FSM July issue observations- RANT

looks like we get a star trek review next month. good to see.

i guess you're right.

It's been a while since I posted in this thread, I wanted to see what path it would take without me prodding it along. First of all, thanks for all the interest and opinions, I do appreciate the input and beliefs of some of the other members. That said, let me say this:

It's wonderful to see familiar names I recognize from some of the other sites, they are great modellers all, and deserve the recognition.

I am also grateful that the FSM high-ups are at least listening, and it goes to show that they value comments both for and against FSM practices and publishing habits. Thank you, Lawrence, Matt, and all others involved.

But frankly, the online gallery is great, but it's not enough. What I'm really griping about is what actually goes to PRINT. When we see at least ONE pic, or review, then I will be a man of my word, and but at least two copies. I'm not asking for a feature, or a cover pic, but please, just one pic in the gallery, or something. The last article I remember seeing is back in January, when the Polar Lights Enterprise was featured. Great kit, popular subject, a winner for all. Great choice. Keep it up, guys! And now that Polar lights has been sold, maybe something from Finemolds in the next issue? Perhaps a Slave I?

So, yes, I'm happy. For now. Baby steps. Phase 1 complete. Onto phase II.

Hi Lawrence, I have been following this thread and agree with those that think sci-fi (and some of the other catagories) subject are undercovered. I'm posting now to thank you for the website sci-fi gallery as I really enjoyed it. To me the website feature was nearly as good as a feature in the mag but I'll continue to prize the issues with sci-fi covers. Besides I like WWII too so I'm never really disappointed. Once again thank you, you efforts are greatly appreciated.

Hello MUD~

Glad you liked the sci-fi/fantasy/TV/movie gallery. It was a collaborative effort: Matt shot the excellent Wonderfest photos and selected the ones we used in the gallery; Elisa, our intern, culled the rest of the photos from other shows; I scanned, cropped, and loaded the images and captions into the website database; and Mark Thompson gave us permission to do the gallery in the first place.

I just received the FSM newsletter and noticed the Science fiction/fantasy/TV/movie OnlineEXTRA gallery. Thank you thank you thank you! I really think that this is a great step. Thanks to the editorial staff, especially Matt Usher who I suspect was a big factor in getting that published.

The future of Finescale Modeler Magazing is not in WW2... but it sure is the present. It has been stated that the vast majority of the reader population are baby boomers who most identify with WW2. I have no doubt on this point. However, (A BIG HOWEVER), the next generation of modelers will have their own genre of choice. The next generation of modelers is being highly affected by the media that propogates alot of sci-fi/fantasy/anime, which, not surprisingly, is one of the fastest growing areas of modeling.

We know the hobby is in vast decline, and we are quick to blame computer games, TV, and other things that shorten kids attention span. However, I believe the biggest reason for the decline in the industry is the reluctance of the industry to innovate and adapt to the population's changing preferences. Like the automotive industry, the Japanese (e.g. Hasegawa) have been much quicker than the U.S. or European companies to identify these trends.

My word of advice to the editors, it may be in the magazines best interest to place a few more articles in this magazine concerning these genres or at least bring someone on your staff with a good knowledge of these issues. This would be a smart thing to do if you want to attract a new generation of modelers.

Side note: I'd encourage any of you who doubt the viability of the sci-fi genre to attend Wonderfest one year. I believe you will find that there is a wealth of opportunity to expand the world of modeling into subjects you never thought possible.

Foster7155 - Thanks for the breakdown. It is rather interesting, although I would differ with your breakdown of the Chuck Yeager example, as it is clearly a military aircraft that was modified for research purposes.

I have been a subscriber to FSM for at least 5-6 years and used to just buy it on the stand for 5-6 years before that. The magazine has clearly change, and it should, because everything does and it needs to evolve to survive. Like many have stated, I will continue to buy the magazine as long as I perceive value from it, while I don't place a lot of value on the genre' of the articles, they do set a tone. For the most part I read the magazine for inspiration and learning. I think I learn a lot from any article and can apply the techniques to whatever subject I am woring on, but replaying the same material over and over again does get old.

