Brooks and I are talking pretty much about the same thing as Dick Karnes has also proven with his construction articles. When I wrote my last article it appeared just a month or two after I submitted it. It's the full blown layout features and product reviews that are on the shy side.
Chances are if you see a review of a new product from one of the "majors" in MR, you will see a prominent ad for that same product. Those product reviews normally laced with praise of that product have been the standard for specialty magazines for many years in all kinds of industries. I did many a cover for the S Gaugian with the help of SHS and a cover shot or two for a magazine devoted to powdered coating paid for by Dupont. All the oil field magazines are supplied editorial content by their advertisers and their public relations agencies--it's pretty much the way things are done. When it comes to the photography aspect, StringBob is correct that the newer consumer cameras are pretty darn good and their small size come in real handy when getting down low. Of course it's good camera work, lighting and content that make a publishable shot. I will relate one instance back in the 'film days' that relates to how picky some of the editors can be. A local modeler had built a smallish layout (more like a diorama) from an article published in MR. He did an excellent job on this--equal to anything I've ever seen. He gets out his camera and captures some pretty nice views, but he used only the existing lighting I understand. He submits the photos, track plan and copy only to be told the photos aren't acceptable because his lighting is bad. So he rents some photofloods of some kind and reshoots. He then is told that they are still lacking and he is told to contact me. I gather my equipment, use some of angles and setups that they like. He then resubmits the entire article. They came back and said whow--great photography, great article but where's the rest of the layout? This layout filled two sides of a small den like room with almost no room for additional layout. At that point the article is dead in the water, the owner having no place to add to it and besides his home is up for sale anyhow. I would guess two years later I get a call from Kalmbach looking for the author/layout owner, because now they wanted to publish the article as is. I put them back into contact and was paid for my work. Long story short, to this day the article has never been published. If you count this layout plus another from Idaho (a friend of Jess Bennett who died waiting for publication), I've photographed 15 layouts for MR or GMRR's. Of those seven were S scale features. Like I mentioned yesterday I've got one in the hopper and hopefully another coming along after that. Additionally, I was paid a few bucks for a photo of a interlocking tower built by one of the Marks, that I recall was way above the normal with interior detail and Armstrong levers. It was to be used in Trackside photos maybe 15 years ago but never ran. Perhaps if it would have been a full blown construction article things would have gone better. Bob Werre bcgsteam wrote: > > > 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. > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > 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> > <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] > > > > [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/
