NEW LOOK – Model Engineer & Workshop

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Michael, Neil did mention somewhere about not being able to use & in his email address and that he would likely stay with what he has now.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Some reactions.

Most people have reacted positively, a few after ‘sleeping on it’ and reading the magazine properly, which is welcome.

For this issue, unlike MEW and ME we actually had full proofreading (Diane and I proofed each other’s content). Clearly a few things still got through, presumably because it was such a huge task pulling the issue together. It may not seem like it, but almost everything was redesigned from the ground up, and many things went through several changes. Hopefully we will get more time for actual; editing and proofing in the future.

The Club News font, in particular, does seem faint. I will check this with the designer.

The paper is the same as for MEW and ME previously. It’s possible that a different designer led to pictures being printed more densely, again something we can look at.

Photo quality, we are beholden to what we are sent by contributors. Some of the material was not ideal, but I felt most images reproduced to a good or at least acceptable standard. This has always been a problem, and I have to accept we will never compete with the likes of National Geographic and BBC Wildlife Magazine…

The actual number of ‘feature pages’ depends on what you consider a ‘feature’ but it increased by at least 25%.

There was considerable overlap between the publications, so feature content could be ME or MEW – so for example, Casting Strakes, Depthing Tool and Comsol were all lined up for MEW in the near future but would not have looked out of place in ME, and hopefully have interested readers of both magazines (that was my intent).

Putting the ampersand in my email wasn’t possible, so meweditor@mortons.co.uk is the obvious choice. I know also get anything sent to meeditor@mortons.co.uk, use whichever you prefer, but replies will come from mew…

Anyway, it seems most readers think we are moving in the right direction and your feedback will mean a few tweaks in the next issue.

We will be sending out a survey soon, it will be based on articles in the issues of ME and MEW before the change, and will focus on the type of content you want, not design. This is deliberate, as we want to cover a wide range of ME and MEW content, not just what was in the first ME&W. Please look out for the survey.

Many thanks all,

Neil

[bernard towersParticipant @bernardtowers37738]

You are always going to be compromised with the images as file size restrictions are in place

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

I’m not aware of any size restrictions for submission, the author pack suggests a minimum of 3MB but not a maximum. The ones I have been sending in lately have the camera set at 12M.

Still waiting for mine to arrive

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Keep up the good work, Neil

I am, thus far, delighted with my change to ‘Digital’ which is very useable on the iPad.

Just out of interest [absolutely no offence intended to anyone] here’s a screen-shot of one small portion from the archived MEW 317 which nicely shows both text readability and the perils of using low-resolution images.

MichaelG.

Note: __ The forum software will presumably limit the effectiveness of this, so I shall eMail it to you as-is [hence my sudden interest in ampersands]

.

 

[Michael Gilligan]

On Michael Gilligan Said:

Keep up the good work, Neil

I am, thus far, delighted with my change to ‘Digital’ which is very useable on the iPad.

Just out of interest [absolutely no offence intended to anyone] here’s a screen-shot of one small portion from the archived MEW 317 which nicely shows both text readability and the perils of using low-resolution images.

MichaelG.

Note: __ The forum software will presumably limit the effectiveness of this, so I shall eMail it to you as-is [hence my sudden interest in ampersands]

.

Thanks Michael.

I’m not entirely sure what the issue is there… the picture is blown up about 600%  and looks fine in print. I think the text there is vector and can be blown up almost indefinitely and remain sharp.

[bernard towers]

On bernard towers Said:

You are always going to be compromised with the images as file size restrictions are in place

Print resolution is 300dpi,

The pages are just under 12 x 9″ across, so for a full portrait style page image you need 3,600 x 2,700 pixels.

That’s approximately 10 megapixels.

Most images we use are smaller, a typical large image is about 8 x 6″ landscape needing 2,400 x 1,800 pixels or 4 megapixels. Three megapixels is fine for most images we use.

It’s nice to have at least few larger images (especially for header shots of overall views of a project).

The worst is when we are sent thumbnails or images embedded in a document (word of pdf) that may have been automatically reduced in resolution and potentially over-compressed.

It’s easier to recover a low resolution, but sharp, image than recover an over-compressed high resolution image.

These days, most images straight off a phone are usable – the real bane of an editor’s life are people who switch off auto-exposure and auto-focus on ‘proper’ cameras because they think they can do better… not everyone can!

