Supreme Line wrote: IRONROOSTER wrote: I don't think too many people submit layout articles to MR until they fell they have reached some level of completeness and detail. And I see no reason for MR to not use the best ones they get. But I also suspect they are having trouble getting articles from new authors. I think that's the reason behind the layout contests they have had. And currently they are running a contest for articles on just doing a single scene. Looks to me like MR is really trying to get some new folks writing for them.EnjoyPaul See I disagree because the MR mag consist mainly of a circle of contributors who know one another over and over. Does anyone else notice when they read the articles of the layouts the author more than likely is linked to another regular character? Which reminds me of 6 degrees of separation but these people are usually 3 degrees at most separated from editors and publishers of the magazine. Its really sad that new comers have no chance to make it in the mag. Well that is a typical business though. Cops hire other family and friends, firefighters do the same, actors and actress' family get in due to the connection and I guess that is just how the world is.
IRONROOSTER wrote: I don't think too many people submit layout articles to MR until they fell they have reached some level of completeness and detail. And I see no reason for MR to not use the best ones they get. But I also suspect they are having trouble getting articles from new authors. I think that's the reason behind the layout contests they have had. And currently they are running a contest for articles on just doing a single scene. Looks to me like MR is really trying to get some new folks writing for them.EnjoyPaul
I don't think too many people submit layout articles to MR until they fell they have reached some level of completeness and detail. And I see no reason for MR to not use the best ones they get.
But I also suspect they are having trouble getting articles from new authors. I think that's the reason behind the layout contests they have had. And currently they are running a contest for articles on just doing a single scene. Looks to me like MR is really trying to get some new folks writing for them.
Enjoy
Paul
See I disagree because the MR mag consist mainly of a circle of contributors who know one another over and over. Does anyone else notice when they read the articles of the layouts the author more than likely is linked to another regular character? Which reminds me of 6 degrees of separation but these people are usually 3 degrees at most separated from editors and publishers of the magazine. Its really sad that new comers have no chance to make it in the mag. Well that is a typical business though. Cops hire other family and friends, firefighters do the same, actors and actress' family get in due to the connection and I guess that is just how the world is.
I've also noticed that the majority of material that gets published comes from the same clique of contributors. This is too bad for the beginner or even the advanced hobbyist as the magazine is more of a showcase and infomercial rather than an informative medium. I remember how I used to revere Model Railroader ever since I got my first Lionel trainset in the early 60s but I guess times change. I'm sort of lucky that I model minority scales and offbeat railroads that are rarely if ever covered in MR, as it has compelled me to seek out other magazines and sources that cater to my interests.
secondhandmodeler wrote:Though I've found some useful articles in the few magazines I've read, I feel like I'm reading an infomercial. I don't think you can look on any square inch and not see a plug, or reference to an advertiser's product. I may have become spoiled by everything I can learn online for free. I like seeing the larger than life layouts in the magazine. If I want to see a layout in progress, I come to this or other forums. Sorry, I hadn't read a Model Railroader in years. When I bought one last month, I was rather annoyed by the advertising.
And
Way of the Wolf wrote: I have noticed that they do push products in their articles. I can understand why they do it but still irks me.
I have noticed that they do push products in their articles. I can understand why they do it but still irks me.
Normally I'm a cynic but I can't say as I've seen them "push" products, but they do mention them and cite where to get them. My guess is that they are just pre-emptively answering the inevitable "What did he use for ground cover in last month's article?", "Who made that station kit on the PRR layout?", and "What brand of track was shown in the live interchange piece?" questions. The scale modeling sites I visit have forums where people show their work. It is impossible to post a model without noting what kit was used, what accessories, even what paint without a follow-up of "Is that the DML or AFV Club kit?" or "Are those aftermarket tracks? Which ones?" When people see something interesting they want to learn more. If it's really interesting they want to try it themselves, and to do that they at least want to know what the first guy did and used.
KL
I'm all for the idea of Joe Average layout photo's having a place in the magazine whether it be in special editions, or a couple pages each issue. However, I would also like to see occasional photos of smaller layouts (4 by 8, and larger...) beside the occasional "project layout's built by MR's staff members. I enjoy seeing those large 25' X 35' empires, but let's see some smaller pike size ones every now and then. I have a "land-locked" 11' by 7' area and would like to see what other modelers with a similar size layouts have been able to accomplish with their modeling.
fifedog wrote:luvadj - I checked out your website, and I think your rolling-cart benchwork itself might garnish some interest. When you do get to a stage of completion, submit an article. All they can say is "no".
luvadj - I checked out your website, and I think your rolling-cart benchwork itself might garnish some interest. When you do get to a stage of completion, submit an article. All they can say is "no".
