, just ordinary. I know a number of people put in quite a bit of effort trying to make it work, but somehow the one thing it never quite was, was inspirational. It lacked lustre.

 

Fifteen years ago there was a certain amount of politics floating around, and one form it took was a certain separatism. MRM was a response to that demand - it was evidently a commercial failure, and D&E has been seen as a bit of a busted flush ever since. The next move in model railway magazines was Hornby Magazine - and Ian Allen gave HM a specific launch brief that it would not cover anything after 1971 (or before 1948 - which was crackers), and it would stick to commercial scales. HM has moved on a long way since its launch, it has a different owner , and those time restrictions in its launch concept have long ago been forgotten - but I do think that the original brief was very much a reaction to, and comment on, the failure of MRM.

 

The strong line being promoted at the time of MRM's launch, that as a modern image modeller I ought to want to read articles about US outline modelling, and ought not to want to read articles about British steam age modelling , rather rubbed me up the wrong way. I have a boxfile that is almost all diesel (a Y3 is an honorary diesel) but is firmly set between 1955-70, and I would much rather read about Buckingham GC, or East Lynne or Southwell Central than about US outline. If MRM had featured Antipodean or French prototypes, or even Eastern Europe in TT I might have been mildly interested , but their overseas content seemed invariably to be the Western USA in RTR HO or N, with an occasional flash of lederhosen , and that left me cold. I like to buy the Model Railroader Planning specials, but that's as much for a very different philosophy and approach to model railways  as for the prototype [ You could argue that Buckingham GC is in many ways a very American style of layout...]. A British approach to generic US outline does nothing for me.

 

So my reaction to this one is very much "please, no..." - we've been here before and it isn't a particularly happy memory.

[Huw Griffiths]

In 30 years time, I wonder if someone will start a thread suggesting that the current magazine (or whatever they morph into by then) have a split between Modern Image and anything up to and including EWS!

 

No - 1950!

 

After all, isn't that the "official" cutoff point - as suggested by Mr. Freezer?

 

Anyway, by that reckoning, anything in my lifetime would count as "modern image". As I'm in my early 50s, I can just about get my head around that sort of reasoning ... .

 

Modern essentially means that it is current, contemporary. When Mr Freezer made his suggestion of 1950, it made sense at that point in time: he was referring to around the last 15 - 20 years? So using his benchmark, that would surely mean that modern image is now post-millennial??

 

We have had a good old debate about this in our club, with a significant majority believing that modern image is a moving window of time. Models that are modern image now, will in their turn become historic. Like green and blue diesels did, and NSE and Thames Trains.

 

The blue diesel era was around 40-50 years ago now. When Mr Freezer came up with the term ‘modern image’, 40-50 years previously would have been around grouping! I think that puts things into perspective?

 

It's been done to death on RMweb, too

Whatever people might want it to mean, it seems like the term "Modern Image" is now forever stuck as an alternative description of the catch-all 'Diesel & Electric' or 'Post-steam' railway era.

 

I have said this before. Cyril Freezer commented on both my 1960s diesel layouts saying they were real modern image. So if the person who is credited with "modern image" says 1960s diesel layouts are "modern image" that is where it stays.....I personally hate the term and think it should be left in the 1960s along with greasy haired rockers.

 

To be honest, I'm not exactly a fan of the term "modern image" - and I certainly wasn't seriously trying to suggest that "modern image" should represent anything built since one specific year, fixed in perpetuity.

 

Let's face it - if anything that a number of fifty- or sixty- somethings have ever come across could (in theory) be defined as "modern image", it doesn't really sound right to me either.

 

For a number of years, I've quite liked the German era / epoch system (in which "green Diesels" would probably be era 3 or 3b - and "rail blue" era 4). Likewise a similar system (with more eras - especially in "pre-grouping") used by one UK outline manufacturer.

 

For me, though, the main problem with the UK outline version is that it isn't a standardised system, used by all manufacturers - with the result that a lot of people probably wouldn't have a clue what approximate year range each era number refers to.

 

In principle though, I think it could have the makings of a very good system.

 

 

Huw.

[PMP]

. The next move in model railway magazines was Hornby Magazine - and Ian Allen gave HM a specific launch brief that it would not cover anything after 1971 (or before 1948 - which was crackers),

 

 

Complete and utter fantasy, and not the first time you have made this claim

 

Issue 2 featured Steve Saxby's BR Blue Tinsley South Woodhead electrics layout. This is a link to Model Rail magazines feature of Tinsley South

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/model-rail-uk/20160505/281517930306830

Clearly if the above statement were factual, this layout could not have appeared in Issue 2, except it did ...

