MRJ 204

[t-b-g]

Comments on RMWeb have been passed on to Paul Karau in the past and I am sure that they will be again! Just because Paul prefers to work without the wonders of modern technology (and I totally respect his choice and admire him for making it and sticking with it!) doesn't mean that MRJ is handwritten by a team of monks working in a monastery with quills!

 

Part of the problem with the photographs may be the rise of the decent cheap digital camera. In the "old days" there were only a small number of people who were any good at photographing model railways for the magazines and they became quite well known for their personal styles. They usually had (and have) top of the range equipment.

 

Nowadays, particularly now that digital cameras can cope with bad lighting and provide much better depth of field and close up shots, it fools people into thinking that they can point and shoot and hey presto, they are good enough to be a published photographer! Then you have the problem of playing about with image sizes, compressing them to save space on emails and to get lots onto a disc and the photo that looks pin sharp on the 2" screen on the camera suddenly looks bad spread across a full page in a magazine.

 

The fact that a photo can be taken, looked at and deleted (no more wasted film)if it is no good has, in my view, made some photographers lazy. I have seen several well known professional photographers at work photographing models railways. The difference in the amount of time they spend setting up a shot, sorting out lighting, composition, background clutter etc. is astonishing! Those that take their time to set the shot up seem to get the best results. The ones who say "we can sort that out on the computer" produce results that seem to lack something.

 

I wonder how many of the poor photos in MRJ were taken on a point and shoot camera by the people writing the articles and how many were taken by the better (known and more experienced) photographers.

[neal]

I must admit that I love the MRJ tradition, the typeface, the smell of the print, the typos(!?) and the beautiful images normally contained therein.

 

True, it can be aloof and often sets standards that I could only dream of, but at the end of the year when I clear my bookshelves it is the only periodical not sent off to the NLR fundraising shop.

 

Long may it continue.

 

N

[Kenton]

Might I suggest that "Railway Modeller" has improved itself so much that I think it runs as second fiddle to MRJ? RM has been having quite a lot of 'finescale' layouts in over the last few years!

Personally I think RM isn't anywhere near being compared to MRJ - totally different content/style and possibly readership.

 

RM has certainly improved over the last few issues, though that could be easily lost again with any of the next issues. But I see that improvement being driven by the introduction of the Hornby mag, a mag I still dislike intensely (don't ask why), at the bottom end of the picking pile.

 

I find MRJ still the only mag I read cover-to-cover (well every article - if not in the editor's chosen order) including the adverts. Although I like RM, probably because it covers all gauges and scales (I have interests in many), I often skip articles and forget to ever come back and read them. RM is a coffee break, lunch break read time. Whereas MRJ deserves a quiet corner and enough time to absorb its content.

[Coombe Barton]

So how much has MRJ been an influence in or scored in:

• Improving the rest of the model press?
• Improving people's modelling skills far more than other mags.
• Having more words then pix?
• Being kept longer for reference?
• Being quoted more for reference for modelling techniques (not counting prototype drawings as other mags being round longer could have more of them)
• Have owners who are envied for haiving Issue 0?

I regret not being in the hobby for 20+ years so only having MRJ up to issue 31 or so continuously, and then from a couple of years back, plus back numbers when I need specific information.

[davknigh]

To be blunt, MRJ got me back into modelling British outline by showing what was possible. I had trolled through RM & the rest but saw little to inspire, just the usual tailchasers and branch line terminii that had been around for yonks. MRJ had me looking hard to decide what scale/gauge the models were and offered a challenge to try and match what had been done. Is everything in the mag to my liking? Not always but there is always something to learn.

 

Cheers,

 

David

[sixteen 12by 10s]

Having had a look through some old copies, this is what I have come up with.

Certainly the quality of the photos needs to be improved, with colour being a possibility.

But the big one.

A better overall balance of articles, per issue. I came across one issue that was devoted to the building of a SR Q1 kit, coincidently, this issue was from the same month that Hornby introduced there models.

