Jump to content

hahughson

My initial impression...

Recommended Posts

Stil kneads a gud prove reeder.

 

Mike.

We've tried to make sure there aren't any Mike! It's usually the problem of being word-blind after a while. What have you found?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

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.

Wow! This just goes to show what I know (like?)... I thought the photo on page 21 was untouched.  Having read this thread I now wonder if it is the excessive (in my eyes and I fully accept that some people will prefer it) use of smoke in the photos on pages 34 and 35 that I dislike more than the photoshopping, that said maybe the term photoshopping is too generic?

 

I'm trying to find the photo in the Realistic Modelling thread, but it's a fairly large thread so I may be some time...

 

Hamish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

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. 

I agree with Mike's point 3, now if someone could just combine the illustrated key with the camera direction icons from Model Rail... I'm also in complete agreement with Mike's summing up, I too am looking forward to seeing the next couple of issues.

 

Hamish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read this thread I now wonder if it is the excessive (in my eyes and I fully accept that some people will prefer it) use of smoke in the photos on pages 34 and 35 that I dislike more than the photoshopping, 

 

From my perspective that makes it clearer to understand your viewpoint and I don't necessarily disagree. The two shots used on their were provided to the designers as atmosphere shots rather than to specifically illustrate the content of the article (they were done with an equivalent of stage smoke for an earlier piece, again for atmosphere). Although I don't handle the design of the articles I supply images for I did sit with the designer and make a few changes within the issue on this occasion and obviously 'OK'd' those pages from my point of view but can appreciate on a printed page, rather than a huge monitor, they're likely to solicit different reactions.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

As ever you raise some good points Mike but I'd hope we come out favourably on point 6 on the reviews we've got in this issue when you had the chance to read in detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As ever you raise some good points Mike but I'd hope we come out favourably on point 6 on the reviews we've got in this issue when you had the chance to read in detail.

A very fair point Andy - and worry not, I'll let you know once  I've read and absorbed the reviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it does very much give the impression of a 'Model Rail' clone

Reading that is such a shame - in 1993 British Railway Modelling was such a breath of fresh air of such a standard that the content of those twenty year old magazines is still relevant and inspirational today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! This just goes to show what I know (like?)... I thought the photo on page 21 was untouched.  

 

Hamish

That view of Summat is probably the most problematic for a photographer, there is a blue scenic break behind the Engine shed - the sole remains of the original scenic break bought with the baseboards. Andy has blended the backscene over this blue break to give a more even background. I can confirm that despite appearances the 9F is not fitted with an experimental long range fuel tank! It is of course the water tower behind (made using an old Airfix tank wagon)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've tried to make sure there aren't any Mike! It's usually the problem of being word-blind after a while. What have you found?

 

The Jack Ray faux pas as already mentioned.

P22. Caption to picture 3.

P53. Caption to (far right) picture.

Letters page. Friends in the north. Has Shildon been renamed?

 

The mag only arrived this afternoon so only had a quick scan, I'm not deliberately trying to find fault, but BRM "seemed" to be the worst offender amongst the mags previously.

 

Mike.

 

At least you spelt BRM right on the cover :sungum:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arrived today

 

Some good reviews of Locos with nice close ups.

 

I am sorry other than that not much difference for all the hype.

 

The articles need to have more meat in them . Far too much space is being wasted on over large Arty photos. I dont like photoshopped photos with fake smoke etc ,show the real article!!. If its good no one looks at the background they look at the model.

 

Why do we have things being built to a deadline gimmick?? it is not Timewatch. Modelling if something to enjoy, not rush and then cock it up.

 

 

Do more articles on more complicated items of modelling. They do not have in one magazine issue. Copy MRJ and do parts in ongoing issues. If they are good they keep the punter buying the following months issues.

 

 

 

I am a subscriber ,at the moment no idea if that will continue at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we have things being built to a deadline gimmick?? it is not Timewatch. Modelling if something to enjoy, not rush and then cock it up.

 

It shows what can be achieved in a short time-span, hopefully to motivate people to at least pick up a small project even if it isn't the exact one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P22. Caption to picture 3.

Very odd as that error was not there when I proof read the article

 

post-6717-0-83438900-1381397012.jpg

Edited by RedgateModels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It shows what can be achieved in a short time-span, hopefully to motivate people to at least pick up a small project even if it isn't the exact one.

Sorry to me its a gimmick !! lets do proper modelling articles please.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this thread with interest because my hobby is making photo-edited pictures of RTR 00 BR steam models.

