Perceptions of print

[steve1]

Subs - I have one sub and that's to a magazine that hasn't been mentioned yet, Model Trains International. I've had it since Issue 1 and also had one for its predecessor, Scale Model Trains Issues.

 

Positives - Lots of 'how to' articles and practical advice. A wide range of interests, which appeals to me as I model UK, USA and German prototype. A focus on small layouts,. Reviews that don't take up two pages for one model. A homely approach to modelling.

 

Negatives - Virtually no colour and very variable photo reproduction.

 

Covers - Make no difference to me, it's the content that makes me decide.

 

Bags - I won't buy a bagged mag as I can't look through it first. (Whatever happened to those fold out wallets that mags used to use? The ones with the mag in one side and the disposable stuff in the other?)

 

I'll buy a mag if it has something that interests me, that's my only criteria. Mostly, I'll end up keeping the useful pages and dumping the rest. The only one I never bother looking at is MRJ, as it seems to be stuck in some sort of imaginary 'golden age' of railway modelling where men smoked pipes and wore collars and ties to scratchbuild obscure prototypes.

 

steve

 

steve

[coachmann]

I used to relish buying 'Modellers Backtrack' and 'Backtrack', which were well above average.

[hollywoodfoundry]

I think the magazine you buy is primarily influenced by your particular preferences in the hobby. I am not into building layouts, scenicing or buildings, I live in a small house that will never have room for such things, so my interest is in designing and building lcomotives and rolling stock.

 

I also live a fair distance from any shop that stocks model magazines, all mine are contained on a list at a shop many miles away and are automatically sent to me. As a result, I never see a front cover before the issue arrives on my doorstep, and I am therefore not influenced by the cover. From time to time I review the list and either add or remove magazines from it. I recently dropped Railway Modeller and some time ago Continental Modeller as the content was not satisfing me.

 

I get Model Rail and MRJ from the UK, they are the two best magazines as far as I am concerned.

 

I get Voie Libre from France, a lovely little magazine with lots of constructional articles, and you can now get an English language translation on-line.

 

I buy Model Railroad Craftsman from the US, again for constructional articles, I think MR has now become a magazine for RTR modellers.

 

And I subscribe to Australian Model Railway Magazine, a small local magazine produced by a club, that has excellent local content.

[Guest dilbert]

Do scale related publications count ? I like the GOG Gazette for two reasons :

 

1) the product reviews do allow the vendor to comment on the critique of the person(s) making the review and this is in the same edition (OK, the Gazette is published on a quarterly basis).

 

2) the trade news has pages of info on a wide variety of subjects. ... dilbert

[burgundy]

I have been quite relieved to see from this thread that I am not the only one who is becoming more selective about spending nearly £4 for a magazine. I used to be a pretty regular purchaser of RM and MRJ, supplemented, when I visited WHS, by prototype mags or sometimes Model Railroader depending on content. However, over the last 12 months, purchases have become fewer and further between. A really interesting layout or a "how to" article are likely to tip the balance; reviews (however good or bad) are not, as I am most unlikely to start buying anything RTR at the moment.

As others have suggested, I find that RM Web is part of the reason. Because it has a large membership, there is almost always something under discussion that catches my interest; I tend to browse "whats new" and even if I skip 90% of the threads, then there will almost always be something going on that I will read. Because it is interactive, almost any question that I may ask is likely to get answered within 24 hours. The electronic format is also an important consideration as it allows you to place links to related subjects, that readers can follow or ignore at their choice; I recently tried writing an article for a hard copy format and suddenly realised how much I had come to rely on links as a shorthand/substitute for a footnote or similar explanation within the main text.

Which sort of brings us round to the RM Web E Mag. I sense that Andy has been trying to find a format that preserves some fo the best material on RM Web and lifts it out of all the ephemeral stuff. There was the previous attempt with the discrete site (sorry, I have forgotten what it was called) which seemed to stagnate with a reluctance to "promote" your own article onto the "premium" site. The E Mag seems to get over that problem, but, I suspect, at the expense of quite a lot of editorial effort and some arm twisting to get stuff put into "magazine" format. I do appreciate the effort that is going into creating it, but I am not sure that it quite hits the spot either. Possibly it is an age thing, but, for anything much more than 2 pages long, I find that I need to read it in hard copy so that I can flit backwards and forwards to follow points that are being made; I find the electronic format does not allow me to do this for some reason.

