Discussion of Modeling Magazines

[larrygre]

edit by jay@af: split from this thread

Originally Posted by dag65

great ideas, and if they are good enough with a few pics our friends at SA might be able to use them

"friends at SA"? Pardon me, but I need to correct you on that.

SA is nobody's friend, least of all any of us. Unless you have the $$$ to buy overpriced advertising space from them, they don't give a rat's ass about you. Same for FSM, MR, B&B, and all other publications under the auspices of Kalmbach. Believe me on this, I know from first-hand experience.

SA only cares about what their advertisers want to shill to you, NOT what you and our fellow modelers are really interested in. (I've had quite a lot of experience in this matter, having written for the magazine when it was called Scale Auto ENTHUSIAST before AND after Kalmbach bought the title in 1996. And the pre-Kalmbach SAE was the best modeling magazine ever. Well, MCM comes close and is trying hard )

A simple rule that always works for enthusiasts of all walks of life: support those who support YOU. And that sure as hell ain't SA.

Just .02 from someone who loves the hobby and knows who does and does not give a #@$# about it.

Best regards,

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

Originally Posted by larrygre

"friends at SA"? Pardon me, but I need to correct you on that.

SA is nobody's friend, least of all any of us. Unless you have the $$$ to buy overpriced advertising space from them, they don't give a rat's ass about you. Same for FSM, MR, B&B, and all other publications under the auspices of Kalmbach. Believe me on this, I know from first-hand experience.

SA only cares about what their advertisers want to shill to you, NOT what you and our fellow modelers are really interested in. (I've had quite a lot of experience in this matter, having written for the magazine when it was called Scale Auto ENTHUSIAST before AND after Kalmbach bought the title in 1996. And the pre-Kalmbach SAE was the best modeling magazine ever. Well, MCM comes close and is trying hard )

A simple rule that always works for enthusiasts of all walks of life: support those who support YOU. And that sure as hell ain't SA.

Just .02 from someone who loves the hobby and knows who does and does not give a #@$# about it.

Best regards,

Okay, time to get off your soapbox ranting about the magazine and Kalmbach, not to mention you self-promoting about writing for the magazines. Now you get to hear mine, and if you notice my contributions on this site, I'm not into all this self-promoting, but today that will be a bit different. I guess I have this need to combine your rants with some of mine, and air yet some more dirty laundry in what may be a vain attempt to get off this crap and back to modeling. I will say that writing a book for Kalmbach pays far better than spending the same amount of time doing articles for their magazines. Far, far better. Not to mention the satisfaction I get from hearing people who really enjoy the book, and are getting something out of it. I put my heart and soul into it, yet it was fun to do. The payoff is more than financial.

I do have friends at Kalmbach and Scale Auto, and you are off base at least with current staff. Do you know Andy Lilienthal? To call him a "non- enthusiast" is a bald-faced lie. Same for Matthew Usher who has been posting his models here and is back at FSM after a stint as editor for another magazine, and Pat Mulligan who left last year for a killer job in Detroit. I happen to have a good rappor with them, and think it would be better if you keep your ranting about whatever happened in the past to a minimum because these threads become of little interest to anyone when they take a turn like this. No, Kalmbach is not perfect but they certainly do have enthusiasts on staff. How many corporations are perfect? Yes, Kalmbach is a company that needs to make money to survive-and to do that it must be run like a business. You don't want to hear this, but they are trying to get the balance of good stories/content vs. making ends meet. I know because they are asking their writers to do specific stories as well as taking submissions. I've talked w/them a lot, they are very open to good, rational ideas. They simply need more good contributors who know how to take professional pictures. They are also actively fixing the problems, like the Loren Bussewicz disaster. I told them exactly how I feel about that, and gave them suggestions how to fix it, and guess what? They are doing it. Sitting around bitching about something, vs. being proactive...let's see, what works better? Yes, they've seen hard times for a variety of reasons, and some of their hard times were well-deserved. They are doing what is necessary to change that. Give them a chance, there are good people working there and it would be a travesty to see them go.

