New Goodwoodworking - First Impressions

[wizer]

I still haven't made my mind up on the new look. I like it, but not sure if its better or worse than the old. It is certainly sleeker and more 'professional'.

I will say that I did enjoy the woodlands article. I'm not sure why this wouldn't apeal to woodworkers?

My only other minor complaint is on the 'Mug Trough'. As a newbie I can see how this is a great 'beginner' project and being a very basic project not much real estate is needed on it. However... Could we at least see a picture of it in use? It took me a good few minutes to work out what it actualy was and how you'd use it.

 

[Philly]

Well-finally got my hands on the "new-look" GW. Was a bit worried as to how the crew had ruined the mag after reading some of the negative vibes here. :?
Had a read through it twice now-I LIKE IT!
The last 6 issues have been pretty bad, obviously thrown together at the last minute and, frankly, not worth the money. This issue is much more like it! A lot more to read, better layout, no pixelated dodgy pictures, not too many typo's and loads of stuff to read. A nice mix of articles for beginner to advanced, turning, cabinets, weekend stuff, techniques, loads of reviews. This is more like it.
So a big thumbs up from me, especially as this is the first issue. Also, having Nick the editor asking us good folk for our opinions and input-what more could you want from a magazine???? :shock: Come on-let the GW crew know what you like and lets get the magazine WE want. :wink:
Cheers
Philly
(and yes, I know a certain Krenov style thing is in the next issue but this does not colour my opinion! )

 

[devonwoody]

Don't forget the issue number next time though

 

[tim]

In general I think that its possibly to early to judge after one new issue but I still can't see that there is a clear strategy for the mag. To be honest, this is a criticism that I would have levelled at the old look GWW as well. I don't believe that GWW knows what its core reader is and as a result aims a portion of the magazine at each possible type. Net result is that everyone pays the same price tag but only finds a percentage of the magazine of any value. This means that most folk will feel that it does not offer value for money.

I do think the new look is 'busy' and I know that Nick has already commented that it is a look that he is after, but busy and effective are not the same. I stopped count on the front page after 14 different typefaces/ sizes.

In order for this to be deemed constructive (which its meant to be), I don't actually mind what direction GWW decides to take for its own commercial survival. If its not a positioning that yanks my chain then I will stop subscribing, but if they have done their research then hopefully lots more, more targeted readers will take my place. What is lacking is any form of colours being nailed to the mast. I agree (as said in other threads recently) that F&C has become dull but its focus is clear. GWW seems to be trying to catch everyone and pleasing very few. My personal preference would be to have a heavier bias towards finer stuff (not one article a month), but thats not necessarily right for the magazine or its wider readership.

So, as a sign off, I don't think that the core direction has become clear and that the majority of changes (will broadly improving) are anything more than cosmetic. I would love to see a clearly stated objective for the magazine's direction.

I do hope it gets better, I don't want to only get US Mags and I wish Nick and the team the best of luck.

Cheers

Tim

PS - don't call something 'exclusive' when its not. I already had all three of those catalogues.

 

[MikeW]

...Snip...
My/our vision is sometimes in the heart, other times in the head, and often written down. It's a constantly evolving vision, driven by a desire to entertain and inform as many woodworkers as possible, enabling them to enjoy woodworking even more through what they read and through the shared experience of a magazine. And I want to learn and have fun too.

The aim is to have woodworkers craving the day the magazine goes on sale, yearning for another dose of Good Wood.

That is my vision.
...Snip...
Nick Gibbs

Hi Nick,

The parable of sailing was great as applies to sailing. Not sure it is effective regards an effective business plan, though.

I would suggest a clear and concise vision statement, used to write a clear business plan, which business plan is then carefully outlined by clearly written objectives to which everything, and I mean everything, is then checked against for adherence to those objectives as regards:

Content itself. Does this article submission fall within our business plan (who is the target audience?) This includes how many of each type of article for this issue compared to the past publishing schedule or two (article repeat issues, content mix--beginner, intermediate and more accomplished articles. What is the target mix)
Direction of content--does this article take us toward our vision? Does it fit our criteria for content? If not, what will it take to make it adhere to it? Should it?
Writing style
in this regard, this includes not only a general "voice" for the writing, but also things such as general format of article composition (are all the "parts" of an article present?), consistent photo journalism, consistent article drawings as needed, etc.
Stylistic issues. Are there stylistic rules in place for the layout personnel to follow?

Oh gosh, I was up until 2 am last night again and I haven't had enough coffee yet. There are many more issues regarding publishing a magazine. Been there on the working end (graphic design and layout).