 

I also had an article regarding weathering BR wagons, an OBA and VDA, the wagons chosen specifically for the era ,1980's, in issue 3 or 4 IIRC. There were others too.

 

It is simply untrue that HM had that editorial policy. Any doubts?, ask Mike Wild.

 

Edit I owe Rav an apology, Steve's Tinsley South didn't appear in Hornby Mag in issue 2, it was MRM as Dave below has pointed out. (Note to self, double check posting stuff at 02:00!) For some reason I'd got it confused with Chris Nevards 'Diesels on Combewhich' which appeared in Issue 3. The rest of the above is true and despite Rav having had this pointed out ten years ago, still persists with this daft theory. Mike Wild debunked it in 2008  as far as I recall, ad as he's been editor since day one, he should know.

Edited February 22, 2018 by PMP

[Dave47549]

.

Edited October 4, 2021 by Dave47549
Removed pointless guff

[deltic17]

I only keep my Rail Express subscription going because of the quality of the modelling section, that said even there are a number of issues I have flicked through quite quickly as I lost interest in the modern scene after 1996. Potentially it could go standalone but Model Rail tried that when it split from RAIL in the mid 90's and quickly broadened away from their modern image only approach and I imagine the economics are even more stacked against it now.

I agree - perhaps the place for many to go is Rail Express as it is all modern image modelling in their modelling section.

[Dunsignalling]

We nowadays have the choice of a greater number of magazine titles than at any time in the history of the hobby.

 

If one were to become steam-only and another non-steam, it probably wouldn't change much.

 

John

Edited February 22, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

I have said this before. Cyril Freezer commented on both my 1960s diesel layouts saying they were real modern image. So if the person who is credited with "modern image" says 1960s diesel layouts are "modern image" that is where it stays.....I personally hate the term and think it should be left in the 1960s along with greasy haired rockers.

And poncey mods...........

 

"Modern Image" is a constantly moving target. In my book it should mean nothing over five years old.

 

John

Edited February 22, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[ruggedpeak]

For those who see 'Modern Image' as meaning contemporary rather than a fixed point in time, Rail Express seems to tick the boxes with the usual current 'news' articles and good and different modelling articles. The link between the news section and modelling is also useful, like the current issue which a piece on the history of Binliners and detail photos in the modelling section on the wagons and containers. I also think the 5 page article about life operating 'Pandora' with lots of pics clearly has modellers in mind following Hattons recent release. The Shenfield Shark piece is not only quirky and interesting in its own right but relevant for contemporary modellers of wagons abandoned at the rail side. A nice little project with a Hornby or Cambrian model. RE is the mag I most look forward to each month, followed by Traction, which is similar but for the BR Blue era. Together they provide a great D&E fix each month/2 months respectively.

Edited February 23, 2018 by ruggedpeak

[dj_crisp]

For those who see 'Modern Image' as meaning contemporary rather than a fixed point in time, Rail Express seems to tick the boxes with the usual current 'news' articles and good and different modelling articles. The link between the news section and modelling is also useful, like the current issue which a piece on the history of Binliners and detail photos in the modelling section on the wagons and containers. I also think the 5 page article about life operating 'Pandora' with lots of pics clearly has modellers in mind following Hattons recent release. The Shenfield Shark piece is not only quirky and interesting in its own right but relevant for contemporary modellers of wagons abandoned at the rail side. A nice little project with a Hornby or Cambrian model. RE is the mag I most look forward to each month, followed by Traction, which is similar but for the BR Blue era. Together they provide a great D&E fix each month.

 

Agree with this. The "historical" articles are of great interest to me.... and I always buy Traction which gives a different view on most topics and I think they could expand their modelling section.

 

Will

[MartynJPearson]

Hmm, looks like part one of a split has taken place - well, BRM appears to have gone well and truly pre-diesel. Last month's vintage edition was followed by another steam-centric edition this month and the outlook for next month isn't looking very modern either. Maybe time to ditch the subscription and buy ad hoc as and when the content suits (or join DEMU). Or resubscribe when the offer is too good to refuse...

[Norm81]

Hmm, looks like part one of a split has taken place - well, BRM appears to have gone well and truly pre-diesel. Last month's vintage edition was followed by another steam-centric edition this month and the outlook for next month isn't looking very modern either. Maybe time to ditch the subscription and buy ad hoc as and when the content suits (or join DEMU). Or resubscribe when the offer is too good to refuse...

I'm in the same boat, I don't expect it to be mostly D+E but it's been 100% steam for too many issues now. They fail the "if I was flicking through this in Tesco would I buy it" test so it's not worth the subscription saving. Pity really, the balance has tipped too far in one direction for me personally.