I totally disagree with the statement that in pre-Kalmbach days it was "perfect". It was far from perfect; their former associate editor who became editor after the buyout was famous for having just a few close "cronies" and shut out other fine writers. It wasn't pretty. Ask Bojaciuk or Coulter. That happened long before Kalmbach. He made a few lifetime friends, but he also made at least as many enemies. I was always kind of perplexed when I would see him at a show, we were very friendly but I saw easily how he would not be friendly towards others. Many people who didn't write for the magazine were left with a very negative opinion of him. Some of those "formerly blacklisted by Kirk" talents are just now realizing it's okay to write for SA again, along with writing for MC. Model Cars is a good magazine, but I can't survive and write many articles for a magazine that doesn't pay it's contributors. Ask Rick Harris how much he got paid to take contest photos previously. Oh, you don't have to...he's quite vocal when you see him at a show why he's not taking pictures any more. It's a great magazine for a "club-like" atmosphere, but I don't get much difference in useable content in MC vs. SA. I can't afford to support the hobby, and support a magazine that is making income, that doesn't cover the costs to get that information to them. That is completely ludicrous, and most guys in the hobby have no clue that is what's going on there. Sorry, I'm not giving all my free time to what amounts to charity work, and that's what life is like for MC writers, unless they've changed their policies. I did get a subscription out of Greg for writing an article previously. That was okay, but I'm not going to put models on my workbench or paint in my airbrush by getting free subscriptions. So my contributions to MC will be infrequent.

MC magazine has repeatedly ignored updating our incredibly outdated club listing when we've tried to get it changed-they are going by information that is now about 15 years old, including a listing for a local organization that has been gone for years and the organizer is dead. We tried to buy advertising in it for our show, and couldn't get a timely response. They couldn't get back to an advertiser? Is that how to run a magazine? And many of us in our club including me know Greg personally, so that didn't help either in having any "pull" when it comes to getting things done w/them. Hell, he's been to our show. I know he's had serious health issues, but c'mon... Sorry, but I'm tired of the SA bashing followed by the lemming-like worship of MC magazine...it's obviously not coming from people who have any grip on reality or what is really going on. And it does the hobby no good either.

In many situations I end up the middleman, and here I feel similarly. I like both SA and MC, and the people who run them. I have good rappor with all of them. Take away the "business end" and I still like both magazines, and feel they both contribute well to our hobby. In a way they complement each other. Model Cars has more home-spun charm, but to be honest when I'm looking through any model magazine, I'm never left feeling 100% satisfied, and realize that will never happen. I'm more satisfied by the daily content on the web than between the pages of the magazines. Yet I can't give up my addiction to magazines.

My "charity work" is better off in places like this, I post when I can, give advice and show off my work. If I'm going to spend my time taking slides and doing polished writing, I'm going to do it for a publication that at least covers my costs. Or do like Pat Covert, and take my enthusiasm for other hobbies and interests to other publications that pay far more than any model publication will ever pay.

I enjoy your writing. I thoroughly enjoyed "Strictly Stock" in SAE, until it got to the reviews, where I honesly felt duped at times because what I saw in print did not match my feelings of what I was seeing in plastic (or had already built). I certainly hope it was a case of the magazine changing your editorial content vs. just looking at a box of parts not having built something and giving a sketchy kit a "highly recommended" label. That has been my biggest question all along...were you writing those reviews truthfully based on actually building something, or did the magazine literally force you to give good reviews to bad subjects? Perhaps I build more, or know more people that build, and I definitely have a cynical/critical eye towards models and I found myself utterly shocked at times seeing good reviews to models that needed a good slamming; actually that's not the real case, I feel an obligation to let readers know what works and what doesn't, and if it doesn't how we can fix it so it does. My feelings about magazine reviews...if it's not built, make it clear that it's only a review by looking at the contents. And by all possible means, build it before you write about it. I know you have the enthusiasm towards the models and to writing about them, but I honestly can't remember ever seeing your work as a builder published. Do you build anything? I'd certainly like to see your work as a builder. In fact that gets us right back to where this thread was headed...what would be the most useful kind of review, i.e. buy it, build it, show it off. Be totally objective and if you have to be negative, do it as constructively as possible.

Okay, that's enough for today. I have money to make with a pile of paying work, and models to be built in my free time.

Bob Downie aka ZoomZoomMX-5
Author "How to use an Airbrush" by Kalmbach
Feature article writer for Scale Auto Enthusiast, Scale Auto, and Model Cars Magazine
Contributor to Hobby Heaven Message Board and Automotive Forums
Believer in truth, honesty, and telling it like it is when absolutely necessary.

[larrygre]

Bob, I think you know me well enough, even though we have not spent a great deal of time together, to know I have a passionate love for this hobby and a passionate dislike for anyone or anything that detracts from it. I wish I would have seen you at NNL East to tell you in person how much I really enjoyed your airbrush book. That was a needed work, and you finessed it well. Congrats and thanks.

Now, if I may, allow me to address your concerns and criticisms.