I still buy a copy occasionally, and still look to it for “raising the barâ€

Gary

[Mucky Duck]

…Part of the problem with the photographs may be the rise of the decent cheap digital camera… Nowadays, particularly now that digital cameras can cope with bad lighting and provide much better depth of field and close up shots, it fools people into thinking that they can point and shoot and hey presto, they are good enough to be a published photographer!

Yes, this is a universal phenomenon and I'm sure that many professional photographers get miffed at the decreasing number of commissions thanks to amateurs doing it on the cheap, or even for nowt! There's a similar trend with graphic designers… the cheap pc with design applications is available in every office and home, so too many folk now think they're a designer. As a result, standards are definitely slipping.

[LaScala]

MRJ 204 has strengthened my view that the use of various Guest Editors, while probably a practical short term expedient when Tim Shackleton left, is causing the magazine to lose it's way.

 

Surely one of the roles of editor is to solicit and commission articles to match the readers' interests. That means having a spread of contacts within the modelling community, across scales/gauges/interests/skills, etc. as well as a bit of an understanding of the readership. Changing the editor continually, even if some make repeat appearances, loses any continuity that a regular editor should be able to provide.

 

Completely agree the guest editor, idea has had its day. Maybe it's PK's way of maintaining control and avoid a Tim Mk2? Time to take a chance and appoint someone and let them run with it for a couple of years. No need to disqualify anyone who uses a PC either. Whether one regards the analogue isolation of WS Towers as quirky, charming, quaint or just ridiculous; one thing is for sure it will end eventually.

 

I can live with the anorak extremes (and even be impressed by some amazing projects instead of being general bemused) only if the inspiration and achievable (by me) factors are also present. I accept I will be happier with some issues more than others, but reckon the hit rate has declined markedly post Tim.

[Bernard Lamb]

No need to disqualify anyone who uses a PC either. Whether one regards the analogue isolation of WS Towers as quirky, charming, quaint or just ridiculous; one thing is for sure it will end eventually.

 

 

Prior to TS taking over as editor MRJ did use a computer and you could contact the editor by email. It was at the time TS took over that this facility was removed.

 

 

Bernard

[David Bigcheeseplant]

Small Suppliers have an email address smallsuppliers@googlemail.com, If anyone has any new product that they need a plug send it over.

 

David

[LaScala]

Prior to TS taking over as editor MRJ did use a computer and you could contact the editor by email. It was at the time TS took over that this facility was removed.

 

 

Bernard

 

Thanks for this staggering news..............

 

To my mind, the real competitor to MRJ isn't RM or any other mag, but forums akin to RMWeb. Granted there is much content here that is light years away from Chris Pendlenton/Barry Norman et al, but there's the Bigcheese's engine shed for example at the moment and Craig's wagon etches, both top shelf efforts. Read about them here today and if you are very lucky, a condensed version (much less useful than the dynamic warts and all tales here) might be in MRJ in a year or two.

 

One of my favorites here are Jazz's 7mm kit builds. Too repetitious for a mag, but unfolding as they do here, each one is fascinating and Ken's problem solving so much more entertaining than a dry after the even tale of "the kit came with cast parts, so I had to fabricate my own whatsit..."

 

Elsewhere on RMWeb I have added comments in the gossip area about the 2011 Queensland flood disaster. If ever there was an example of the new media proving its worth it was here in Brisbane 3 weeks ago. The Police use Facebook & Twitter to broadcast warnings, all the fresh news was on line when you needed it, and the hard copy newspapers had to print photos because they were so far behind what was happening. It seems to me that this is exactly what awaits specialist mags that see some noble purpose in being old school for the sake of it. Just being able to subscribe on line would be a small step forward.

[cctransuk]

Small Suppliers have an email address smallsuppliers@googlemail.com, If anyone has any new product that they need a plug send it over.