[Phil Parker]

Despite what you'd like to think, there isn't an anti-diesel bias in any of the mainstream mags. We spend a lot of time trying to balance the contents to keep everyone happy, BUT there are simply not enough good quality layouts out there at the moment.

 

Lots of D&E modellers are building MPD planks to show off their noisy DCC RTR models, but beyond that? There are layouts out there, but most have been covered already which only leads to moans that "such and such" has been in every magazine. 

 

I'm not going to bother with the "modelling is modelling" argument because I'm sure that you've heard it and don't believe it. After all, a steam era allotment is obviously going to be different to a "modern image" one, likewise carriage interiors and buildings made of resin.

 

As a start, would anyone like to suggest some Cake Box dioramas from the selection on RMweb at the moment? We can report on these very quickly and a "Modern Image Cake Box Diorama" selection would be nice.

[Pete the Elaner]

I can remember the first editions of ModelRail being pull-outs from Rail magazine. I seem to remember these were D&E only.

Once it because its own magazine, it started to include more steam content.

My assumption was that this was to appeal to a wider market.

[Andrew P]

Just my 2p-worth about 'Banger Blue' - It's my impression that it's modelled mostly by 'those who were there'. On the face of it, it seems like a boring Era when everything was one colour; in reality the variety was in the amount of different loco classes around (albeit dwindling throughout that time) and the still very "regional" nature of the railways; you had to travel to different places to see certain Classes. People who didn't experience the Blue Era (either too young, or too old and still mourning Steam) can't perhaps appreciate that, and so don't model that Era.

 

Somehow, the 'Green' Era does seem to be an area of increasing interest recently, myself included; despite my trainspotting years being the Blue era (1977 onwards), I'm getting more interested in the era I just missed, either because I wasn't born yet (1967, so missed steam really) or just too young to even know about it at the time, such as WR Hydraulics. As an aside, since it overlaps with Steam, which magazine would Green era layouts go in, if there was a rigid distinction? 

 

For a magazine where the modelling is always D&E-focused, I quite like Rail Express. In fact for me it would be no bad thing if it became a modelling magazine with a 'Real Trains' supplement section!!

As my main interest is American trains, it might be assumed I'd call for more of a mix of 'Foreign' with British in the mags; in actual fact I can see why it doesn't happen, besides the inherent xenophobia of a lot of UK modellers. I can see that a 'mixed' approach just can't do justice to all those interests. For example, I rarely buy Continental Modeller. If it has any American content, it is usually just one article, & that might be a 'Logging Line', so often - however good the modelling is - most of it is outside my core interests*, including most of the adverts. I think the same would happen to a mag that tried to split it's content between UK & US subjects. As American mags are available, far easier to get those - and they rarely publish anything about 'foreign' trains, either!! 

 

* I realise that this conflicts with my attitude at Exhibitions, where I make an effort to view (as opposed to 'glance at in passing') every layout, regardless of subject matter etc.

And of course with Banger Blue you have the Speedlink / Short mixed Freight to make things interesting and colourful, I too started spotting / modelling in 77, and so that's why my Kings Moreton is now firmly BR Blue.

 

Maybe a Bi Monthly or Quarterly Blue supplement might go some way to help with a mix of prototype and model articles.

[grahame]

Despite what you'd like to think, there isn't an anti-diesel bias in any of the mainstream mags. We spend a lot of time trying to balance the contents to keep everyone happy, BUT there are simply not enough good quality layouts out there at the moment.

 

Lots of D&E modellers are building MPD planks to show off their noisy DCC RTR models, but beyond that? There are layouts out there, but most have been covered already which only leads to moans that "such and such" has been in every magazine. 

 

 

Yep, I appreciate the efforts to produce a balanced magazine, but I don't think all D&E layout are just MPD planks - I've also seen similar types of layouts featuring smokey steamers. But how about re-visiting some of the classic D&E layouts - fresh photos, an update on any developments (since last time), new and different write-up angle, some modelling tips abut how effects were achieved, etc..

 

But perhaps the balance is getting a little out of kilter as there have now been several reports/feedback about no D&E in a few issues and that the DVD has become all prototype with no modelling content. When I read things like that on the forum it does put me off bothering to purchase an issue (and perhaps being pleased that I'm not a subscriber).

 

And finally, as a plea, how about some classis 'electric' traction layouts/articles - D&E is not exclusively 'diesel' and electric does cover a very large timespan from the 1880s. Sure there are few modellers following that route but it would be worthwhile rooting out the few to bring something different to the table. And even if not a layout, then perhaps some modelling features about it instead of more about adding coal to tenders and so on.

