Jump to content

Decembers SAM magazine


Terrain Safe

Recommended Posts

Yes had the same situation looking for the 109 article.I haven't bought a SAM magazine for ages and was impressed with the quality. But it won't put me off buying another issue as i'm not on the net at home and really look forward to my monthly fix. I know things have moved on with the onset of the digital age and i would love to have the latest internet tool but it's not affordable for me.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...me, I gave up on SAM when it became all grey jets ;-P

Seriously, this is a nice argument to have, if you're an aircraft modeller. At least you have several widely-available titles to discuss and decide whether they are catering to your particular interests in terms of period and sub-genre ("Not enough airliner models," I hear someone calling, faintly, "Not enough 1/32" calls someone else... "Not enough 1/32 airliners" shouts Iain, from the back...). I think that AFV modellers and figure painters are reasonably well catered for (at least Smiths appears to have one or two titles each). But try being a car modeller or a ship modeller... For cars, there's the occasional article in Airfix Model World (which is one of the reasons why it's the only mag I buy on a regular basis) and in TMMI, but those are mostly race cars and bikes. The only two dedicated magazines are published in America, hard to find over here (and one of them is distinctly "hit and miss" in its publishing schedule), and focus mostly on hot rods and big square lumps of 70s Detroit iron...

When I talked about "curated content", I meant the role of an editor in choosing interesting stuff and making it more accessible and engaging. Scale Modelling Now is an example of that on the web, and although I don't know how successful Geoff is at persuading people to part with their hard-earned for it, I know enough people who do to think that you CAN get people to pay without a paper magazine to shove on a shelf at the end of it. If you look at what, say, the Top Gear or Evo iPad editions do with integrating extra content, video etc into the same articles that they run in the paper magazines, you can imagine how a modelling magazine on a tablet could really bring something new and valuable to the party...

bestest,

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And reduce your readership a little more?

Why prolong the inevitable? Magazines are dying out.

No doubt if you were to ask many high street newsagents about sales they'd probably confirm that sales are falling all the time. There are better more efficient forms of communication available. It's really only a matter of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why prolong the inevitable? Magazines are dying out.

No doubt if you were to ask many high street newsagents about sales they'd probably confirm that sales are falling all the time. There are better more efficient forms of communication available. It's really only a matter of time.

Which is why most of the Magazines have moved to the digital format.

Whilst you may not like the content, undoubtedly others do, that's why they still sell. Unfortunately, magazines do not cater for single modellers like yourself in a very narrow band of interest, it's too niche, otherwise their sales figures would be easily counted by a Guardsman without having to take his socks off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why most of the Magazines have moved to the digital format.

Whilst you may not like the content, undoubtedly others do, that's why they still sell. Unfortunately, magazines do not cater for single modellers like yourself in a very narrow band of interest, it's too niche, otherwise their sales figures would be easily counted by a Guardsman without having to take his socks off.

I haven't got a very narrow range of interest, unlike SAM, I just don't have any interest in WW2. From over 100 years of aviation, magazines only seem to concentrate on a 5 year period. Seems they have a narrow range of interest!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why prolong the inevitable? Magazines are dying out.

No doubt if you were to ask many high street newsagents about sales they'd probably confirm that sales are falling all the time. There are better more efficient forms of communication available. It's really only a matter of time.

Which is why most of the Magazines have moved to the digital format.

Whilst you may not like the content, undoubtedly others do, that's why they still sell. Unfortunately, magazines do not cater for single modellers like yourself in a very narrow band of interest, it's too niche, otherwise their sales figures would be easily counted by a Guardsman without having to take his socks off.

The digital format is being pushed by magazine publishers simply because it is more profitable. They charge nearly as much as for the printed issue (often only the cost of postage is taken off) but they save on paying for distribution, printing, posting, administration, replacing lost in post copies, storage, and so on. If you want to refer to an article in last years run then often you have to have a current subscription. By comparison the digital format uses a distribution system that, for business, is supported by everybody who pays for internet access.

From my personal experience the number of magazines sold isn't falling anywhere near as fast as you may think. Individual titles suffer as there is increased competition so sales are spread further, the very fact that these titles appear and keep going tells you that there is money to be made. As soon as there isn't and the publisher can see no way of making a title profitable it will be cut. Sure some won't make as much as they'd like but many in work feel the same way as their wages get topped up by tax credits which, again everybody else has to support.

Over the years I've heard this conversation too many times, while there are editors who will sell review material for gain, reviews which are basically extended adverts for suppliers, articles which only apply to that kit and aftermarket with no further interest and often poor editing to boot (printing over background images in a low contrast colour is common as is printing across a page join, despite books being critised in the same magazine for doing the same thing!) this 'Us' and 'Them' roundabout will continue. Each side feels that they're misunderstood, not trusted and ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't got a very narrow range of interest, unlike SAM, I just don't have any interest in WW2. From over 100 years of aviation, magazines only seem to concentrate on a 5 year period. Seems they have a narrow range of interest!!

