Editor of SAM acknowledges internet may be useful shock!

[Seahawk]

That's because Ray Rimmel was, and probably still is, one of the finest modelling journalists this country has produced. Perhaps the problem is todays editors are not journalists per se, and were not full time magazine writers before becoming editors?

I think I'd agree. Though his job was made easier by having a strong team of reviewers and contributors who really knew their business (eg Bob Jones, Geoff Prentice, Roger Chesneau).

[andy]

Apart from the internet vs printed matter debate, has anyone else noticed the extremely poor editing in the latest issue?

Page 16 A review of (I think) the Two Bobs' Buckeye with pics of Two Six Models' DC-9 kit. In the "Marketplace" section, small pictures of various kit box art, with (sometimes) a few words about the kit, but no indication of who the manufacturer is. In the books section, we get more of what the publisher says about the book than the review. In the "Briefing" a comparison of decal setting solutions, with 4 brands shown, but only "ratings" for two.

Hmmmm....

i noticed in the book review section they also had a review on the new jaguar book,pity they repeated the review of the SU-27 from the same page

[Jon Kunac-Tabinor]

Gents - while I'm chuffed this has stayed nice and civil. I was more interested in the editors comments on the internet, than on giving SAM a general berating ( which we've doen before), cus I actually think that Jay has got a lot better since his first issue, not perfect by any means in my opinion, but loads better.

We can all find fault with a magazine I'm sure, but lets do that on another thread - if we want to.

So back to the chat - come on internet bores, and rattling empty cans - nows your chance to reply!

Cheers

Jonners

[Dave Batt]

Gents, I think we've covered the pros and cons of the new SAM format - however much we like or dislike it. And we've done that discussion on here too.

I'd rather my thread steared clear of that topic if you lot dont mind. But having said that - the editor's view on internet forums is still fair game. So tally ho - as they say.

Cheers

Jonners, with a steering hand ( he hopes)

Actually - just go for it

I never put a penny-worth's in on the original debate, but I'd like to say that it's an easier magazine to read than SAMI, 'cos the letters is bigger! When I was doing my editing stint (R/C magazines, none you'd know about) I worked on the principle that 9/10pt was the ideal, maybe 8/9pt at a pinch. 6pt was something for the fine print at the bottom of the Contents Page, if it was used at all. Now it seems that the entire content of SAMI is in the tiddly letters, and I often have to take my glasses off (I'm seriously short-sighted) so I can balance the magazine on my nose to read it!

[Nick Millman]

I see that this theme (internet "naysayers") is also one of the subjects of the June 'Model Aviation World' editorial (by Alan Firbank), particularly the internet panning of certain kits. The internet really has nothing on the grapevine.

As with life the "internet world of modelling" (loose term) is populated by white knights and black knights, sometimes forming themselves into temporary or permanent alliances. Both the groups and the individuals think of themselves exclusively as white and the others as black, regardless of the actual colour of their armour - which in most cases is shades of grey.

[Matt Roberts]

I see that this theme (internet "naysayers") is also one of the subjects of the June 'Model Aviation World' editorial (by Alan Firbank), particularly the internet panning of certain kits. The internet really has nothing on the grapevine.

As with life the "internet world of modelling" (loose term) is populated by white knights and black knights, sometimes forming themselves into temporary or permanent alliances. Both the groups and the individuals think of themselves exclusively as white and the others as black, regardless of the actual colour of their armour - which in most cases is shades of grey.

So does he mention anyone in particular or specifically the Kinetic Viper?

I may have to take a look at this sissue if I can find one over here

[Iain Ogilvie]

What's the Internet??

[bexwh773]

I dont buy any modelling mags but I do read them via hand me downs However, from my point of view, the internet gives me the chance to show my models where as with a mag I know Id have no chance of getting any of my work in them. T'Internet all the way for me

Not only that, but Id prefer to really on peoples oppinions on a forum like BM for info on various, because the oppinions are based on a very varied knowledge background and if I fancy a certain kit, I can get out of bed, leave a massage on here, and within a couple of hours I can decide if I want to spend out on the kit or not.

Bexy

[Nick Millman]

So does he mention anyone in particular or specifically the Kinetic Viper?

I may have to take a look at this sissue if I can find one over here

It is about the internet panning of the Hasegawa 1/48th Raptor and how someone who saw the actual kit said he was surprised it was so good after reading about how bad it was on the internet.

[AnonymousAA72]

It is about the internet panning of the Hasegawa 1/48th Raptor and how someone who saw the actual kit said he was surprised it was so good after reading about how bad it was on the internet.

That "someone" will have to watch out......The "Internet Panner's" will be out to get them...............

