New look Furniture & Cabinetmaking Magazine.

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
maybe they were trying to appeal to the manbun hypster vegan crowd? it really is a big thing now, I remember those nutters when they were still a small minority, they also collect records, don't have a single CD, wear sandals and only use reclaimed woods, everything they do and say has to look cool, it's like a cult you can join.
 
thetyreman":4f8hpedv said:
maybe they were trying to appeal to the manbun hypster vegan crowd? it really is a big thing now, I remember those nutters when they were still a small minority, they also collect records, don't have a single CD, wear sandals and only use reclaimed woods, everything they do and say has to look cool, it's like a cult you can join.

why did you leave out flannel shirts, mandatory tattoos and neck-beards?
 
I have to say that while I've never written stuff for any woody-type mags (hardly surprising that :D ) in the past I have contributed to several mags, both "hobby" (aeromodelling) and "professional" (aviation).

I agree 100% with woodbloke 66 - it just ain't worth the candle - the money in v the effort out that's required by at least me to write a coherent and decently photographed material just does not add up.

And what's particularly annoying with those hobby mags which I've contributed to is that they reserve the right to re-publish your material again (and sometimes again and again!), maybe in different mags, maybe in "sister" mags, maybe in "collation-type" booklets - all without further payment to the originator.

I guess that it's a bit of a vicious circle - the mags find it more and more difficult to compete with each other and especially with other media like the net; and find it more and more difficult to sell advertising (because of falling circulations); so see their circulation dropping even further. All of which leads to their budgets being reduced for everything, including paying their contributors a decent hourly rate for their efforts. Which in turn leads to lower standards of contributions (generally speaking). As said, a bit of a vicious circle IMO.

Frankly, for the little writing and photography that I now do, I'd rather find a Forum like this to "publish" on. No financial reward at all of course, but at least with UKW my "vanity publishing" efforts can hopefully help some other members, in the same way that other members' efforts help me and many other members.

If you know you're doing it for free at the start of the exercise then at least you don't have the feeling of being ripped off by the professional publishers when you see just what the professionals can - and do do - with your work.

BTW, it may or may not be the law (I understand it isn't actually) but personally I regard anything that I publish on t'internet is therefore freely given to any and all comers, with me having no rights whatsoever after that first publication.

Just my take.
 
woodbloke66":3ji1xll5 said:
I used to be a regular contributor to F&C some years ago when the editors were Mike Huntley and then Derek Jones.
That's interesting, Rob. From about early 1998 to maybe 2004 or 2005, F&C published my articles intermittently. I suspect that's because I wrote them fairly intermittently, and only submitted them on spec - I was never commissioned by them to write. In terms of success, I think all but perhaps one item I submitted was published.

I wrote articles primarily because I enjoyed the process of putting something reasonably cogent together, and I just like to write, writing being an essential for studying English, probably my second favourite subject at school. I also found the money earned a small bonus, but it wasn't really enough additional income to fully compensate for all the time and effort necessary to create the article's content. The kudos of being a published author I think possibly helped open two or three doors leading to work, so there was that more tangible benefit.

But, in the end, I decided I didn't want to write articles anymore, it being more work than I was prepared to put in for the return, even though I frequently sold essentially the same article to more than one publisher in different parts of the world, thus frequently doubling the income generated. My writing interest moved on to a longer format, the result being my book on timber technology, Cut & Dried. This actually started as basically article format texts intended primarily for my furniture students at the time, with the possibility in the background of perhaps spinning off variations of the student learning material to woodworking magazines. That never did happen because I realised that the word count and images required to properly discuss each of the essential timber technology topics was always going to exceed by thousands of words what a magazine would publish even in a series of perhaps three issues, or more. So that was the end of that, and I just got on and wrote a book instead, which took about ten years, on and off, all without having a publisher to hand, which really is a cack-handed way to write a book, but there you go.

Interestingly, in about September of 2018, I was contacted by Derek Jones who was still then editor of F&C, who told me they were going to publish some sort of extract out of Cut & Dried near the end of that year. They'd made arrangement to do so directly with Lost Art Press as far as I know. I never did see the article nor, unsurprisingly, did I get any payment for it, but I assumed it happened. Slainte.
 