If the aim is to highlight material that reflects "best practice" (sorry for the managementspeak, but I can't think of a more concise way to put it), can I offer a suggestion? At the moment, we have a button that we can press to indicate on an article that we "like this". Could we perhaps have another button (or rename the existing button) to indicate that we think something reflects really good practice? This would allow the threads of real value to be pushed forward by general consensus, rather than leaving it up to an editor/arbitrator. And does it really need to be formatted into a magazine style article when much of the value may have come from the peer review provided by subsequent postings?

Sorry, this has now wandered away from the original exam question but I can't help thinking that the issues are related.

Best wishes

Eric

[Boris]

I've not bought a model mag in quite some time (considering at one time I used to subscribe to MRJ, RM and BRM), the layout articles are all well and good, but in more recent years have moved away from "this is how I did this" to "look at what I've done". I have also found many reviews have moved away from actually reviewing a product to just describing it, giving some background and posting a couple of photos. The example that I gave was a review a number of years ago about the then new "Super Detail" Hornby black 5, unfortunately which magazine it was escapes me at the moment. Talked about critical dimensions, how it looked, how it performed and then said right, these are what we believe are faults (minor) and this is how we would correct them (for example brassmasters detail kit). Things we are going to want to know before we invest £100+ on a model, rather than an edited history of it.

 

I gave up with mainstream mags when I moved into O gauge for a start, but I found the reducing number of articles featuring scale drawings or detail photos a shame.

[ForestPines]

I no longer am a regular buyer of modelling magazines, but there are a few I look at regularly. However, my opinion of them all is heavily filtered through one fact: my parents bought me a subscription to Railway Modeller when I was 7, and I read it for 10 years after that. Because of that, I feel that all my opinions of modelling magazines are filtered through John Brewer-era RM, even though I think they really messed up the production design in, erm, 1991 I think - the year when they changed the article headline font and started doing dumb things like printing diagrams and illustrations in yellow ink on white paper (at least they only did that specific mistake once). It's not my favourite modelling magazine, though, but it's my favourite one still available today.

 

At one time, I bought almost every MRJ, too, but it has varied. I started buying it regularly in the mid-90s; I bought most of Tim Shackleton's issues, but in-between I bought very few of Martyn Welch's because I thought he skewed the content far too heavily towards his own scale, 7mm, which I've never really been that interested in. There was at least one "4mm finescale is on its last legs, 7mm is where all the activity is" editoral during Mr Welch's tenure which put me off rather. Of course, maybe Mr Shackleton was just as biased but I didn't notice because it suited my interests. At least the Have I Got News For You style editorship means that that sort of thing is much less likely to happen. Now, I buy MRJ when it looks interesting - the last one I took, I think, had a very interesting (and long) article about operating a layout based on 1980s Preston. The best things about MRJ are the house style (nothing but masthead and picture on the cover - just like early-80s RM!) and the wide range of prototype subjects it covers, much wider than any other magazines. I was very puzzled by the poster upthread who said that they wished it covered more subjects, because it is unarguably by far the most wide-ranging we have at the moment.

 

I do still usually consider buying RM, but usually don't. Having said that, I have firm hopes for Steve Flint's ability because he wrote some pretty good articles for them back in the 90s. I also have a look at Continental Modeller in the shop, and buy it if it's got something interesting in - but I find it much harder to get hold of than the others. For example, I went looking for it this weekend, a week or so after its normal publication date (I think), and couldn't find a copy. I do find the "look and feel" of the other modelling magazines off-putting - with all that text on the cover, far too much like the sort of thing that has "Soap star left me for dead, and I gave birth to 17 lobsters!" as a cover story. Yes, I am a snob. In fact, yesterday, I bought a train magazine (Railway Bylines) from Smiths, and the shop assistant said "Anyone who buys a magazine gets £1 off if they buy The Sun too". No, thank you. "But The Sun would only be 60p - we're basically paying you 40p to take a copy of The Sun away!" No, thank you. "You can even leave it here if you want!" No, thank you, I will not let you bribe me to help push The Sun's circ figures up, even just by one. I twirled my moustache at the chap and his gauged ears* and left. But I digress. I do skim the contents of the other magazines, incidentally - I'm not that much of a snob, and I would buy them if there was anything to interest me, but I don't think there ever is.

 

Incidentally, I do buy Railway Bylines every month, and sometimes Backtrack. I like Bylines' writing style, and, again, breadth of subject matter. Plus, they do publish correction letters! Well, either that or they had a slow postbag the month I wrote in. One gripe: they do list "Coming soon!" articles which seem to never actually appear; but I guess that's the editor being a bit premature when a correspondant has promised they definitely are going to write that article they suggested about Engines That Shunted Fish Dock No. 2 (But Not Fish Dock No.3), by next month, honest.