 

David

 

Well - I tried to use it and it just bounced back!!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood,

Cambridge Custom Transfers.

http://www.cctrans.freeserve.co.uk/

[45157]

Yes, this is a universal phenomenon and I'm sure that many professional photographers get miffed at the decreasing number of commissions thanks to amateurs doing it on the cheap, or even for nowt! There's a similar trend with graphic designers… the cheap pc with design applications is available in every office and home, so too many folk now think they're a designer. As a result, standards are definitely slipping.

 

As a life long engineering draughtsman it's a problem I have to deal with regularly.

Drawings produced by computer wizards with no engineering knowledge often take a great deal of work to get into a condition that is of any use to the manufacturing process, sometimes it is even quicker to just redraw it.

Another case of it actually being cheaper to just do it correctly in the first place.

Rant over ..... back on subject .....

 

Much as the current issue is not one of my favourites (another one who has them all from issue 0) I do accept that this is a very wide and diverse hobby and the mag is not written just for me.

I do miss the regular "workshop" articles though, and learning of the tools used, it was from numerous comments in articles and then the review of the GW Models rivet tool that made my mind up it was the one I should buy.

I know that many of them are way outside my comfort zone, but I still like to know what can be done and always remain hopeful that one day, maybe, I might get there.

The older I get the less I am inclined to change "what works for me" so how MRJ is produced doesn't bother me, just as long as it is, and those doing the work are happy with what they do.

 

regards

Stewart

[David Bigcheeseplant]

Well - I tried to use it and it just bounced back!!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood,

Cambridge Custom Transfers.

http://www.cctrans.freeserve.co.uk/

 

If you have still have problems just PM me, there is still time to get it in MRJ205

 

David

[LaScala]

Yes, I did enjoy Craig's article thanks, probably an exception rather than the rule. How ironic that PK wants some etches but can't be contacted?

[craigwelsh]

Yes, I did enjoy Craig's article thanks, probably an exception rather than the rule. How ironic that PK wants some etches but can't be contacted?

He can be phoned or someone sent around if needed. He'll be well aware next issue though anyway I should think.

 

I've actually never posted on here any shots of the completed wagons that went into MRJ or indeed anything on the next project to give MRJ the exclusive as such. I agree though a forum is better for the nitty gritty though MRJ does normally spur on the imagination with the broad outline of an idea.

 

Much of the info used for my etching and article came from those by Chris Crofts in the earliest MRJs which are as old as me! Much more useful to refer back to than an article on lengthening a Triang Princess or similar you find in Railway Modeller.

 

The wooden mineral from Dragon in small suppliers is a nice kit - I looked over the prototype at Railex last year. I think the chassis parts could have been finer and I don't like the use of compensation instead of springing but the body was a very creative fold up affair.

 

I picked up my copy of MRJ204 this evening and I have to admit that Mike's article could have done with being split over two issues or cut down a bit as it is half of the issue. The issue may be longer than normal to compensate though, haven't checked yet. The documents photographed are referred in the text and all legible so i'm not too bothered about those.

 

The computerised buildings looks interesting as its something i've been doing long term to draw up the station building I need, no doubt there are some tips in there I can use.

[The Stationmaster]

 

I picked up my copy of MRJ204 this evening and I have to admit that Mike's article could have done with being split over two issues or cut down a bit as it is half of the issue. The issue may be longer than normal to compensate though, haven't checked yet. The documents photographed are referred in the text and all legible so i'm not too bothered about those.

 

 

 

I quite agree - it is a very 'gutsy' article which can perhaps get rather tedious if either the subject matter doesn't switch you on or you don't latch on to what he is getting at quickly enough to keep you going, and with an awful lot of information that might be difficult. But the profuse illustration does help break it up a big and it is very brave (if that's the right word?) of him to tackle it in such depth for his layout but he really is 'running a railway' and it is encouraging to see MRJ giving 'operation' a run again.

