Cover Art

[John Bunting]

Much as I look forward to the arrival of RCM&E each month, I get a feeling of, "Oh no, not again!" when the cover photo is revealed. Every month, for ages, we've had an oblique, foreshortened close up nose shot, with a few inches of wing showing each side, maybe a bit of fin and tailplane away in the distance, and a blank monochrome background. For example, the Sea Fury on the latest issue:  the whole thing looks posed and lifeless, and about as interesting as the bottom end of a milk bottle. Just occasionally, it would be good to see a picture of a whole aeroplane - or even half an aeroplane. Meanwhile, tucked away at the back of the magazine, there are the 'Parting Shot' photographs, which are of consistent high quality and full of interest. Why not put something that good on the cover?

[Tim Mackey]

I agree - and as has been discussed before, preferably with something / someone to lend it some scale ( but not scantily clad young ladies ) with a nice landscape background.

There must be thousands and thousands of other pictures that could be used - and it surely does not have to be a model that is being featured necessarily. The idea of a cover is to draw ones eye, and indicate the typical content.

John...why not write in your thoughts to the magazine itself, which in many ways exists in its own right, albeit associated with the forum. You never know...may end as letter of the month and win a big fat prize! 

[birdy]

The matter of the cover art again.... I agree about the way the cover is always pretty much the same monotumus, lifeless block of colour, but I also think that is one of the things that makes RCM&E stand out on the local newsagent (in the days where I did the monthly 2 mile weekend walk to get it), where all the other AMI, ModelWorld and co are using the whole grass and all stuff. And if we do go that way, scantily clad females are an absolute must. Just joking.

[John Bunting]

Been there, done that, Timbo. I emailed the Editor about two months ago, saying pretty much what I put on here.  No response so far!

[Ernie]

Hi Guys,

I agree, boring, boring. High res.studio shots. The last thing this hobby is about is  a photographic studio. Sodden runways, yes...dusty workshops yes.

Why not run a competition for  front covers.  They don't necessarily have to reflect the content of the magazine. Is their function, not to sell the magazine?

ernie

[Tim Mackey]

I will forward your comments on

[Erfolg]

I  am of the opinion that most purchasers of the magazine find the cover formulaic. Yet most other model magazine covers have a similar approach.

In some ways i do sympathise with the magazine staff. Why? Because every one has a list of do not want or like. For Timbo it is a scantily dressed young lady. For me not another Spitfire/Hurricane. There is someone else who has concerns about how the viewer percieves the image of a person.

I personally think it is better to produce covers that are suffiently different to get talked about, but constantly changing in image type. There are no taboos with womans magazine covers or even content. So why pussy foot when it is a mans magazine, as the number of youths who read it, are probably similar to children reading womans magazines.My wife bought a magazine Vanity Fair which had a picture of a naked pegnant Debi Moore on the cover but was linked to an inside article. The same of an almost nude David Beckam in on of my daughters magazines, linked to a product placement and celebrity endorsements story. I do not think these images reduced the circulation figures

One thing that needs to be recognised appeasement to extreme views and censorship does not encourage innovation, or a healthy society. Extremists always try to supress or extinguish alternative outlooks, in the name of "being fair", "safeguarding the vulnerable in society",   and you can all add your own similar quotes.

I sometimes think that there proportionaly less modellers as a fraction of the population today, because we are seen as sad old men, lacking in excitement. Yet at events such as Woodvale massive enthusastic crowds attend. We need modern covers which inspire.

We are now in the dying days of a regime which inspires mediocraty in the name "Health and Safety". Get ready for a change to something hopefully more inspiring. Give us some new covers that will take the publication forword.

The other benefit i would be able to

1. Find the magazine I want to reference.
2. Instruct/describe to my wife what it is i would like her to buy.

I think a major problem might be, that most covers of magazines have linkage to the content, which possibly makes producing an interesting image more difficult. Plus the cost issue. Plus time constraints. Plus some will still moan (ohh thats me). Plus some would threaten to buy another magazine if they do not approve (forget the thousands you have lost already to appease them)

Erfolg

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Erfolg]

Eric

I sence philipancy.