The cart is only a small part of the layout..there are other features as well that we're equally proud of, especially the group effort part by the family. I've entered the small layout contest held in the past..obviously, it didn't win, but it was an enjoyable experience for us.
That's not the point of the post..it's the fact that I'd like to see more of other people's work and not just the masters. If it took more ads, I'd be willing to pay a little more for the magazine.
Bob Berger, C.O.O. N-ovation & Northwestern R.R. My patio layout....SEE IT HERE
There's no place like ~/ ;)
luvadj wrote: I'm catching up on my Febuary MR and it got me thinking about their content of late. I mean, a few years back, anyone's layout would be featured..Mr Joe Jones's small layout could be viewed on their pages and not just someone's polished and unbelievably detailed empire. It almost makes me feel that whatever effort my family and I put into our layout will never be as good as the guy who gets a writeup in MR.Now I know that what we accomplish is not in vain and is a joint effort; one that we are proud of. But I for one would like to see more of the average guy's efforts grace their pages instead of someone's magnificence. That kind of work mostly results from spending all their free time at it and most of us work and don't have that amount of time, degree of talent or amount of money ( 5 MRC #1501's on a shelf layout..must be nice to put out $100.00 for convience ) to achieve those kind of results. Sorry for the rant, but it just struck me as they use to showcase a broader spectrum of modeling..is it too much trouble or is advertising more important? I'd pay more for the magazine if they offered more....
I'm catching up on my Febuary MR and it got me thinking about their content of late. I mean, a few years back, anyone's layout would be featured..Mr Joe Jones's small layout could be viewed on their pages and not just someone's polished and unbelievably detailed empire. It almost makes me feel that whatever effort my family and I put into our layout will never be as good as the guy who gets a writeup in MR.
Now I know that what we accomplish is not in vain and is a joint effort; one that we are proud of. But I for one would like to see more of the average guy's efforts grace their pages instead of someone's magnificence. That kind of work mostly results from spending all their free time at it and most of us work and don't have that amount of time, degree of talent or amount of money ( 5 MRC #1501's on a shelf layout..must be nice to put out $100.00 for convience ) to achieve those kind of results.
Sorry for the rant, but it just struck me as they use to showcase a broader spectrum of modeling..is it too much trouble or is advertising more important? I'd pay more for the magazine if they offered more....
Not many people wll admit it because they would rather kiss MR butt since this is their forum but the fact is you are right. It matters on who you are to get in the mag and how money is invested in the layout to make the magazine. If you look thru 2007 MR magazines you will be able to figure out the majority of the Model railroaders are some sort of ENGINEER. The likely job is a Computer Engineer, retired pilot, Retired Colonel in the Air force. Basically all the contributors are rich! Remember the layout a few months back in the guys garage with the two matching corvettes in it? That is a typical type of people who contribute. OR OR OR the contributor will go into a story of who helped them bulld their layout and when they say the names it is always in the circle of previous MR contributors or employees. If you do not meet the two standards of a great career and knowing someone the chances of getting into that mag decreases much much much more to less than imaginable and it does not matter if you have a fantastic looking layout either SORRY! Then just for the heck of it the MR might throw in one or two new guys thru the whole year but thats it. Sort of like an affirmative action hire. :) So the move you need to make before trying to get published in the mag is locate someone like TONY KOESTER, befriend him a little bit kiss his butt and then later one boast how he helped you take a picture or build a kit or two then BOOM your in!!
Interesting topic - obviously.
I appreciate the inspring, incredibly realistic layouts MR generally features, but I wonder if so little of the "average Joe's" work in the magazine also contributes somewhat to the lack of hobby growth?
Stay with me, here - MANY years ago (50s & 60s), most of the layout features were written by the layout owners, and more than a few explained that their first exposure to model railroading came from an issue of MR they bought or found, and this in turn led to their involvement in model railroading.
MR isn't on so many newstands today, but you can find it at places laike Barnes & Noble. Mr. Joe Average, who has always found trains of some interest, happens to see a copy and picks it up to flip through it. He sees only the masterworks, and thinks "HOLY [bleep]! This is great!" Next month he picks up another issue, and again is floored by the incredible layout. And maybe it goes one more time, then he's intimidated out of the hobby before he even gets into it because all he saw were the cream of the crop, and he's sure he could never do that.
