[Les]

Posted By East Broad Top on 09/02/2008 1:03 AM


I would like to think that a column called "Garden Railways Basics" would be recognized as being concepts for beginners, so in that light, I'd like to think there's something new for beginners in every issue.
Later,
K




I think right there you've laid bare an issue that nearly caused me to drop the magazine. Beginners need 'concepts', true. But they quickly progress to needing much more than that. Once a newbie learns about gauge, for instance, what else can one say? An issue not addressed in the year I've been subscribing deals with 'scales'. To my memory, there never has been a picture or drawing comparing ALL the various scales available in G. I think that issue is a very serious one. And I'm speaking of the mainline gauges, not the various narrow gauges that could be introduced by the occasional article on one of them.

If GR is indeed the foremost magazine in garden gauge, then nothing will change until change is forced.

Les W.

 

[Wendell Hanks]

Yes, the magazine is welcomed!
The difficultly, if there is one, is new subscribers from the ranks of those who have purchased starter sets for Christmas.
From the starter set group is where I started. I then saw an outdoor layout, heard the matra and the "It's OK to leave these toys outside" addage, and the how-to information.
I doubt this beginner population is growing. I don't thing the manufacturers are specifically targeting potential starter set owners or those who have them.

I see no complementary articles tucked into a starter set with the box indicating important information inside on how to enjoy large scale trains.
The only starter sets in two of the train stores I have recently been in are the older LGB Stainz sets with a price markdown or the words "collectible."

So the magazine will continue to be published until those who continue to subscribe stop doing so.

Wendell

 

[Road Foreman]

Guys,

Garden Railways has been doing a excellent job.. Look @ what is happing in large scale, to name a few: the LGB issue, the Bachmann socket, the price of every thing going up.. Companys have been sold, lots of new ones & some have gone broke..

If you look, they have been having to dodge & duck all kinds of flack, most created by stupid people..

BulletBob

 

[joe rusz]

Todd, the reason much of Garden Railways is written in the first person (BTW, no need to use quote marks here) is because that most of the stories are essentially how-to pieces, with the modeler/author (Kevin, Marty, Verducci, etc) recounting their experiences. It's subjective, not objective, as it is not really reporting. If you are refering to the use of the editorial "we," or "one," as opposed to "I," that went out with the Linotype.

As far as the old magazine versus print argument goes, I just spent several minutes printing several images posted by Richard Schmitt, because I wanted to save them in my model building file. The reporduction was crappy, compared to what you get in a magazine using quality paper (not GR or the one I write for) and after a while, all those paper copies tend to clutter up the old filing cabinet.

 

[joe rusz]

K, about making money from a website: I had a chat with one of our on-line guys and he told me that a certain automotive magazine (not the one I write for) stood to make $10 million off its site this year. The money is in the number of hits, which automobile manufacturers seem to equate with readership.

 

[East Broad Top]

I think right there you've laid bare an issue that nearly caused me to drop the magazine. Beginners need 'concepts', true. But they quickly progress to needing much more than that. Once a newbie learns about gauge, for instance, what else can one say?

About the very basics, not much, which is why my columns over the recent few years have been geared more towards what I call the "basics of the next steps," things like repainting locomotives, refurbishing old buildings, photography, those kinds of things. At various points, I do go back and revisit the "basic" basics, but the trick is to do so in a way that doesn't get repetitious. The information needs to be repackaged in a new context.

An issue not addressed in the year I've been subscribing deals with 'scales'. To my memory, there never has been a picture or drawing comparing ALL the various scales available in G. I think that issue is a very serious one. And I'm speaking of the mainline gauges, not the various narrow gauges that could be introduced by the occasional article on one of them.

Scale is actually one of the more difficult concepts to explain, for a number of reasons. First, there's the confusion of everything running on the same track which is a huge hurdle for one to get their hands around. Second, there's the fact that prototype trains of one gauge came in different sizes, so while a model may be labeled for one scale, it may serve quite well in another. I'd love for it to be black and white, but it's not. In truth, I could probably write 6 different columns on scale and gauge to fill an entire year's worth of magazines, and still have an audience of vastly confused people come December. It's a lot like geometry. Once it clicks, it all makes perfect sense. But until that point, it's a muddy, incomprehensible mess. Last, you've got to want to understand it. Many people in large scale simply don't have any interest whatsoever in scale. They just want something that looks cool running through the garden (which only perpetuates the first point). But your point is well taken, and given the flack in a similar thread, perhaps it's time to revisit.