 

My favourite modelling magazine, though, was one someone else has mentioned above: Morill. I still have every issue produced by the original editors, right from accidentally discovering Vol. 1 No. 1 in a newsagents' shop near Orpington station. It really did seem to encapsulate both a level of modelling and a breadth of subject that seemed both achievable and original. It seemed to be for people who aspired to MRJ-standard modelling, but presented in an approachable we-think-you-can-do-this-too way. Sadly it went downhill after Rice and Farquaharson (sp?) left, and I had stopped buying it some time before it closed (partly due to cashflow - I was a student at the time).

 

* Not that I have anything against gauged lobes - they can look pretty good. I genuinely did twirl the moustache though, in case you were wondering.

[10800]

 

It did exist once and was called Modelling Railways Illustrated (MORILL for short) Originally it was edited by Iain Rice & Andy Farquharson and used the quote "achievable excellence" or something similar.

 

MORILL did have a good level of content, but I wouldn't say it was well-designed in the sense that MRJ is. Modellers' Backtrack on the other hand (as mentioned by Larry) was in the 'reference quality' category but half of its material seemed to be of the prototype, often pre-Nationalisation - nothing wrong about that per se, but that was what Backtrack was (is) for, and so MBT never really had its market sorted out for me. Still got all of MORILL and MBT though.

 

Iain Rice tried again with Railmodel Digest, more of a book format which only lasted for seven issues, but going for a similar ground to MORILL.

[ForestPines]

Morill (or MORILL)'s design was certainly less staid than MRJ's, and in some areas they were fairly innovative - I recall them using double-gatefolds to print 7mm scale drawings, for example.

[cromptonnut]

I have a subscription to Model Rail. I buy it because it seems to suit 'my level of modelling expertise' if that makes sense. Occasionally I'll buy other magazines if there's something that particularly takes my fancy.

 

I guess the downside will always be content:advertising ratio - but in realistic terms I know that magazines have to cover their costs and increasing the cover price, reducing the content or having more advertising are the only options available.

 

What I hate though is when you plough through full or multiple page adverts of the 'big name box shifters' all selling the same out of the box stuff - I know that advertisers pay for the privilege and the magazines won't turn the revenue down but it just seems silly to me when the vast majority of us are online these days, and would prefer a good website with a search button rather than trying to read pages of miniscule text which these adverts often are.

 

I suppose the hard balance is getting the ratios right between the various gauges/scales, eras etc - although I can usually find something of interest or a scenic technique I can adapt from a layout that otherwise has little to no appeal to my normal modelling interests.

 

It's nice to see loft size layouts but I'd personally like to see a bit more 'small' layouts for those of us not lucky enough to have the room we'd like - but I guess it's catch 22, people won't build them if the magazines don't show them off, and the magazines can't show them off if people don't build and submit them!

[Trevellan]

Hornby is the mag to take with you whilst on the throne, a good light read with excellent picture quality, you can also beat the flames out with it.

Now this is exactly what I mean about honest, forthright reviews. A classic quote, sir!

 

Modellers' Backtrack on the other hand (as mentioned by Larry) was in the 'reference quality' category but half of its material seemed to be of the prototype, often pre-Nationalisation...

Given that the late David Jenkinson was heavily involved with this I don't think the slant towards pre-Nationalisation was surprising. As much as I admired the man and his work, there's only so much Midland and LMS a firm BR period fan like me can take. The quality of the mag was superb though. I had forgotten about MORILL, but on checking I do have several copies in storage, confirming my belief that I've read them all at one time or another.

 

I think RMweb has definitely shifted the goalposts. In the late 1980s I bought Model Railways magazine on the basis of articles by Vic Green on scratchbuilding 7mm steam locomotives. Ultimately, this led to initial correspondence, then meeting the man and remaining in touch for several years, during which time I learned a great deal. These days, the immediacy of the web and e-mail has made it much easier for very average modellers like me to engage with the higher echelons of the hobby. This immediacy has become apparent to the mainstream mags, hence the roadshows and live events with mag support.

