6mm and 10mm represented in latest Wargames Illustrated

[Norm]

There has long been a feeling that magazines concentrate on the larger scales for photographic reasons and that any sense of balance of what is happening in the real wargame world is lost.

The postman has just delivered the latest Wargames Illustrated (this should be in the shops at the end of the month) and there is a goodly nod to both 6mm and 10mm, so well done them, I hope they see a pick up in sales at WH Smiths, so that they are encouraged to do more of the same.

[Leman]

There has been a  long-running thread on the Baccus forum about this very topic.

[Norm]

Yes, I found that and tried to add a comment, but not for the first time my password (I love Pendraken) was not accepted, so will have to go down the 'forgotten' password' route again to sort it out!

I think Pete Berry, is right in his questioning about the consistent magazine content over the years and the general lack of diversity, as a magazine just representing a single large scale at the expense of others is not reflecting the type of gaming that many gamers are doing at home. I suppose looking at the advertisement content of the mags tells it's own tale.

I have been an avid buyer of all three magazines for many years, but this year, for the first time, that blind loyalty is under review.

Interestingly, over the last 3 years or so at wargame shows, there has been a real positive shift towards 'kitchen table' type gaming, with those tables taking their place alongside the 12 - 16 foot tables.   

[Subedai]

Three words...about bl**dy time!

[Steve J]

I know one of the WI photographers and we chatted about this subject several years ago. Frankly at shows it is hard to get magazine quality pics, mainly due to the lighting. 28mm is, apparently, more forgiving in this respect. Not sure of this is true as I know sod all about photography

[Leon]

Good to see this when our magazine arrived today!  I'm hoping we can see more like this going forward.

[Leman]

I can't imagine a professional photographer preparing photos for a magazine and knowing how B awful sports centre etc. lighting is, would travel to such a venue without at least a small portable light. After all, the photos appearing in the magazines these days do not look as though they have been taken 'in passing'.

[Womble67]

it's always good news when the smaller scales are in the magazines

Take care

Andy

[Subedai]

Most decent SLR -Single Lens Reflex not Self Loading Rifle- camera's nowadays have the ability to take pictures in 'RAW' which are the unedited versions of the pics in question. You can set the RAW files to be up to the max number of pixies you can fit in the back of your camera so the pixies are all there, they are just not painting fast enough to show the full picture. You can edit them till your hearts content so even the pic is not all that clear, programs such as Photoshop or Lightroom can do a good job on them. I've taken pics that looked like a black cat in a coalhouse at midnight but Photoshop has sorted them for me.

I reckon the magazine photographers just see 6 and 10mm as not being photogenic enough and can't be ar*ed.

[Steve J]

A lot of truth I think in what you say Subedai. Certainly 28mm etc can look better (which is subjective I admit) in the relatively small images within a magazine. Also IIRC there was talk before about pressure from the big boys in wargaming wanting their products on display, or they might withdraw their advertising revenue etc. I'm certainly going to buy the forthcoming issue just to see figures in a scale that is of interest to me.

[steve_holmes_11]

I've pretty much given up on the "dead tree press" of the hobby.

1. My occasional glances at the covers leave me feeling they've gone down the "White dwarf: House magazine" rabbithole.
2. Slavish dedication to "Horribly deformed hulking great oaf" size figures.
3. The hobby is more diverse now (see other threads here) and the Interwebs are simply a more interactive and agile place for my gaming fix.

I might still be subscribing if points 1 and 2 weren't so glaring.

[fsn]

I put away regularly buying wargames magazines several years ago. Too little of the content was of interest (and that's with my butterfly mind) and the reliance of understanding of specific rulesets turned me off.

The only think I buy now is Ancient Warfare Magazine and Medieval Warfare Magazine, and that's only when the cover story grabs me.

[Leman]

I too now have a good look through in Smith's and only rarely actually buy. I have bought the latest (June) WI as it has the Italian Wars amendments for Lion Rampant

[Norm]

The nearest bigger Smiths to me used to get 12 copies of Miniature Wargames on their shelves and that pretty much lasted the month. Now they get three copies.

two months ago, the three copies were still there at the end of the month,

last month they put a free model kit on the front of the magazine and they all sold within a few days. The model was sci-fi based, so it would seem that the Sci-Fi part of the audience is important to the magazine.

I bought this months issue (but not the previous 2 months), so  there are still two left of the shelf!

The only problem that I have with the internet thing is that if you get a mag, you pay for it, which is at least fair and then you can judge whether the amount of material you actually read is worth that money, but on the net, visitors move from blog to blog, which are free, and in most cases can't be bothered even leaving a simple thank you comment to the poster. I speak as someone who has around 410,000 hits to date, but just a small band of loyal, regular and polite visitors leave a comment and a lot of my posts are in the 3500 - 5000 word type articles (plus rules available for download, which get well hit but never a thank you follows), something that reflects a lot of work and would get me around £70 from a magazine as a submission. We seriously need to get away from 'the internet is free' mentality or at least stop taking bloggers work for granted. In an evening a browser can easily consume a magazines worth of content for free.

[fsn]

Norm: Sorry to be ignorant, but could you leave a link to your blog?