>I owe all of you an apology...on 24 February, I posted a message about having received, read and loved the new Woodturning Design Magazine. The copy I received was an early-release issue that had been expedite-mailed to me, as I had written an article that was contained in this premiere issue. Like the rest of you :-(, my regular subscription issue has not yet been received...but, I've been told that it should be here soon. Please be patient...it's worth the wait.
>I recieved my copy early this week also. It's a great magazine. I hope the quality stays as high as it currently is. Everyone should look at this magazine.
>I was delighted the moment I first opened the premier issue. I've carried the magazine with me to read over lunch at work, carried it around with me to appointments, etc., and have read it cover-to-cover. I, too, hope the quality remains as high as the first issue; I'm eagerly anticipating the arrival of the second issue!
>Not totally against the tide Fred. I tend to agree with you. I'll probably check it out on the newsstand and see where it goes before I'd subscribe. I'd like to see it cover more in the way of technique and design than another mag of "projects".
I'm 50/50 on the new magazine. I enjoyed it but I look for more real content not just project articles. Unfortunately that's what most poeple want. That's why I like American Woodturner.
I like Woodturner(from England)because they have been doing some really good articles on top turners and how they got there. It's just pretty expensive. Turning Points which is the publication from the Turning Center is really deep into the philosophy of turning which I find interesting but difficult to read.
>How each of us sees this new magazine is a reflection of how we see ourselves as woodturners.
If the targeted audience for this magazine is the beginning to intermediate recreational woodturner, they have done an excellent job.
For those who see themselves as being somewhere close to becoming an expert woodturner, this magazine offers very little. Many of these same folks are saying the same thing about the AAW Journal.
>I agree with you Russ; the mag is really a project book suited for the competent beginner to intermediate turner. I don't have a problem with that per se. There is definitely a market out there for this type of publication and I think the projects are presented well. Even though I consider myself an advanced woodturner, I usually learn something from a demo that I can use on a project of my own invention.
My problem (disappointment) with the mag is that the title (Woodturning Design) is not related to the content. I was hoping to see articles related to design, inspiration, proportion, new directions and a new look to old classic shapes! For an excellent start, just select some of the turners at the AAW Symposium's instant gallery or the ACC Arts and Crafts shows. I would love to see discussions about design considerations concering Stuart Mortimer's twists, Wally's ollas, Cindy Drozda's boxes, Trent Bosch's mix of cast metal and wood, Mark Nantz's exquisite consructions, Jaques Vessery's and Andi Wolf's artestry with carving and colors, etc, etc, etc.
Would you be willing to pay $40 an issue for a magazine that critiqued 10 woodturnings by a panel of "experts". Giveing as many pictures as needed to show the "stuff" mentioned in the critiques.
Perhapse call the magazine "Woodturning Critique"?
I wonder how someonme would go about starting such a magazine?
>I'm with John here -- a good magazine for beginner to intermediate projects, but I am hoping a lot more emphasis is placed on design considerations in the future. It is a very young publication, so there is every reason to expect an evolution in style and editing, especially over the first year or so. I'll be a regular subscriber if the design component is cranked up, but perhaps not if its just fun projects.
I read Richard's comments, and I don't think a magazine focusing on design considerations would necessarilly cost more than the current version, but would have to be somewhat different in format. An example would be a still photo essay like the video sequence in Raffan's box making video, showing different steps and ideas en route to the finished design, with comments from the turner on why a given form was discarded, etc ...
This is easier to achieve in video format, but still do-able in the still photo world.
Interesting idea. I would be more interested if a thematic "body of work" was pictured along with an article that fully explored the turner's story, including their inspiration for the pieces, the evolution of the design, directions they explored that did not seem to work, technical challanges, special techniques, etc. This could include turners from expert to intermediate. The critique from a panel of experts should be "skill appropriate" in that they would nit-pick the expert's turnings but offer more basic design suggestions to the intermediate turner. As a follow-up, the turner could re-submit a turning or two that has incorporated the panel's suggestions and the panel's comments upon re-evaluation.
I still would prefer to see at least some parts of my above ramblings incorporated into Woodturning Design.
>A long time ago when I was a camera-guy, there was a "magazine" called Aperture. It was a quarterly publication, and was $15/issue. the quality was superb, as it catered to "high-end" photography afficinados. No ads, no comparisons, only picture essays.
I would liken it to more of a book club than a magazine in terms of the item they produced. However, the "short-lived" nature of their subject matter seemed more magazine-like. Typical articles would be heavily documented with photographs, and talk about the why's more than the how's.
