Forums and magazines: a blurred line

[Halo Jones]

I'm starting to wonder if woodworking magazines are a waste of time, or if the magazines (or contributors) don't think we read forums or vice versa.

I've seen quite a few wips or finished pieces on this site and others. They are all very nice but then there is some kind of comment that goes "this is going to appear in X in a few months"; or you pick up a magazine and look at an article and you get a sense of de-ja-vu. Now where did I see this before? Are editors looking through the posts on forums and looking for interesting articles they can use later?

The only magazine I subscribe to is Pop Woodworking (but that may stop after the editors rant at Paul Sellers). All others are bought as one offs if they look interesting. F&C is currently on my never buying again list after a few issues ago seeing a bosch "how to" advert showing how to make a frame and raised panel. Then an article later in the very same mag showed how to make exactly the same thing. It was so similar that they even used all the pictures that were in the advert!!! Do you think I felt a little cheated?

I feel slightly bad writing this as I like the production values in many of the magazines and understand their margins are tight but my money is also tight at the moment and if I can read it on the web for nowt before it is even published in the magazine then my money will stay in my pocket!

H.

 

[Jacob]

The net is a challenge for all media, not only woodwork mags. But it's worse for woodwork as in reality there is nothing much new to report on a monthly basis. It's up to them to sort out their role.
I found myself signing up for a 2 week free trial on an American mag on line (free downloads etc) and then forgetting to cancel. So I've got to download a lot of PDFs to get my monies worth!
I haven't bought a mag in years except for American Woodwork when it was ad free and briefly an excellent publication. Basically they are all rubbish and there is masses of free stuff on the net. No guarantee that it's not written by an idiot but the same is true of the mags!

....the editors rant at Paul Sellers...

:lol: Interesting. I'd quite like to see that. Anybody care to post up a scan?
For a lot of people Paul Sellers is a breath of fresh air. Any mag not recognising this is obviously failing.

 

[Halo Jones]

Is slightly off topic but interesting nonetheless. No need to post a pdf, this was an online rant:

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/codswallop

 

[bugbear]

Is slightly off topic but interesting nonetheless. No need to post a pdf, this was an online rant:

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/codswallop

Seems reasonable.

BugBear

 

[Jelly]

Is slightly off topic but interesting nonetheless. No need to post a pdf, this was an online rant:

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/woodworking-blogs/editors-blog/codswallop

Seems reasonable.

BugBear

Semi-reasonable... I think she failed to get quite where paul was coming from, people today seem to lack a clear distinction between milling timber and crafting something from it...

For example making a moulding with H&R planes is craftsmanship, making it with a Spindle is wood machining, a different set of skills entirely, (no less valid mind, especially if you're using your own tooling and profiles)

By contrast, it doesn't really matter how you get your timber ready for work, because the whole process is distinct and rather different, and if you're not going to be doing it yourself. then whoever sells you it will be running it through a machine anyway.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

I think Mr Sellers has something there. Not wishing in any way to become embroiled in stereotyping, but - I am a member of a green woodworking group. Aside from the odd chainsaw and occasional cordless drill, few power tools in sight. But there are women and children there. Even children making safe use of rather sharp tools. Perhaps it is the lack of power tools, or the more creative free-form nature of green woodwork, I dunno.

Hand-tool woodworking can be hard work. And in many cases, it takes more skill and practice (and more tools) to perform some operations by hand than it does to perform the same operations by machine. So what I hear you saying, Paul, is that one needs a much more advanced level of skill and far more practice to actually engage in what you would deign to consider “woodcraft.”

As a hand tool fan, and occasional green woodworker, I'm going to agree with Paul again. Megan makes no sense to me; yes, hand tools take hard work and skill. Skill is what craft is about. Machine tools can do a similar job, and more economically. Indeed, you might automate the whole production - but the result is no longer "craft". IMHO, the hard work and skill required to work with hand tools certainly does not make woodworking less accessible to women and children.