[Jol Wilkinson]

I get MRJ on subscription, and very occasionally RM or BRM if there appears to be an article of interest. For example the recent article in BRM on building a York Modelmaking Midland Railway signal box, as I am interested in laser cutting for a particular project. I don't know about Hornby magazine, etc. as a their marketing hasn't prompted me to buy any of them. When I am in the local branch of WHs's reading room, anything in a bag is not even going to get a look in.

 

As someone who makes all his own models, through choice of railway, period and gauge, I get inspiration (if not always guidance) from the articles in MRJ. The concentration on RTR/RTP in the other magazines holds no interest for me. I also have all the back numbers of MORILL and Rail Model Digest, together with some Modellers Backtrack , because they were aimed at that sector of the hobby that held interest for me. Together with MRJ, I find it enjoyable to read through the back numbers from time to time as they appear to improve with age. I don't know if that applies to RM, etc. as I only keep an articles of interest in and recycle the rest.

 

I don't find the photography in the "mainsteam" magazines very atmospheric, although they may be "technically" better at colour reproduction. Perhaps that's indicative of the different market sectors the magazines aim at. Bright and glossy for the RTR enthusiast market, more atmospheric for the model maker sector.

[Dave777]

Oh by the way I notice that Tony Wright seems to have been missing from the last couple of issues, no pix or articles, I hope he is OK.

 

Isn't he ill at the moment? I think I read that somewhere, but I could be VERY wrong.

 

 

These days, the immediacy of the web and e-mail has made it much easier for very average modellers like me to engage with the higher echelons of the hobby.

 

Very true. Nothing like being able to directly contact a modeller regarding a very specific point and get a personal reply... and then be able to ask follow up Qs if required.

 

 

Funny you should say that, is there a natural end to ones readership of a magazine? Once you have read how to weather wagons once, you don't need a second article saying how to do it using a different manufacture's brush?

 

That's an interesting point which I'd never considered before, and probably goes a long way to explaining my tiredness with the traditional ‘and then we did the scenery’ layout articles. I have definitely plateaued in my ability to learn further from paragraphs explaining ‘plywood tops with softwood batons’ construction methods.

 

 

If nothing else, this thread has solved a years-old mystery for me as I’ve finally found out what MORILL stands for! And doesn’t it make a change to have a thread where people are able to discuss something openly, honestly and calmly without it dropping into a ‘my opinion is more important than yours’ slanging match?

[David Bigcheeseplant]

When I am on the Wild Swan stand at some exhibitions we sell back issues of MRJ at full cover price, I am pleasantly surprised at the amount of people who will buy quite a pile of them spending in some cases near on £100, I don’t think any other magazine would be able to do this, so maybe this accounts for the loyalty of the brand, product and the way people see MRJ as something slightly different from the rest.

 

David

[coachmann]

Given that the late David Jenkinson was heavily involved with this I don't think the slant towards pre-Nationalisation was surprising. As much as I admired the man and his work, there's only so much Midland and LMS a firm BR period fan like me can take.

It's funny but I never thoght of it like that. British Railways merely presided over the demise of our railway system as my generation and older had know it and so the pre-Nationalized era seemed like a natural ground to cover seeing it was the most interesting. Much of the 1960s research by LMS Society members was reintroduced to later generations via Backtrack and Modellers Backtrack, but there was also a lot of new research covering, for instance, tank wagons, steel mineral wagons and coaching stock of the Big Four......Much of it in colour too.

 

I had a quick browse through the various railway monthlies except BRM yesterday, if only to get me up-to-date. I left the shop empty handed....

[dibber25]

Model Rail is for post steam era modellers so I don't buy.

 

Unbelievable! as Victor Meldrew would have said. Where do people get these ideas, and why perpetuate them when they are simply WRONG?

Just shows that when you ask for 'perceptions' there's a narrow gap between that and 'misconceptions'. Sorry, I guess the magazine folk aren't really intended to get involved in this particular thread so I'll 'butt out'.

CHRIS LEIGH

[coachmann]

I understand your feelings Chris, but no matter how frustrating perceptions might be, it is perception that determines whether a person will buy or not buy a product.

[Trevellan]

Where do people get these ideas, and why perpetuate them when they are simply WRONG?

There's no pleasing some folks Chris. I know from various stages in my career - especially in the public transport sector - that you can put any amount of information in front of some people and they will not shift from their narrow viewpoint.

 

On balance and to be fair, I think MR's reputation among posters on this thread is generally pretty good. See also my first sentence above!