From within your 100years of aviation, the current SAMI offers

Voisin Farman 1907

Northrop Alpha 4 1931

Various WW2 types 39-45 (probably most modelled era)

Yak 18 1960s

British Phantoms Late 1960s early 70' to 1990's

Kfir C7 1970's

I think I would call that a good cross section

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit to not having read all of the posts fully in this thread but I feel that a couple of comments are in order. So according to some, magazines are dying, then if this is indeed the case the world will be worse off place. Does the internet reign supreme, I think not.

Forums (or Fora) are an ideal sop for instantaneous discussion but after all they are what contributors put into them. Does the internet manufacture all of the knowledge and wisdom and (Gord elp us) Truth. No of course not. The information good or bad comes from a mix of perceived wisdom, first hand knowledge and most of all, from the collective printed data. Books to the geeks.

I write this sitting in my 'aviation only' library which is about 20' x 10' and the walls are lined with shelves of books and boxed magazines These range from "How to Fly" p.1910, to the latest SAM by Guideline, (so called when at the enforced demise of the old SAM and the rise of the usurper SAMI, Mike McKevoy suggested SAM 2 (NATO codename Guideline) to shoot it down).

I must say I dislike the "Yo man, Hi five" approach to titling of SAM articles and I feel that the mass cataloging and glossy hyper detail by fabulous modellers. of kits costing well over the norm can be overpowering (by all the main magazines). I think the average modeller does want to be inspired but not to feel belittled by an avalanche of high art rather than a 'good build'.

Don't get me wrong, much of the information and especially drawings in magazines and books can still be regurgitated despite the fact it's inaccurate and editors often ignore this because of deadlines or don't have the expertise to question it. The internet amplifies this tenfold. Just Google Vampire drawings and you'll soon find the source of the odd Trumpeter Vampire for an example of research by the internet. My computers do on occasion let me down and I can also look for a remembered piece of information to find "the owner has removed it". I also have trouble tolerating 'American' automatic spell checkers. Mine farts sulphur at even the use of aeroplane, perhaps I should use airplane (Gord elp us) He He.

As a note and with no bias whatsoever, most people on this excellent forum use the veil of a sobriquet so as I understand it the author Tim Laming has a perfectly legal right to use a family name of McLelland.

John

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a note and with no bias whatsoever, most people on this excellent forum use the veil of a sobriquet so as I understand it the author Tim Laming has a perfectly legal right to use a family name of McLelland.

John

A good post John, and just to set the record straight - this is taken from one of Tim's posts on 'Fighter Control.com'.

Although I write under my name "Tim McLelland" a lot of people seem genuinely confused by the fact that much of my older work is credited to "Tim Laming". The reason is actually perfectly simple - I changed my surname many years ago (because of a family saga, nothing mysterious).

The legality of him being able to use his family name is not in question, however his use of other Alias's due to him being banned from this and other sites (apparently) may well be! (And I do happen to have a good selection of his books!!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some 'general commentary' in reaction to a specific post....

The digital format is being pushed by magazine publishers simply because it is more profitable. They charge nearly as much as for the printed issue (often only the cost of postage is taken off) but they save on paying for distribution, printing, posting, administration, replacing lost in post copies, storage, and so on. If you want to refer to an article in last years run then often you have to have a current subscription. By comparison the digital format uses a distribution system that, for business, is supported by everybody who pays for internet access.

That's right. The digital format is pushed primarily by companies like Amazon, which want to get rid of employees, printing, storage, distribution etc. - all of this in interest of profit.
Their advertising is creating an image of digital formats as 'happily accepeted by most readers' - for which there is anything but something like 'forensic evidence'.

Usual, 'automatic' reaction from various publishing houses was to 'push the panic button': those that could afford it would employ some 'controller'. Net result (really compressed) was usually that the controller would a) decrease the investment into the product (also in attempt to increase profit) - nearly always at the expense of quality, and B) dictate selection of topics. One might wonder since when are bean-counters 'experts' for public opinion, marketing, and enthusiast interest in specific topics, but majority of publishers didn't do so. Instead, majority of aviation-related magazines are meanwhile done by 1 person only, perhaps - statistically - '1 1/2' (as sarcastic as it might sound: some publishing houses lend a 'half' of some employee to their editors, on temporary basis, every month).

