This months F & C Magazine

[Mooeee]

Has anybody noticed that this months F & C Magazine shows a front cover page of shooting veneer, and when you check the index an arrow points the the main story listed on the the cover which says on page 18 you will find the article on shooting veneer ONLY to find nothing on shooting veneer, this months magazine luckily enough is not wraped up in clear plastic which gave me a chance to browse and find nothing on shooting veneer and was able to save my money.

This is not the first time that projects and featured items listed on cover are nowhere to be found, It is amazing that they sell magazines with features listed and expect people to buy them and when home unwrap the magazine from the plastic cover only to find that you have been ripped off.

I do now unwrap magazines in the shop to check that what is shown on the cover is in fact inside, some issues ago I purchased this magazine as I'm interested in veneering again to find nothing inside about veneering and apologies in the next issue for the ommision and that this feature would be in a later issue which ment that I would have to buy another issue good sales tactics or what, the feature was never in a future issue.

You can not return magazines to borders and I dare say the majority of newsagents as they think you have read it and just want your money back.

When are the proof readers going to notice that features that they are supposed to check for mistakes are not even there?? can't get a BIGGER MISTAKE than that.

Don't take it for granted features are included, Woodworking magazines in this country are to say the least not worth the money and so only specific features get me to part with my money for them, I have to say that most of the content in woodwork magazines from this country contain articles, features for very basic woodwork.

 

[JonnyD]

I have made my own veneer shooting board which can be seen here http://www.woodworkuk.co.uk/forum/viewt ... f=5&t=2856.

might give you a few ideas.

Jon

 

[Nick Gibbs]

Woodworking magazines in this country are to say the least not worth the money and so only specific features get me to part with my money for them, I have to say that most of the content in woodwork magazines from this country contain articles, features for very basic woodwork.

I hope that's not the case for British Woodworking. If you haven't seen a copy do email me and we can send you a free sample.

Cheers

Nick

 

[woodbloke]

I agree that this month's issue and the front cover was confusing...I couldn't find anything directly in there either, but if memory serves there was a snippet in the mag on shooting veneers. I also think you're way of base by stating that... "that most of the content in woodwork magazines from this country contain articles, features for very basic woodwork" Most of the making articles in F&C are long way past basic...you fancy having a go at making RI's box? I couldn't even understand the articles, let alone how he made it :? - Rob

 

[davegw]

Woodworking magazines in this country are to say the least not worth the money and so only specific features get me to part with my money for them, I have to say that most of the content in woodwork magazines from this country contain articles, features for very basic woodwork.

I hope that's not the case for British Woodworking. If you haven't seen a copy do email me and we can send you a free sample.

Cheers

Nick

Nick - you're safe - this is definitely not the case with BW! or to be honest with any other woodworking magazine I get (BW, GW, Woodturning, and The Woodworker) whilst some are certainly better than others (BW is the best as far as I am concerned, and not because Nick is on this site, but because it contains the best mix of articles, news, and projects.) I don't recognise Mooeee's description at all.

Thank being said, the one I don't buy is F&C...

 

[Corset]

I don't want to start the whole slating magazines because I think it is a tough job and I would be awful at it. I really enjoy F and C and buy it every month. That aside I think it has a strange mix, it seems to aim at the experienced end of the market but find many of the articles lack depth and the reviews seem quite short ( i understand the whole sponser bit)
Reading the faults on a machine review are brilliant examples of skirting the issue politely but never explaing clearly on the areas that fail.
The hand tool reviews are way to short I want to here more!!. The users are clearly experienced but seem to be working for a compact summary.
I also find the journeyman articles a bit strange. There are lots of interesting topics for beginner such as the saw sharpening article. I bought the magazine thinking great here we go a usefull guide. Instead I get an article which tells me nothing usefull like how to actually do it practically. Thats not much use to any beginner and someone whom is experienced already knows how to do it anyway.
I do however really enjoy the articles on stuff people make as I always find some clever technique or idea thats worth having.
I was quite keen on the refurbing a workbench. However it didn't really go anywhere. I felt it was a bit of a lost opportunity.
I was really impressed with the way that british woodworking incorporated tests into articles and project. Really very good.
I am stopping my fine woodworking subscribtion because every article seems to be a table of comparable figures. No-one seems to actually want to write a proper article.
At the end of the day I will continue to support the uk magazines as I would be sad to see them go but I think that F and C seems to have lost its way a bit.
Owen

 

[Rob_H]

Hmm, I don't agree that they're all the same. I seem to remember reading British Woodworking in the past and it seemed very good. In fact, just had a look at their website and now I have more time in my workshop (young baby sleeping more and 3 year degree finished) I think I'll start a subscription at the end of the month.