 

To my eyes the photo-editing is self-evident, but maybe not to others, in any event it is not intended to deceive, as might be thought if it was a illustrating a model for sale. I sell models too, and I am careful to NOT edit beyond exposure and focus and possibly 'cleaning' of lens dust.

 

I used to photograph trains and admired all the great British photographers from M W Early to Colin Gifford, and we all used 'burning' of skies to enhance exhaust, and many old plate camera pics were subjected to 'painting out' as in maker's photos. The use of skies and smoke in modern digital media is self-apparent and in my opinion not much different.

 

We had one or two purists in our railway society back in the 60s who frowned on anything but pin-hole cameras, well, almost...

 

For me, the most negative aspect of BRM and Hornby and other magazines is the bright colours and inks used, yuk! But I SO ADMIRE Andy's photography that I wish him nothing but success.

 

I attach the kind of pic by me which many will have seen here in other threads, as well as a picture by Andy which I HOPE is allowable, which shows what is clear photo-editing by me, and zone-focussing by Andy. In both cases, the editing is apparent, and I don't know how one can draw a line as to what is acceptable or not.

 

Apologies Andy if this pic is not appropriate.

 

post-7929-0-40947200-1381263801_thumb.jpg

 

post-7929-0-23987400-1381263834.jpg

 

Rob

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Very odd as that error was not there when I proof read the article

Its them annoying typesetters in Fleet Street again.

 

I don't mind the built to a timeline type of article (it is a different perspective) and anything to set it apart from a Model Rail clone. Do it with a brass kit and help folk understand it is not an overnight task.

 

But if you are going to have this type of article it really has to be achievable by Mr beginner/Mr average modeller and not what a guru can do when locked in a quiet room with someone threatening to smash his most cherished toy if the deadline is not met. AFAIC Good idea but room for improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One for the typo collection: on page 4 Gloucester is mis-spelled.

 

The magazine now looks like a cross between Model Rail and Hornby Magazine with all the panels such as "Fact file", did-you-knows and other asides sprinkled through the articles.  Maybe I am a lone voice but I find this so irritating.  Even the idea of random quotes in larger type, such as "shows are the only time I get to play trains" on page 21, has been lifted from the competition.  Why?  Are there no more original ideas to be found?

 

It's a pity because there is some good stuff amid the cosmetics and some of the photography is stunning.  Howard Smith's article on doing up a Corgi is marred only by an ambiguous use of the apostrophe: did the Peugeot belong to one or both parents?!  The layout plans are welcome and well executed.  Phil Parker has brought some good ideas with him and I liked the way he encourages kit-building.

 

I dare say we will all get used to the new look.but for now it comes across to me as a missed opportunity. 

 

Chris [infected by typos!]

Edited by chrisf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies Andy if this pic is not appropriate.

 

 

No apology needed, it's interesting that your insight quotes CG's techniques which everyone slavers over (me inc.) but heaven forfend anyone who explores contemporary techniques in a model world. ;)

 

For the sake of those who believe such content should remain unadulterated here's a comparative shot to show what you'd have had at best in years gone by, please believe me that this is a better background than you'd frequently see!

 

W2plain.jpg

 

Is the modelling any different? No. Is the completed image a better portrayal of the modellers' efforts? I would hope so.

 

Wychnor_s.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's certainly a 'yes' from me, to 'adulterate' the skies, add some effects, sharpen things by various methods, and generally indulge in the pleasure of modelling and photographing the results.

 

My partner Jan has been a successful print broker in the business world, and I am not alone in my dismay at the colours used in many modern magazines, she agrees that they are 'a bit tragic' (my term), but we are 60 yrs old, so maybe we are non-typical.

 

edit; equally we both comprehend the constraints of cost in producing print-runs for magazines.

 

Rob

Edited by robmcg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My partner Jan has been a successful print broker in the business world, and I am not alone in my dismay at the colours used in many modern magazines, she agrees that they are 'a bit tragic' (my term), but we are 60 yrs old, so maybe we are non-typical.

For those with specific learning difficulties the choice of colour can make the difference between being able to read it and not being able to do so. I actually had to give up on one car magazine about ten years ago for sometime because their choices of text and background colour made it impossible to read. This is because I have 'visual sensitivity' which is something which affects many of those with dyslexia. Sadly I doubt many of those designing magazines and publications really understand this (or perhaps are completely unaware) and the effect it has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the sake of those who believe such content should remain unadulterated here's a comparative shot to show what you'd have had at best in years gone by

Is it really? Or would the photographer have tried to avoid the angles which revealed the background?