Here is another rub, I don't think FSM has missed a single IPMS regional and doesn't miss a beat in publishing them. One of the pinnacles of Sci-Fi modeling or Figures is Wonderfest. An annual event held in Louisvilles, KY that has been held for about 15 years. Last year they were kind enough to send Mattew Usher, but to be honest, I don't recall seeing any coverage in the magazine about it, not even a half page mention in the readers gallery, This year no one had the time. Personally, I think this is just as important as the IPMS conventions and some of the work at WF exceeds anything I have seen at the NORCON, our local IPMS convention. If that isn't a snub.....

Personally, I am not looking for FSM to do a lot of Sci-Fi, if they did I would probably get bored with it or worse tired of it. I am not upset that this issue didn't have Sci-Fi because it was appropriate to do an all D-Day version with 60th anniversary of the event. But I would like to see more coverage, go to WF or another Sci-Fi event, I know of one in Atlanta and Las Vegas. Look at the coverage they provide at IPMS events, they have Sci-Fi entries do you see any of them pictured?

I'll be honest and blunt, I have meet Paul Boyer at a couple NORCON's. I think he is a great writer and has fantastic skills as it relates to hobby skills, but I don't think he has any interest in Sci-Fi subjects. I might be wrong, but I don't recall seeing any of his tents at any of the Sci-Fi subjects....... Sorry for singling Paul out but I think he is an example of how the rest of the staff feels. If I am wrong I will apologize but that's just the way I see it....

FSM is with the French SteelMasters, a mag dedicated to Armor modeling, final point, the only mag I buy every issues of. Although, for professional reasons, most of my 'production' is AFV related, I do model just about everything and despite what some say, I find that FSM is the only mag that brings me, in every single issue, at least one great idea, tip, technique. I'm not buying FSM for any particular theme of modeling, I buy it because of the techniques explainred in there. Whether the article is about dinosaurs, aircraft, figures, AFVs, SF/Fantasy, ships or whatever else, there's always a tip in there that's worth reading. I do buy many other modeling/specialist mags, from various countries, every month, but all of those are for a particula article on a subject I find interesting. FSM is interesting from cover to cover. I want to see it kept that way, reghardless if the article is about a P-47 or a X-wing fighter.

Let me open by saying that I appologize for the lenght of this post and preface my input by saying that I am playing "Devil's Advocate" and the information below does not neccessarily reflect my opinion...I'm trying to simply state facts.

I've just reviewed one year's worth of FSM magazine (May 03 - April 04) for another tread that I'm putting together. Why this time frame? Because my 3-year subscription started in May 03.

There is an assertion that FSM has become a military modeling magazine. Outside the automotive genre (which is almost all non-military), the majority of models produced are of military subjects. Therefore I would expect more milltary articles - or articles about military subjects - than non-military articles. With this in mind, I reviewed all of the articles and broke them down by Military and Not Military in nature. This can be difficult in some cases because some of it comes down to interpretation. Is the article on Chuck Yeager's F-105 near-space plane military or not? The plane is clearly military, but the subject is more historical in nature and not combat related in any way. (I called this one not military, BTW). I judged the 88 articles:

Military - 56
Non-Military - 32

BTW: I would love to see similar statistics for say three years ago, five years ago, and ten years ago.

Of the 32 non-military articles, 11 are "General Interest" with applications in every modeling genre. This is just about what I would have expected. Roughly 1 out of every 3 articles is of a non-military subject or nature while 2 are military. However, FSM is a long way from AFV Modeler (100%), Military in Scale (100%), or other similar magazines. (As stated above, I would love to see an annual statistic from say 1978!)

I've read somewhere that 7 out of every 10 models produced today in all genres is of a military subject. I don't know if that number is completely correct or not, but based on what I see in most model shops and at most general interest model shows, I think it's probably ballpark.

When I was growing up in the 60's and 70's, there were by far more non-military models - as a percentage of all models available - than it appears that there are today. I can remember row upon row of car models for as far as you could see. Shoot, there were at least as many LeMans, Indy, and Sportscar models as just about any other area. There were of course plenty of military aircraft models, but there were also quite a few civilian aircraft models. Military armor and vehicles were nothing more than a nitch and usually had only 10% (or less) of the shelf space.