Neil

[JasonB]

On JasonB Said:

Michael, Neil did mention somewhere about not being able to use & in his email address and that he would likely stay with what he has now.

Lots of things have been ‘mentioned somewhere’ in this transition

… I just wanted to make sure that the address printed in the new publication was valid.

No harm done, I trust … or too many data-bits squandered.

MichaelG.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

The digital version has the faint text for club news so unlikely to be a printing issue.

The Drilling article also seems to have suffered with the subheadings and references not done in bold or colour

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

So when will we see a preview in the latest issues bit at the top right?

[John MCParticipant @johnmc39344]

Made one of my very rare visits to the town centre this morning.  While my partner was busy elsewhere I nipped into WH Smiths thinking I might be able to buy a copy of ME&W.   No sign of it.  Has it been published yet?

 

 

[alan ord 2Participant @alanord2]

I have not received my copy as of this morning and the postman has been and gone!!

Alan

[John HinkleyParticipant @johnhinkley26699]

I’m keeping an open mind about the content at the moment.  I was worried that there might be too much steam-related material for my taste. (I can appreciate the engineerings skills, but the models don’t appeal.  But that’s my problem, no one else’s.)

I note the advert for the Midlands Model Exhibition on page 75, but my time machine is temporarily out of MOT, so I’ll not be able to go back to 2015 to visit it!

John

 

[dc1Participant @dc1]

Hi Derek, no I live in Cleethorpes. HoweverI have had both my legs removed below the knee. So I don’t go out more than about 3 times a year to hospital and that is by ambulance.

I had cancer just after leaving as editor which knackered my veins (chemotherapy).

I had been gradually getting weaker over the few years since and got dizzy if I stood up. I had the legs removed about 3 years apart, quite funny really.

The first one was removed bit by bit because I had a tiny blood blister the size of a match head which gradually got worse. As the infection grew, the doctors kept chopping lumps of my foot. I asked what was wrong and they said I had a super bug so  said is it in the foot or my leg? They said in your foot so  said what if you cut the leg off? They said it will remove any infection. So I said cut it off. Four hours later, I woke up and rang my wife to say they had cut my leg off. She did not believe me.

The second leg was interesting. I had a bed sore on my heel. They could control it but not cure it. So we had a discussion about chopping it off. 4 hours later, it was gone. Then I had to ring my son up, my carer, to say they had cut my other leg off.

I had it cut off because I needed a cataract operation but they could not do it if I had an infection. My eyes were more important than a useless leg.

The operation was interesting. Because I had a pacemaker fitted nine months earlier, they could not knock me out for the operation so they did it under a local anaesthetic. I tried to see in the wall mirror the operation but the surgeon was standing in front of the mirror so no luck. It did vibrate a lot as the saw went through.

 

 

 

[dc1Participant @dc1]

Probably not until Friday morning. Subscribers get their copy a few days earlier still waiting for mine.

[dc1Participant @dc1]

I have just seen the new issue on Readly.

It is a definite improvement. Especially Neil’s photo. He looks like a real editor, not some hippy tree hugger.

Some Likes, Some Dislikes

Overall very good.

Photos are quite detailed, many are too detailed, the spring tool holder shows up all the machining marks because they are too large. The drawing for fig 2 is badly dimensioned, the 8 mm holes for the bolts should be dimensioned as centres rather than from 2 different datums and the angles are not dimensioned very well either. The photo of the dovetail cutter gives no useful information and should have been replaced or just binned.

Harold Hall

Interesting article. I never met Harold but I think I exchanged emails with him once.

The section, The Publishing Process, should have made it clear that it was by Harold Hall. It just ran on from the editors’ rather than being defined as its own section.

The Geometer section reprints.

These are interesting but should be reprinted properly. I started the reprinting of old articles when Model Engineer increased to 68 pages. They were a way to fill pages without having to pay contributors which covered the cost of printing extra pages. However, I scanned the text in, re-edited it, and had the images redrawn. The way it is done now is a lazy way and it looks like someone has just copied and pasted something in to fill the space.

Club News

Ok but I think the font is different to the rest of the magazine. It looks like a finer font rather than washed out like others have said.

And Finally, Another Joke? I don’t understand.

 

Lunar mission, do we really need this? Anyone with half a brain will have seen this on the news a long while ago.

The machinery, fragile cartoon was again a waste of space. If there are insufficient adverts available, miss it out for an issue. Perhaps one issue, a half page form followed by half page of adverts or better still, redirect to adverts on the website.