 

[RichardS]

The older I get the less I am inclined to change "what works for me"

regards

Stewart

 

I don't know how old you are Stewart but using a web based forum to share thoughts such as RM Web implies that you are open to relatively new change. However, as a middle aged modeller myself I understand the underlying sentiment but I don't agree with it. I think that age causes one to discrminate more about change. I cannot abide change simply for change's sake but if the change provides clear benefits and improvements then I will grab it with both hands and I hope I will always be able to do so.

 

In the 21st century it is extraordinary that a magazine of such standing as MRJ does not have a web presence - even if all it told you was when the next issue was coming out and comprised an index of previous articles. I note that one advert in MRJ this month still states "Range available from 17 April 2010". Even the adverts are unchanging. This magazine need competition but if it did I suspect it would close down.

 

RichardS

[lonesome_whistle]

 

In the 21st century it is extraordinary that a magazine of such standing as MRJ does not have a web presence - even if all it told you was when the next issue was coming out and comprised an index of previous articles. I note that one advert in MRJ this month still states "Range available from 17 April 2010". Even the adverts are unchanging. This magazine need competition but if it did I suspect it would close down.

 

RichardS

 

Richard,

 

There is a pretty comprehensive online index for MRJ at www.modelrailwayjournal.com. I'm not sure that any official website would be of much benefit - there are plenty of print periodicals with glossy websites that still don't manage to give details of their current or next issue and that, to my mind, is worse than having no web presence at all. With regard to ads, surely it's up to advertisers to update their copy - I'm sure a trawl though the pages of RM would find advertising that hasn't been updated in months.

[djparkins]

Completely agree the guest editor, idea has had its day. Maybe it's PK's way of maintaining control and avoid a Tim Mk2? Time to take a chance and appoint someone and let them run with it for a couple of years. No need to disqualify anyone who uses a PC either. Whether one regards the analogue isolation of WS Towers as quirky, charming, quaint or just ridiculous; one thing is for sure it will end eventually.

 

I can live with the anorak extremes (and even be impressed by some amazing projects instead of being general bemused) only if the inspiration and achievable (by me) factors are also present. I accept I will be happier with some issues more than others, but reckon the hit rate has declined markedly post Tim.

 

IMHO they need a new resident editor and fast - I fully agree that the guest editor idea has run its course. I am probably in a minority in prefering the editorship of TS to the current situation - what I'd really like though is Bob Barlow back [but I know that will not happen!!!]

 

David Parkins

[James]

This magazine need competition but if it did I suspect it would close down.

Why does it? Surely as a niche publication it does very well and nobody can say it hasn't done the hobby a huge amount of good since it started. Surely a web presence would end up being similar to the Scalefour Society's website in content? The online index is more than enough for most of its readers needs.

 

I'd actualy say that in one area it does have a direct competitor; Roy Link's magazine covering narrow gauge subjects is a wonderful high quality publication and there is a notcable cross over between the two at times.

 

I was also intrigued by the comments that by buying it, it makes you a snob somehow?? Over the years I think MRJ has embraced all sorts of new ideas. I think one of the most significant articles in recent yeatrs was TS' article on the Southern Mogul. It really set the tone for future articles using RTR as a base. Nothing snobby there surely?

 

I'm amazed some people don't seem to have warmed to the oerational article based around Preston. Having seen it in Snooze previously I thought it was a great insight. It's also nice to see a subject like this covered. Most enthusiasts know **** all about how the railway's run, they know plenty about locos and where lines go maybe but how it all goes together is another matter entirely. Even if you work on the railway in some form, you can still find it fascinating how this huge system all gels together as one!

 

The guest editor thing has produced some excellent articles - no question there, but I do feel a regular editor is needed. There's also a danger that MRJ will appear too much like a closed-shop or an Old Boys' Society - but I think all of MRJ's readers would do the same if they'd been asked to be guest editor. You'd ask your friends for articles wouldn't you?! I would like to see a new editor to guide MRJ. To where I'm not sure as finescale modelling seems much more achievable now than it has ever been - just look at early MRJs to see how the range of parts and compnents has changed enormously.

