KIT REVIEW SUGGESTION

[sjordan2]

Okay, the following thoughts went down in flames along with another thread that was deleted for one reason or another, but I'm sure it wasn't because of this part of the content.

Wouldn't new kit reviews, both on this forum and in the magazine, benefit from publishing the instructions? You can see what the parts are, how they fit together, and in what sequence.

Instructions could be posted either here or at a site like drasticplastic, with a link.

In the magazine, very long web addresses can be shortened to something easy to deal with, using a free online URL shortener like bit.ly

For example, look at the address of this page in your browser, above. Here's what it looks like, in its entirety, when it's shortened at bit.ly

http://bit.ly/MdSFrk

Edited May 14, 2012 by sjordan2

[Foxer]

Kit instructions would be nice to see if there is no lawyer concern. The instructions tell more that can ever be gleaned from a review in words. In combo, words and instruction sheet. we'd actually KNOW what we were buying in that sealed package!

Edited May 14, 2012 by Foxer

[Cato]

Seems like a sensible and helpful addition with few if any drawbacks.

Page space or bandwidth would not be taxed or wasted.

Sometimes even kits that have well molded parts and good accuracy can be an unhappy build experience due to poor assembly sequences and directions.

For example, viewing the new 1/12 Enzo's instructions before such a big expenditure can change ones mind. Sure, the experienced among us usually go our own way with construction and finishing steps but seeing the 'book' can help evaluate or formulate a plan.

Many kits don't 'fall together' like Tamiyas and judging that degree of difficulty beforehand is worthwhile.

I also think a single finished photo in place of a box art photo (unless it's a photo of the built model) is also a great addition to a review. Sure that requires the reviewer to build it and the drawbacks to that were explained by Harry. But can't the kit manufacturers supply a built photo? After all you're advertising their product to a captive audience...

[sjordan2]

Yup. And (though I don't know how quickly they publish them) Revell posts their kit instructions online. All it takes is for the reviewer to post a link.

As for copyright, many of the new kits proposed for review here are provided by the manufacturers, and the instructions should be part of the package. In other cases, the worst someone can do is tell you not to publish them and then you take it down. Considering the longevity of drastic plastic, I doubt there's any concern here. And you'll be doing a favor for a multitude of other modelers who aren't part of this forum.

http://public.fotki....ruction_sheets/

Either the reviewer or MCM just need to scan the instructions and put them somewhere that's accessible, with a link.

Edited May 14, 2012 by sjordan2

[Gregg]

I guess you completely miss the ones that I do on the main site:

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/content/amt-meyers-manx-dune-buggy-kit

Also, I would highly recommend that you DO NOT use URL shorteners; they are famous for attacks of spam, unwanted emails, etc.

Read up on them, they are the subject of a lot of issues and problems lately.

As for the prior thread, it turned into a slamming contest, and sorry, that's not only not right, but was uncalled for.

The magazine is doing the best that it can with what we have.

I am not a big corporation, with huge offices.

When it comes down to it, it's still one guy in Hawaii who is doing the best he can.

I spend more every year than what I make on the magazine, and when attacks that have been on the forum lately show up, it really makes me want to shut it all down.

Why should I spend my own money to be treated like this?

[sjordan2]

Didn't see anything there about instructions, Gregg, which is the subject of this thread. And I have no interest in why the prior thread was deleted. Good to know that there could be problems with bit.ly, though - I never heard about that. I suggested that only for the magazine for easy reference and not for the site.

Yes, I know you're doing the best you can, and I and the rest of us appreciate it.

[mikemodeler]

If the kit is of enough interest to me (subject matter) then I will be purchasing the kit and will get the instructions anyway. The only time I would need another set of instructions is if I lost or ruined them, in which case I could just buy another kit.

The kit reviews in the mag seem to give a decent sense of what to expect, keeping in mind that the reviewer is trying to be objective but it still comes down to their interpretation of what they feel about the kit. Again, if the subject matter is of interest, a review may or may not sway me but having the instructions would have little influence.