I think Tilden had a great idea - a few pages of an average guy's work. Maybe not every month, but every second or third month, maybe. Something to show that not every project comes out a masterpiece.
Or maybe not...
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
I like MR as it is but wouldn't mind seeing a mid-level or the first project once in a while. Having been out of the hobby for too long I read MR and have regained some knowledge that I had forgotten and learned quite a lot more. Showing the best of the best is an inspiration for the newbe and mid-level.
Just don't take the joke out.
Agreed. Said the same myself before.
luvadj - I checked out your website, and I think your rolling-cart benchwork itself might garnish some interest. When you do get to a stage of completion, submit an article. All they can say is "no". But, maybe they won't.
And for the rest of you, keep posting those pictures on your WPF. You never know who will be watching...
Railphotog wrote: dinwitty wrote: This is what trackside photos is about tho, submitted stuff from readers.That's what Trackside Photos was for decades. These days it seems to be an outlet for commissioned photographers such as Lou Sassi and others. I think there were three of his photos in the current issue. Other times they are promotional photos for the specials that MR puts out such as their annuals. They also used to place non winning photos left over from the annual photo contest, pehaps that is where the few that appear come from.
dinwitty wrote: This is what trackside photos is about tho, submitted stuff from readers.
This is what trackside photos is about tho, submitted stuff from readers.
That's what Trackside Photos was for decades. These days it seems to be an outlet for commissioned photographers such as Lou Sassi and others. I think there were three of his photos in the current issue. Other times they are promotional photos for the specials that MR puts out such as their annuals. They also used to place non winning photos left over from the annual photo contest, pehaps that is where the few that appear come from.
From one of the "elders" here, and of the hobby in general, I think this is an important statement. I can't judge whether it should be counted as merely an observation or an opening for some dialogue (meaning I don't want to say one way or another...I invite some comment and feedback on Bob's behalf, if I may). Maybe this is a place where those of us who want more "Joe Average" content need to be submitting material?
What is your own feeling on the subject, Bob, if I can call on you to help us out?
-Crandell
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
Kurt_Laughlin wrote: Flashwave wrote: Maybe the terminology is bad. We don't want "average" quality. we want more of a "good or great" (depending on your interps of the words) quality by "average" people. Quality that's good, and deserves even a small article, but just maybe not the Guiness Record type quality that some have put out. ??? Whaddaya mean "average people", and what does that have to do with anything anyway? I wouldn't care if the RR was built by a rich guy, a poor guy, a housecat, or a potted cactus if the modeling was good. KL
Flashwave wrote: Maybe the terminology is bad. We don't want "average" quality. we want more of a "good or great" (depending on your interps of the words) quality by "average" people. Quality that's good, and deserves even a small article, but just maybe not the Guiness Record type quality that some have put out.
Maybe the terminology is bad. We don't want "average" quality. we want more of a "good or great" (depending on your interps of the words) quality by "average" people. Quality that's good, and deserves even a small article, but just maybe not the Guiness Record type quality that some have put out.
??? Whaddaya mean "average people", and what does that have to do with anything anyway? I wouldn't care if the RR was built by a rich guy, a poor guy, a housecat, or a potted cactus if the modeling was good.
I didn't mean that as an insult, I meant normal person as opposed to felix moneybags.
-Morgan
Maybe a feature called "The Pike Next Door", MR would drum out offers of folks to have their model railroad featured in however finished state, talk about their construction and so on.
Hey Loathar, I'll go post up the O27 streetcar line I had as a kid, running from room to room on the floor with the Lionel bumper streetcars ....8-D
Now THAT would be interesting!
What is the mission of the magazine? I don't have a copy handy, so I don't even know if they publish their mission statement regularly, or if they even have one. But I can't imagine that it is to not hurt anyone's feelings by showing mediocrity and pretending that it's anything but.
Regarding the Trackside Photos, it is supposed to come from readers, and in at least the last issue, they have a big promotional announcement soliciting same. They also couldn't just pick up images off of this site directly, since most of them have been reduced and compressed to be on-line, so they wouldn't likely reproduce well.