Clear vision, clear business plan, clear objectives to accomplish the plan--for each and every article. Else there are too many hands on the tiller and you'll never even arrive on the proper cost--if at all.

 

[Alf]

The aim is to have woodworkers craving the day the magazine goes on sale, yearning for another dose of Good Wood.

I reckon we would all vote for that, 'cept maybe assorted SWMBO's, LOML's and TPTB's that want other things done first... :-$

I'm sorry if I came across as overly negative, btw. I think it's just sheer frustration; I have a vision too, but it doesn't seem to have anything in common with any of the UK magazines. But look at it this way; I wouldn't complain if I didn't care.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Chris Knight]

Alf,
You can't leave it there lass. We know you care but what is your vision?

I don't want to sound confrontational - I am really interested to hear from someone as articulate and passionate as yourself.

 

[MikeW]

So Alf and Chris,

Why not make a sticky that is for what our ideal magazine would be like? Encourage people to just list the ideas/desires/vision that they believe would make a good magazine without elaboration...

I would be glad to compile those into a concise message. As for the current situation y'all have with GWW, I'm not sure it is helpful, but one never knows.

Heck, I don't care where a "good" WW magazine is published. I just want one.

 

[Alf]

It's a vision unclouded by real-world considerations such as time-limits and lack of resources... :roll:

My vision would be a magazine that isn't format driven but content driven. If an article justifies more space, it'd get it. If there really isn't anything worth saying in the "X" slot, then don't have it. I'd like articles on people's workshops that actually make me feel like I've been there and that I've learnt something from the visit. In the "real world" there isn't one workshop I've visited that I haven't come away from with a new idea or information I didn't have before. I'd like to know a little more about the person who's article I'm reading; not how many kids they have, but their woodworking background. I'd like the turning stuff to be less divorced from the rest of the magazine (round mortises would have been nice, f'rinstance). I'd like projects that have lots and lots of detail, because only then might I be able to learn something useful even if I'd never build that project in a million years. I'd like articles on why a joint should have particular dimensions, when you can break that rule, and examples of it in use. Or articles on a particular tool or machine that tell you exactly how to set it up and use it, tips to get more from it safely and what I can use instead if I can't afford one. I'd like a nice rambling column from a woodworker, who isn't so accomplished that I have nothing in common with them, about whatever happens to occur to them to write about. Okay, so I'd like John Brown back, if truth be told... :lol: I'd like a regular column from an experienced finisher focusing on a particular finish, or way of finishing a particular wood, using products I can buy in this country. Most of all I'd like a regular feature on hand tools, but now I'm getting beyond wishful thinking and into Utopian Ideals... I'd like all that with copious quantities of clear and relevant photographs (not of people), diagrams, and where appropriate, line illustrations by an accomplished draughtsman.

I don't ask for much now, do I? :wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Chris Knight]

Alf,
I second your ideas, very like my own in most respects.
Mike, that is a good, intriguing notion - I shall try and add a few thoughts soon.

 

[Nick Gibbs]

Well, Alf

I couldn't agree more. I would love to be producing the magazine you outline. That's pretty much my vision too. I'm a woodworker, after all. Be patient and let us try. Don't attack where we fall short, but praise what we get right. Understand you're not the only reader and give us the encouragement that's deserved of a team that works hours and hours to produce the best possible magazine we can.

When I asked you if you'd like to write for us, you gave me the impression you wouldn't have time. Well think of this: we produce a 100-page magazine (about 44,000 words, plus drawings and photos) every 19 working days. Yes 19 working days. And that's not forgetting holidays, sickness, meetings, staff changes and accountants, and many other interruptions (including the defence of our decisions and mistakes).

That's not a complaint: I love it. But come and work with us for a month and see what it's like.

Thanks, though, for being passionate about it.

Nick

 

[les chicken]

Alf
Brilliant. =D>
I think you have summed up the opinions of many.

Les

 

[Alf]

When I asked you if you'd like to write for us, you gave me the impression you wouldn't have time.

I think it'd be more accurate to say I don't have time to write something with a beginning, a middle and an end and then see it hacked to fit the layout... Oh it's not just you; my brief brush with another woodworking mag amply demonstrated I'm not a natural for the demands of magazines.

Funnily enough I was thinking of the turnaround, and the mags from the US we all compare the UK ones to, and it dawned on me what the main diference is (okay, so I'm not the fastest thinker). They're all seven issues a year. GWW is thirteen. Even going to twelve would give you a day and bit extra time on each issue... :-k

Don't attack where we fall short, but praise what we get right.

Ah, another Utopian Idealist...

