My initial impression...

[hahughson]

My copy of BRM arrived in the post earlier today and I'm afraid to say my initial impression is that I could easily confuse it with Model Rail!  That said it's printed on better quality paper with more heavily airbrushed photos.

 

Personally I really dislike the photos on pages 34 and 35, not because I think they are bad photos just that they would be better in a photoshop magazine than in a model magazine. They make me wonder about how good is the actual modelling inspiration photo on page 85 as I have no idea what is real and what is fake or were these photos more heavily edited because the nature of the article was operation and not modelling?

 

I'm inclined to believe the latter, as some of the other photos, like the one at the top of page 21 are very nice.

 

Hamish

 

 

[Theakerr]

My naivety continues to amaze me even at this advanced age!  I know that people photoshop in smoke and steam, which is obvious, and backgrounds which are less obvious. When there is no pretension, I see this as a skill in its own right and dont have a problem with it.  But to airbrush or photoshop a model in a mag (and i dont mean the 36:24:36 type) and not acknowledge it, I find rather disconcerting and disapointing.  Assuming hahughson is correct, and I have no doubt he is, in future I will never know if the model pictured is really built to a Pendon standard or a photoshop standard.

[Kenton]

Is it not the fact of intended deception (the lack of credit to the photoshopping) rather than the act itself. We all know it is a skill and in some cases can add something to a photo (even amending a bad photo or issue apparent following the photo shoot) but I find its use without some acknowledgement that the photo has been retouched and altered simply deceiving and making out that the model is not what it seems. Airbrushing out dust, fibres, airbrushing in backgrounds, smoke - just how far are we prepared to accept. I like modelling exposed in the raw with all its faults and quirks. Sometimes it is sobering to know that the experts can make mistakes as well. Photo manipulation and special effects should stay in the photographic magazines and tabloids.

[James]

I'm afraid to say my initial impression is that I could easily confuse it with Model Rail!

Similar comments were made on British Railway Modelling's Facebook page too.

[Andy Y]

My copy of BRM arrived in the post earlier today and I'm afraid to say my initial impression is that I could easily confuse it with Model Rail! That said it's printed on better quality paper with more heavily airbrushed photos.

 

Personally I really dislike the photos on pages 34 and 35, not because I think they are bad photos just that they would be better in a photoshop magazine than in a model magazine. They make me wonder about how good is the actual modelling inspiration photo on page 85 as I have no idea what is real and what is fake or were these photos more heavily edited because the nature of the article was operation and not modelling?

 

I'm inclined to believe the latter, as some of the other photos, like the one at the top of page 21 are very nice.

 

 

Interesting. The images on P34/35 have no photoshopping other than cropping and brightness etc . Follow the quoted source in the mag to read and see more about New Haden and you,all be able to judge if it's good modelling.

 

Page 21 has more tidying up in Photoshop to correct background sections but even after looking at the image for many hours someone spotted something straight away over the weekend, which is an amusing howler in one way, but nothing to do with the model.

 

The MI image on P85, other than cropping, is exactly the same as presented on RMweb in the Realistic Modelling topic by the owner of the loco, just a well executed shot of excellent material with a hint of smoke.

 

So it's not easy for people to present a consistent argument for or against sometimes but that doesn't seem to affect the prejudices of some without full knowledge of the source material or facts. Please, Kenton, don't infer that the quality of modelling is materially misrepresented, all I try to do is do justice to someones model, tidy distractions and present it in a form that communicates any atmosphere in a model.

[RedgateModels]

You been using your "important phone call" for scenic effect again Andy

[RedgateModels]

Firstly, clearly I am quite biassed towards the look, feel and content of this month's BRM. It has been a privilege to have been involved in the process and could not be more pleased with the outcome.

 

Andy, like other photographers in our little hobby are well aware of the feelings for and against 'shopping and a sort of line has been drawn in the sand throughout the industry where backgrounds and a little smoke are ok but that's it. As an example, my eldest would have been delighted to have seen this version of the cover photo used

 

 

His first airfix kit added by Andy after the fact as we didn't have any cotton to hang it from the light fitting in my front room at the time

[Torper]

I do hope that in the next issue the BRM subscription ad on page 27 will be re-worded as I certainly initially read it to say that one can get 12 issues for only £10.99!