What they COULD do is occasionally contact contributors here who make the effort to build and photograph nice looking layouts (or scenes, or photo dioramas, or what not) and provide them with an easy means of making a properly scaled submission.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
museum quality layouts are great to look at,they give me a goal to reach for even though i know i could never reach it. but do to xmas being last month, my spare million$ are spent till my income tax return shows up. i dont have a 100x200 spare room at this time untill spring cleaning, and with the whole global warming cure i found, my time isnt what it was. but maybe a avererage joe write up every now and then wouldnt be bad. they have great ideas also, due to bugets,spare time restrictions,room size. maybe some of their passion for the hobby could find its way to others who need it. model railroader is a qreat mag, and very rarely have i ever been left down by them. but there could be more wrote for the average joe, with a room bigger than a 1 wall shelf layout or a museum quality 50x85 layout, and are at a skill leval between then 4x8 table and the 50x85 that we read about so often infact almost monthly and feel overlooked. cant we all get along and share the same mag if a half finished layout or a plywood mainline makes you sick, just flip the page
truly yours
average joe
I enjoy seeing articles that immortalize a master.
I also enjoy articles that show how the master did something. I subscribe to both the magazine and these forums to learn, not to look at other people's trains.
If you have built something remarkable, I would like to see it, and to learn how you did it.
It doesn't matter if it is huge. It can even be a small feature on your layout. If it is unique, I am interested. If it's average, I am not. If you have found a new or better way to do something, I am interested. If you have found a new construction material I am interested. If you are just a true artist of scenery construction I am interested. I am here to learn.
If others can learn from my experiences, that is good too.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
andrechapelon wrote:The alteration of submitted material ultimately amounted to a joke (one of many) on John Allen's G&D. Allen built a building called "Lynn's Archives". "Lynn's Archives" specialized in "Literature and altered articles", a reference to the fact that submitted material was often unreconizable to its author upon publication.
That is no doubt true, but I'm guessing that in about half the cases the submitted material was unrecognizable as English prose.
On one of my scale modeling groups fellows were talking about the great aircraft/aircraft modeling articles in the mags of yore. One guy who edited one of the mags piped in that while ol' Joe Shmoe was a great photographer and model builder, he couldn't write an English paragraph to save his life, and all of his articles for twenty-odd years were essentially ghost-written by the editor. I'm sure this was not uncommon.
wm3798 LeeTrackside Photos may supposed to be that, but most of the photos are shot by Lou Sassi, Paul Dolkos, Andy Sperandeo. No problem with that, I like the feature. I am talking about photos direct from the forums Weekend Photo Fun. Just from this weekend alone, pics from Brian M, Garry (Heartland Division), Jon Grant, Ray (Howmus), jktrains, Selector, and your own, would make up one or two pages. Each has at least one photo posted that would look great in the mag. Plus it would be a real kick to see your work in print.The page would not have to have a write-up on the layout or project, just the pictures and your name, with a blurb for the forum, to see more like this go to the Model Railroader web site, forums, and look for Weekend Photo Fun threads.
wm3798 Lee
Trackside Photos may supposed to be that, but most of the photos are shot by Lou Sassi, Paul Dolkos, Andy Sperandeo. No problem with that, I like the feature.
I am talking about photos direct from the forums Weekend Photo Fun. Just from this weekend alone, pics from Brian M, Garry (Heartland Division), Jon Grant, Ray (Howmus), jktrains, Selector, and your own, would make up one or two pages. Each has at least one photo posted that would look great in the mag. Plus it would be a real kick to see your work in print.
The page would not have to have a write-up on the layout or project, just the pictures and your name, with a blurb for the forum, to see more like this go to the Model Railroader web site, forums, and look for Weekend Photo Fun threads.
Kurt_Laughlin wrote: I would be in favor of seeing an "average-sized" layout so long as it is well done. However, it appears (based on the postings here) that many people think that there is a market for articles showcasing "average quality" work - there isn't.If you can't afford the time or money to make a gym-sized layout to top quality, rather than rant here, make a module or diorama and submit that. I have seen a number of articles covering a particular industry or scene and the surrounding terrain that were quite good. Take a look at some of the back issues of RailModel Journal if you want "average guy" layout articles. Some - not all - are embarrassing. Pikes with 90% of the track on bare plywood, dark, out-of-focus photos, junk and boxes poking out from under the bench and into the aisles, and tools and supplies on the benchwork apparently taking the place of hills and buildings. The MR features may make you think "I wish I could do things like that", while these RMJ articles make you say "Gawrsh - I know I could do better that!" I guess both are inspiring in a way . . .KL
I would be in favor of seeing an "average-sized" layout so long as it is well done. However, it appears (based on the postings here) that many people think that there is a market for articles showcasing "average quality" work - there isn't.