 

It's a difficult task granted, but this is just some feedback and ideas.

 

G.

[Clive Mortimore]

Despite what you'd like to think, there isn't an anti-diesel bias in any of the mainstream mags. We spend a lot of time trying to balance the contents to keep everyone happy, BUT there are simply not enough good quality layouts out there at the moment.

 

Lots of D&E modellers are building MPD planks to show off their noisy DCC RTR models, but beyond that? There are layouts out there, but most have been covered already which only leads to moans that "such and such" has been in every magazine. 

 

I'm not going to bother with the "modelling is modelling" argument because I'm sure that you've heard it and don't believe it. After all, a steam era allotment is obviously going to be different to a "modern image" one, likewise carriage interiors and buildings made of resin.

 

As a start, would anyone like to suggest some Cake Box dioramas from the selection on RMweb at the moment? We can report on these very quickly and a "Modern Image Cake Box Diorama" selection would be nice.

Hi Phil

 

At this weekend's Glasgow show there were far more D&E based layouts than at your average show, so there are layouts out there.

 

I must have been privileged in the past with Hanging Hill being in two consecutive editions of BRM. Not bad for a MPD/TMD/Shed layout. No sound, scratchbuilt diesels (and other stock) and no RTP buildings. I must have got it all wrong. 

[Legend]

It was interesting and a bit of an eye opener for me that most of the layouts at Model Rail Scotland last week were "Modern Image". While Newhaven was BR Blue, actually most of the D+E stuff was Sectorisation to date . It may just have been a coincidence, but I do travel the Central Scotland exhibition scene quite widely and it seems to me that most club layouts are similarly modern image . I'm wondering if there has been a shift away from what I thought was the most popular period BR Transition.

 

While primarily multiple unit based it has to be said the real railway is going through a bit of a transformation at the moment with more new trains than anytime since the modernisation plan . I'm wondering if this is a factor . Availability of great models like Dapols 68 and Hornbys 800, if you can get it to go round corners , might be driving interest . There is also DCC sound, which although I'm not a great fan of, is very popular. Then there are all the colourful liveries VTEC, Colas , Scotrail , DB

 

So while I never thought that a Modern Image only modelling magazine would be sustainable , I'm wondering if time has moved on and indeed it could now be successful. As to lack of layouts worth featuring, well I know Aberdeen Kirkhill was in RM recently , but I don't recall seeing Coppell featured anywhere, and there were certainly a good few layouts around that could qualify for inclusion . Ironically, given that most people think its rather old fashioned , I think its RM that contains most D+E layouts.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Legend

[Phil Parker]

Yep, I appreciate the efforts to produce a balanced magazine, but I don't think all D&E layout are just MPD planks - I've also seen similar types of layouts featuring smokey steamers. But how about re-visiting some of the classic D&E layouts - fresh photos, an update on any developments (since last time), new and different write-up angle, some modelling tips abut how effects were achieved, etc..

 

But perhaps the balance is getting a little out of kilter as there have now been several reports/feedback about no D&E in a few issues and that the DVD has become all prototype with no modelling content. When I read things like that on the forum it does put me off bothering to purchase an issue (and perhaps being pleased that I'm not a subscriber).

 

And finally, as a plea, how about some classis 'electric' traction layouts/articles - D&E is not exclusively 'diesel' and electric does cover a very large timespan from the 1880s. Sure there are few modellers following that route but it would be worthwhile rooting out the few to bring something different to the table. And even if not a layout, then perhaps some modelling features about it instead of more about adding coal to tenders and so on.

 

It's a difficult task granted, but this is just some feedback and ideas.

 

G.

 

You've always been at pains to tell us you don't subscribe to the mag and how rarely you buy it. However, while we do look at RMweb, it's not the ONLY source of feedback as the view can easily be distorted by a few active posters. It always strikes me as odd that we hear "All magazines look the same" but when anything different is tried, that's also wrong. You really can't please all of the people all of the time...

 

Anyway, the solution for a lack of D&E is simply for D&E modellers to write something. We aren't inundated with articles so it's an easy way to see your modelling in print and earn some cash. The steam era boys have a harder time as there is more for the editor to choose from. It's interesting to note that no-one has spotted any D&E Cake Box dioramas for us to feature yet.

 

As Andy has said, we are looking for layouts. Sadly, there are very few Hanging Hill's, full of scratchbuilt diesels (and other stock) and no RTP buildings, but if anyone is hiding one, let us know. I like the idea of re-visting old ones, although we can expect a "Why have you gone back to XXXX, it's been in AAAAALLLLLL the magazines before." cry on here if we do!