 

DT

[Andy Y]

I do hope that in the next issue the BRM subscription ad on page 27 will be re-worded as I certainly initially read it to say that one can get 12 issues for only £10.99!

 

DT

 

I can see that as being ambiguous and we'll discuss in our next meeting.

[alant]

I haven't seen a copy yet but will try and pick one up later.

 

Some interesting points regarding Photoshopping. My layout was recently photographed by Hornby Magazine for a future edition and I had mixed feelings about the Photoshopping done. This was mostly adding a sky background, smoke etc but I think overall adds to the photos and certainly tidies up the background.

 

Alan.

[Kenton]

I think one problem with the photoshopping discussion is that to those of us who are awful photographers (that's me) believe that every good photograph has been photoshopped rather than simply taken with skill. But this is exaggerated further when we as modellers know it just cannot be that good. Even more so when we have seen the layout for ourselves - even if it was in poor exhibition lighting.

 

RedgateModels, I didn't even see the airfix model I was just focused on the lovely uneven and twisted trackwork (P4?)

[micknich2003]

If I didn't know, I would have said, more of a quility paining then a photograph.

[James]

I was just focused on the lovely uneven and twisted trackwork

For industrial stuff, the track's not that bad at all! I've had to contend with much worse;

 

Level Crossing? by JamesWells, on Flickr

[Verityboo]

As someone else who hates the comedy smoke effects which blights most of the magazines I would be interested in a proper discussion (it is unfair to just pick on BRM). I do see it as a real slap-in-the-face for the modeller whose work was obviously not good enough.

 

I would interested to see some before and after shots so that we could see what the effects really are, perhaps it would persuade the doubters like me that they are a benefit

 

p.s. As well as looking at the Subscription advert I think the website needs looking at. I was tempted by the subscription offer and tried on 3 PC's & Mac using 4 different browsers and the site didn't work

[James]

I would interested to see some before and after shots so that we could see what the effects really are, perhaps it would persuade the doubters like me that they are a benefit

Those like Chris Nevard are very good with their processing - I think he enhances the photo whilst presenting the model very well. I still think that sometimes there's a place, even today, for the Brian Monaghan school of photgraphy which gives an excellent overall idea of layouts.

 

Some of the best model photography has been in MRJ; B&W often makes models look better! The best known layouts in MRJ have come out very well in photos taken by people like Barry Norman. And these were, and are still, simply well composed photos.

[Dicky W]

As someone else who hates the comedy smoke effects which blights most of the magazines I would be interested in a proper discussion (it is unfair to just pick on BRM). I do see it as a real slap-in-the-face for the modeller whose work was obviously not good enough.

 

I would interested to see some before and after shots so that we could see what the effects really are, perhaps it would persuade the doubters like me that they are a benefit

 

p.s. As well as looking at the Subscription advert I think the website needs looking at. I was tempted by the subscription offer and tried on 3 PC's & Mac using 4 different browsers and the site didn't work.

 

Let me know at what point your subscription request failed and I'll inform our internet team.

[Andy Y]

 I do see it as a real slap-in-the-face for the modeller whose work was obviously not good enough.

 

 

 

How do you know? I talk to every layout owner and take their wishes into account. After a recent job I showed with/without to the layout owner as he was similarly disenchanted and they preferred the 'with'.

 

Some day I may do an article on the whole process, we don't make the modelling better but we do try to show it in its best light so to speak (and bear in mind even if you've seen something in the flesh it's often just the lighting and presentation which doesn't display it to its best). The only hard layouts to improve the presentation of are the ones who pay attention to presentation in exhibition form; think Pempoul, DitD, Chris Nevard's layouts etc.

[Verityboo]

Let me know at what point your subscription request failed and I'll inform our internet team.

After selecting the subscription and logging in, the next option is a Green button to 'proceed to checkout'. The button takes me to a runtime error page stating 'Server Error in '/' Application.'

