Newsletter Number 58

<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 07 Apr 2012 23:32
    Reply # 884426 on 873273
    Well I guess 'greenness' and 'product standard' are, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. If anyone wishes to carry on this discussion (we'd love to hear more), please make them on the 'The JRA & its Magazine and Website' Forum. This one is really for 'techie' stuff like booms, battens and rigs. Thanks.  
    Last modified: 08 Apr 2012 00:22 | Anonymous member
  • 07 Apr 2012 12:16
    Reply # 884177 on 883437
    Deleted user
    Robert Groves wrote:
    Annie Hill wrote:
    Brian's 'green comment' is also worth pursuing.  Using any paper, sustainable, unbleached or otherwise is a strain on Gaia.  Those of us who do not get a printed copy, or print out our own, are taking a green alternative.

    I use paper charts and prefer to read paper books and magazines. Paper is renewable, recyclable and sustainable. Computers on the other hand transfer the pollution of production and the dangers of recycling to third world nations. They are made of plastics and metals none of which are sustainable. Many businesses have jumped on the band wagon that the digital era is a greener alternative. The green is the money that goes into their pockets. I support the concept of a sustainable and greener paper magazine of high quality for those who prefer hard copy. 

      Robert’s point is precisely correct and the present or future ownership of a computer is irrelevant in economic terms. After all, nobody tries to claim a reduction in resource use on account of other people reading ones Newsletter (or using one’s pc).

      My point is simply that a seriously substandard product must always be regarded as a waste of the resource it is consuming.



  • 06 Apr 2012 22:40
    Reply # 883845 on 883437
    Robert Groves wrote:
    Annie Hill wrote:
    Brian's 'green comment' is also worth pursuing.  Using any paper, sustainable, unbleached or otherwise is a strain on Gaia.  Those of us who do not get a printed copy, or print out our own, are taking a green alternative.

    I use paper charts and prefer to read paper books and magazines. Paper is renewable, recyclable and sustainable. Computers on the other hand transfer the pollution of production and the dangers of recycling to third world nations. They are made of plastics and metals none of which are sustainable. Many businesses have jumped on the band wagon that the digital era is a greener alternative. The green is the money that goes into their pockets. I support the concept of a sustainable and greener paper magazine of high quality for those who prefer hard copy. 
    Bob,

    What you are saying is mostly true but people already have computers that they use for other things (besides surfing the web). If you did not have a computer your position would have merit but if you already have a computer, I'd say the "e" version is greener.
  • 06 Apr 2012 11:47
    Reply # 883437 on 873486
    Deleted user
    Annie Hill wrote:
    Brian's 'green comment' is also worth pursuing.  Using any paper, sustainable, unbleached or otherwise is a strain on Gaia.  Those of us who do not get a printed copy, or print out our own, are taking a green alternative.

    I use paper charts and prefer to read paper books and magazines. Paper is renewable, recyclable and sustainable. Computers on the other hand transfer the pollution of production and the dangers of recycling to third world nations. They are made of plastics and metals none of which are sustainable. Many businesses have jumped on the band wagon that the digital era is a greener alternative. The green is the money that goes into their pockets. I support the concept of a sustainable and greener paper magazine of high quality for those who prefer hard copy. 
  • 05 Apr 2012 20:02
    Reply # 882829 on 873273

    I'm afraid I don't recognise the newsletter/magazine that Tom Wallace refers to - the one I received was well produced, perfectly readable, jam-packed full of relevant and current content, and the diagrams were no smaller nor less readable than those in some of the recent Fred Barter produced ones.

    I don't experience the photographs as being unclear or not of good colour - the focussing and exposure are down to the original photographer and the light conditions at the time.  A lot can be done on contrast and colour balance using software, although I don't know if FB went to those lengths.  Nothing can improve lack of focus or camera shake.  When I was involved in turning the previous printed magazines into digital format I spent quite some time on each photograph in each issue with photo processing software.  The reason for this was that, it seemed to me, all the photographs were balanced for an overall visual effect, whereas the rig on each boat was far too dark to make out the detail of the sail panels, battens, etc.  I took the view that it was exactly this detail which was of most importance in our newsletter, rather than having pretty pictures of seascapes obscured by those infernal junk boats.  The downside (if it is one) was that backgrounds then tended to become a bit washed out.

    I will concede that there are none of the attention grabbing photos, spread over two pages, as Fred used to do at the head of some articles.  For that you need pictures of a high quality to stand the enlargement, and I don't know if the publishing software and printing process David uses are capable of it.  Perhaps some full page photos would fill the gap?

    The only doubt I have is that it may be difficult to fill newletters regularly when so much content is provided in each one, and the intention is to produce three instead of two a year.  Down to you, Tom, and all the other members, to get writing.