 

[Jacob]

It was a bit of a rant.
I think Sellers' hands-on, free form (spoons etc), no-machine approach in his book (and presumably courses) is really good especially for beginners - really getting to grips with wood and its peculiar characteristics.
Making useful odds and ends (treen?) which might also be decorative, with simple tools, from odds and ends of wood, is probably the best place to start all beginners, women and children included.
Much better than having tool polishing, mdf and router as your introduction to woodwork!

 

[Benchwayze]

It's not about the tools (as Jacob says). Whether you use machine tools or hand tools, or both, working wood is working wood.
So, it's about the pieces you want to make, the joints you need, or want to use, and the means employed to make those joints.

The only things that are 'hand-made' are snowballs, and maybe a 'hand-thrown' piece of pottery. (Sans wheel) For virtually everything else you need TOOLS! And without an x-ray, who would know how a blind mortice and tenon joint was made? Few people indeed. Further, would they care; and does it matter? There are people who work wood with hand tools exclusively; and long may they be, but at the end of the tale, it's about the work. I prefer well-made joints, where they are needed. A piece made using routers etc, and made well, is going to look better and last longer than a rickety, poorly made hand-tooled piece. So I use hand and machine tools, as and when I feel necessary. I try not to let the machines dictate design, but it's difficult.

This hand versus machine debate started when power-tools, became freely available to amateurs. This put home made furniture within the reach of tyros. Sadly, a lot of 'anti-feelings' came from old-time, arrogant hand-workers, who were simply jealous of their hard-won skills; peeved that their results could be matched by workers without those skills. Either way, they dismissed out-of-hand, anyone who didn't use traditional methods.
We don't denigrate turners (and rightly so) for using their lathes, when they could make a bowl using hand-tools; and I'm sure some of them do so, from time to time.

So, let's stop assuming the router-jig and Domino users don't know how to use hand-tools. They might not, but it isn't absolute, and it doesn't matter. This argument belongs on the scrap-heap. The only sensible division is on this forum, where there are sections devoted to the 'Buffs' of both forms of woodwork.

Pity we can't have a mixed-work section; although that is probably "General Woodworking"!

Or am I missing something?

 

[Sheffield Tony]

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with power tool workers. I am only a hobbyist dabbler, but I do a range of woodwork - some starts with a chunk of tree and involves no power, and mostly homemade tools. Sometimes it involves routers etc. There is of course a continuous scale - what I think I'm defensive about is specifically the word "craft".

craft, noun: an activity involving skill in making things by hand (OED)

Which seems to support Paul Sellers' viewpoint.

 

[siggy_7]

craft, noun: an activity involving skill in making things by hand (OED)

But as Benchywayze says, even if you are Woodworking "by hand" you are still using tools. Tools which are (usually) mass produced out of metals in factories predominantly by machine. A table saw in the home workshop still requires operation by the human hand, the only difference one could argue functionally in this sense is that the cutter is powered by a motor and not directly by human effort. If I were to somehow replace the motor in my saw with a human-powered drive to the spindle, that would then make it a "hand tool" and presumably would that be "craft" then?

 

[Sheffield Tony]

As I said, there is a continuous scale. Sometimes I carve a spoon with a crook knife I forged myself. At the other end of the spectrum I could assemble a cupboard from CNC router cut components. In the first case, I would say I'm crafting. In the latter case, such craft as is involved lies mostly with the maker of the machine.

 

[Jacob]

There's a great deal of craft skill in running machines but it's different from the hand and eye skills of hand tool work.

Not sure what is the difference between "craft" and any other variety of skill but I guess it's based on practice and experience rather than by following instructions.
It follows that it's not easy to communicate - hence the incredibly long threads over simple procedures (sharpening a fli**ing chisel - 262 posts and more to come no doubt!) and the reliance of those without adequate craft skills on precise directions (bevel angles, grit sizes etc :roll: ) or gadgets.

 

[Jelly]

There's a great deal of craft skill in running machines but it's a different from the hand and eye skills of hand tool work.

That's been my contention for some time now...

