GoldThree

Gil, Thanks for the feedback. Working on March/April now, will be at printer in a week and to members after that.

Noel, You bring up a good point. It is my opinion that offering to pay our contributors, while possibly incentivizing members to submit more articles, could also have some downsides. As it stands now, we have had a plethora of submissions to the magazine, so I don't think we would need it for that reason. In terms of submissions, what we do need are more articles on the types of models we do not normally get, such as ships, figures, mecha, Gundam, dinosaurs, game miniatures, humor and so on. Not to mention models made out of non-traditional media, such as paper, wood, and 3d printed. We would also like to feature models built by "Juniors." None of the traditional stuff we print will be pushed out to print these (armor, aircraft, sci fi, cars), if need be we will add more pages. I also like the idea that modelers submit their work to us because they simply want to, not because there is some cash in it. Authors may also submit their text and photos of something that we have printed in the IPMS/USA Journal to other publications. The only thing copyrighted or ownable by the IPMS/USA is the exact form in which the printed article appears (the reason for this is to protect the IPMS/USA from piracy). But, I think the biggest reason is that none of the volunteers who produce the magazine get paid, other than a comped membership. The IPMS/USA is a non-profit organization, so paying volunteers is essentially off the table. So far, the process has worked out, and based on the number of article submissions, I would discourage paying for articles. It would also be one more thing to keep track of. At the moment, just getting the magazine to print is more than enough to do. As far as the logo, this will be addressed in the Jan/Feb issue, which is at the printer now and will be in mailboxes in a couple of weeks depending on where you live.

Gil, More answers: 3) Are the changes so extensive that they may continue to delay the Journal's getting back on track for "on time" publishing and delivery to our members? If so, how is that problem going to be resolved and WHAT WILL BE DONE to get it back on track. The answer is not what "will", but what "is" being done and has been going on for the last many months. Firstly, now that we have a team of volunteers, the workload can be divided up so that no one person can break the magazine. Second, starting with the May/June issue (yes that one, the one that everyone complained about) we were already working like mad to get back on schedule. Like I said in the previous post, the March/April issue will be on schedule. The IUJ team has been working non-stop to accomplish this. 4) With 4-7 modeling articles per issue, and the need for an average of 30 articles per year to fill the 5 issues besides the one used for the Nats coverage, HOW MANY articles are currently on hand? How many issues do we have enough articles for? Enough for rest of 2025; enough for into 2026? Bob Lomassaro is the Managing Editor and has edited articles already for 2026. He has worked hard to find all sorts of diverse content (which you will see in upcoming issues). However, this does not mean all the issues up till then are "filled up." We always need space for things that come in, new, timely, and so on. I don't want to have so much of a backlog that new submissions can't be printed. On the other hand, it is nice to have a bunch of articles ready as a cushion just in case. We will always need new content. If we start to have "too much", then we will add more pages to the magazine. Typically, the IUJ runs 72 pages, you will note that the last two issues ran 76, because we had more content. The issue I am about to send off has 72 pages. That's because some of the articles I thought I could use had pics that were too low resolution to print. I knew I could drop back down to 72 pages and get the issue done, again to get back onto schedule. BTW, Bob Lomassaro is doing a fantastic job (along with all the rest of the team). 5) Has the Eboard and the Journal staff considered offering membership extensions as a form of "carrot" to entice members to write and submit articles IF there's a shortage in articles, particularly for certain genres? We have. The problem is tracking all that. Honestly, I don't think we need another "carrot"-seeing your article in print is pretty gratifying. And even while folks were complaining loudly about the 2024 May/June issue, the amount of submissions began to increase dramatically. This is still true. So, while I still get complaints about the "IUJ", I have also been getting lots of submissions and compliments. We are always looking for what our members are building, whether it is an M3 Lee (but 3d printed) or a 1/10th scale Hatsune Miku (both of which you will see in upcoming issues). I hope this answers your questions. Your initial post almost sounded like an ENDORSEMENT.

Gil, I will answer your questions once I have sent the Jan/Feb issue to the printer. I expect this will be tomorrow. That will take care of one of your concerns, namely, getting back onto schedule. Assuming all goes well, the March/April issue will be on schedule. I am glad you liked the cover, the Journal almost never has ships on it, so we couldn't pass this up. Thanks to William Kluge, who reshot images of that gigantic model using a tripod and multiple focal lengths, which allowed me to focus stack multiple images to create one in which most of the ship is in focus. It isn't perfect...but still a great image. I worked hard to make sure it read as a model (because the background was added) and not try to make it look like a real thing. Wait until you see the covers for the next two issues! And, yes, we are printing the cover on heavier stock, which means it can take more ink and the Tamiya ad doesn't bleed through. And maybe even "Sanity Clause" will have a late X-mas present for you regarding the "IUJ" thingie. I believe your Lee is in the upcoming issue. RO

Ron, I have that one in the queue. I plan to get it in during the first half of this year.

Ron Bell, What did you submit?

noelsmith, I have not seen that submission, more than likely it got lost in the changeover. Can you you re-submit everything to me at: basementleader@gmail.com? You reference "a lot of debate about the new Journal format." If you have any issues, please feel free to address them here, directly to me. I hope you enjoyed the last issue with the Yamato on the cover. Few issues of the magazine feature ships on the cover. I know the image isn't perfect, but it is a very large model and very difficult to shoot (thanks to William Kluge for reshooting a few images for me to use, BTW). The feedback here seems to have died down...