But it has been done.

There was one magazine that used water coloured pictures, there has been every thing and anything you can remotely connect with Radio or Aeromodelling. Yet all the UK magazines have a similar feel to the cover, never really varying

Talking with one of my relatives (some time ago) who owns a publishing house, he strayed into the role of the cover. In his opinion it was a major marketing tool in the area of sales. For unkown authors, exhibition booklets and monthly type publications, it can mean the difference between clearing out the print run or taking up warehouse space.  

Another aquantance has told me ( I do not know if true), that many publications are now produced with very little in thew way of in house journalists, that the printing technology makes short runs finacially viable. Yet margins can be vey tight as the distribution costs remain unchanged, the number of titles in each catogory of interest area has generally grown.

So I guess cost plays its part. But differentiating a title appears to me more important than ever.

A brief word with my wife about covers, had a view which will raise the hackles of many. sic.It is obsene to glory in machines whose sole purpose is to kill, maim and reak violence on individuals and the population as a whole, yet can find the picture of a woman offensive. I countered that these machines are seen as the protectors and the insurance policy of peace. Her reply, no wonder the world is as it is, your views are self serving, devoid of reality ( I did protest that theses views are not necessaily mine). I said I am interested in the planes, not the havoc that they may produce.

Perhaps fewer military planes?

Any way i want more varied covers.

Erfolg

[Tim Mackey]

I don't find the "glam pictures" at all offensive  - I am a healthy normal male and father of 3 - even a chauevenist at heart I suppose , but my wife finds them offensive, and is very sensitive about me seeing them...call it insecurity if you will, but she simply does not approve - she is no prude however, in fact she was a nurse most of her life, including private clinics specialising in shall we say..."enhancements".

However, should half naked females start appearing again on the cover of my mag ( which incidentally she also reads ) my life would get slightly more uncomfortable once more every month IYKWIM 

[Erfolg]

Timbo

I am not having a go at you in particular. I am having a go at me as well. I am just finishing off my TA 152, so I am at odds with my wifes views (allthough the first military plane in 30 years). Being a Christian I now hold views which are unacceptable to the Government and official government departments, yet were main stream only 10 years ago.

It does strike me that once David and Graham pander to my and others prejudices and believes, pretty soon there is nothing much left.

But I would like to see a bit more radical thinking with regard covers. For the magazines and the  hobbies sake. As I do believe our image is a little last year with the public and I fancy many of us (which could well be me) fit that description.

Erfolg

[Tim Mackey]

I agree  Erfolg - as I said earlier...the recent cover shots have been naff as far as artistic effort and so on. I would be happier with the items being shown "in the field" as it were..such as this one maybe ?

[Erfolg]

I just wandered down stairs to the lounge, their lying on the coffee table was last weeks Telegraph colour supplement. It is a picture of a model in a pair of shorts and a bikini type top, leaping in a moon type landscape (Morocco?). These types of images hit the newstands every week, causing no offence.

I then cleared my newspaper from the floor, before my wives return, to save myself from a lecture on tideness and newsprint marking the beige carpet. What did i see a magazine, "Now" with images of two (very) scantilley attired men in swim suits.

To some extent I can understand the position of the proprieters of the magazine in not wishing to upset those who may influence its purchase. Yet I suspect there readership will deminish unless it is recognised that appeasing these very people will despatch our hobby to the foot note of cultral history, as we cease to be part of the modern young mans world, who is not afraid to expect the same level of imagry and content as other publications destined for family or female viewing.

We are not talking about nudity or even soft porn, but every day images seen on the high street, the beach and on other non-controverial publications.

Remember the ever so safe "Womans Weekly" ceased to exist as it became irrelevant to its female readers.

Erfolg  

[John Bunting]

Hooray, that's better!

Having complained, a few months ago, about the quality of RCM&E cover art, I am happy to see that a distinct improvement has now taken place. Mike Goldby's Sopwith Dolphin on the January cover is not only a superb looking model, but well photographed, in a natural setting. True, we still don't see all of it, but you can see nearly all if you turn to page 27. Sorry to read that you were unwell during the meeting, Mike: hope you are better now.