While the issue of bean-counters can be discussed endlessly, sadly, that of majority of editors is summarized quite easily: most of them are overwhelmed by the task, permanently in a rush to fill the next volume, have no long-term planing, 'supported' by failed advertising policy of the publishing house, etc., Not few of editors also lack the expertise necessary to do their job in satisfactory fashion (they might be good in regards of grammar and sintax, but simply wrong in place regarding modern aviation, just for example). Examples are nearly countless, and considering above-described circumstances this is unlikely to change in near future.

Combined with unrelented advertising about digital format, plus a kind of 'market clearing' in recent years (i.e. some titles being bought by competition), all of this might have caused the impression that the number of printed magazines is decreasing. That's similar to books, where there appears to be a push for digital format too. Actually, this is not the case. It is simply so that books and mags with declining quality are sold in ever smaller numbers. No surprise here (except for specific publishers and their bean-counters). But, quality products are selling well (and often much better than expected).

Even more so, slowly but certainly, the responsible people are starting to understand that publishing about such 'niche' products like 'this hobby' (plastic modelling, aviation etc.), is never going to function in relation to digital format. Just like publishing without quality (even without editing of grammar etc., as practiced by a number of US publishers in the last decade!) is not going to function.

How comes?

Well, they see specific other high-quality products covering 'niches' (not only mags, but especially books) selling better than ever before, having higher numbers of subscribers, literaly 'flourishing' - and that in printed format. Simply because they are done with the necessary care and investment.

Quality simply has its price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some 'general commentary' in reaction to a specific post....

That's right. The digital format is pushed primarily by companies like Amazon, which want to get rid of employees, printing, storage, distribution etc. - all of this in interest of profit.

Their advertising is creating an image of digital formats as 'happily accepeted by most readers' - for which there is anything but something like 'forensic evidence'.

Usual, 'automatic' reaction from various publishing houses was to 'push the panic button': those that could afford it would employ some 'controller'. Net result (really compressed) was usually that the controller would a) decrease the investment into the product (also in attempt to increase profit) - nearly always at the expense of quality, and B) dictate selection of topics. One might wonder since when are bean-counters 'experts' for public opinion, marketing, and enthusiast interest in specific topics, but majority of publishers didn't do so. Instead, majority of aviation-related magazines are meanwhile done by 1 person only, perhaps - statistically - '1 1/2' (as sarcastic as it might sound: some publishing houses lend a 'half' of some employee to their editors, on temporary basis, every month).

While the issue of bean-counters can be discussed endlessly, sadly, that of majority of editors is summarized quite easily: most of them are overwhelmed by the task, permanently in a rush to fill the next volume, have no long-term planing, 'supported' by failed advertising policy of the publishing house, etc., Not few of editors also lack the expertise necessary to do their job in satisfactory fashion (they might be good in regards of grammar and sintax, but simply wrong in place regarding modern aviation, just for example). Examples are nearly countless, and considering above-described circumstances this is unlikely to change in near future.

Combined with unrelented advertising about digital format, plus a kind of 'market clearing' in recent years (i.e. some titles being bought by competition), all of this might have caused the impression that the number of printed magazines is decreasing. That's similar to books, where there appears to be a push for digital format too. Actually, this is not the case. It is simply so that books and mags with declining quality are sold in ever smaller numbers. No surprise here (except for specific publishers and their bean-counters). But, quality products are selling well (and often much better than expected).

Even more so, slowly but certainly, the responsible people are starting to understand that publishing about such 'niche' products like 'this hobby' (plastic modelling, aviation etc.), is never going to function in relation to digital format. Just like publishing without quality (even without editing of grammar etc., as practiced by a number of US publishers in the last decade!) is not going to function.

How comes?

Well, they see specific other high-quality products covering 'niches' (not only mags, but especially books) selling better than ever before, having higher numbers of subscribers, literaly 'flourishing' - and that in printed format. Simply because they are done with the necessary care and investment.

Quality simply has its price.

Hmmm, I'd like to know what basis you have for this?

With nearly 25 years in the short run print industry ( and having worked with A LOT of publishers over the years) - its now cheaper than ever to do small runs of high quality printed magazines. I would also say that a well produced digital "magazine" would represent an even better bet for "niche" subjects, as this really does lower your production costs ( NO Print at all).

Publishers are in the game to make money - as are all businesses, so they will go with whatever reduces costs, and maximises profit. For things like novels - then the ebook ( Kindle) format makes sense - and I'd say it makes sense to the consumer too ( 1 device, several hundred books, easy to carry, books cheaper to buy than paper versions)

When it comes to 'our' magazines with high visual content required, and to a good quality - you have to work harder to make it work digitally, and to make consumers want to pay for it. Having a digital facsimile of your printed mag may be fine "now" but it doesn't make the best of the format:

I've said this before - but the first digitally available mag that really uses the technology properly will win - embedded video demonstrations of techniques, proper links inks to online references and to downloadable hi res images, buy it now buttons next to products ( properly supported by the sellers too) etc etc.