[Adam]

There are a number of interesting perceptions revealed in this thread which - like the one identified by Chris above (I'm fairly certain that the last three months worth of Model Rails have had a steam loco' of some description on the front...) - do not bear comparison to the content of the magazines involved. To address the OP:

 

The only modelling magazine I buy with any regularity is MRJ. Why? Not because I think that there's some caché to reading/buying it, but because, for me, the hobby is about making things (not to knock other approaches) and that's primarily what MRJ provides - at the level at which I am aspiring to.

 

In terms of the other press, on browsing it in WHS, I am impressed by ModelRail which does carry prototype features written for the modeller (Rail Express Modeller does this very well too on occasion, but rarely for the era I am interested in) and Steve Banks' pieces are routinely inspirational when they appear. This is the kind of article that interests me because it directly relates to what I do and I have bought both ModelRail, BRM and RailExpress on the back of this sort of feature several times.

 

I can take or leave most of the how-tos, but that's mostly because, for example, that loco' detailing and assembly of plastic kits is something I can do and the more involved pieces are 'pot-luck'. This isn't a criticism, simply a reflection of the modelling I've done. Similarly, layout photo features often leave me rather cold, possibly because of the photographic style currently prevalent in magazines. Technically, it's excellent, but somehow, to me, it makes models appear much more model-like, probably a result of the lighting employed which is rarely representative of that which the models are generally seen under. This is a matter of personal taste/opinion and puts me in the minority!

 

The consumer magazine elements do vary. The reviews are an impressive feature of ModelRail, for example - large, clear pictures showing the detail of models, not always only from the big RTR suppliers - and this something which I suspect reflects the Chris Leigh/Model Railway Constructor influence. This is less obviously the case for RM (the 'rade gazette of the Model railway world) or Hornby Magazine, which often read like press releases or a basic summary. The prototype information that accompanies Hornby Magazine's loco reviews in particular is useful when well-executed, but here again, that reflects my personal prejudice for linking models and the prototype. If only I had the time to write pieces like that myself! It's hard eough to actually fit the modelling in...

 

Adam

[Revolution Mike]

Where do people get these ideas, and why perpetuate them when they are simply WRONG?

Just shows that when you ask for 'perceptions' there's a narrow gap between that and 'misconceptions'. Sorry, I guess the magazine folk aren't really intended to get involved in this particular thread so I'll 'butt out'.

CHRIS LEIGH

 

I don't understand why you would be so spiky about someone's views? Perceptions are important, whether you agree with them or not. In fact knowing what people's views are may help you stop any misconceptions!

 

FWIW (for my personal tastes) Model Rail has gone the other way - a few years back it was for the post steam modeller and it seems much less so now! Nothing wrong with that at all - you can't (and shouldn't try to) please everyone all of the time.

 

Back to Andy's OP - I find myself buying fewer and fewer mags. I stopped my sub to Model Rail as I found less and less of interest to me. I took out an electronic sub to Rail Express as I liked the idea of not having to keep masses of paper, though I am not sure whether I will stick with the e-version or go back to paper when my sub runs out.

 

Everything else I will buy only if there is an article of interest.

 

Cheers, Mike

[Revolution Mike]

Probably because like other mags I'm familiar with the editorial teams spend a good amount of effort to produce a balanced content mag to the market, (excepting 'theme' issues). Such a perception as Chris identified is clearly wrong and indicates the person whom holds that perception hasn't, to put it politely, done any research and needs to spend a little more time in Smiths.

 

Sorry, but that sort of attitude is commercial suicide! As I said, Chris doesn't have to agree with someone's perceptions/views but if they are ignored or told they are wrong etc then there is a risk that perceptions will never be changed/corrected (if indeed they are wrong).

 

As an aside, "balanced" content is different things to different people and depending on what market you are after may not be a good thing. If I am a steam modeller then I may not be interested in balance if that balance means diesels then I may not want balanced content (modelling techniques that are era/prototype irrelevant are different).

[DaveF]

I subscribe to a number of magazines and usually end up reading each of the "big four" together with Continental Modeller and most issues of MRJ. I am content if there are one or two articles of particular interest even if I disagree with the methods or views expressed.

 

All of them to some extent (MRJ most of all) challenge me and make me want to improve my modelling, though I always think I am the "average modeller" as defined by the Railway Modeller many years ago.

 

However, I really learn far more about the railway in its broadest sense by reading prototype magazines which I buy when I find something of interest. That is what really inspires my modelling, I don't want to end up accidentally copying another person's models.

 

Perhaps I am fortunate in living close to a branch of Smiths which stocks a wide range of railway magazines and "one offs" - last time I counted there were 28 titles to choose from! So I can spend a while browsing before choosing what I want.