[Mikey Wood]

I'm completely new to modeling and flying, so bear with me.
I noticed a few posts mentioning the decline In popularity of modeling hobbies. It got me thinking.

The following aren't necessarily my views or beliefs, more thoughts and hypothesis.

I'm thinking the loss In popularity Is down to a lot more things than just the magazine cover Isn't appealing enough. Particularly the building side of things maybe more to do with these "ready made" £30 Argos things.
It Is similar to that of home cooking - People are cooking less due to fast food and "ready meals".

I know a nice looking cover Isn't going to make me buy the magazine If I haven't been introduced to modeling In the first place by a friend or relative. I'll just walk past the shelf where It sits, lost between the endless amounts of other magazines.

I've just done my first build! I haven't got a "ready to fly" thing. I was introduced to modeling by my Dad, and I believe If I hadn't have helped him with his models the past few weeks, i would have not known how much I enjoy doing It and therefor would not buy the magazine.
I guess what I'm trying to say by that Is - Someone might not even realise they're Into building models. When you get these ready to fly things, you don't have the feeling of achievement when It's completed, or the worry and excitment of it's maiden flight.

The only way to keep It alive Is pass on your knowledge.

Another possible reason Is this "health and safety" world we live In. I couldn't get a taste of flying unless I got insurance, then join a club because you can't actually fly a "park flier" In a public park. As well as have to pass an exam to be able to fly In the club. Soon are the days where we will need insurance to ride a pedal bike or to push a pram - anything.

 The only reason I managed to get a taste of flying was because I was taken slope soaring. Just threw It off the edge and flew the damn thing (on a buddy lead of course).
I wouldn't mind giving powered flight a go because of it - not just yet though, lets get sloping aced first.

I don't think it matters whether there Is a female model wearing a belt for a skirt or just the prop of a plane - It's the content, the stories, the crashes, the reviews. Also RCM&E can not please everybody.

I'm sorry If people disagree, heck - I'm not even sure I agree Its just some thoughts.

[Erfolg]

Mikey

There are almost certainly many reasons for the current level of aeromodelling and its age profile.

You are again almost certainly correct in saying that the cover of a magazine will not recruit many new modellers.

However i do think that magazine covers do have an impact. A good cover should entice a potential purchaser, to want to know what is inside. Yes, some will buy a magazine, month in month out, out of habit and believe that this magazine is for them or is always the best. The majority however, may not share that view and need seducing to find out more.

Until recently, I was unaware that there is an annual prize awarded by the Publishing Industry, for the years best cover. The basis and thinking behind the award is that the cover is highly influencial in determining the purchase choice of discriminating people. One of my close relations is a publisher, who has confirmed that he invests a lot of time in ensuring that the covers of his companies publications, are attractive to the audience he is addressing. This ranges from books, scientific journals and major museum  exhibitions.

In reality, it matters little what i think. What matters is what the policies of the Editor and owners of RCM&E think and do.  

[Alan B]

As we say in our magazine business.  "The front cover is our shop window"  At the end of the day the front cover design has to catch the eye of the browsing public to set your magazine apart from the competition..

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Alan B]

Hi Phil

There is plenty of competition out there Phil.  In the case of RC mags mostly you will find them in W H Smiths, Menzies and model shops etc  Not Tesco's.  Most magazines employ a whole sale distributor.  It is their job to get the magazines into as many relevant shops as possible to boost sales.

As far as Tesco's, Morrissons etc are concerned you cannot just put your magazine into these places. You have to go onto a waiting list for them either to consider you.  Especially if your are a small publisher and not a major publishing group.  In our case we have been offered a trial 3 month period in selected Tesco stores in the Midlands area. That has taken us nearly 5 years to get that far as the magazine has grown, and we are only a small family business.