Sgian Dubh":3o9wldw8 said:
woodbloke66":3o9wldw8 said:
I used to be a regular contributor to F&C some years ago when the editors were Mike Huntley and then Derek Jones.
That's interesting, Rob. From about early 1998 to maybe 2004 or 2005, F&C published my articles intermittently. I suspect that's because I wrote them fairly intermittently, and only submitted them on spec - I was never commissioned by them to write. In terms of success, I think all but perhaps one item I submitted was published.
I was in fairly constant touch with both editors and they remain good friends to this day (Mike lives close to me and is on my Christmas card list) so I often used to put ideas to them about projects and if I received the 'green light' I went ahead with the work. Both editors also commissioned the odd article from me on specific topics, one of which from DJ was how to fit 'L' shaped knife hinges, for which I made a small purpose built, wall hung oak cabinet which now takes pride of place in the downstairs khazi :lol: :lol:

Finished C&D by the way, excellent but not 'bedtime reading' :lol: - Rob
 
woodbloke66":thbnzzxb said:
I was in fairly constant touch with both editors and they remain good friends to this day

Finished C&D by the way, excellent but not 'bedtime reading' :lol: - Rob
I too have never really had a beef with woodworking magazine editors. I dealt with Colin Eadon-Eden (I think I spelt that right?), and not very much with later editors at all, except a few telephone calls with Derek, basically where he was sounding me out to write for them, I think, if I remember that correctly. I suppose the only disappointment I had was a marked reduction in remuneration for articles. The newer payment terms I recall became something called a 'bulk purchase' rather than a per page payment. Whatever it was called, it was quite a reduction in earnings for me, and I must admit it was a significant factor in me deciding to not bother writing any more articles.

It always seemed to me to be a bit of a stretch to have to specifically make something in order to write an article, as you describe with your wall cabinet. I've never done that, with my project articles being derived only from items I was making anyway. I just wouldn't be prepared to do what you had to do for that knife hinge article.

I'm pleased you enjoyed Cut & Dried, and feel you can give it an 'excellent' rating. I agree, it's not a bedtime read, and I don't think I've heard of any regular woodworkers that have read it from beginning to end, except perhaps Chris Schwartz at Lost Art Press (and maybe other editors at other publishers), who had to really I suppose, to decide that he wanted to publish it. From what I've learnt via feedback I've been given, most woodworkers that have bought it read sections as they need information or want to learn about a particular timber technology topic. They end up reading the chapters in all sorts of random orders, although most do seem to read the introduction and first chapter straight away, before moving on to other chapters as they need. Slainte.
 
Sgian Dubh":2fkgqg4p said:
I'm pleased you enjoyed Cut & Dried, and feel you can give it an 'excellent' rating. I agree, it's not a bedtime read, and I don't think I've heard of any regular woodworkers that have read it from beginning to end, except perhaps Chris Schwartz at Lost Art Press (and maybe other editors at other publishers), who had to really I suppose, to decide that he wanted to publish it. From what I've learnt via feedback I've been given, most woodworkers that have bought it read sections as they need information or want to learn about a particular timber technology topic. They end up reading the chapters in all sorts of random orders, although most do seem to read the introduction and first chapter straight away, before moving on to other chapters as they need. Slainte.

There is a huge crowd of people who want to read about woodworking rather than read and do it. The former will buy books, read them from end to end, and talk about how great they are or use passages to beat someone over the head on the internet.

The fact that someone will use your book sectionally as a reference means that it's good for the crowd who actually want to do things. That's an accomplishment in my book (bad choice of words).
 
Having just come across the new look F&CM, I came here to look for exactly this thread and I wasn’t disappointed.

I used to read F&CM for years, but became extremely bored with it. Same old, same old, and never any furniture in it that appealed to me or would get in my house.

Personally I think the new look is excellent, and has furniture in it I’d want to build. Clearly they saw the writing was on the wall for a magazine that appealed only to 50 and over demographic, and realised that something had to change. By the way, I turned fifty this year...

None the less, I think that they’ve done what they had to, and have succeeded.
 
Having seen this I may have a look at a copy of F&C. I had it delivered for many years but it became boring and was marketed by idiots. I regard direct debits as stupid so I don't use them, this meant that in spite of my willingness to pay two years subscriptions up front I still didn't get the best discount.
The think quality of all woodworking magazines has fallen since they all slashed the rates of payment for contributors. I contributed articles to F&C and several other magazines, but many contributors, including me, soon made for the door when the rates were halved.
As a result, articles featuring purile rubbish about fitting castors to plastic boxes to made a mobile tool box started to be top of the offerings. They have changed names,editors , and formats in an effort to sell loads of adverts at £6 a copy, I think they are doomed by the availability of the Internet woodworkers.
 
I wish them well, I really do.

But being a woody journalist is, I am coming to concede, no longer a career option.