Later,

K

 

[Les]

Posted By East Broad Top on 09/03/2008 1:28 AM
About the very basics, not much, which is why my columns over the recent few years have been geared more towards what I call the "basics of the next steps," things like repainting locomotives, refurbishing old buildings, photography, those kinds of things. At various points, I do go back and revisit the "basic" basics, but the trick is to do so in a way that doesn't get repetitious. The information needs to be repackaged in a new context.

Scale is actually one of the more difficult concepts to explain, for a number of reasons. First, there's the confusion of everything running on the same track which is a huge hurdle for one to get their hands around. Second, there's the fact that prototype trains of one gauge came in different sizes, so while a model may be labeled for one scale, it may serve quite well in another. I'd love for it to be black and white, but it's not. In truth, I could probably write 6 different columns on scale and gauge to fill an entire year's worth of magazines, and still have an audience of vastly confused people come December. They just want something that looks cool running through the garden (which only perpetuates the first point). But your point is well taken, and given the flack in a similar thread, perhaps it's time to revisit.
Later,
K




I want to make one last point before going away--two, actually. The first and most important is that I have no personal animus toward anyone involved with producing GR, at any level. I think, overall, it's a good-enough magazine. I once did tech writing for a magazine and an aircraft company (McDonnell-Douglas) and the like. I have some insight into the work necessary, though I admit up front I'm dated. (Pre-computer era). The old saw, "You can't please everyone all the time" is true. GR isn't meeting my needs (or more importantly, my wants).

Which leads to the second, most important point. A discussion arose about paid websites vs brick 'n mortar. I'm not going to illustrate the argument, it's old and should be well-understood. A point that was overlooked on both sides is this: I, for instance, pay $ to have the convenience of storing pixes and creating a blog (if I understand correctly--and I may not) on this site. That means, if my blog is successful in attracting input from others, a group of people with dissimilar interests can inhabit the same site without conflict. Or conversely if I find someone else's blog wherein the subjects are of interest I can post, which would act as a blog-limiter. It works out, then, that we have a number of subjects, each with a relatively minor following who send what are essentially 'letters to the editor (and others)'. Every day or every time the notion strikes. And most importantly, there's this factor: I read GR once and lay it in the pile. Rarely do I page back through old ones. They take up physical space. With a blog, everything tends to be organized, or at least is findable. As many times a day as I wish I can access the site, find the blog(s) I'm following and retrieve or add information. It's the 'Forum' format given over to amateurs, so to speak--though topical organization is still paramount.

All the above means that the host site gets lots of 'hits'/day, and makes money. Didn't You-Tube already invent this? /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/ermm.gif

That's the flexibility that sites have over hardcopy.

Regards,
Les

 

[toddalin]

Actually GR has done a very good job describing scale and gauge. Just look at page 13 of "Beginning Garden Railroading, A Supplement to Garden Railways Magazine."

 

[Les]

Todd,

If it's this month's, I'll go take a look. Here's why I missed it:

1) I'm not 'beginning' a 'garden' RR. My RR (SL, actually) will be an indoor layout, rather small. I've already said in another post that 'Gardening' as a subject is of little interest to me. Thus, the inclusion of scale under a header like that is open to question. A subline something like 'Scales, track, power supplies--everything you'll need to get going!' might not have hurt.

2) Just off the top of my head, the only indoor layout that GR ever featured was in a room approximately large enough to hold my house--and the one next door. Or perhaps most of a football field.

As it worked out, first health, then changing economic situations forced me to postphone starting my layout. This has turned out to be a very good thing, because instead of building and running, I've been forced to read and 'plan'-- plan being understood in the widest sense of the word. I had time to sketch out various features and think them through to a degree that showed I'd have to give up large engines and long trains. Since I'm more interested in building and switching/freight transfer, that'll work out just fine. Because my means are limited, my costs will be far less to achieve my purposes.

I'm glad you called that to my attention since I rarely re-read old GR issues.

Les W.