[Mike]

Internet Panners... that trips off the tongue doesn't it?

Has anyone yet found any gold on the internet then?

[denstore]

10-15 years back I used to buy at least a couple of magazines a month. Sure the articles where interesting, but strangely enough the adds and "coming kits" where the main reason for buying.

Today I can find out what kits are coming long before any magazine will have it in print. Much thanks to people like Mr Roberts. Thank you, rumourmongers! You must have saved me hundreds of euros!

[Nick Millman]

v. panned, pan·ning, pans

v.tr.

1. To wash (gravel, for example) in a pan for gold or other precious metal.

2. To cook (food) in a pan: panned the fish right after catching it.

3. Informal To criticize or review harshly.

I simply used the term "panning" in the informal sense of 3 above and in good faith, having been brought up to believe its use in this way was commonly acceptable and understood and not imperative to mockery. However, I shall try to avoid such obscure/controversial/interpretative forms of descriptive writing in future and apologise to those of transatlantic origin or inclination for any inconvenience/anxiety/ire/stereotypical reinforcement caused. I should also point out in the interests of precision that Mr Firbank does not use this word in his editorial although he does refer to "naysayers".

[pigsty]

it's a little disconcerting to only now be reading a build review of the Airfix Spit IX - a kit that even I managed to finish last year !

Being completely fair to all magazines, this is largely inevitable. There's a lead time for publishing every issue - it can be quite long but is rarely less than six weeks - so "news" is going to feel a bit stale compared with the immediacy of the Interweb. Who knows, perhaps this will be one factor in print's eventual demise. Also, there's a limit on space, which has to be balanced between copy and advertising, and a publisher can't just add pages unless they pay for themselves. As a result, there's almost always more content than there is space, and material that might have been fresh can sometimes end up being published a little later than would be ideal.

None of this bothers me much because I never jump at a new kit without letting someone else test the water first. You may think this is a bit cheeky; but it works for new cars!

Edited May 6, 2010 by pigsty

[TheModeller]

Being completely fair to all magazines, this is largely inevitable. There's a lead time for publishing every issue - it can be quite long but is rarely less than six weeks - so "news" is going to feel a bit stale compared with the immediacy of the Interweb.

That doesn't wash really, SAM had the big Airfix Mossie built and painted and in the mag at Telford, six weeks before the kit was on the shelves, given SAMs 'special friendship' with Airfix I'd have thought getting the new-tool Spit reviewed would have been a high priority.

Magazine editors have to find a way to poke at the Internet, even though many of the most prolific and talented modelmakers and writers are well known users! If the editors don't keep picking at the Internet, making out its populated by 'worthless, nit-picking, rivet-counters who know nothing and should just shut up for the good of the industry', then there is a chance that the readership might find the Internet more useful than they make out. And then where would they be!

Edited May 6, 2010 by TheModeller

[Julien]

Wow, the internet can be useful hey?! what startling bit of news will we get next?

I must admit I am one of these who has stopped buying mags altogether. I much prefer to get stuff over the inter web thingy? I wonder if this internet will ever catch on?

Julien

[Nick Millman]

I enjoyed the solemn admonition in this month's mini review of Airfix's re-issue of their venerable Albatros D.Va: "It is important to remember that there need to be models readily available that kids can afford with their allowance."

OK. I'll remember that.

[AnonymousAA74]

What obvious and peurile crap. A mag I certainly will never buy.

[Harvs73]

Well he is correct that models still need to be available for kids I don't think a repop of a 40 odd year old kit is the way to go. Acadamy produce some very nice, simple kits for $10, Hobbyboss produce some very nice and once again, simple kits for AUD$10. Pegasus produce simple kits in 1/48 that go for under $20 so I think a crappy repop is not valid anymore as other companies have it covered more in a better waay than Airfix. Now that they are starting to produce new kits they will be a bit moer useful for kids.

[TonyT]

Well he is correct that models still need to be available for kids I don't think a repop of a 40 odd year old kit is the way to go. Acadamy produce some very nice, simple kits for $10, Hobbyboss produce some very nice and once again, simple kits for AUD$10. Pegasus produce simple kits in 1/48 that go for under $20 so I think a crappy repop is not valid anymore as other companies have it covered more in a better waay than Airfix. Now that they are starting to produce new kits they will be a bit moer useful for kids.

And look at the 21 century ones, originally priced at £10 for a decent 1/32 scale simple to construct kit with a stunning pilot figure and decals, a youth of today would see a really good model of a decent size and finish for £10.... then they were selling them off for £1.99, I couldn't get a pint for that.......... but what I did get was a cupboard full of 21 century kits...... and even got some for peeps on here that could not source them......... a win win model If I have ever seen one.