Cheers, Alf

 

[MikeW]

....
Funnily enough I was thinking of the turnaround, and the mags from the US we all compare the UK ones to, and it dawned on me what the main diference is (okay, so I'm not the fastest thinker). They're all seven issues a year. GWW is thirteen. Even going to twelve would give you a day and bit extra time on each issue... :-k
...Cheers, Alf

See, ignorance is bliss. I had no idea concerning the volume. I've worked under tight publishing deadlines...but I'm not certain I could, or would choose to, work for a length of time with that as a goal/reality.

But then, I've grown a bit lazy of late as regards even documenting what the heck I'm doing. Too much work--speaking of, back to drawing.

 

[Midnight]

Well think of this: we produce a 100-page magazine (about 44,000 words, plus drawings and photos) every 19 working days.

Personally I'd give my eye teeth to be that kinda busy year round... Why not take a leaf out of FWW's book... encourage and use far more articles written by woodworkers themselves (Ian's tool cabinet for exmple)..?? Articles like that tend to be the ones I'll re-read time after time; I've spent a small fortune on back issues specifically to get a particular article...

 

[Losos]

Well, I've read all the thread and decided to subscribe. I sent an e-mail to ask about the European subscription price - Alf, your comments are very relevant to what I'm looking for in a mag. I already take one US woodworking magazine which I 'm happy with but my current UK mag. is not impressing me at all. I hope GWW will be closer to my needs.

 

[Newbie_Neil]

Hi Nick

Don't attack where we fall short, but praise what we get right. Understand you're not the only reader and give us the encouragement that's deserved of a team that works hours and hours to produce the best possible magazine we can.

I don't think people are attacking GWW, I believe that we're trying to be constructive and helping you understand what your target market would really like to see. This is amazing customer feedback. I wouldn't be writing this at 6.30am if I didn't care.

Well think of this: we produce a 100-page magazine (about 44,000 words, plus drawings and photos) every 19 working days. Yes 19 working days. And that's not forgetting holidays, sickness, meetings, staff changes and accountants, and many other interruptions (including the defence of our decisions and mistakes).

If it's a problem, do you really need to do it? Would it not be more cost effective to produce the magazine monthly? If the quality of the content was increased by reducing the number of issues I, for one, wouldn't complain if the subscription stayed at the current level.

Good luck, we really do want you to succeed.

Cheers
Neil

 

[Anonymous]

So Alf and Chris,

Why not make a sticky that is for what our ideal magazine would be like? .

No!!!!!!

I don't like this idea at all. Not one bit

Everyone wants a different mag depending on their interests, experiences, needs, budget, history etc.

Such a sticky will just provide a forum for critisism and vitriol + disagreement

A sticky is not a good idea in my opinion - the discussion is here and now.

 

[MikeW]

So Alf and Chris,

Why not make a sticky that is for what our ideal magazine would be like? .

No!!!!!!

I don't like this idea at all. Not one bit

Everyone wants a different mag depending on their interests, experiences, needs, budget, history etc.

Such a sticky will just provide a forum for critisism and vitriol + disagreement

A sticky is not a good idea in my opinion - the discussion is here and now.

Geez, Tony. Take a breath. It might have been a dumb suggestion to you, but that's all it was. I wasn't calling for a trans-Atlantic rewrite of the Magna Carta.

The point of using a sticky (aren't they really just the same, except their location in a forum hierarchy?) would have been to allow people to see it as they enter the forum in order to add, modify etc. as ideas would have come to them.

There have only been a couple times in my brief stay here that I've seen things get heated. It certainly wasn't because people were adding ideas to a topic overtime as they saw fit that differed from others'.

But hey, we even disagree about this. Glad I won't get vitriol all over my shoes for it. :lol:

 

[trevtheturner]

I agree with Neil. I do not think that Good Woodworking is being 'attacked'. GWW has invited, on more than one occasion, comments and suggestions about the 'new look' magazine and these have obviously been honestly given - but they do, and will, come in the form of both support and constructive criticism.

Most of what has been said on here, from both readers and those with magazine production/marketing skills, has been said in a positive fashion. Hope you can see it that way, Nick. After all, people are only saying what they want to see in your mag., as you invited. Having said that I do realise that with many different views you cannot please all of the people all of the time. That presumably is where your judgement as the editor comes in. :wink:

Incidentally, I notice, Nick, that you now refer to Good Woodworking as 'Good Wood'. Is there an underlying reason for this? Are we about to see a name change on the front cover?

Good luck from me, too.

Cheers,

Trev.
(who also would be happy with twelve issues a year)