The main problem, as with all 'criticism' of new tech, isn't the tech, its the people that use them; often they have no training in how to employ it so just try an emulate what they have always done in the past on the newer platform - ergo it tends to look rubbish.

Publishing houses that produce specialist mags would be better off employing an overarching professional editor from a publishing background ( who could probably oversea several different titles on this basis), and then having "specialist editors" do the interest related stuff. This way the actual job of being editor ( planning issues, chasing up articles, checking proofs etc etc ) could be left to someone with a grasp of it, while the actual commissioning of articles and themes etc could be left to the hobby specialist.

This might at least prevent embarrassing things like the OPs issue - article still blazing out on the cover and contents page, but pulled from content as it wasn't ready; and it might also result in the article then appearing ion the next issue too - with an apology.

I believe there are things in business called "meetings" where these things could all be sorted out.

Just my thoughts though

Jonners

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon,

it's nearly 30 years that I'm working as analyst, journalist and historian, and this in cooperation with some 30+ aviation magazines world wide. Ah sorry: actually, it's slightly less, then I gave up trying, some 2-3 years ago.

Regarding your commentary: yup, it's cheaper than ever - and more profitable than ever - to do small runs of 'high quality printed magazines. Which is why 'dailies' from various fairs are flourishing and many of best journos went that way.

We're in absolute agreement that a 'well produced digital magazine' would do very well on the market. However...

- a) there is no 'well produced magazine' left on the market at all, and

- B) there is no suitable software enabling production of such a product, simply because available software neither can reproduce photos in the necessary quality, nor actually sort out illustrations and text in fashion that is presently 'standard' for most of - say - 'aviation' magazines that are in print. With other words: nearly all of the presently available software is 'specialized' for reproducing text-books.

(BTW, this is based on something like six months-long testing of all the presently available software; a process that is still going on).

Regarding publishers and profit: essentially, I have no problem with publishers making profit. I have a (massive) problem with publishers making this profit at the expense of quality (not only in technical, but foremost in the sense of content). Precisely the lack of quality (see endless lists of faux-paux, chaotic design etc.) is what is killing the entire branch, slowly but certainly, and that since more than 10 years. Essentially, publishers are permanently fighting a 'retreat battle', instead of doing things like you're suggesting them.

Furthermore, readers became 'more sophisticated': flashy photos of F-16s, Tornados and F-22s on the title page, and copy-pasted 'summaries of internet news' simply do not have 'the wow' effect since long. That's 'boring' - even for most sincere collectors.

Publishing houses that produce specialist mags would be better off employing an overarching professional editor from a publishing background ( who could probably oversea several different titles on this basis), and then having "specialist editors" do the interest related stuff.
This is 'right on the money' - but you'll not get this in 'our' branch (actually, it's something I'm suggesting since something like 15 years). But, there is no way one is going to get this. At least not in the presently active companies. Like there is no way to prevent them from continuously embarassing themselves, and like there is no way to bring any of the companies in question to apologise for own mistakes.

Perhaps they do these things like that called 'meetings', but I rather wonder: who are the editors 'meeting' - when most of them are fighting all alone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- B) there is no suitable software enabling production of such a product, simply because available software neither can reproduce photos in the necessary quality, nor actually sort out illustrations and text in fashion that is presently 'standard' for most of - say - 'aviation' magazines that are in print. With other words: nearly all of the presently available software is 'specialized' for reproducing text-books.

I guess no one has told the guys who build the online editions of Top Gear and Evo that...

bestest,

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- B) there is no suitable software enabling production of such a product, simply because available software neither can reproduce photos in the necessary quality, nor actually sort out illustrations and text in fashion that is presently 'standard' for most of - say - 'aviation' magazines that are in print. With other words: nearly all of the presently available software is 'specialized' for reproducing text-books.

Art of Modelling is perhaps the best of the current crop of digital model magazines and is pointing in the right direction.

http://ipad.artofmodelling.be

I have to agree that the digital clones of paper magazines are not using technology to its best but in their defence they are cheaper and save on a lot of physical storage space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, despite un-subscribing to SAM last year, I then had to go out and buy every issue! Consequently I've just set up a new subscription so no hassle about getting my copy and £4.50 saved! The addiction is satisfied!! Why? Well they're all as good/bad and I'm damned if I'm going to buy them all so 'better the devil you know', even if he's Canadian!!

Simon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'ere, Simon,

can 'Canadianism?!' be classed as 'prejudice'?!!!!!!

'Cos their big lads wiv BIG chop, er, ax, er, tree felling equipment!

Know you model, but how's yer running.....................................!

He, he, he...

Paul

Link to comment
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...