Please do not confuse my being proud of contributing to the hobby with, as you termed it, "self promotion". I mention my magazine contributions and web site in my sig line for that reason and that reason only - I am proud of being part of this hobby. And you have just cause to do the same. You have made many contributions, not only to writing. To this day one of my favorite resin pieces is the MGB-GT body you mastered for AAM. I wish I could get another and do an MGC-GT from it, but oh well...

Your post inferred that I made direct statements about people involved with Kalmbach as being "non-enthiusaists". For the record, I havbe never made any statements whatsoever about Andy, or Matt (whom I also have a good rapport with), or Patrick, whom I ALWAYS had a good rapport with, in that regard. Please do not make such assumptions that I do not regard them as "enthusiasts". They very much are. But they take (or took) their marching orders from non-enthusiasts who, in my experience, put more emphasis on the advertising dollar than on the wants and needs of the so-called "target audience" or the factual correctness of what was put into print. You may not like the fact that I'm castigating Kalmbach for their business ethic, but I believe in my heart of hearts that their business ethic is damaging to the hobby in total. Reference your comment:

"Yes, Kalmbach is a company that needs to make money to survive-and to do that it must be run like a business. You don't want to hear this, but they are trying to get the balance of good stories/content vs. making ends meet."

When a media business ignores, or forgets the basic needs of, its target audience, and concerns itself solely with the bottom line, it loses track of the fundamental purpose of its existence. And that colors its actions. You speak of balance, but that balance is not there - and it NEEDS to be there. Desperately. Especially in a shrinking economy and changing audience.

SAE was not perfect, and please do not infer that I ever said it was. What I said - MANY times - is that you could feel the passion of its people in its pages. It was worthy of the "Enthusiast" subheading.
MCM is not there yet but it's getting there, and perhaps it needs a bit more "oomph" in the administrative and business areas to avoid future poroblems like the ones you described. I'm not shilling for MCM - merely stating that I'm proud to have an association with people who give a damn about the hobby and the people in it. And it's not "lemming-like", as you put it, to recommend to my fellow modelers that they support those people and organizations, magazines, etc. that support THEM, not those who consider the consumer merely advertising targets or, as the current business definition of "consumer" seems to be, "bottom feeders".

Now, you raise one of the most valid points of all, and thank you for bringing this up so I can properly address it once and for all.

Originally Posted by ZoomZoomMX-5

I enjoy your writing. I thoroughly enjoyed "Strictly Stock" in SAE, until it got to the reviews, where I honesly felt duped at times because what I saw in print did not match my feelings of what I was seeing in plastic (or had already built). I certainly hope it was a case of the magazine changing your editorial content vs. just looking at a box of parts not having built something and giving a sketchy kit a "highly recommended" label. That has been my biggest question all along...were you writing those reviews truthfully based on actually building something, or did the magazine literally force you to give good reviews to bad subjects?

One of my biggest gripes about Kalmbach is that the column that appeared in print bore little resemblance to the column that I penned when it came to product reviews. Not in form, mind you, as every editor has to do that, but in revision of the contents. I would have to say that about 90-95% of the time when I was critical of an item - and you know my policy was, and is, - if its right, say so and why, and if it is wrong, say so and why, and if it can be corrected, and don't bash the kitmaker, stick to the facts based on research. If I was critical of a product, it was rewritten to sound like it just wasn't something I was interested in, or it was turned 100% around and capped off with that infamous "highly recommended". I wanted to stop using that tag as it was horribly misunderstood, but they didn't listen. And I was told on more than one occasion that the powers that be put trying to get the advertiser to pay for bigger ads above being truthful about their product in a review. They (Kalmbach) will publicly deny it to high holy heaven, but I was told this by people you and I both know - VERY credible sources.

These may be in the past, and they may, as you say, be trying to address these issues. I may have battle scars, but I do not close my eyes to realities I may not be able to see firsthand. The contingency for a quality article should not be, however, the ability to provide professional photography (though yes, good quality pics do help, for sure). It shoud be whether the article is correct in scope, whether its facts have been checked properly, whether it does not project any falsehoods for a purpose other than providing useful information to its reader, and most importantly, to generate enthusiasm for the subject matter. When Kalmbach gets this, I will happily sing their praises both publicly and privately. And don't get me wrong on this - I sincerely hope that they do. The hobby would benefit greatly. And that is what it should really be all about.