[sjordan2]

Well, I have made instructions available to modelers who were interested in certain kits, and in 2 out of 3 cases that I know of, it did sway their purchase decisions. The only one who decided not to buy looked at the instructions for Revell's reissue of the Mercedes 190SL coupe and determined that it would take too much work to produce a build he would be satisfied with, since it's such a simplified kit.

But that's not the point. If you're going to spend the bucks, why not have as much information as possible up front, before you open the box? What is there to lose?

Just an example of kit surprises I could have known about if I'd seen the instructions: I am mostly interested in 1/16 classics. If I'd had instructions to study, I would have seen that, although they have separately molded doors, they have no hinges and the instructions say to glue them in place -- Mercedes Maharajah roadster, SS Sonder Kabriolet, Rolls PII Continental, Jaguar SS 100. And the 1/24 Minicraft Rolls Silver Cloud 1 has no suspension parts or more than a blob of an engine.

For reviews, I think both the sprue photos and instructions are important.

Edited May 15, 2012 by sjordan2

[SSNJim]

Both Revell and Round 2 publish their current instruction sheets on-line. Revell's are available through the support tab, while Round 2's seem to require a search.

I'm totally with Gregg on the use of URL shorteners like tinyurl and bit.ly. There is zero chance that I would ever intentionally go to a link that uses them. Way too much risk, in my opinion.

[Rick Schmidt]

I'd have to agree on pics of the sheets or the sprues a review is useless without any info to tell how its built and such

Are ya refering to the shortened url in his post ?? That's not using a shortener thats the forum shortening the url. Can even see it in Greggs post.

[sjordan2]

I'd have to agree on pics of the sheets or the sprues a review is useless without any info to tell how its built and such

Are ya refering to the shortened url in his post ?? That's not using a shortener thats the forum shortening the url. Can even see it in Greggs post.

No, the forum doesn't really shorten the post overall, it just hides part of it with dots ....

The "URL shortener" I referred to completely changes the long URL to a new shortened code as you'll see in my description above. Gregg mentioned that it can be very insecure, which I didn't know about, so I'd stay away from it.

[Scuderia]

Some people may interpret things differently visually as well. For me I LOVE seeing pix of trees of a kit im interested in. The instructions without seeing shape and depth size etc doesnt do it for me. unless i have parts i can feel and match to my pix in the sheet

[Casey]

I guess you completely miss the ones that I do on the main site

I think a lot of people who visit the forum aren't even aware of those reviews, Gregg. Perhaps a stickied link at the top of the "Reviews" section would help direct people there?

I don't see a huge benefit to including instruction sheets in reviews, to be honest. You can't make out much of anything from a line drawing of a part, and if you're relying upon an instruction sheet to "show" you what the kit is like, you're probably wasting your time. Sometimes, you still need to pick up a kit, look over the box art and built model, read the info on the side (parts count, special parts, etc.), and decide if you want to buy it. Sometimes we get spoiled by all the info available at the click of a mouse, but no single review of any one kit can give everyone all the info and answers they seek.

What I would love to see is a standardized review form, so that each and every review has a minimum of information, and at least follows a regular, established review pattern. I think that's pretty much what Larry Greenberg does in MCM, and what I would love to see in this section, too. There would still be plenty of room to add your own opinions, comments, and external links if necessary (say to the instruction sheet, if desired), but the basics would always be present (kit name, number, scale, manufacturer, etc.).

[Rick Schmidt]

No, the forum doesn't really shorten the post overall, it just hides part of it with dots ....

The "URL shortener" I referred to completely changes the long URL to a new shortened code as you'll see in my description above. Gregg mentioned that it can be very insecure, which I didn't know about, so I'd stay away from it.

Ahh ok my bad Did not realize such a thing existed guess thats what I get for not thinkin lol

I think a lot of people who visit the forum aren't even aware of those reviews, Gregg. Perhaps a stickied link at the top of the "Reviews" section would help direct people there?

I know I never knew such a part of the site existed or if I did I forgot it cause It aint slappin me in the face

[Gregg]

I am trying to push all traffic to the main site, that is the goal of knocking heads with David (my web guru/helper/brainiac), and once I get the handle on the site, hopefully it will be seamless integration to all parts of the site.

It's a lot of work, and it takes up so much time, which I have, but just can't use, if that makes any sense.

