Lee,  Perhaps this process took a long time from the time that John and 
I had talked and your review.  I don't get RMC very often, so I don't 
recall seeing it, but I'm glad it ran. 

I have been way behind in my reading but finally got into the stack of 
magazines and I was surprised by 3 or 4 new product introductions in the 
S section in the November issue-- that's actually pretty amazing.

I also mentioned in one of my last messages that MR can be fairly 
'picky' about what they run.  The opposite can be true also.  I was 
glancing at the modeling done in their "Workshop tips:  Servicing Steam" 
insert.  I don't want to get a 'holy'er than thou' attitude but the 
modeling of that facility looks 'cobbled' together in a temporary 
manner, perhaps just for the photo session.  On the cover shot, the 
rather poor track laying  at inspection pit, the wooden walkway on the 
next track looks again placed their just for the photo and indeed the 
whole service area seems way too well ballasted including around all the 
structures.  The coaling tower, however looks like an excellent model 
with great weathering and contrasts greatly with the plastic-looking 
roundhouse. 

When I was shooting the ads and catalogues for both AM and SHS, I always 
went through great pains  to make the scenes and track plans look 
believeable as possible even though these were indeed temporary scenes 
and destined for more of the hi-rail crowd. 

Bob Werre





[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> In a message dated 11/2/2007 11:50:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:bob%40bobwphoto.com> writes:
>
> > John Verser, of Pacific Rail shops,
> > and I talked several times about not getting any 'press' for his
> > products. He sent the magazine kits to review but never saw the results
> > from the majors.
>
> Smile when you say that, pardner! I personally built a kit of John's 
> which he
> had sent to RMC for review, they published the review, and I know John 
> saw
> it, because he quoted my review in his later advertisements!!!
>
> It is my observation that RMC is much more open to unusual scales, 
> gauges and
> eras than is MR -- though I happily subscribe to both and find both of 
> value
> in my S scale modeling.
>
> Lee Rainey
>
> **************************************
> See what's new at
> http://www.aol.com <http://www.aol.com>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to