I'll get off my soapbox now and get back to building. Stay tuned to MCM...you'll be seeing a lot more of my built models in the next few months..up close and personal too if you make it to 2004 NNL East. We may disagree on a lot, but I'll defend with my life your right to disagree. And I welcome your continued association, and appreciate all your continued contributions to our beloved hobby.

Best regards,

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

Glad to hear the rest of the story, especially regarding the kit reviews. Sounds like we're definitely on the same page, especially enthusiasm-wise. The others watching are probably glassy-eyed and bored w/us dredging up the past. There's an old saying that the more you stir up old shit, the more it just stinks.

Right now, I'm currently annoyed w/Fujimi, having spent nearly a year's subscription to a magazine in $$ on a kit that is worth about $3 in reality. I should slip a review of this stinky STi to Scale Auto and see if they dare print it!

Now, let's get building...

[dag65]

BOb I see you just responded to Terry Jesses message at the HH board, seems Larry wasn't too far off base. What a shame.
Thanks for the insight guys.
BTW love your book Bob

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

Originally Posted by dag65

BOb I see you just responded to Terry Jesses message at the HH board, seems Larry wasn't too far off base. What a shame.
Thanks for the insight guys.
BTW love your book Bob

I've learned a lot today, especially from Terry's very current plight. He has been as big a defender of Kalmbach/Scale Auto as I have known, for this to happen is sad indeed. I don't know any of Kalmbach's higher-ups, or the new editor-I deal directly with others there, but sounds like they need a good dose of reality. Terry's letter to them is exactly what they need to hear. Whether they listen is a whole 'nother matter.

Thanks for the comments.

[Jay!]

To keep everyone following this thread up to date....

Here's a link to Terry Jessee's post on the H/H board, and you'll see the replies to it as well:
http://www.modelcarkits.com/cgi-bin/...gi?read=328946

Bob and Larry (and Darin),

While it may be old dirty laundry to you guys, I'm sure you realize that much of our membership here is either young or not from the U.S., so they (and myself, as well) do not have the historical perspective in this realm, and I find it very interesting. I'll admit I don't have a lot of knowledge about the politics of publication, but I think it's valuable to have exposure to any entity that can and will potentially help or harm our hobby and its community.

I'll also add that personally, I don't subscribe to any modeling mags anymore. Maybe I'll pick one up if it has a particluarly interesting article, but for the most part, I think my internet experience (mostly this board, but several other sources as well...) has easily replaced the value I was getting from any of the magazines. For example, I'll pick one up a fawn over the valuable pictures in the How-To articles, then realize we have threads like that turning over in the forum almost daily.

I'm not sure how a magazine can compare, really. It'll be difficult, to be sure...

BTW, thread split.

[AE86er]

Robert,

Sorry to digress this thread, but I just wanted to commend you on your book "How to Use an Airbrush."

I'm back into the hobby after about a 10-year absence, and picked up your book on a whim at the local shop. WOW! What a great buy - your hard work really comes through in this book.

While I enjoyed Pat Covert's books, what I really like about your is that you "get it." That is - you're more up-to-date and with the times, using kits and supplies from companies like TAMIYA and Scale Motorsport. To me, the other books always seemed dated using the old revell kits and testors paints, which I pretty much avoid.

I also enjoy the step-by-step examples that I can easily try to replicate.

Best,
AE86er

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

Originally Posted by AE86er

Robert,

Sorry to digress this thread, but I just wanted to commend you on your book "How to Use an Airbrush."

I'm back into the hobby after about a 10-year absence, and picked up your book on a whim at the local shop. WOW! What a great buy - your hard work really comes through in this book.

While I enjoyed Pat Covert's books, what I really like about your is that you "get it." That is - you're more up-to-date and with the times, using kits and supplies from companies like TAMIYA and Scale Motorsport. To me, the other books always seemed dated using the old revell kits and testors paints, which I pretty much avoid.

I also enjoy the step-by-step examples that I can easily try to replicate.

Best,
AE86er

Thank you, it's comments like these that are why I enjoy building and writing in the first place, and makes it all worthwhile.

[larrygre]

Originally Posted by ZoomZoomMX-5

Right now, I'm currently annoyed w/Fujimi, having spent nearly a year's subscription to a magazine in $$ on a kit that is worth about $3 in reality.

Fujimi, as good as they are in most cases, sure seems to cut corners where it's VERY visible - such as what you pointed out on the WRX. Im also not too happy with the RX-8's headlight area. On the other hand, the NSX's turned out pretty good. I'm impatient for the coming NSX-T. I just have a thing for the NSX I guess

Fujimi needs to get off the dime and do some modern (2003) wheel sets. How about some RO_JAs (take your pick), Motegi FF-5s, and the like? And maybe some up to date tires like Toyo Proxes T1-S and Advan Neovas?
18 and 19 inchers, please.