Overall, a great improvement over the last 10 years, keep it up.

I did spot a typo but I was deliberately not looking for them.

Real Dislikes

Postbag – Justified text in logo looks stupid.

A Round Tuit should have ben thrown away years ago.

Too many black backgrounds on headers and header photos.

Captions directly onto photos. A flag for the number and a separate caption would be better or is this a new method of ensuring captions and photo numbers don’t get mixed up?

[John MC]

On John MC Said:

Made one of my very rare visits to the town centre this morning.  While my partner was busy elsewhere I nipped into WH Smiths thinking I might be able to buy a copy of ME&W.   No sign of it.  Has it been published yet?

 

 

Late last year I cancelled my subscription to MEW as I felt it was not what it used to be, the last issue I received confirmed I had made the right decision. I then found out from discussions on this forum that the (next) final issue of MEW was a step change in quality. I want to buy the new ME&W with a view to re-subscribing so I made a rare visit into town yesterday for the sole purpose of buying a copy from (a fairly large) WH Smiths.

I was unable to find it on the shelves and an assistant (begrudgingly) looked on the computer and initially could not even find the title but when they did could only inform me that is was ‘Not in stock’.

I asked if it had been in stock and sold out, or was on order and had not yet arrived but the only response I could illicit was that its was ‘Not in stock’!

Not sure if there is any method a prospective customer can see the goods without explicitly ordering a copy, which is probably too late now anyway for the first issue.

Ian P

[VersabossParticipant @versaboss]

Hello all,

I’m a bit disappointed that none of the esteemed participants posted a photo of the new title page.

I dearly would like to know if it has ended better than the failed preview.

Regards,
Hans

[Nick WheelerParticipant @nickwheeler]

Ian you won’t find it on the shelf before its publication date, which is this Friday. Subscribers might get it a few days earlier; mine arrived today.

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Thanks Nick

Ian

[Versaboss]

On Versaboss Said:

Hello all,

I’m a bit disappointed that none of the esteemed participants posted a photo of the new title page.

I dearly would like to know if it has ended better than the failed preview.

Regards,
Hans

Don’t get your hopes up, Hans

.

.

 

MichaelG.

[ claiming no esteem ]

.

P.S. __ I was interested to note that pocketmags is numbering it 349

… that should cause some confusion !

.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Ian, you could also purchase a single issue digitally from Pocketmags to see what it is like if you don’t mind that format and don’t want another trip to Smiths.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

The latest ME&W is accessable from the Archive by going to “Model Engineer” Hopefully the headings will get changed as well as the “latest Issue top right”

Here is a larger cover for those that want it. Shame the business end of the parting tool got cropped. Problem with designers not knowing the subject but should have been checked. Or was it to generate more interest by those thinking it is a rear mounted one!

Also says “Plans” to build the parting tool but there is only one half dimensioned elevation

Not sure the white text for the strakes works on the mixed colour background

[Versaboss]

On Versaboss Said:

Hello all,

I’m a bit disappointed that none of the esteemed participants posted a photo of the new title page.

I dearly would like to know if it has ended better than the failed preview.

Regards,
Hans

No, it’s unchanged from the preview. It looks even more of a mess on paper

[Trumpet / FlugelParticipant @trumpetflugel]

My paper copy of the new title arrived a couple of days ago. I’ve been a subscriber to both ME and MEW for many years and always eagerly await the next issue. I’ve now had several sessions of reading the new title and find it to be a really interesting magazine. There are some articles which interest me more than others, but that can be said of my daily newspaper too. Overall a good mix of articles.

I was concerned by some of the comments on the forum about the “print being washed out”. My copy is fine. The ink weights and registration are as would be expected from the web offset process which has produced good clear printing of the text, photos, ads and other graphics.

Some text may appear to be “washed out” because I think a “light” variety of the font has been used as opposed to a “medium” or “roman” option. For example, the Club News pages show this well. But looking at the bold type used as paragraph headings and photo references shows that the inking is fine: it’s the font which is causing the comments.

Given the long history of the “Model Engineer” and the important contribution of “Model Engineers’ Workshop” to our hobby and the changing world of pastimes and publishing I think that Neil and Diane and the many backroom colleagues who have been involved in moving us to the present situation deserve a great deal of credit and our thanks. Long may the new magazine thrive and I really look forward to the next issue.

Peter.

 

[Author]

Posts