Magazines are a complicated business.  Yes you have your readers but magazines sales are just a small part of your recovered running costs.  There is a lot of wastage in this business. A shop may receive for example 20 magazines and only sell 9. that means 11 unsold mags have to be absorbed into your running costs as you still have to pay your staff, printers ,designers etc irrespective of how many that haven't been sold. So you might say! then just supply the shop with 10 magazines. Then the following month they go and sell the whole 20!    It is very frustrating!! The main income that pays the bills is the advertising. You need to sell the advertising. So for example if your your production costs are £10,000 a month then you need to sell £10,000 of advertising just to break even.

It is a very worrying time for the publishing industry at the moment like most Industries.  People are pulling there belts in and are very selective with their now reduced advertising budgets. Everbody is now scrapping for any available advertising. Even usual regular advertisers do not now advertise at all, they are waiting for they economy to pick up. So our problem is now  -is how are we going to put a few thousand more magazines into Tesco's as there is hardly any advertising out there to pay for it! Its a catch 22 situation.

All I can say to all readers is to support your favourite Magazine. Not only to buy the magazine, but when you approach a advertiser with your business is to mention where you have seen their advert. That then makes them think where the best place is to advertise with their reduced budgets. Hopefully your favourite magazine!! The catch 22 situation with us modellers is . Our prospective buys have gone up on average of 50%. So we think - we will wait a bit till the price comes back down.  The Retailer dosn't get the sales - so they cut their advertising budget!  Its a vicious circle.

We have one pay for magazine and the other is a free magazine. The free magazine is purely advertising driven to support it . Reduced advertising means less pages, reduced print runs and distribution. No advertising - No magazine!!  People loose ther Jobs. The last annoying point is that our magazine sales have gone up 30% every year. Which is wonderfull on paper, but just magazine sales wont support the magazine.

As I have already said - very worrying times.

Well thats my 2p's worth

Al

[Gemma Jane]

Probably a very large factor in the reduction of the sale of magazines is actually the medium we are now communicating with. If I buy a model and run into problems, 30 minutes searching the net usually provides numerous solutions and opinions, if that doesn't work, well I post and ask directly.

The fact RCM&E has this very active forum to its credit will ensure that it remains in my view and I will be honest that I bought my subscription after visiting here.

Years and years ago I only had one window on the world of aeromodelling, namely the old aeromodeller magazine, that was it, if the answer wasn't in there I had to find out for myself as I knew nobody locally who was into flying models.

I think in many ways aeromodelling is healthier than it ever was due to the ease one can now find success in the flying aspects. A look on youtube will show that many young people fly models like the HZ Cub or mCX. All this far more successfully than when I started out by building kits such as FF CO2 models and watched most of them get destroyed on the first flight. Don't write the young people off either, many are prepared to modify the models and upgrade them, soon they will have a taste for building from plans and kits and perhaps designing their own models. I'm sure too that they will use any of the modern materials available to them and that is just what aeromodelling should be about. As they progress throught those mediums don't be in the least surprised to see them buying balsa and building scale models 30 years down the line. 

What doesn't really change much is magazine content. I often read articles that actually tell me very little that I didn't already know, with perhaps just one paragraph of information that gets stored away for future reference. So that brings up what is the purpose of the magazine? Does it assist in the knowledge of aeromodelling or is its purpose more as I use it to just read about a hobby that for me was a long time dead but was hiding in the wings (excuse the pun) to entice me once again. You see the young won't do that, they will just go out fly the model and if they have a problem ask any of a thousand people who have been there and done that what they should do about it on the internet.

PS half naked women on the cover, hmmm if you want to consign the magazine to the image of an old mans hobby that would be just the way to go!

The exclusively male orientation always seems a bit of a turn off. Glad to see in the January mag there was at least one article that said his or hers models etc, that was refreshing!

So perhaps in a long winded way I arrive at congratulations on the January cover, it captures all the essence of why I buy the magazine, aeromodelling, please don't go for a studio shot for February

[Erfolg]

Al/Gemma

I generally agree with all if most of what you have said, particularly Al.