If you can't afford the time or money to make a gym-sized layout to top quality, rather than rant here, make a module or diorama and submit that. I have seen a number of articles covering a particular industry or scene and the surrounding terrain that were quite good.
Take a look at some of the back issues of RailModel Journal if you want "average guy" layout articles. Some - not all - are embarrassing. Pikes with 90% of the track on bare plywood, dark, out-of-focus photos, junk and boxes poking out from under the bench and into the aisles, and tools and supplies on the benchwork apparently taking the place of hills and buildings. The MR features may make you think "I wish I could do things like that", while these RMJ articles make you say "Gawrsh - I know I could do better that!" I guess both are inspiring in a way . . .
Railphotog wrote: dknelson wrote: Maybe the real issue is, that fewer and fewer people feel comfortable writing genuine prose (not just photo captions) to a publishable level. Dave NelsonThis is probably the easiest part of submitting to MR - they've said in the past that they cannot do much about poor photos, but can rewrite supplied text. I beleive they do in fact rewrite much of the submitted articles, that's what all of the Associate Editors do. They ensure the material is prepared in "the MR style", whatever that is!
dknelson wrote: Maybe the real issue is, that fewer and fewer people feel comfortable writing genuine prose (not just photo captions) to a publishable level. Dave Nelson
Maybe the real issue is, that fewer and fewer people feel comfortable writing genuine prose (not just photo captions) to a publishable level.
Dave Nelson
This is probably the easiest part of submitting to MR - they've said in the past that they cannot do much about poor photos, but can rewrite supplied text. I beleive they do in fact rewrite much of the submitted articles, that's what all of the Associate Editors do. They ensure the material is prepared in "the MR style", whatever that is!
The alteration of submitted material ultimately amounted to a joke (one of many) on John Allen's G&D. Allen built a building called "Lynn's Archives". "Lynn's Archives" specialized in "Literature and altered articles", a reference to the fact that submitted material was often unreconizable to its author upon publication.
Andre
I have liked the mag since I was young. It takes on some high dollar aspects for some of the featured layouts, but thats ok with me. I enjoy the test reveiws, and new product line. Yes there are some very detailed layouts featured. I wonder at the time and effort that went into the build, and admire the work. Do I have some of those features on my layout? Or strive to get it just as good? Yes everytime i work on it. Time, money and effort play a major game in this type of work.
Yes I would like to see some average Joe layouts in MR mag, but its ok if they don't throw them out there that often. Fancy detail and layouts always sparks me to do better I guess.
1train1 wrote: Way, Way and perhaps not so way back - people were building layouts on shoestring budgets and innovation and a thought process was required to acheive realism. Specifiacally, ditch the RTR buildings -and get back to building it yourself from scratch or a kit.A return to the basics is always good. Old techniques can be new again - if infused with New Technology.I too would like to see more "guy/girl next door layouts". It's their progress as modellers that would interest me most. The 'masters' we revere nowadays probably botched a few early buildings with too much glue or a paint smudge on a locomotive. It's a talent you hone and are not born with.You can bet that Walther's doesn't spend alot on advertising - MR does it all for them.
Way, Way and perhaps not so way back - people were building layouts on shoestring budgets and innovation and a thought process was required to acheive realism. Specifiacally, ditch the RTR buildings -and get back to building it yourself from scratch or a kit.
A return to the basics is always good. Old techniques can be new again - if infused with New Technology.
I too would like to see more "guy/girl next door layouts". It's their progress as modellers that would interest me most. The 'masters' we revere nowadays probably botched a few early buildings with too much glue or a paint smudge on a locomotive. It's a talent you hone and are not born with.
You can bet that Walther's doesn't spend alot on advertising - MR does it all for them.
I agree. Many of the money-saving techniques used in the past can be applied today using modern materials. There are many alternatives to using costly dedicated model railroad products, however, some people either don't have the time or an interest in building or prefer to persue other aspects of the hobby. Nothing wrong with that or RTR (that's the way I like my locos). I always try to use alternative methods and materials whenever possible instead of having to rely on some of the costly dedicated model railroading products. One of the things that attracts me to offbeat scales and gauges is the fact that they require more scratchbuilding, kitbashing, and innovation, as there aren't many products available. Model Railroader being a mainstream magazine cannot possibly cater to everybody's interests but I believe it does a good job in catering to the majority of modelers. For those of us who are not in the majority (like me), there are other magazines and resources available.