 

The one thing I really do not like is when over a period of a few months a layout appears in more than one magazine. But I do appreciate the problems editors face of getting individuals to write about their layouts. If anything there seems to be a tendency to have too many exhibition layouts featured which can be very different to layouts built purely for home use as I well know having built both at various times.

 

David

[Mod6]

 

Sorry, but that sort of attitude is commercial suicide! As I said, Chris doesn't have to agree with someone's perceptions/views but if they are ignored or told they are wrong etc then there is a risk that perceptions will never be changed/corrected (if indeed they are wrong).

 

 

It seems to me that it is the 'perceiver' who perpetuates these views and causes frustration if he ignores information that clearly contradicts and requires him to modify his perceived view, e.g 'Magazine X is all modern image', 'But the last three issues have been mainly steam'.

 

Anyway let's calm down please and not get diverted from the main subject.

[Western Scottish]

I'm a bit of a magazine addict quite frequently buying all 4 of the majors , along with other Railway, Aircraft ,Photo and Shipping mags. So here are my views for what they are worth:-

 

Railway Modeler . Most generalist in nature both in terms of range and capabilities. I am interested in most model layouts and find I'm coming back to Railway modeler after a period away. Certainly over the last year I've found it most improved in content and photography and the amount of Narrow Gauge has been reduced. Far from objecting to the number of adverts I tend to look at it as a buyers directory and find the adverts very useful. I like the fact the adverts are at front and back leaving main text un-obstructed. Lots of reading , articles seem to have more content than other mags. Reviews poor, little more than manufacturers blurb with emphasis on history of subject.

 

Hornby Mag. New kid on the block . Photography very good. Tends to concentate on BR Diesel/Steam transition layouts (not a bad thing its my era!) although recently has widened scope. Some articles are a bit lightweight and there are usually a good few errors eg last edition has a picture of a train leaving Glasgow Queen St when its actualy St Enochs. Now, I can spot the errors I know about but how many more are there that I'm accepting in good faith as correct? Reviews poor, although slightly better than RM. A good bit of reading in it.

 

Model Rail. Very refreshing when it was launched 13/14 years ago(?). I think it does tend to have more modern image content than either of the previous two mags , which along with their limited editions (with the obvious exception of the Sentinel) being all modern image tends to give the perception that it is more attuned to the modern image scene. I thought that was their positive differentiator, surprised by Dibbers remarks above. I don't like the gimmicky lists of things "top 10 ways to save money" etc. I also think articles tend to be shorter than those in RM and maybe not covered in such great depth. I find I get to the end of this mag much more quickly than either of the above , so my perception is that by the time you exlude adverts for Steam Railway, Rail,subscription offers, limited editions, details of Model Rail live there is actually less reading in it. I suppose there are 13 editions pa which maybe makes up for this. Quality of paper poor. Reviews seem to go into more depth but usually end up with models scoring roughly the same. As with most model rail mags I wonder about impartiality given that the manufacturers are also a major source of advertising revenue. I mention this under Model Rail only because I think it tries to give the impression of being independent and thorough more than the other mags, but in effect is much the same.

 

BRM. Taken only occasionally (when I can see the contents and its not sealed!) I would say a bit more highbrow than the others with more of an emphasis on kit building than any of the other 3. Where there is an article of interest then it tends to be covered in depth, I'm thinking of Ken Paynes "O" gauge LMS layout that was covered particularly well last year. I think of all the mags a BRM review is probably the most objective. For a while there were DVDs on layouts which were also pretty good and included in cover price (Model Rail take note). Tend to have more pre nationalisation layouts.

 

MRJ I view this as out of my league, being primarily concerned with scratch building and kits. Format old fashioned. Not really attractive for me.

 

I still buy the mags because I like to see layouts . I tend not to use them for reviews prefering the feedback on here (4 VEP thread as an example). I did very much like RMWebs emag although I printed it out to read! Sorry bit of a luddite !

[BlackRat]

Paul I think there are enough known folks to keep any one of the mags going for quite some time.

 

OK, not everyone would want to do it, and I am not looking at an invasion of privacy.

 

I can think of loads I would like to know more about, Alan Downes, Barry Norman, Gordon Gravett, Tony Wright, Roy Jackson, Ian Futers (where does he get those trousers!!? , bit like my shirts eh!!), and so on.

 

Much better than 'reallity tv', lets have a bit of reallity modelling!