Magazine preferences

I love center-folds...

But seriously, some photos can take up multiple pages, over the years FSM has had several large-scale ships. (I was looking at a 1/72 escort carrier a couple days ago ) I know it adds to production costs to add a real fold-out, but sometimes you need that big photo to show the sheer size. And you can still add tips & points over top of the photo where needed.

dmk

It depends on the topic of the article, but for a how-to, I think I agree with the others when they say it should be somewhere around 50/50 text to image.

 One of the things that is starting to get frustrating in FSM is articles that advertises a technique (let's say weathering, scratch building, casting, or whatever), but they show a lot of pictures of the technique completed, but little description of the step-by-step of how to do it. What little text there is seems to be bragging about how they used <insert brand> detail items.

 

As an frequently-published FSM author, I can tell you  that the text of the article you see depends on two things--the ability of the writer to convey his ideas, and the skill of the editors to consolidate those words into a concise explanation. Every one of my submitted articles gets edited in some way for brevity and/or spacial consideration. Generally, my published articles have been very well-edited and arranged, with not much omission.

But a writer who is not necessarily that eloquent might not give enough material to allow for a clear explanation.

As a guitar teacher, I can also add that some guys really can "teach" the complex ideas and theory behind music, while other guys think that plopping a student down with a book in front of them and saying "play that" is "teaching". What is comes down to is the ability to form a concept in one's mind and to be able to clearly articulate that to an audience. Writing a "how to" article is the same as teaching, really. Some people are better at it than others, so if you don't see enough text to suit you, it may just be that that person is not as good a communicator as he is a modeler.

Personally, I LOVE to read. I crave it actually. Nothing ups your IQ points more.

Don Stauffer

I know the current thinking for magazines is shorter text, more pictures.  FSM and other hobby mags are going this way too.  What do you guys think?  Do you really want picture books?  Certainly good pictures add to a how-to article, but I think well-written and extensive text is important too.

Editors tell me Americans can't read, they just want to look at pictures.  While this may be true for the average person, I wonder if serious hobbyists- ones who read mags like FSM, SA, and others really fit into this category.

These days, no product, no matter how long it has been with us, is on the market unless it has been "focus grouped" and the trend of shorter text and more pictures is happening because the focus group results showed the publishers that is what the  customers wanted.

Magazines are published for the largest mass, the "serious" have to deal with that fact of business.

I've noticed this trend also.  In some ways I really don't like it.  I think articles need a good balance but I do see a lot of magazines just putting in photo fluff to grab interest, while not really saying anything useful.  FSM Is one of the few that still have a decent ratio.  But FSM needs to find some more innovative articles.  After all, you can only read about doing washes so many times...

Rich

Don Stauffer

I know the current thinking for magazines is shorter text, more pictures.  FSM and other hobby mags are going this way too.  What do you guys think?  Do you really want picture books?  Certainly good pictures add to a how-to article, but I think well-written and extensive text is important too.

Editors tell me Americans can't read, they just want to look at pictures.  While this may be true for the average person, I wonder if serious hobbyists- ones who read mags like FSM, SA, and others really fit into this category.

It depends on the topic of the article, but for a how-to, I think I agree with the others when they say it should be somewhere around 50/50 text to image.

 One of the things that is starting to get frustrating in FSM is articles that advertises a technique (let's say weathering, scratch building, casting, or whatever), but they show a lot of pictures of the technique completed, but little description of the step-by-step of how to do it. What little text there is seems to be bragging about how they used <insert brand> detail items.

IMO, the writers should save reviews of resin, decals or whatever aftermarket items to review articles. If the article is about a technique, 90% of the text should be about that technique, with pictures backing up the descriptions in the text, not text explaining the pictures.

though i read lots  of words i have  known some people over the yrs that  have  trully brilliant minds who need to be shown     they  for lack of a better term  have a mental block  when it comes to reading paragraphs worth of words as inst on how to do something     

                   then of course there are the girly books   all i want is pics and no words

I think there should be a bit more text than pictures.

I agree,  The pictures provide so much valuable information to absorb, but we also need to know the details on how the results we see were reached.  It's funny, I just entered a post for a completed aircraft in the P-38 Group Build and had to tone down the explanation, because I thought I was creating too much text.  But you all know that there are so many steps, techniques, and little details that need some explanation, because we really do want to know how that look was created.  But this phenomenon has been growing in our society for years.  We want it now, we want it fast, and we want it easy.  But like you all hint, true artisans, like many here, do want to take the time to absorb and enjoy the story behind the pictures.  Rick

There are fantastic builds...then there are ordinary builds. They tend to have similar amount of coverage. Take away the useless kit description, where it was bought, history of the subject etc (my personal preference, I can find these easily from google, I don't need to pay for these info thank you very much) and...there's typically not all that much left of value.

I find Japanese magazines do more 'step-by-step' coverage of a build. Granted, not all builds are documented to the same degree. To have value, I ask myself - have I learnt something new technique-wise? Is there a step that I typically skip/gloss over, but there's explanation that if you don't do this, horrible things might happen? Is there a demonstration of a tool or even better a self-made rig to make a particular component?

pics and text go together  won't buy a picture book.Ron

I go to great lengths to use photographs taken while I am actually doing what I am writing about.

It does take some preplanning, but it is well worth it in the end IMHO. It is a challenge at times to remember to document as you proceed with the build process. Once you get into the groove of the build, stopping to snap images is a real PITA!

You also have to understand that many of the pictures in the articles are provided by the author, who may not be well versed in photography. It takes a special person who can build, photograph, write and work under a tight (sometimes very tight) deadline.

Agreed with Dre,

Staging a photograph of modeling 'action' was discussed in a different thread and yes its ridiculous unless some 'action' is happening. One day i will set up the tripod and get some technique in mid build.

Far as the OP (original post) I agree with the rest a picture says a thousand words yet supporting text is required.

*FYI A grown person needs at least 15 minutes a day of reading to maintain their thinker.

I'm OK with most of the photography that illustrates the written points, but those shots of a clean hand holding an empty AB that is pointed at a previously painted model, all of which is inside a photo booth..  those I can do without as they tell me nothing at all.   I know that it is wickedly impractical to shoot a photo while using an AB, but surely there's a better way to make whatever point is being made.

Just a pet peeve of mine.

...yes...

fermis

I do like pictures, so you can see the results of techniques(and inspiration), but those pics do need the text to tell you how the results were achieved. Like Vance said...50/50, they go hand in hand.

I agree. You do need captions with the photos to explain the techniques. Sometimes they cram in too much wordage at once in fewer photos, so that doesn't work as well for me.

I do like pictures, so you can see the results of techniques(and inspiration), but those pics do need the text to tell you how the results were achieved. Like Vance said...50/50, they go hand in hand.

Good question Don. When I was taking my design course10+ years ago we looked at the same issue, from an advertising angle of course. Go to a flea market etc. (or search the web for that matter) and find an ad for, well, anything. Auto ads seem the most obvious to me. Text was everywhere, because people wanted to read it...

Granted this one is for accessories, but even ads for the cars themselves had that much copy. Big ad agencies had a copywriting department! Grab a Road & Track and 3/4 of them have a giant photo, a sentence or two, the company branding & a website.

Modelers... tough question. If there is text there, yeah I'll read it. But when I read about a certain technique that was used, I'll flip the page to find the appropriate page if needed. I guess when it comes to actually building, we are very visual, but need the text to back it up. I think a 50-50 split is probably what I prefer to be honest. (Unless I'm reading some "research material", that can have very few pics.)