The very best machining can only happen as a collaboration of understanding the material, paying attention to setup, understanding the operation of the machine and accurate metalworking in the preparation of the tooling (or a machinist, fitter and toolmaker if you're employing the division of labour). These skills are different to the skills employed in hand-work, but share the same basic aptitudes required... If you're good at one you most likely have every potential to succeed at the other...

 

[Nick Gibbs]

Back on topic (we're fans of Paul's approach, as in latest issue of BW), I've come to see forums and magazines as complementary. Though I've often considered starting a forum for our mags, I've come to the conclusion that the independence of a forum like this is crucial. I am happy to contribute from time to time, to help woodworkers and to keep our name in the public domain. I won't lie about that.

It is very tough publishing woodwork magazines in the UK, but there are still readers who want them, for various reasons. I enjoy forums, and learn a lot from them, and get ideas for articles from them. I get answers for readers from them. But I also get answers direct from crafstpeople and by email from our Reader Panel. This issue we have mentioned a couple of pieces of work and threads from forums, I'm sure you'll recognise them, and in two cases the members said how pleased they were to receive the recognition of being featured in a magazine. I was quite surprised. We send them a copy and hope it adds to the mix.

Long may both media prosper.

Nick

 

[graduate_owner]

Back to magazines-

I was given a load (about 120) of old magazines, Woodworker and Practical Woodworking, dating from around 1995 and so still very relevant (apart from prices in adverts). What surprised me is how little of real interest I find in them. I 'm getting back into woodturning. I'm not a fine furniture maker, although I would love to be, and I'm not a wood carver. Perhaps therefore I'm not a typical reader, and perhaps I'm doing the magazine publishers an injustice, but I find I can fetch half a dozen into the lounge and go through them all in an hour. The woodturning bits, tool & book reviews and the readers' hints are usually interesting, but when it comes to looking at current? work from colleges, interviewing prominent woodworkers, looking at cart making in Sri Lanka or whatever, or having a guided tour of someone's workshop then frankly I skip through the pages - they feel like just bulking out to me. The detailed fine craftsmanship required to make an inlaid glazed bow front cabinet are obviously essential to anyone wanting to create one, but it's not in my league, so I skip those as well.

To be fair there are many of them that have very useful articles in them, but unfortunately only one per issue on average. As I say, I may not be typical, but I usually feel glad I didn't shell out about £4.00 (in today's terms) for each of them.

It must be so difficult for magazine publishers to continually find things worth publishing which, as has been pointed out, are not already well covered on the web. It wouldn't surprise me to see some of these well known titles ceasing publication, which I'm sure would be a disappointment to many.

K

K

 

[Nick Gibbs]

I would like to defend what we publish in BW. Of course there will be things that don'tinterest one reader or another, but I'd be surprised if you don't find quite a few good things to read. If you don't it's probably more a reflection of your experience and knowledge than of the magazine's quality. We don't do that much on woodturning, which could do with more attention.

 

[Halo Jones]

This issue we have mentioned a couple of pieces of work

I guess the key word here is "mention" - that is fine as it starts to introduce a newcommer to the great woodworking community that is online. However there have been quite a few forum entries that suddenly appear as full blown articles in various magazines. You end up paying for something that is available online for free (It has certainly stopped me parting with cash at the newsagents when I recognise something I have already read online). I would have expected that any magazine would want their contributor to not publish the work elsewhere until at least a month (or some other suitbale period of time) after it had appeared in the magazine.

As for the bosch advert/article in F&C. I cannot get my head around who paid for what. Bosch will have paid for the advertisement space but maybe did a deal with F&C to share the cameraman. Was the article a new version of subliminal mesage to enhance the advert? Did the guy who did the work and write the article get paid by Bosch and F&C :-k ? I hope so :lol:

H

 

[Nick Gibbs]

I agree about full-blown articles, and have never done that knowingly. Apologies if I have by mistake.

Nick

 

[Halo Jones]

I cannot say I have ever noticed it in BW either!

btw I'm glad you have made the jump to digital - means I cannot be given a row by my fairer half for all the magazines lying about!

H.

 

[Nick Gibbs]

How is the digital experience?