 

Oddly, it would now be quite refreshing to see photos like the 'before' one appearing in magazines!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really? Or would the photographer have tried to avoid the angles which revealed the background?

 

And which angle would that be then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(snipped, a bit)

 

I don't mind the built to a timeline type of article (it is a different perspective) and anything to set it apart from a Model Rail clone. Do it with a brass kit and help folk understand it is not an overnight task.

 

But if you are going to have this type of article it really has to be achievable by Mr beginner/Mr average modeller and not what a guru can do when locked in a quiet room with someone threatening to smash his most cherished toy if the deadline is not met. AFAIC Good idea but room for improvement.

 

 

 

The magazine now looks like a cross between Model Rail and Hornby Magazine with all the panels such as "Fact file", did-you-knows and other asides sprinkled through the articles.  Maybe I am a lone voice but I find this so irritating.  Even the idea of random quotes in larger type, such as "shows are the only time I get to play trains" on page 21, has been lifted from the competition.  Why?  Are there no more original ideas to be found?

 

It's a pity because there is some good stuff amid the cosmetics and some of the photography is stunning.  Howard Smith's article on doing up a Corgi is marred only by an ambiguous use of the apostrophe: did the Peugeot belong to one or both parents?!  The layout plans are welcome and well executed.  Phil Parker has brought some good ideas with him and I liked the way he encourages kit-building.

 

I dare say we will all get used to the new look.but for now it comes across to me as a missed opportunity. 

 

Chris [infected by typos!]

I've quoted both of these as they show an interesting contrast with Kenton talking about constructional features for Mr Average or Mr Beginner while Chris has I think expressed some of what I feel, except he doesn't use the word 'clone'.

 

Now I think a revamp was a good idea - I think the mag needed something a bit further than the gradual breathing on of the past months although that has certainly made a big difference and it has kept me buying it.  But I am a little disappointed by the 'sameness' which has come out in the relaunch, the sameness with another mag.  I buy the different magazines because they are different, not because they're the same.  I realise that 'looking the same' isn't 'being the same' but impressions count - and visual impressions count for a lot on the bookstalls or as you flick through the pages.  I'm going to stick with it, it has time and room to mature and the quality and thrust of the articles will be tremendously important in going beyond the first visual impression so much still to absorb there.

 

I have now read the first of Tony Wright's reviews, of a couple of locos I knew (from outside the fence, officially that is) in the shape of 10000/01 review and I like it because TW's style is still there, still shining through - good english, heavily laced with relevant facts, superbly readable, and straightforward - so the visual impression of MR clone is not present in the text because the difference quickly comes through.  The need - for me as a reader - is to get that sort of distinctiveness into the rest of the mag and re-establish or exploit the things that James mentioned - 'a breath of fresh air' and 'inspirational'.

 

Edit to add PS - PS I like all the pictures, great atmosphere to some of them and a touch of distinctiveness.

Edited by The Stationmaster
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And which angle would that be then?

No idea, I just pay my three quid every month! :lol:

 

And I don't what the rest of the room is like, but I'm sure you can see my point. The before isn't very sharp but to me the processed image is over sharpened. Sharp to the extent it's not the appearance I would associate with an image taken at the time the model is clearly set.

 

Some of my favourite model photos are in MRJ 58 - the effects with cotton wool steam, B&W photography is absolutely perfect for effectively relfecting the subject and the photos also show the wonderful modelling of Chris Pendlenton. I recently bught another copy of the Modeller which featured Martyn Welch's Hursley - the photos in that were spot on, clearly without digital processing and showed an excellent model railway, just as its builder intended :) These would be two bench marks for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, there is a big difference in viewing something live versus in a photo.

 

Live, the eye/brain seems more forgiving, it focuses on what you want to see and filters out the background, be it a wall, bookshelves, operators or whatever. In a photo, everything seems to be of equal 'value', there's much less subconscious filtering out. The comparative images above are a case in point, I find that background wall incredibly cluttered and distracting, adding the sky, even or just a plain blue wash, just concentrates my view on the modelling.

 

There are lots of good angles to view a layout from, I've no problem with clutter beyond the modelled boundary being removed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of good angles to view a layout from, I've no problem with clutter beyond the modelled boundary being removed.

 

In many ways its now almost essential, with the advent of ever smaller digital camera and smart phones, photographs are now possible where even a few years ago it would have Ben difficult at best to get a shot.

 

Go back a little further to wide format and even 35 mm and some of today's shots would have been impossible.

 

As a result there is going to be an ever increasing need to crop, cut paste or whatever and something else to, we are going to have to up our game as again, there's so much more now that we CAN'T get away with!

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.