Coggy, I agree with your comments and MEW is not the only culprit in this respect and of another frustrating event not mentioned by you. It is this, photos generally, often too small to see detail clearly and some photos of workshops where the background includes something of interest, perhaps another machine or tool.

John

Edited By DMB on 29/12/2022 08:33:18

It's mostly down to how the author spaces out references to pics in their text. If an author puts in six references to pics in the first few paragraphs, then no more until halfway through the story, obviously some of the pics relating to the early text will end up on the same page as some of the later text, because there is a limit to how many pics you can fit on one page and still have room for text.

And some subjects etc do not lend themselves to pic references at regular intervals. Plus it depends too on what pics the author took while he or she was working on the project. I often get involved in the job and forget to take pics of some critical stage, then remember and take a load of pics of the next stage, so when it comes to putting it all together there are patches of "feast or famine".

And remember, a lot (probably most) ME and MEW contributors are not publishing professionals, but simple home hobbyists having a go. So don't expect National Geographic.

While I agree with Coggy, I also understand the problems as stated by Jason and Hopper, so. Noel.

Having written a few articles my sympathies are with the editor who has to finesse whatever rough diamonds are contributed by his authors into the space and format available. Must be like assembling a jigsaw puzzle from random pieces provided by a crowd.

I imagine contributions vary tremendously from digital professional quality to handwritten notes with blurry photographs and incomprehensible sketches. The magazine seems to put more emphasis on publishing interesting work than insisting on the author having top quality production values, but it means the editor and team have to put a lot more effort into beautifying and organising contributions. The originals might not be crystal clear.

Some of the images I provided were general scene setters that could go almost anywhere or be left out entirely. Others went with particular sections of text. It's hard work for the author to indicate this, typically by putting a marker in the text 'picture 4 near here' in the text. These instructions are easy to get wrong and the editor has to them strip out. I provided an indexed list of images in hope of clarifying which was which.

No idea whether Neil used it or not, but I created a PDF of the finished article complete with images where I thought they should all go. I used it as part of my checking process; asking does this make sense as a whole. It's amazing how obvious errors creep past: it's because anyone close to the work reads what they expect to see, not what it actually says.

So I sent the editor:

• The plain text in an acceptable word processor format with referenced hints about image placement.
• A folder full of JPG images, plus an index giving a reference number and description of what they were.
• A PDF of the whole article in A4 format, with images placed where I, the author, would put them. This document is just a hint because the magazine isn't in A4 format, and the article will always have to be structured rather differently in print.

A magazine issue is assembled from these and other contributions individually laid out as their authors see fit. The editor has to bring a disparate range of stuff together, a job that might require major changes to the text, creating new images, and working round images that can't be made printable. There's more to being an editor than fixing a few spelling and grammar mistakes! Depending on what Neil gets, I'd imagine some MEW issues are straightforward to put together, whilst others are a nightmare. Of course mistakes are bound to be made!

Was it done better in the past? Maybe. One of my Model Engineering mags from the late fifties / early sixties lists a gigantic editorial team, from memory more than a dozen people. Hard to see how they were all paid! I think the modern magazines are produced by much smaller teams, and all in glorious technicolour too.

Dave

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 29/12/2022 15:48:56

Whilst I appreciate the frustration expressed by the OP, any aspiring author can ask Neil for the contributors notes – running to some 9 pages – which, if adhered to, would assist the editor in the layout of the submitted article. I only have the notes for MyTimeMedia contributions dated 2014, but I would think that the Mortons Media guidelines follow much the same principles.

John

I don't see the layout issue the OP mentions as a big problem. Just my opinion.