I personally do not  (particularly) want half naked young/woman or men on the cover, but like it or not, plenty of young woman and men buy magazines of all topics which feature naked, semi naked bodies, partyicularly womans magazines, for cosmetics adverts, alchohol and articles regarding celebraties etc. The youngs mens magazines, feature woman semi naked in any context they can be worked in. Will they survive long term? I do not know. But they do sell to young people of all gendres. Please do not get all Mary Whitehouse and prissy, because you do not approve. Again,  I do not want naked woman or men on the cover, but I would not mind some humans, even a child in the cockpit of a 1/4 scale glider. But I have no problem with those who do want tasteful human  models included, however dressed.

Regarding young people. I personally do not think enough are atracted to our type of modelling, particularly to sustain and increase the scale of the activity. I do not subscribe to the closed club argument either. Yet it is not just our hobby. Being a keen cyclist until taking up modelling again, I found that the club i was a member, comprised mainly of over 45s. Will Hoy, Pemberton (nude on bike) and my favorite Nichol Cook etc. may hopefully change this situation for cycling. I fear we are a little like trainspotters. Once mainstream, now seen as a little nerdy.

The point that Al makes about advertising is very worrying, as the retail and to some extent the wholesale market is becoming very much businesses based in a room , with a computer. Manufactures seem to all but have disappeared. Yet again we do have the Bel-airs and West Wings, doing there best in the UK. Although I lement ther passing of KK, Veron, Mercury(and subsidaries) and Frog etc., I cannot ever see a UK revival. The brighter aspect is that the Far East has the equivalent businesses now, is this their Golden Era?

Erfolg 

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[flytilbroke]

Erfolg, You do the wrong kind of biking, our Mountain biking scene is full of younger people.

As for Aeromodelling the young folk don't know what it is, nor are most willing to go to the hassle of learning when they can't get to a flying site without a great deal of difficulty. Gone are the days when it was acceptable to go to the nearest big bit of park and do your own thing.

That said not many clubs are willing to go through the hassle of complying with so much advised formal ^%^&*(&^.. legal stuff to do with young people.

I LIKE nice ladies, they make a pretty picture, just not much sense on a modelflying Magazine cover though

[Mikey Wood]

I may be wrong but, When It comes to the sales of the magazine (I mean this magazine In particular, not other beauty, or Pop mags) It doesn't matter about the cover,

If you have subscribed, your getting It despite what the cover Is - Job done, SOLD!
If you're buying It each month at the local shop -  If It didn't have a picture you particularly liked, you're not going to put It back on the shelf and say "Nah, It looks %$*&, Not buying It this month"

Maybe that's why there has been all these big BRIGHT, flashy looking pictures each month. The magazine Isn't trying to sell It to YOU with the cover - you're already going to buy It. Maybe they did It to make the magazine brighter and more noticeable - To stand out on that shop shelf for the possible newcomer.
Whilst this months picture Is a wonderful one, that the majority Is happy about, It is more likely to get lost In the magazine shelves because of the colours - Quite dull compared to bright pink "THIS CELB BARES ALL NOW"
Last months was the bright yellow one If I remember rightly, that stood out.
I think If they follow the theme of this months In the next few issues, people will be complaining saying "oh not another one, can't we have a nice bright spitfire " (maybe not )

Really, It doesn't matter to me what RCM&E do with the cover. Somebody Is ALWAYS going to complain. One person may want to see a spitfire cover, the other may say "I'm going to scream If I see another spitfire"

Some may want naked girls In an airbrushed studio shot, the others may want a scale model In a field.

This thread could go on forever, why RCM&E chose the covers they did, when the only real answer will come from someone who works for the magazine and who knows the actual reason why.

 Mikey.

[Erfolg]

flytibroke

Yes I agree there are far more young mountain bikers, possibly a pretty representative age distribution. The image of mountain biking is quite positive from a young persons perspective, exciting, breaking the rules, a bit of danger and tremendous commarderie. I think the UK image of track cycling is changing for the better, be it on the velodrome or grass track. Just think that road and TT are not there.

With regard the covers, if the cover grabs your attention , you may well pick that one up first. If the content grabs you, you possibly will look no further..

Then again if you are that individual, who is unaffected by advertising, or the label, you will not be affected.