Today it is far different and if it has changed, I think FSM has changed because modelers have changed. I can remember there used to be two guys in my home town that built civilian aircraft exclusively. Piper Cubs, the "Spirit of St. Louis, the "Spruce Goose", and many of the latest airliners of the day were all they built. Today, I only know one person who builds civilian aircraft and if you don't count airliners, I can count on three fingers the number of contemporary civilian aircraft I have seen at the last four model shows I've attended.

Additionally, a new modeler today can pick up just about any fairly new kit and with a bit of modeling skill, produce a model in less than a week that it would have taken a modeler with years of experience at least a month to produce back in the 1970's. The quality of kits, paints, and tools, not to mention the proliferation of information on the Internet, have all served to shorten the period of appenticeship for modelers around the world.

There are very few true "novice" modelers - as I was back in 1972 - left in the world. I knew nothing beyond the kit, the instructions, and whatever the hobby shop owner wanted to share - in my case, not much! All it takes today is two or three days on the Internet and anyone will know most of the basic principles to building a decent model. If you spend two or three months studying, a modeler today can amass the knowledge that it took several modelers years of trial and error to learn. I personally don't think that it would serve anyones interest to have FSM publish information that say 95 - 98% of the modeling community already knows. I could understand a few more "intermediate" type articles in the magazine, but then they would duplicating information that is already available. FSM relies on modelers to provide them with new techniques or new uses of old products. If modeler don't send this type of information in to the magazine, FSM cannot be faulted for not printing it - they don't know.

Finally, I can't close without saying that I think it's a bit unfair to make blanket assumptions or categorizations about FSM on the 60th Anniversary of possibly THE most important day in the past century. As stated above, military modeling represents a very large percentage of the modeling community and WWII modeling is the largest percentage of military modeling. I would expect similar coverage in July of 2014 for the 70th anniversary and possibly more in July 2019 for the 75th anniversary! I have not as yet received my July FSM, but I am eagerly anticipating its arrival.

I did not start receiving FSM until about two years ago, so I cannot comment on the degree to which it has changed. I do know that I plan I subscribing to FSM for at least the next four years (it's already paid for) and probably longer.

Thank you for your time,
Robert

rossjr~

We do work with prospective authors a lot, helping them put together a story or refine one into "FineScale-ready" form. You can e-mail any one of use (Mark, Matt, Paul, me) with questions or ideas. I've had people send me drafts to review; I give them feedback, which they incorporate into the final manuscript they submit to us. Gotta run--the cleaning staff is about to kick me out tonight. Other people have made good points in this thread that I'll respond to later.

Me thinks they should re name the mag to more accuratly depict the contents "Fine Scale Armor and Aircraft" and spot pretnding to be an all around modeling puplication. Just my thoughts. I'd still get the mag but I too wish to see a lot more Auto, ships sifi and figures.

One thing I would add to the comments above, I would like to see a better mix of outside writers/contributors and staff. I especially like the work Mattew Usher has been doing. How about helping contributors along? I believe some of the issue is that you are not getting quality contributions, why not work on a program that partners and writer with a contributor, take what they give you and clean it up or re write it completely. I realize that might make it necessary to change the compensation formula you use, but I don't think people are sharing to get rich....

QUOTE: Originally posted by darrenbb FSM bills itself as a "GENERAL" modeling magazine, they should practice what they preach. Either that or they should better define the focus of the magazine and cut out everything else.