 

[newt]

There is a reference on shooting veneers on page 54, this relates to the DVD cabinet. I also was thrown by this one, expecting an article devoted to the subject. The front cover picture must be from something else. I hope the ED will explain, I suspect it was a genuine mistake.

 

[moz]

Am I missing something? I don't have my copy to hand at the moment, but I remember on the contents page a helpful image of the mag's front cover with arrows pointing to each heading and telling you on which page to find the article on - in this example, I think it was page 18, from memory (I could be wrong). i.e. John Lloyd's serpentine cabinet article where there is a brief mention of shooting veneers. I agree, the cover is misleading because one would have expected a bit more having trumpeted it from the rooftops. The small sub-heading was worse, something like "traditional methods of producing curves" (again from memory) which were not actually used in John's piece in favour of vacuum laminating but there was a passing reference to how things used to be done by 'brickwork' grounds. It's not wrong, just more than a bit overblown but probably just a symptom of the way in which mag's are put together.

John

 

[Ironballs]

Moz is right, the serpentine cabinet has shooting veneers as does the DVD cabinet. Though granted you might have expected a bigger article based on the cover.

Personally I would agree that the OP was way off and that F&C is the best of the current crop of mags and they generally aim at the upper end of making. Very aspirational for me, bit like buying a mag full of supercars

 

[billw]

I quite like the F&C articles for beginners and projects for the more experienced (or idiots like me).

I had always thought it was aimed at amateurs and hobbyists, but the reviews of machines costing thousands of pounds make me wonder about that.

 

[woodbloke]

That aside I think it has a strange mix, it seems to aim at the experienced end of the market but find many of the articles lack depth and the reviews seem quite short ( i understand the whole sponser bit)
Reading the faults on a machine review are brilliant examples of skirting the issue politely but never explaing clearly on the areas that fail.
The hand tool reviews are way to short I want to here more!!. The users are clearly experienced but seem to be working for a compact summary.

I do however really enjoy the articles on stuff people make as I always find some clever technique or idea thats worth having.
I was quite keen on the refurbing a workbench. However it didn't really go anywhere. I felt it was a bit of a lost opportunity.

....that F and C seems to have lost its way a bit.
Owen

A little bit of insight into the way it works, from someone who's gained a bit of indsider knowledge :wink: The machine reviews are sponsored by the manufacturer...so Robland say to GMC that they want a nice four page review of the latest mega-heavy duty combo machine (which 1% of the woodworking fraternity would want or be able to afford) in exchange for a nice wedge to go into the coffers which helps to keep the mag afloat.
Reviewers (myself included) are simply not allowed to completely slag off a bit of kit (there's loads of stuff that lands on the ed's desk each month, but only a small fraction is reviewed)...minor criticisms can be offered (as I did with the Pax saws) but an article that totally writes off a piece of equipment (even with justification) simply can't be done.
The making articles are generally pretty good and I disagree about the ed's bench...I thought that project was great, particulary when you consider that Michael Huntley was head of the restoration dept at Sotheby's...so he does know a thing or two about restoring old pieces.
As for losing it's way, again I completely disagree. My own view is that it's a much more 'user friendly' mag now than a couple of years ago under the old ed, when I thought it was a bit impersonal.
Michael will be joining UKWorkshop in a couple of weeks and I look forward to his contributions - Rob

 

[big soft moose]

A little bit of insight into the way it works, from someone who's gained a bit of indsider knowledge :wink: The machine reviews are sponsored by the manufacturer...so Robland say to GMC that they want a nice four page review of the latest mega-heavy duty combo machine (which 1% of the woodworking fraternity would want or be able to afford) in exchange for a nice wedge to go into the coffers which helps to keep the mag afloat.
Reviewers (myself included) are simply not allowed to completely slag off a bit of kit

so what do you do if you are asked to review something which turns out to be total and utter crap ? does the magazine not run the article at all ? or is there a subtle pressure on reviewers to find something nice to say ?