My first article was published in the Jan97 issue of GWW. It was one page about the fine line between the difference of design inspiration and plagiarism. I got paid £100 and was over the moon.

Ten years late my pay had gone up to £110 per page, and I was one of the lucky ones. I know of others who were being paid as little as £40 (not by the same mag).

It is an enormous amount of work to do the writing, the high-quality photos, the dimensioned drawings and the cutting lists. An immense amount of work. The reward was always modest and is now paltry.

I currently write for an Italian magazine called LegnoLab. I've just been paid. £510 for a year's worth of contributions. OK, it was not every month, but several articles, not just one or two. Most properly self-employed tradesmen would expect to earn that in a couple of days.

Magazines have died, not least because of the rise and rise of YouTube. Everything is there, the Excellent, the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, you just have to be able to differentiate between them all. And it is all free*.

YouTube creators do not get paid a penny until they have jumped a very high hurdle. 4k HOURS of public viewing in the previous 12 months. So even will all the videos I have made I am only half way there. It's just not going to happen, is it?

I follow a guy called Pasquale. He is an elderly Italian gentleman who cooks Italian food in an entertaining manner. There are at least three people involved, I think they are his son and daughter, cameraman and editor.

They published a new film yesterday, already had 10K views. Contrast that with my entire wardrobe build. Don't bother, it's not worth the emotional turmoil of the realisation of the difference.

The only conclusion that one can reasonably come to is that it is not worth the candle. Either do it as a hobby that you are prepared to spend your money on or don't do it at all.

Just don't expect anybody to want to pay you for giving them what they want to consume.

*I.e. paid for by somebody else.
 
Steve Maskery":1i6wq0v5 said:
I follow a guy called Pasquale. He is an elderly Italian gentleman who cooks Italian food in an entertaining manner. There are at least three people involved, I think they are his son and daughter, cameraman and editor.

They published a new film yesterday, already had 10K views. Contrast that with my entire wardrobe build. Don't bother, it's not worth the emotional turmoil of the realisation of the difference.

Is that ‘Chef Pasquale’ Steve? He seems to have 260-odd thousand subscribers, so no surprise his vids are getting watched. What is a little surprising is that his recent videos doesn’t seem to be getting watched all that much, as a percentage of his subscriber base ie 10k views sounds great, but actually means that only 2.6% of his subscribers were bothered to watch on the first day.

And as we’ve chatted about Steve, 10k views doesn’t earn you much from YouTube ads. - especially if it’s split three ways!

He has a big back catalogue though (looks like he’s been on YouTube 11 years, so almost from the start) which certainly helps.

Cheers, P
 
petermillard":2t2qlh7d said:
And as we’ve chatted about Steve, 10k views doesn’t earn you much from YouTube ads. - especially if it’s split three ways!

Is it still as the old rule of thumb of 1000 views = roughly £1? You don't have to answer that if that breaks any NDAs or whatever.

Made a start on the MU podcast lately, only 4 episodes in but it's good stuff.
 
True, Peter, true. But that compares with less than 1% of my subscribers over a week.
I'm glad that you find it worthwhile. I just wish that I was as good at it as you are.
S
 
Trevanion":3vde34gy said:
Is it still as the old rule of thumb of 1000 views = roughly £1? You don't have to answer that if that breaks any NDAs or whatever.

Made a start on the MU podcast lately, only 4 episodes in but it's good stuff.

It varies, depending on w.g. the location where the ads are played, time of year, exchange rates etc... etc... but roughly 10K views = $15-20 US gross.

And thanks - good to hear you’re enjoying the podcast; seems like a long time ago, those early shows!
 
Steve Maskery":1kc7z3pf said:
True, Peter, true. But that compares with less than 1% of my subscribers over a week.
I'm glad that you find it worthwhile. I just wish that I was as good at it as you are.
S

Not to derail this into a YouTube thread (as if!) but after such a long (and understandable) period of absence, Steve, you’re effectively starting from scratch again. This is the first series you’ve posted in years, and unless all of your subscribers have notifications turned on, they may not realise that you’ve posted anything new.

Out of interest, other than posting about it here, have you done anything to promote the series e.g. social media? It all helps drive interest and engagement - Instagram, in particular, is very big with the ‘maker’ crowd, so well worth having a presence there.

FWIW on my channel (and the other guys I know in the game) ‘making’ or ‘project’ videos are the most requested, but actually the least watched, btw - especially those intricate, detailed ones that run over several episodes, I’m afraid.