I agree with Darrenbb, FSM has gotten away from its roots. I was looking at a FSM from 1989. The magazine has changed radically, and not or the better I am afraid. It used to have a better, more rounded coverage of subjects. In fact, there was a letter to the editor about the coverage of Sci-Fi, and the great amounts. Problem is that FSM changed about 10 years ago, and began to cater to masters. Articles ceased to be for modelers written by modelers. It was for Masters by masters. Gone was the neat features like basic "techniques<-->advanced results", and other techniques that were simple, and did not involve fancy, expensive parts from obscure or hard to reach companies. I enjoyed the aricles on the international color guides, and dicussion on aircraft markings. These were all replaced by articles on how to use resin or photo-etch sets to spruce up expensive kits of real things. It seemed that there wasn't an article that didn't involve resin. Add to this that the readers gallery were almost exclusively award winning models, and FSM stood for "For Showcasing Masters".
Fancy tools an chemicals were a must. Terms changes. I remember when painting a model meant doing it with a brush, and one was airbrushed it with an airbrush. None of the stupid "brush painting" nonsense. I resent this term becuase it makes it sound like that a modeler is not really painting a model, or is just doing it like a beginner. Yes there are modelers who still HAND paint, and only use an airbrush when they need to. It takes a lot of skill to hand paint, just as it teakes a lot of skill to Airbrush. No, Airbrushing is not Hand Painting.
Then there was the split of FSM into FSM, and CAR modeler, so automotive was effectively removed from the mix. That, wiht the snubbing of the sci-fi crowd. I know that we are a small reader base, but if it weren't for us, Most of the memorable movies would not be what they are, with all the special effects. ILM, foremost special effects company in the world was started by Mr. George Lucas for his original Star Wars movies, Science Fiction Classics. How many movies use ILM for special effects?
FSM has gotten better, but I agree with Rossjr. I thin that these forums have been a great thing, because it has gotten the staff in touch with their reader base, and what is important to them. and therea rea lot of modelers that think like me: WWII is great field to model, but there are other aspects. Resin and Photo-etch are not required to build an nice model. Not every modeler can afford to collect atermarket parts, or even the fancy foreign kits. They need to do like they used to, let the modelers outside the staff write and submit more articles. They ahve gotten better though, they are starting to re-focus again, and go back to theri roots. Just starting.

I have to agree with many of the other comments here. I have interests all across the board, but FSM has ceased being a magazine devoted to modeling and has become Military Modeler Magazine. While I enjoy the how to aspect of many of your articles, I think your focus has swung way around. While I acknowledge the significence of D-Day and it's anniversary I would appreciate more balance in your articles. Spread the wealth and try something outside the "old boys" network...

I used to buy every issue of FSM but not any more. Now I just buy the issues that interest me, which is about 50/50. Way too much WW2 and aircraft stuff for my liking.

After 27 years of aircraft modeling I got sick and tired of the same old stuff. Now I build cars and motorcycles which FSM does not cover much of. I shouldn't have too buy reams and reams of magazines just to cover the subects that I like, thats crazy.

FSM bills itself as a "GENERAL" modeling magazine, they should practice what they preach. Either that or they should better define the focus of the magazine and cut out everything else.

Darren

To Mr. Hansen and all the respected members here,
I would like to say one thing. Yes, Finescale modeler does not run many Sci-Fi articles, but as the demographics point out, there just is not as high a demand for the subject area. However, I am a huge fan of the A-10 Warthog, and the PBY. In fact, in regards to the Warthog, there is very littel modern information, and if you want to learn more, there are two wonderful gentleman that will help you with it. Now, to date, FSM has not printed an aritcle solely deidicated to the A-10. They did once for the PBY, in tandem with the release of the 1/48 PBY-5, when it was first released by Monogram. Does this mean that FSM is failing me and my interests. By all means, No. FSM is dedicated to helping modelers build better modelers,a nd it must look at what the majority of modelers are building. So Finescale modeler caters to the majority of its readers. But in the process, it serves us with different interests. I am finishing a heavily modified krote from the S.F. 3D world, and I would say that 90% of the techniques that I used to build the model are from stuff I learned in FSM. Fior the first time I used Gap-filling super glue, sanding sticks, airbrush, metalizers,a dremel tool, gloss coats, and micron pens. When I go to decal, I will further use the skills that I have learned in this mgazine to bring a very masterful finish to the kit. Could I have accomplished this by only picking up the issues that heavily featured Sci-fi. No!
I made a comment int he Rosa Parks topic, and I satnd by it. (Thank you J-hulk for your kind words in that topic) That is to pick a mdel and do a "how-to" My personal example was the Ma.K. zbv 3000 series. Those are excellent multimedia models that are picking up momentum in the Sci-fi world. I may even try my hadn at writing an article about them. And I may teachohters, becuase the techniques that one uses to build those kist is not really exclusive to just that particular thread of the genre; Armor modelers can use the same techiques in there models, or person working on one of Trumpeters new kist can use the same skills, becuase they are both multi-media, though the S.F. 3D kits are far cheaper. Point is we cn't complain because the magazine doesn't exactly address our particular interests, but to learn what we can to build better models from what is in the magazine.