 

On a separate issue, I really like the the layout plans and appreciate the time it takes to produce them but they don't really work when vertical and when the magazine is being viewed on a tablet, its a pain to view them the correct way as the tablet always wants to reset the page as vertical. It works well on paper copies and I appreciate they fit best that way. Would it be possible to add the layout plans the correct way by pressing a button (like extra photos are available sometimes)?

[Guest oldlugger]

Firstly, clearly I am quite biassed towards the look, feel and content of this month's BRM. It has been a privilege to have been involved in the process and could not be more pleased with the outcome.

 

Andy, like other photographers in our little hobby are well aware of the feelings for and against 'shopping and a sort of line has been drawn in the sand throughout the industry where backgrounds and a little smoke are ok but that's it. As an example, my eldest would have been delighted to have seen this version of the cover photo used

 

Spit_1024.jpg

 

His first airfix kit added by Andy after the fact as we didn't have any cotton to hang it from the light fitting in my front room at the time

I like the way the track is uneven in this photo; just like a real industrial railway. The J94 is nice too!

 

Cheers

Simon

[RedgateModels]

On a separate issue, I really like the the layout plans and appreciate the time it takes to produce them but they don't really work when vertical and when the magazine is being viewed on a tablet, its a pain to view them the correct way as the tablet always wants to reset the page as vertical. It works well on paper copies and I appreciate they fit best that way. Would it be possible to add the layout plans the correct way by pressing a button (like extra photos are available sometimes)?

Agreed

[RedgateModels]

I like the way the track is uneven in this photo; just like a real industrial railway. The J94 is nice too!

 

Cheers

Simon

Oh that's pretty good, there are other shots in the article and elsewhere in the mag (the Editor's forward for one) where the uneven nature of the trackwork really leaps out at you. Of course the foreshortening of the camera angle exaggerates the effect to a great degree. The track is by no means as bad as some you see in real life!

[pete55]

According to the contents page, Tony Gee saved Jack Ray's Buckingham layout......funny, but I always thought it was Peter Denny who built Buckingham!

 

Apart from that, like what I've seen so far.

[Enterprisingwestern]

Stil kneads a gud prove reeder.

 

Mike.

[Dicky W]

After selecting the subscription and logging in, the next option is a Green button to 'proceed to checkout'. The button takes me to a runtime error page stating 'Server Error in '/' Application.'

I assume you're referring to the Model-Railways-Live website? It seems to be OK on Firefox with a Mac, but you can never be sure! Do you want to give me a call on 01778 392455 and we'll try and sort it out. If you can't today, I'm not in the office tomorrow but am back on Thursday.

 

Richard

[The Stationmaster]

Bought a copy early this afternoon and have really had little more than a skim through so far but some things standout straightaway -

 

1. The new cover design, which I like but its cleanliness of design and illustration seems a bit over-fussified with bits of text and little pictures dropped on it almost randomly.

2. The 'open ness' of the printed pages immediately impresses - great improvement.

3. The layout plans and illustrated key to the pics in the article referenced to the plan is a marvellous idea that works really well.

4. Interesting mix of 'how to' articles plus layout articles - that will obviously vary from issue to issue but has come out well this time (subject to studying the content of course) however I do wonder about the (market) 'positioning' created by these various things and it will be interesting to see how that develops - I retain an open mind and crossed fingers on that one.

5. Some of it does very much give the impression of a 'Model Rail' clone - if I want 'Model Rail' I buy it with that name on the cover (actually I subscibe) so I have no need at all for a clone - I look to BRM for some of its past individuality to shine through (upcoming content will help to decide that).

6.  This latter point continues with the reviews - in my view 'MR's' are the best in the business and they will take some beating, in fact the only way they can be bested is to start from a different viewpoint - and sorry to say (again subject to detail study) I don't think the new BRM approach is doing that, rather it is trying to copy the master and not go for its own ideas.

 

Overall - a fair start in my view and I know the cover is unlikely to be 'cleaned up' as long as it remains the mag's billboard but as for the rest I'd like to see how it settles over the next 2 - 3 issues.  Incidentally as far as the ad on p.27 goes it very clearly reads '12 issues for just £10.99' in very bold red type. Me?  - I'm a literalist