And thanks for your kind comments, but in all honesty, you just need to keep at it: I’ve posted 374 public-facing videos on YouTube in 3 years and I’m proud of what I’ve achieved in that time, but - as I’ve shared privately - it’s barely worthwhile, financially.

And FWIW my current video #374 (a lighthearted look at sharpening) is tanking; sometimes it’s just not your day, so you move on to the next one and try something else.

All best, Peter
 
Well I have to say to both of you Steve and Peter, I do enjoy watching your stuff, please keep it up.

BUT compared to a young lady who appeared in our newspapers the other day, you two are just rank AMATEURS - she is aged 16, lives in the US (where else?) and (according to the paper anyway) has just bought a villa in Malibu costing 4.5 M USD - all from her work on Youtube and related social media. Come on boys, what are you playing at?

:D :D :D :D :D
 
Just to add Tiktok is also extremely good for woodworking content.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
" Chopping onions was an eye opener. They also come ready chopped in packets apparently."

Yes they do - a friend of my wife buys them. She says life is too short to chop onions, no wonder she is never seen in her kitchen!!
 
petermillard":3j8clbn2 said:
FWIW on my channel (and the other guys I know in the game) ‘making’ or ‘project’ videos are the most requested, but actually the least watched, btw - especially those intricate, detailed ones that run over several episodes, I’m afraid.

As you say, that seems to be the thing most youtube creators are saying, it's very difficult to get views on long-term or even short-term projects as general people like to watch short, messing about in the workshop videos. John Heisz comes to my mind as he's always been quite open on his "scrap bin" channel about what's going on with his other channel and he says he simply cannot produce detailed "series" style videos and expect to make money from it so he has to cram as much as he can into a sub-twenty-minute video of a build that took several days otherwise nowhere near as many people would watch three, four or even more separate videos. For him, "regular" projects like furniture just don't make the same money as random workshop builds even if it really isn't needed in the workshop or random messing around videos. His most popular video of twelve million views is about him fitting a piece of paper into his table saw and cutting stuff with it, mainly I think because it can be recommended to anyone on the planet "Hey, look at this video of a guy cutting stuff in his table saw with a paper blade for two minutes" rather than "Hey, look at this guy spend two weeks building a cabinet over ten videos at twenty minutes each". Obviously, the imaginary cabinet build took far more effort and cost far more in time and materials than just stuffing a piece of paper in the table saw and doing a few cuts but it generated at least a thousand times the views that the cabinet video would because it was just silly.

[youtube]rYfkhdKcEiE[/youtube]

I think, with specialist content such as your own it's more aimed at people already kind-of in the woodworking habit. I'm sure you're well aware of why your track saw and bandsaw videos have done so well compared with the cabinetry content simply because it's more relatable to the general viewer who might be looking to buy that track saw or bandsaw in Aldi and have a play about with it in the shed rather than building their own built-in wardrobe. I think the people that would be interested in your more technical videos are probably too busy doing similar stuff themselves to watch the videos which is why I think Instagram like you mentioned or TikTok as Coley suggested has become so popular amongst the "pros" because they're very short bits of content which you can scroll through whilst you're having lunch on the job site rather than sitting down in the evening, putting the headphones on and spending twenty minutes watching a video. It's only very recently I joined Instagram and I was blown away at the sheer amount of content aimed towards the professional woodworker compared to the stuff on youtube. There's some great stuff on there and it's not a complex matter, it's literally pointing the camera at what you're doing, take a snap or a video and post it up, no editing or anything like that which means anyone can post stuff up without feeling as if they're lacking because they don't have all the camera gear or software to make excellent videos.

As for the hand plane and sharpening video, I think that may be down to the subconscious mind saying "What does this machine man know about sharpening hand tools?". But I think you missed a trick with the "shaving with a plane iron" video as you could've put your face with some shaving foam on as the thumbnail rather than the plane blade and blood and I guarantee you that you would've got many more views simply because they know you're shaving your face and not your arm hairs like every other YouTuber.

I do enjoy the content though, so thanks for putting it up :)
 
Trevanion":3jb8n4vc said:
...But I think you missed a trick with the "shaving with a plane iron" video as you could've put your face with some shaving foam on as the thumbnail rather than the plane blade and blood and I guarantee you that you would've got many more views simply because they know you're shaving your face and not your arm hairs like every other YouTuber.

I do enjoy the content though, so thanks for putting it up :)
I do actually have that as a thumbnail but it just looks messy, and it’s surprisingly hard to hold a plane iron in such a way that it looks like you’re shaving with it, and yet still looks like a plane iron. So I switched to the simple, clear shot that’s served me well over recent videos.
 
Back
Top