 

[TheTiddles]

I should imagine you do what everyone else in industry does, roll over and take the cash, principles cost!

Aidan

 

[big soft moose]

I should imagine you do what everyone else in industry does, roll over and take the cash, principles cost!

Aidan

true but doing that (if it became known) would lead to a loss of consumer confidence in your reviews , which in turn would lead to a drop in readership and then magazine closure and redundancy.

It may not be an issue as its possible that the cheap and nasty manufacturers dont pay for reviews anyway - and its going to be hard not to find something good to say about most name manufacturers offerings.

 

[Corset]

I'm not saying that F and C is naff after all I keep buying it. I just think some of the aricles could be fleshed out a bit. I want to know more and that why I buy magazines therefore if I see an article on a subject I would like a little more detail.
The machine reviews are usefull for me as I bought a hammer after reading and F and C article but their review missed quite a bit of stuff not all of it negative.
I am sure that editor knows his stuff its just that bench article didn't really give any usefull insights for me.
I do however rate the gallery and the aspirational quality of the pieces etc.
With so much on the web now magazines need to offer the most they can to make them viable.

 

[big soft moose]

The machine reviews are usefull for me as I bought a hammer after reading and F and C article but their review missed quite a bit of stuff not all of it negative.
.

how much can there possibly be to say about a hammer ???

" its got a nice grip, and the head is well shaped for both driving and pulling nails, at 4.99 our best buy "

 

[Loz_S]

:lol: Either you're being deliberately obtuse or maybe you're missing the capital H at the start of the word Hammer!

I'm pretty sure Corset meant Hammer as in sub-division of Felder tools!

 

[woodbloke]

A little bit of insight into the way it works, from someone who's gained a bit of indsider knowledge :wink: The machine reviews are sponsored by the manufacturer...so Robland say to GMC that they want a nice four page review of the latest mega-heavy duty combo machine (which 1% of the woodworking fraternity would want or be able to afford) in exchange for a nice wedge to go into the coffers which helps to keep the mag afloat.
Reviewers (myself included) are simply not allowed to completely slag off a bit of kit

so what do you do if you are asked to review something which turns out to be total and utter crap ? does the magazine not run the article at all ? or is there a subtle pressure on reviewers to find something nice to say ?

The really rubbish stuff never gets reviewed :wink: as it won't find it's way into a crowded mag. For example, the Pax saws were good but had glaring issues with the handles and were due to go into one issue, but owing to the pressure of limited available space for reviews, it had to be split over two issues - Rob

 

[Steve Maskery]

There is always the issue of reviews and not upsetting the advertisers and I've had criticism in the past of being too Festool-pushy, because of their support for my DVD work. But the fact is this. I've written very few reviews and some of them have been for stuff I've actually bought. Only a couple of small items have I been given and one of them I never use anyway. A couple of pieces have been on loan and returned, and one is on loan and I never expect I'll have to give it back. I don't care if I do as I don't use it because I have much better alternatives.

I think that, in general, reviews are fair. After all, why shouldn't they be? Is any journalist going to risk their reputation by saying something is good when it isn't? Why would I, or Nick or Rob or anyone else say something's good when it is rubbish? So that the manufacturers are pleased and send us more rubbish stuff? It's just not the case.

Page space in mags is generally speaking at a premium, so it's much more constructive to fill the pages with stuff that people actually want to hear about and is positive than wasting space writing about something that is not worthy of the space.

BTW, the router that is on loan and I don't expect to have to return was sent for me to review, but as I saw more disappointments with it than good points, I didn't write the review. If I had I would have been paid, but I chose not to. In the words of the song, "If you can't say anything real nice, not to talk at all is my advice".

My 2p.
Steve