I'd like to offer a little different view on the issue of getting "S" articles in the non-"S" modeling magazines. I really enjoy writing articles and I always look at it from the view of what the magazines want and need, not why they won't run an "S" article. I have had articles published in the last three years in Railmodel Journal (now unfortunately defunct), RMC (twice), MR, the NMRA Magazine (formerly Scale Rails) and now GMR 2011. At the present time I have two articles accepted and awaiting publication (one in RMC and one in NMRA Magazine). In some cases I submitted the completed article and in some cases asked the editor in advance if he'd be interested in an article on a certain topic. In no cases did I inquire about their interest in an "S" article...I asked about their interest in an article on a specific topic of interest to model railroaders in general.
The key is to provide articles that are of interest to the WIDEST POSSIBLE NUMBER OF READERS. Do articles on building structures, cars or locomotives that can be applied to any scale, weathering techniques, layout stories that emphasize the prototypical nature or other unique aspects of the layout design (not it's scale or simply 'here's how I built it'), or ideas on improving realistic operations that have applications to those operating in any scale or gauge. While the editors can, and will, help with grammar, etc, the author has to provide the solid, INNOVATIVE content. The magazines will do the illustrations and track plans, but the author has to provide the photos. I specifically did a 'sidebar' for the GMR 2011 article on how to take good photos with an inexpensive camera to help others with what is often the 'deal breaker' from the magazine's standpoint...poor photos. The author has to provide those. My conversations with editors indicate they are ALWAYS eager to publish quality articles that have unique and interesting content...they never have enough of these. I don't believe they care what percent of the readership is "S"...they care that most people who pick up the magazine can apply something (preferably a lot) from the article to THEIR scale. And I can't understand why there would be any connection between who advertises in the magazine and who writes the articles. Guys, we spend way too much time bemoaning the lack of articles by S authors in magazines (and generally putting the blame on the magazines!) and too little time submitting quality articles on unique projects that just happen to be in "S" scale. I simply do not believe that there is any prejudice against "S" by any of the major magazines (and I know the editors of them all). I do believe the existence of the several "S" only publications 'uses up' some articles that otherwise might appear in magazines serving all scales, but that's another story. I will repeat the offer that I made on this site about a year ago. I'd be willing to help anyone who has a good idea for an article with getting it ready for submission to a major magazine. Let's not rationalize why magazines don't want "S" articles. Let's write good articles on interesting model railroading topics with good photos that just happen to be done in "S". Happy modeling! Brooks --- In [email protected], Bob Werre <b...@...> wrote: > > There are basically three reasons an article is rejected by MR or any > other publication. I submitted a layout feature asrticle for a large HO > club layout. Their answer was they had several similar articles "in > stock", so they're not going to spring for my fees until needed. I most > recently proposed another layout which they bought into because it > apparently fit a spot. I'm putting the final touchs on it now, but the > financial conditions are tighter than they were in the past. Overall, > we probably receive our fair share of S layout features of about one per > year based on the subscriber base of the magazine. Right now if we're > 2-5% of the subscribtion base they will run about that per cent of > articles. Another reason is simply that if there were 10 full pages of > S ads in the magazine, you could be on a S article every other issue > plus product reviews of the items in those ads--money talks! > > So those three reasons--1) they've got articles in stock, 2) we'll only > get our share, and 3) S doesn't advertise, will keep us out of gaining a > larger foothold in that type of publication. A fouth but much smaller > reason might be that Kalmbach distributes the S Gaugian and therefore > still makes money without having to listen to our needs the way we think > they ought too! > > If you check out the current remaining modeling magazines, you will find > them fairly thin, meaning they're feeling economic pressures due to the > economy and internet based competition. Unfortunately this isn't going > to change this November or even two years from now for those who study > politics and election cycles. > > What has surprised me are the overall quality of the various historical > publications dedicated to a particular railroad. They use thick high > quality stock coupled with all the benefits of a smaller publishing > setup. Face it Kalmbach has a full staff with benefits while the > historical publishers typically handle couple of such magazines plus > perhaps some local work for other kinds of firms, meaning lower > overhead. These magazines typically run a couple dollars more than the > RMC/MR crowd but they're closer interest wise in many cases. I just > finished some photo work for Remember the Rock magazine again which is > one such magazine that seem to be making it for the present time. > > If you look at the bigger picture, it doesn't take long also to find > that any grouping of models builders of any kind all you generally find > are really old guys. At the train show this weekend, my wife pointed > out all the guys (gals too) with their Hover/Rascal motorized > wheelchairs, oxygen tanks and the like. > > Bob Werre > BobWphoto.com > > > > > Roger Nulton wrote: > > > > > > > Brooks Stover's fine layout is in this year's (2011) "Great Model > > Railroads" by Kalmbach. I just got it in the mail today. > > Roger Nulton > > > > From: Tom Hawley > > Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 11:34 AM > > To: [email protected] <mailto:S-Scale%40yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Magazine interests > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Gary Chudzinski > > . . . . . . . . There are a number of S modelers who have written > > articles > > for the leading model railroad magazines, except one, but are rejected > > for > > no good reason. . . . . . . . . . . . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I caught up with some Kalmbach people at the NMRA convention in Detroit, > > said something similar to them. Their response was "You people have > > your S > > Gaugian." But they also said we need to send them something good and they > > will publish it. Not letting it drop there, I got a professional > > photograher in our club to photograph a very nice scale layout one of our > > members has. But I don't think photographer or layout owner ever sent the > > pictures to MR. > > > > Tom Hawley -- Lansing Mich > > > > [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: [email protected] [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/