Michael is entirely correct: FineScale certainly does accept unsolicited manuscripts (except for Workbench Reviews). In fact, most of the articles you see in the magazine came in that way.

There were no two ways around it: The July issue had to be wall-to-wall D-Day. The 60th anniversary is just too big an event not to devote a whole issue to it. Every magazine with any connection to military history has done the same.

Certainly, nobody here has a bias against science-fiction subjects, but as several other responders have pointed out, the largest interest areas are aircraft and armor. If we (editors) were left to assemble the ideal "umbrella" modeling magazine in a vacuum, we'd probably go for a more eclectic mix of subjects and higher proportions of minority topics. But we don't work in a vacuum--there are sales numbers and reader survey results that tell us what the most popular subjects are and where our emphasis has to be: aircraft, armor, World War II.

Why no sci-fi on the cover of FSM? Well....we started seeing significantly lower newsstand sales for issues with sci-fi covers (ditto for real space). Newsstand sales rely a lot on impulse buys; more people apparently say, "ooooh, a P-51!" have a browse, and head for the checkout counter, than say "oooooh, a Moonbase Interceptor from UFO." (No, FSM never had a UFO cover--I'm just fantasizing about my favorite Gerry Anderson TV series.....) You can see this in the informal pick-your-favorite-feature polls we run on the home page: Sci-fi, fantasy, and auto articles usually trail the treads-and-props subjects by a considerable margin. Doesn't mean readers thought they were terrible articles or didn't enjoy reading them, just means most readers' main interest areas are elsewhere.

If you're really, really focused on sci-fi and only sci-fi, FSM is probably not the magazine for you, or not the only one (note that Kalmbach distributes Modeler's Resource). If you like to build the occasional sci-fi/fantasy model for a break from olive drab and camouflage, we try have at least one feature in every other issue.

FSM runs a business called a modeling magazine and being pretty smart people they cater to the demographics of their main customers. Look at the posts on this Forum and you will see that Sci-Fi generates about 10% of what either Aircraft or Armor does and about 5% of those combined. I have nothing against Sci-Fi or Real Space modeling, but if FSM runs 5-10% of their articles on Sci-Fi over a years time, it would be about right based on their customers interests. If you are correct about the future, which I disagree with, then you can bet FSM would change their focus to what is more popular.

Well, Bottom line is that it's a business, and as a business they have to aim towards the highest market. That obviously being WWII and such. Again everyone keeps bringing up autos, but Kalmbach has the Scale Auto Mag already totally dedicated to cars, so there isn't a need for 'em in FSM (that's my theory guys, not saying it's right) but they probably don't want the two competing with each other. I pick up 4 different modeling mags to fulfill all my interests...and by far FSM deals a lot with tips, and tricks, and overall seems to dedicate a whole lot more to the main ideas of modeling such as painting, or working with Future, etc....while the others are just interested in one thing....they do a few articles on that genre, tell ya what's coming out, but never go over the "basics", and that's why I like FSM.

QUOTE: Originally posted by leemitcheltree Yeah, It is interesting that FSM seems to comcentrate on WWII subjects more than any other genre.........and if I see ANOTHER bloody Sherman tank article (with apologies to Shermanfreak), I'll pop a vein................

I feel the same way, except with WWII German kits of [/i]anything[/i]! Whenever there's some soft of "armor special" in FSM, it has to do with German armor. For that matter, I'm not too keen on WWII German planes either. Oh well.

Having said that, in the ten years or so that I've been buying FSM, I've seen a huge variety of articles on all sorts of subjects -- including sci-fi! I can recall articles on building Klingon Birds of Prey, lighting various star ships, rewviews of Star Wars kits, and one article on making a new kit master out of resin!