  • 05 Apr 2012 17:00
    Reply # 882683 on 873273
    Deleted user

     

    David. The whole point of the higher sub. is to allow any member to choose to receive a readable printed magazine.

    Gary. My original comment was caused by my reaction to the printed Newsletter. The medium res. download is marginally better than the low res. but I should not have looked at it had my paper version not been so poor.

    Annie. There is nothing as un-green as the product that is useless.

    Karlis. Size matters but fuzzy, illegible figures within drawings are unacceptable. None of Arne’s drawings were improved by magnification.

  • 01 Apr 2012 12:50
    Reply # 873724 on 873273
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

                                                                        Stavanger, Sunday

    (..spring is supposed to be here soon, but the met office promises us a couple of frosty nights now, so I am not so sure. I’d better stay inside and nurse my sore throat...)..

                                         ..I suggest...

    My last posting about the dilemma of the printed NL may look like sulking and it certainly lacked the important factor; a constructive idea on how to improve things.

    But first of all, I don’t think that the NL58 is bad, it just has the same problem as all newsletters have had when lots of stuff has to be compressed into a small area. Compressing photos is not a big problem; it is when diagrams are crimped to half or quarter size that we get in trouble. When text and details get unreadable, the efforts of the writer will be in vain.

    Sooo, I suggest that the next newsletters are made in two versions; one for the web and one meant for printing. It does not have to involve much extra work. This is how it can be done.

    # Challenge No. One is always to receive enough written material from the members. Encourage members to make their own complete articles with photos and diagrams in whichever way they want them to look. Even the rally reports should be made this way, with plenty of big, nice photos. Those who need help with some editing, proof reading and format conversion may get that.

    # Make the web NL first.

    # The web NL and printed NL will only have a few pages in common; the front cover and the official JRA part. This will contain an intro from the editor and/or the Hon. Secretary, reports from the AGM etc. In addition the commercials.

    # Already at the list of contents, the two versions will split:

    # In the web version the list of contents will actually be a list of links to the articles. Click on the link and the article (in PDF format) will pop up. Close the article and you are back to that active list of contents again. The beauty of this is that the web articles can use more space which is more screen-friendly and need less graphic skills. The amount of Megabytes will not increase much. After all, my 7 page "Peaking up .." article is only is 616 kB - well less per page than NL58.

    # The all-up number of pages of these articles for a web NL may well exceed 100 without the need to fell a single tree.

    # From these web articles - hopefully hardly touched by the editor until now - a printed NL can be edited.

    Could this be an idea?

    Arne

    Last modified: 29 Aug 2023 13:46 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 01 Apr 2012 06:09
    Reply # 873636 on 873273

    You can't please all of the people all of the time............

    I think that most people join the JRA for the wealth of knowledge and experience of the members.  For my part I have found that all members who contribute with drawings and articles are more than happy to assist those who require further information.  If you are joining the JRA in order to receive another glossy mag like Seahorse, PBO, YM et al then you will be disappointed.  I do not believe this is the purpose of the JRA nor should it be. I think the newsletter is just that........... It gives a flavour of what is going on. 

    I think the current editorial team are doing a sterling job!  Keep up the good work!

    Peter

  • 01 Apr 2012 02:02
    Reply # 873511 on 873273
    I thought the last issue of the newsletter was fantastic!  Fortunately I'm too young to remember how great the newsletters were in the old days.

    The quality and content of detailed technical diagrams (Arne's for example) are worth their space and should be included in the newsletter full size, or as large as possible.  As well, although it takes more time, hard-to-read scratchy handwriting should be transcribed.  It's some extra work, but there's not a lot of it and it makes a big difference.  

    Are printing costs the limiting factor on the size of the newsletter?  The pdf version can get larger without any additional costs, but I'm sure it's not worth the effort for two seperate versions, short for print and long for pdf.



  • 01 Apr 2012 00:56
    Reply # 873486 on 873273
    One thing that has not been mentioned, although implied in the word 'professional' is that the editor(s) are Honorary and not paid, unlike with the previous newsletter.  In the long run, this will, mean that the money from subs is going into printing the magazine, for those who want a printed edition and is not being spent on compiling and laying out the magazine.

    Brian's 'green comment' is also worth pursuing.  Using any paper, sustainable, unbleached or otherwise is a strain on Gaia.  Those of us who do not get a printed copy, or print out our own, are taking a green alternative.

    Of course, at this early stage, we may well have problems with translating the original images to an acceptable form for downloading, printing, etc.  No doubt eagle eyes have spotted typos and spelling mistakes, although I like to think there are far fewer than there used to be, but we are still learning.  I don't think it's asking too much of the membership that we are allowed a few errors in order both to reduce costs and increase content of the magazines in the long run.  Bear with us.  We're doing our best.
<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software