[larrygre]

Originally Posted by dag65

BOb I see you just responded to Terry Jesses message at the HH board, seems Larry wasn't too far off base. What a shame.
Thanks for the insight guys.
BTW love your book Bob

Darin, you don't know how badly I wanted NOT to be right about this. In some ways its been my private hell for more than two years now. But in a sense I'm grateful that Terry made public the proof of the arrogant monster that is Kalmbach. If anything, it tells our fellow modelers, expecially those around at the time *I* got screwed around by Kalmbach, that what I have been saying about them, warning our fellow modelers about the monster, was not an exaggeration.

And I love Bob's book too.

Best regards,

[Sigmaman]

I used to read SA.Not anymore.Too many adds,to much diecast,constant repetition of some articles and one former editor was a railroad enthusiast(nothing wrong with that except what was he doing at the helm of a model car magazine?)The magazine is twice the US price by the time it reaches these shores and it no longer provided quality reading.

[flyonthewall]

This makes very interesting reading guys. I can't really comment on SAE at its peak coz its not commonly available here in the UK and I never did get around to buying that subscription I was buying it regularly about 3 years ago when it appeared more often down my local WHSmiths. I enjoyed it very much although there was always room for more content and varied subject matter. Again, I dont have a big enough collection of issues to comment but it seems the content was always domestic US subjects, not much in the way of rally or F1. Around this time Sam publications Scale Auto Modeler was tackling a varied array of subjects including a hell of alot of stuff from the likes of Studio27, Renaissance and SMS. At the start of its publication, reading SAM was a breath of fresh air although the quality of some of the contributing modelers was pretty awful, Trevor Pask in particular

I now buy SA(E) once in a while (if i can find it!) depending on if there is at least one article that is really useful to me. I don't see much in there to interest me anymore, i'm sure in the last 3 issues i've seen, there was a 50 something Vette and an article of detailing a diecast Who wants to keep reading the same things over again as well as the abundance of the same adverts.

SAM is long gone now, the revised Scale Models International is its place which isn't a dedicated model car mag and my money certainly isnt wasted on this either. The car aticles that do appear in it, quite regular i have to say, are usually by the affore mentioned Trevor Pask whose trademark is to hide his diabolical paint jobs with even more gastly weathering I shall be keeping my eyes on Model Cars mag now, with the invent of their Tuner column maybe they are heading in the right direction, keeping up to date at least!

[tonioseven]

This is one of the most informative and best written threads ever!! I now know the reason (s) why I no longer find SA[E] an interesting magazine anymor. I had a subscription to MCM but i let it expire preferring to spend that money on a kit and supplies. All the help i usually need is right here and sometimes on Hobby Heaven! Thank you all for contributing so much to the hobby I love and have loved since I was a youngster! (ight after the last velociraptor died off ). If there is ever anything i can do to be of any help, just let me know! I have to go build something now...

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

Originally Posted by larrygre

Fujimi, as good as they are in most cases, sure seems to cut corners where it's VERY visible - such as what you pointed out on the WRX. Im also not too happy with the RX-8's headlight area. On the other hand, the NSX's turned out pretty good. I'm impatient for the coming NSX-T. I just have a thing for the NSX I guess

Fujimi needs to get off the dime and do some modern (2003) wheel sets. How about some RO_JAs (take your pick), Motegi FF-5s, and the like? And maybe some up to date tires like Toyo Proxes T1-S and Advan Neovas?
18 and 19 inchers, please.

I hope Tamiya does the RX-8. I'll see how bad my Fujimi is when I get it soon; the buildup pictured here wasn't detailed very well to really know how bad the lamp areas are. The NSX is much better than the Subaru, but it does have a few fit issues, as Veyron's photos showed...but proves there's more than one team working on their models, the Subaru team must have been junior high interns.

As for Fujimi doing more modern wheels, I constantly on why they keep doing undersized rims. Aoshima is better usually, but their motto must be "make half the quantity the market desires, and make only one production run per year so the customers will buy full kits w/the wheels vs. just the wheelsets"..

Fujimi undersizes the rims in all their models, probably so you'll try to rectify it by purchasing their accessory wheels...

I'm anxious to see what XS Tuning is up to; their 17's are fantastic but they really need to concentrate on larger sizes...fast. These kinds of wheel kits blow away the Japanese products. Amazing for that to happen these days