 

I always though TS did a superb job - he presented finescale in an 'everyman' kinda way, I liked that. It's something I'd like to see continue. Personally I'd love to see Iain Rice as editor (whether that would happen or not is another matter) as the way he ran MORILL produced a wonderful magazine. Otherwise, Chris Pendlenton - I could read his articles over and over again very happily! I've already worn out two copies of MRJ 58 and the third one doesn't look too smart either!

[Penlan]

TIC - It seems to me the half mag. article on the operation of Preston is returning us to those 'good old days' of '0' gauge layouts, when there was little if any scenery and running the layout was based on operational proceedures, often culled from railwaymen, and certainly a common sight to the operators at the time - 1940's / 50's.

 

Don't forget the TIC please..

 

I admit it wasn't my favourite article to date, but as in a previous posting of some MRJ edition long ago, I take the long term view, it's not a full cup every issue, but collectively a great source of inspiration.

[craigwelsh]

I always though TS did a superb job - he presented finescale in an 'everyman' kinda way, I liked that. It's something I'd like to see continue. Personally I'd love to see Iain Rice as editor (whether that would happen or not is another matter) as the way he ran MORILL produced a wonderful magazine. Otherwise, Chris Pendlenton - I could read his articles over and over again very happily! I've already worn out two copies of MRJ 58 and the third one doesn't look too smart either!

I think the idea of the guest editor scheme has been to get all of the usual finescale contributors to do an issue where they badger their mates/group colleagues who haven't done an article before to do something for the first time. It certainly has achieved new writers in MRJ whereas Tim's issues had a habit of repeating the same names by the end. Hell no to Ian Rice though, I hate his self deprecating style that always makes me wonder why he is writing the tutorials if he thinks his modelling is so bad. I don't like an ego trip in print but I do like it to inspire confidence in the methods and be quite matter of fact. I haven't liked the stuff he edited either though I don't think he'll be getting into MRJ anyway!

 

Maybe Paul needs to set out a requirement for a set of articles to be covered within every two issues or something - a layout article, rolling stock build, something on a locos, a piece of track, something on the prototype and a workshop/tool type article for example? Hopefully then you wouldn't have 4 or 5 guests in a row ignoring a subject many like. I guess you still have the issue of someone unfamiliar with writing for the mags giving an article to someone unfamiliar with red ink!

 

My thoughts on the Preston article may be slightly bias when I finish writing it having spent a day operating it to the timetable and getting into a thorough mess trying to send electrics to places without wires or getting the pacels marshalling done hours late!

 

Chris Pendlenton does do some great articles but I have no idea if that would make him a suitable editor. His Deltic article is a good one to compare with the Shawplan part coverage in Model Rail at the same time. Chris Leigh said that MR article was more complex than they'd normally want in MR and I can never imagine them doing the fully sprung Deltic Chris did or something like that turning up RTR for a long time!

[RichardS]

There is a pretty comprehensive online index for MRJ at www.modelrailwayjournal.com. I'm not sure that any official website would be of much benefit - there are plenty of print periodicals with glossy websites that still don't manage to give details of their current or next issue and that, to my mind, is worse than having no web presence at all. With regard to ads, surely it's up to advertisers to update their copy - I'm sure a trawl though the pages of RM would find advertising that hasn't been updated in months.

 

I agree entirely "Lonesome" websites should be kept up to date. In addition many are poorly designed and pretty useless but then when were we the customers asked what we wanted to see on those websites? Many smaller businesses do not fully understand websites. But I work on an assumption that if you've got it you use it.

 

I am aware of the independent index to MRJ that you mention - but question why should a customer have to provide that? Why not the provider of the material as a customer focussed added value service.