Sorry if I come across harsh, it's just that so much goes into behind the scenes, to get bashed on stuff while everything is in progress just pushes that last button.

Rick, sorry for the slap, my lawyer's number is ...........

[Gregg]

Good point about the kit instructions.

I will ask AMT and Revell if it's okay to include the links.

I don't want to scan them myself, that would not be good at all, even with their approval.

It would have to come from them.

[Guest]

I myself prefer pictures to seeing the instructions as well. I also like seeing the parts laid out, tells me far more than the instruction sheet ever would. I also like reading about any assembly bugaboos, etc.

[Casey]

I also like seeing the parts laid out

Round2 has taken care of that by showing what's included on the bottom of each box.

[larrygre]

Good point about the kit instructions.

I will ask AMT and Revell if it's okay to include the links.

I don't want to scan them myself, that would not be good at all, even with their approval.

It would have to come from them.

Absolutely right, Boss.

Too many people assume that if a product is released into the sales channel, images and ancillary materials associated with that product are "public domain", free to reproduce, etc. That is absolutely FALSE. Intellectual property and trademark laws protect such products. That is why writers like myself, and Big Kahunas like Gregg, always attempt to get the permission of the copyright holder to illustrate such items in print or on the Web, properly credited, and properly given a "Used with permission" tag.

Its always been a watchword for me throughout my many years as a writer and columnist. Show the proper respect, and you'll be shown the proper respect. Hasn't failed me yet.

[larrygre]

What I would love to see is a standardized review form, so that each and every review has a minimum of information, and at least follows a regular, established review pattern. I think that's pretty much what Larry Greenberg does in MCM, and what I would love to see in this section, too. There would still be plenty of room to add your own opinions, comments, and external links if necessary (say to the instruction sheet, if desired), but the basics would always be present (kit name, number, scale, manufacturer, etc.).

Thanks for the kind words Casey. I have seen my review style used on the Web and in print (club newsletters, etc.), and I'm honored that it has become something of a standard.

[mickey1938]

If you were go to REVELL site, and go the there list of model, many of them show the full set of Instructions, front to back!

Not every model has this, but many do!!

mickey1938

[Gregg]

This came up with a review I did for upcoming What's New products, some aftermarket parts for the Nissan GTR, and the company not only demanded that I get Nissan's approval first, that they get some "back margin" returned to them after the review is printed.

It's amazing what goes on behind the scenes.

The biggest problem is this: Usually, when you do something new, or want to try something new, you can go and ask others what they think.

Well, guess what, in this industry (publishing), unless you are a Fortune 500 company, are part of a huge media corporation, or part of the insiders in the biz, you are stuck with doing what you think may work.

There is no forum, group, or association that I can ask questions to, or get opinions from.

I am the rare .01% of publishers out there who are that point of being too small to be big, and too big to be small, that there is no available peer help out there.

Everything is by trial and error, and if I didn't have over 15 years of legal experience, I would probably have been in hot water a long time ago.

That's why I am so hesitant to do things, and get yelled at for not doing them.

I error on side of caution all the time, and am my own devil's advocate.

I can't ask Joe Blow what they think about going digital, or using Zinio, because Mr. Blow doesn't know, or sends me to Ms. Idunno, and then I get routed to corporate counsel, Wi Tsuing Yu.

So, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.....

I do take into consideration all comments, suggestions, and requests to travel to hotter zones, and I'm sorry if I don't respond to all of the personally.

Now, where was I?

[edward smith]

Question gregg.... Why can't we have someone build models along with reviews instead of just pictures? It would be cool to have a picture of the built model along w/ the review in our magazine.

[Nick Notarangelo]

Kit instructions would be nice to see if there is no lawyer concern. The instructions tell more that can ever be gleaned from a review in words. In combo, words and instruction sheet. we'd actually KNOW what we were buying in that sealed package!

Over on www.starshipmodeler.com he has posted instructions for sci-fi kits that has been very helpful when chosing to build a kit or if you need to research one,and since me and my wife own a copy center here I have started to take mine and have turned them to pdf's so I can have on digital file for when I need one.

[Nick Notarangelo]

Now, where was I?

playing with a slot car kit.