Would I pay $20/issue (inflation) for this type of a woodworking/turning magazine? Sure would.
>Its been said before, but perhaps a re-statement is needed...Woodturning Design magazine, like AAW's American Woodturner, is totally dependant on us, the woodturning community, for their articles and content. I've seen several appeals made by the editors of both magazines for input, and I'm sure that those of you, who are advanced turners and designers, would be welcome to participate. So, it�s really a situation where you get what you're willing to put into it...eh.
>First, I thought the article on boxes and the discussion of lids and fits (with detailed drawings) was an excellent presentation. It might not be the subject of my interest, but it was a perfect fit into any criteria for "design" or "technical content" that I can come up with.
But, there are two (2) facts of life, as I see them, that will control the content of this or any other magazine.
The first of these has been shared by the AAW Journal, "The American Woodturner" since its first issue. They can only print what is made available to them from their contributors. At some point somebody has to stop complaining about the content of the magazine and SIT DOWN AT THE COMPUTER AND START WRITING. Otherwise we will continue to see the same articles written by the same people about the same topics.
Writing an article isn't all that difficult to do. Send them a proposal and see if they are interested.
The other is that fact of life called "compensation". Many of us have written articles for the AAW Journal for "free", no compensation other than seeing our name in print and the recognition that it gives us. There are those who will continue out of a sense of duty, or they might see it as free advertising for the classes that they offer. The rest of us will never write more than 1 or 2 articles because we are not professional writers.
Along comes a new magazine that offers $65 per written page (I think that was their offer). That will get some of those same folks interested in writing again. I noticed that most of the authors for this first issue had previously been published in the AAW Journal. This magazine is working within the same pool of amateur writers, and the compensation might make that group grow larger.
Then there is that higher level of contributor - those professional writers, the "experts", who write articles for magazines such as "Fine Woodworking", and they are compensated at something like $150 per written page. This higher level of compensation is what you would have to pay to get the quality of expertise to publish a creditable article on design and critique that has been described. It may be one of their long range goals, but I don't "Woodturning Design" being able to pay that price for an article, yet.
My critique of the magazine is that I was disappointed in the qality of photographs, rather than its content
It was a top quality presentation of the craft, and a photographic gallery of fine furniture, including some woodturning, that was published by the folks from "Fine Woodworking". It was an excellent magazine, I thought it was the best ever published, and it reached a wider audience than woodturning. It lasted for about 2-years before it was dropped for lack of interest and sales.
However, there seems to be no shortage of low-mid tier magazines dedicated to woodworking. When I started woodworking, I wanted measured drawing projects on every page. I've never read a tool review (I don't need the side by side of every router on the market.) I'm past those publications now, and have stopped reading most of them. Woodwork is my new favorite.
What's missing on the market today is a magazine that caters to where we'd all like to be in 10 years. In looking at the article in WD #1, I thought it looked like a bunch of beginner projects. Many of the shapes were poor, and projects were things that advanced turners wouldn't care about.
I marvel at Bud Latven's forms and I would love to know the how's, and Hugh McKay, Jordan, so forth...
Even though I can't do these things today, I'd rather read about them than rolling pins.
>Your preference for Woodwork magazine is consistent with mine, not only as a magazine of quality woodworking,but for its seamless inclusion of woodturning photos and profiles of turners. When my subscription to FWW finally runs out some year, Woodwork will be the only commercial magazine presently in existance that I will be subscribing to.
>I took a quick gander at it at a club meeting, and agree that it looks like it is aimed at a beginner to intermediary audience. Now, maybe that's not such a bad idea. I vaguely recall (these days, that's how I preface all my memory-related statements) that something like 80% or some such high number of AAW members had been turning for a very short period of time, i.e., were beginners and intermediaries. If WD has targeted this audience (i.e., it does not skip from beginner-type projects to expert-level projects from issue to issue), that will probably make it successful, at least for a while. However, over time, it will have the problem of having to cater to both beginners, and an increasingly growing number of more sophisticated turners, and balancing those two will require innovative solutions---maybe two magazines? We all should have such problems.
I do agree, though, that, based on the first issue, the title should not be "Design", but more "project"-related. However, not having a lot of stuff on design is not a bad thing in my opinion, as "design" often gets into artsy gibberish (how's that for being pc and subtle?)
>Do any of you read "Turning Points" by the WoodTurning Center of Philadelphia ? it has some turner profiles, comments and pictures on exhibitions, some reflexions on turned art, and many other things. no project for sure (as far as I've read), but many interesting stuff.