 

[NTCGRR]

Ol Kevin has to Work for a living, write articals to support his hobby, be a dad, husband and then come here to exsplain everything....
I don't think he ever relaxes.
I think,,"think" that I can say I accept all aspects of the hobby but for folks saying untruths about something. Untruths meaning pushing an issue to one side so far that there is not two sides to every issue.
Does that make cents?
I try to encouage those who have no idea what they are doing.
I put up with those who know ,,everything.
I "try" to be open minded about changes.
I don't need to be around those who don't want me around.
But I will not quit because of one or two folks.
I lost the rest of my thoughts.?????

 

[MarkLewis]

The argument about printed magazines vs. websites recently got very heated on the NMRA forum; They may have to raise the price of a subscription to Scale Rails to cover increased costs that are not being met by advertising revenue. A lot of members objected and said the magazine should be distributed on the web instead of being printed. The argument was a bit biased because only the members who use the internet were able to participate. In any event, the argument died because too many members are not computer savvy and the cost of the NMRA website would have gone up prohibitively to provide all the features that the magazine does.



With many of their other magazines, Kalmbach's website does offer useful features available to subscribers only. Much of this content is based on historical items that Kalmbach has collected over many decades. It's true that GR has attempted to follow that model, but in their case it looks like few of the authors provide the internet-ready supplemental content needed and they really don't have the history that other train-oriented magazines have. Why they don't use the historical information about RRs that Model Railroader uses, I don't know.


Garden Railroading is a hobby that includes several other hobbies not needed for traditional model railroading or even toy trains: gardening and water use. Both of those ancillary hobbies are served by magazines of their own. Thus many readers of GR find the discussion of plants either too superficial or too restricted in terms of climate subgroups to be of value. Personally, I find their articles on ponds very superficial and at times a bit dangerous (consider running electrified rail in areas where pond overflows can occur).


My complaint about GR is based on my perception that their articles (especially the cover stories) stress appearance at the cost of modeling detail and RR operations. Some of those stories actually scream at me: this last issue's cover story with the author's use of Pennsy signals in a desert RR is a case in point (that the author was most experienced in writing for Kalmbach's toy trains magazine may explain that blunder, but then since I never read that magazine I could be wrong about its content).


Personally I would love to see a magazine that treated mainline RRing in the garden as well as the narrow gauge publications have. GR is not that magazine and probably never will be.


Mark

 

[toddalin]

Posted By Les on 09/03/2008 3:15 PM
Todd,
If it's this month's, I'll go take a look. Here's why I missed it:
2) Just off the top of my head, the only indoor layout that GR ever featured was in a room approximately large enough to hold my house--and the one next door. Or perhaps most of a football field.
I'm glad you called that to my attention since I rarely re-read old GR issues.
Les W.

I don't know what magazine you've been reading because my GR magazine usually has a couple indoor layouts featured each year. "G", the last one I recall was in August 2008. "

 

[Les]

Yeah, the one I didn't get./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/sad.gif

Les

 

[Les]

Posted By MarkLewis on 09/04/2008 1:15 PM
The argument about printed magazines vs. websites recently got very heated on the NMRA forum; They may have to raise the price of a subscription to Scale Rails to cover increased costs that are not being met by advertising revenue. A lot of members objected and said the magazine should be distributed on the web instead of being printed. The argument was a bit biased because only the members who use the internet were able to participate. In any event, the argument died because too many members are not computer savvy....



///Hmm. That's darn thoughtful of them. I remember an ENTIRE year's subscription to MR devoted to making a computer-operated RR. A/D & every-wunnerful-thing. How to do PC boards. (I've never--and will never--subscribe to that mag again). This was back in the mid to late 80s, someplace. There were bunches of computer-illiterates back then. I had a hot Apple IIe. Whoa. Got to write it off my taxes as job related. Thus, I believe you can understand why the objection of 'computer illiteracy' doesn't move me very much. But I don't belong to NMRA. I just bought a bunch of old Bulletins out of the 70s, and they make good reading. I'm very computer ignorant, that's why I don't have my pix up. My daughter's been promising to come over and do it.

... this last issue's cover story with the author's use of Pennsy signals in a desert RR is a case in point

/// I didn't notice that. I guess, if a guy wants to run a Pennsy in the desert, I don't care that much. Kinda humorous, when it's pointed out, however./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue.gif I didn't read the article, either, as it's miles outside of my sphere of interest.
Mark




Les