 

If I were the publisher of a magazine I would want to ensure that it was of the utmost accuracy and gave a good impression. Out of date adverts do not give a good impression either of the company advertising or the care taken by the publisher to ensure that the overall product experience is the best it can be. If the advert is "wrong" (can't think of a better word) what else is "wrong" that I might be relying on?

 

Personally, I never keep a whole magazine - I remove articles that interest me and file. In fact I am contemplating storing them electronically. I would welcome eletronic versions of magazines where I could extract articles that interest me. I can already see most manufacturers products on line so I do not need to buy the large sections of adverts that most magazines (MRJ excepted)contain.

 

An archive of, for example, MRJ articles on line could then be sold by MRJ themselves, for example, to new customers rather than having us having to search out second hand copies of old mags. MRJ would then benefit in the longer term as well.

 

What I describe will happen eventually. It has already happened with televison in certain repsects with on demand services. It is happening with books via Kindle etc. MRJ as an archivable magazine is clearly a candidate for such treatment. The fundamental question is whether the present customers would have an appetite for such change. Future customers will have such an appetite and businesses ignore them at their peril.

 

Somebody else referred to my previous mention of "snob value" in the purchase of MRJ. There will always be an element of "snobbery" in everything we humans do. Without it nobody would strive to better themselves - for what else is the reason for doing so? It's simply our egos at work. There is nothing wrong with this. And apologies if I inferred otherwise. The one thing I beleive we should not to do though is to behave as a "snob." "I know my model is better than yours, you know my model is better than yours - but we don't say so." If we have all done our best to the extent of our circumstances and ability then all models are perfect and equal."

 

RichardS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An interesting debate.

[lonesome_whistle]

Hell no to Ian Rice though, I hate his self deprecating style that always makes me wonder why he is writing the tutorials if he thinks his modelling is so bad. I don't like an ego trip in print but I do like it to inspire confidence in the methods and be quite matter of fact. I haven't liked the stuff he edited either though I don't think he'll be getting into MRJ anyway!

 

Poor old Ricey; he's a bit like marmite, it would appear that people either love or hate his style. I quite like it - When I first discovered MRJ, No.1 Shop was a real highlight for me and I've always enjoyed reading his Wild Swan books. Anyway, the fact that he's not yet been a guest editor sort of confirms what Craig hints at above.

 

 

Maybe Paul needs to set out a requirement for a set of articles to be covered within every two issues or something - a layout article, rolling stock build, something on a locos, a piece of track, something on the prototype and a workshop/tool type article for example? Hopefully then you wouldn't have 4 or 5 guests in a row ignoring a subject many like. I guess you still have the issue of someone unfamiliar with writing for the mags giving an article to someone unfamiliar with red ink!

 

I think you're right here. Perhaps the guest editor should be responsible for gathering the articles and writing the editorial with someone else sub editing the content (I can understand that not everyone would be comfortable correcting grammar and chopping swathes out of a piece they've asked a friend to write as a favour).

 

 

Chris Pendlenton does do some great articles but I have no idea if that would make him a suitable editor. His Deltic article is a good one to compare with the Shawplan part coverage in Model Rail at the same time. Chris Leigh said that MR article was more complex than they'd normally want in MR and I can never imagine them doing the fully sprung Deltic Chris did or something like that turning up RTR for a long time!

 

Looking at it from another perspective, would Chris Pendlenton, or any other candidate, want to take on the role of permanent editor - it would appear to be something of a poison chalice anyway?

 

BTW Preston is some project, particularly in P4, and is quite an inspiration. I found the article very interesting but (and no criticism intended here), bearing in mind the way that real railways ran, it might be entertaining to see some kind of wild card introduced into the timetable operation - a loco failure or non-availability of traincrew or just a late, and out of sequence, arrival due to unspecified problems up north or down south - would really prove a test for those operating.

 

[Edited: Because I'm struggling to communicate this morning!!]