I don't limit myself to building a particular genre, so I'm pretty well interested in most of the articles in FSM. In fact, recent articles on armor kits have inspired me to try my first armor kit soon -- a WWII German Panzer IV. (Yes, I know that it's a German armor kit, which I say that I'm sick of, but what the heck.)

So, while I'd like to read more about sci-fi subjects, or WWI aviation, or anything not WWII German, I really have few complaints about FSM's mixture of articles.

Regards,

QUOTE: Originally posted by Bollod2 THEY DO NOT TAKE UNSOLICITED SUBMISSIONS. It says right there on the page.

I'm not going to venture to speak for the editorial staff, but to be fair FSM does not accept unsolicited submissions only for the Workbench Reviews section of the magazine. Nothing precludes anyone from submitting a how-to manuscript featuring a sci-fi subject matter. Click here for the submission guidelines or follow the "Submission Guidelines" link in the left-hand navigation bar of this page for further details: http://www.finescale.com/fsm/objects/pdf/manuscriptsubmissionguide.pdf

While it may be a "which came first the chicken or the egg" situtation I can also share with you that when we poll our readers, they time and time again indicate WWII is, by a wide margin, the most popular era to model. Similarly, aircraft and armor are twice as popular as the next closest subject matter and have roughly three times the popularity of sci-fi subjects.

Again, I don't want to speak out of turn, but I can assure you that our Editorial staff work quite hard at trying to provide balanced content that has the broadest appeal possible.

Now, there's a good idea!

Wh not go to 12 issues with juna and aug being dedicated to sci fi/real space and ships/autos?

I love FSM. I also love science fiction.
I know I'm not gonna see a lot of science fiction modeling in the pages of FSM. And I accept that.

Why?

Because there are plenty of other dedicated magazines that more thoroughly cover sci-fi and sci-fi modeling (just check out Mike's list above). I want SF, I can go there.

FSM does not have to be the Wal-Mart of modeling for me.

Also, I love aircraft, armor, ships, and automobiles, which there are plenty of in FSM. Plus great modeling tips and techniques that are applicable to any genre of modeling.

Of course it'd be nice to see more sci-fi in FSM, but it doesn't bother me personally at all, for the above-mentioned reasons.

Bollod2, I think the perfect mag for you might be Hobby Japan.
200 pages of Gundam, Macross, Uchusenkan Yamato, Kamen Rider, Ultraman, and Godzilla, and only 15 pages of Bf-109's and Shermans!
Along with FSM, I buy every single issue of HJ.

Anyway, I think we have a pretty cool, fairly active Sci-Fi forum right here on the FSM website, despite the lack of coverage in the pages of the magazine itself.

Doesn't that count for something?

And as the SF forum becomes more active, perhaps the editors will realize that more people are interested in science fiction modeling, and more articles will appear in print.

Yeah,
It is interesting that FSM seems to comcentrate on WWII subjects more than any other genre.........and if I see ANOTHER bloody Sherman tank article (with apologies to Shermanfreak), I'll pop a vein................
There are so many other genres - Sci-Fi, real space, automotive, naval (and I'm not just talking fighting ships), ...........there are so many types of modelling OTHER than just plastic and resin. But FSM does cover lots of multi-media stuff.
I guess it's hard to be all things to all people - and I suppose the powers that be feel that the Gundam stuff (although very interesting) just isn't "fine scale" modelling. I don't agree - and have a look at those incredible Nitto futuristic fighting suits...........they're not mainstream (like a P-51 or a Bf109), but they're amazing all the same.

I'm just glad the drought has ended my July issue arrived today.

I must admit to no real interest in the sci-fi stuff but still appreciate a well made model regardless of genre. TMMI and Scale Model International have regular features on sci-fi and regardless of one's own interest we cannot ignore the future potential modelers, if that is where it lies.

OK close enough !!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Bollod2 QUOTE: Originally posted by BlackWolf3945 Oh well... Fade to Black... THAT'S the spirit! So THAT'S how that quote thingy works!! Brilliant!! Guess you learn something new every day!!