Michael, Thanks for reminding me on that. I don't think we have a new updated "swap" ad to put in it's place. Again, one of those things that needs to be done, but can get lost. I redid the "Membership card" for the last issue and you would think it would be simple. Not so much. I will put this on my list.

Bert, No one is being put out to pasture. I am 60+ myself. On the design team are some 60+ members. The idea, in general, is to embrace anyone who enjoys building models. In the 60's, 70's, & 80's most of those builders were men who built planes and tanks. If the IPMS/USA wants to grow beyond that (which I hear from members all the time) this will mean being open to new builders and genres. This does not mean leaving what the core members like behind, it means adding new genres to it. There will always be armor, cars, and aircraft. When I joined the IPMS, sci fi was still a tiny contingent, now it has grown and more accepted. This is happening with Gundam now, because if we want to be relevant to all builders, then we need to make a spot for them and offer something to them. It takes good ideas, time and work to do this. So, for example, I work with the NCC to help them understand Gundam, so that it can be properly included in the nationals. This takes time-understanding the genre, writing up stuff, working with people to implement it. I am rambling a bit. To quote Gil "that doesn't necessarily mean their silence is anything nefarious." I can tell you that my "so called silence" (if you want to characterize it that way) has everything to do with all the tasks that I need to get done. Right now I am filling in as a designer of the IPMS/USA Journal to assemble the magazine (on the Nov/Dec issue, in case you are wondering, the sooner I get it wrapped, the sooner it goes to the printer and the sooner we get back onto schedule). This is actual work and takes real time. So, I may not get back to someone or post on the forum simply because I really need to get the magazine done. Writing this stuff does not come naturally to me. The magazine is not the only thing I need to do...there is other IPMS business and all the stuff that happens in real life. This is more or less true for everyone who volunteers for the organization. We tend to be busy just trying to get stuff done. So, while it is important to post updates here and/or on Face Book, it also means not doing something else. And honestly, I have never relished writing stuff for social media. It is stressful and takes time.

SkyKing, #1: The magazine changed because a new group of folks were now doing the work. As the lead in this, I wanted the new team to be able to do what they thought was best with out me micromanaging them. Remember, as volunteers, they (like John and Chris before them) will only do the work if they want to. The magazine was ready for change after 18 years and I wanted the new folks working on it to be invested in it. The changes to magazine are not as extensive as you imply, we print articles about models, like we always have, we have the same advertisers, Members gallery and so on. The extensive change I think you may be referring to are the title change (which technically is not a change but a shortening of the existing title) and the gray text of the May/June issue (our first issue out of the gate BTW). The team came up with the title, because I encouraged them to try something new. In regards to the feedback that was sent regarding that issue, there were a lot of folks who hated "IUJ" and there were also an equal number who liked it. The biggest problem was the gray text, and we took quite a beating on that. Ultimately, all of the design decisions that were made are my responsibility (which I took). Finding volunteers with the prerequisite computer and design experience was no easy task and I was very fortunate that a number of folks volunteered. Again, the magazine is produced by your fellow modelers pretty much because they want to. No one gets paid, the only perk is a comped membership, which if you break that down per hour of work would be a few coins at best. #2: John left the magazine probably to have more free time. Chris left the magazine because he and I were not in agreement as to how it should be done going forward. I have no issues with either of them, they both did a fantastic job making the Journal. Getting into the details of why they left solves no purpose. Again, the magazine is made by fellow members who volunteer and can stop working at any point for any reason. The relationship is not the same as a workplace in which employees are beholden to employers. I am not the editors and designers boss, my job is to make it possible for them to do the work if they choose to. They contribute for motivations which are wholly their own. If someone decides to leave, I don't give them a hard time about it (i.e., don't burn your bridges and be respectful) and then figure out how to get the work done. Anyway, that's how I choose to do it. So far the team (of about 10 or so) is working out great. It is huge change from how it used to be done. I hope that answers your questions.

Hello All, at Gil's request I am posting the IPMS/USA Journal update that I posted yesterday on Face Book. Just for some context, I am the current IPMS/USA Publications Director who is essentially responsible for the IPMS/USA Journal. I have gone back and read most of the comments in this thread, now you are welcome to direct any questions you have directly to the source. Sept/Oct IPMS/USA Journal Update: The Sept/Oct issue was printed last week and on its way to your mailbox! In addition, the Nov/Dec issue is pretty much wrapped up and the team is hard at work on the Jan/Feb issue. As I explained in a previous post, our plan is to be caught up and on schedule by this spring. BTW, hopefully you noticed that the cover of the July/Aug issue was thicker. This was a sort of “test” to see if we liked it. We did, and all future covers will be printed on this nicer stock. The Sept/Oct issue has 76 pages (instead of the typical 72) because we needed more room for all the articles. One of them is an article written by Jim Maas about the pre-war markings of Curtiss SOC Seagulls. This type of article was a mainstay of the magazine in the pre-internet days of the 60’s and 70’s. I hope it will inspire people to send us more articles like this. (I am even thinking of writing up something myself about the markings of Narn warships from the 1990’s Babylon 5 universe). We are always looking for articles, so if you have something, contact the Managing Editor Bob Lomassaro at IPMS.Journal.Editor@gmail.com. The majority of our submissions are “build” articles, but we are looking for anything, as long as it is of interest to modelers. I don't want to give away what's in the rest of the issue, but I think it turned out pretty swell! The team of volunteers did a fantastic job ! Anyway, this is just a quick update to let everyone know we have been working hard to get onto schedule while also adding more bells and whistles to the IPMS/USA Journal. Enjoy!