News:



  • June 25, 2025, 03:30:35 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans  (Read 7523 times)

Offline Bill Mohrbacher

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« on: November 29, 2009, 08:36:18 AM »
I'm a staunch AMA supporter, but recently MA has begun to "watermark" plans so they are useless when copied. I really detest this practice and have started trying to get others to write to MA and AMA in protest. Please lend your voices! Here is the letter I sent to MA, Jim Cherry and Dave Mathewson:

For the last several months, AMA has been “watermarking” magazine plans with a big AMA insignia.  This makes the plans unreadable.  I know AMA is in the business of selling plans and this practice makes it impossible copy them.  Is AMA in such bad shape this practice is necessary?

Before I ever took a mechanical drawing class, I could read and interpret drawings.  My first mechanical drawing teachers always asked where I learned so much about reading and making drawing, this in the 7th grade in 1956.  Of course I learned from reading Model Airplane News, Flying Models, and Air Trails.  I spent hours pouring over Paul Del Gatto, Paul Plecan, Walt Musciano, Cal Smith, and the other great craftsmen’s model airplane drawings.  PDG’s use of shadowing and shading made the parts jump off the plans.  The wonderful cutaways of Doug Rolfe made clear just about every detail that could be unclear and he turned these out, sometimes every month!  Pull out a 1956 volume of MAN, FM or AT and see what I mean.

Thankfully the watermark feature of some publishing program wasn’t available to ruin these works or art.  Thankfully you never used it to ruin Robert Sweitzer’s magnificent renderings of Bill Werwage’s Thunderbolt in the July 2006 MA.

Please stop this watermarking!  Many of us old timers and many newer or beginning modelers still love to pour over plans.  You do us a great dis-service, ruin an artists work, and greatly diminish the value of our AMA memberships! 

Alan Hahn

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2009, 09:17:08 AM »
Just to be sure I understand your objection, you mean the plans as they appear in the magazine, or the actual full size plans that you purchase?

I have noticed the watermarking of the plans in the magazine, and I too find it objectionable. I think that feeling does go back to the "good ole days" when you actually got full (multi) page plans that were readable. However I don't even think the plans are a full page worth today, which along with the watermarking really makes it impossible to make much out.

Of course that may be the point of it.

The AMA plans themselves are pretty darn expensive, at least when compared to the cost of a kit itself. Maybe it is a realistic cost, and takes in the effort to draw up and projected number of sales. I don't know how AMA (or a magazine like Flying Models) cost the effort of providing a construction article and plans.

I am guessing that the other alternative is to just forgo construction articles and plans.

Offline Bill Mohrbacher

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2009, 09:42:39 AM »
My objection is to watermarking the plans in the magazine.  Plans long ago were really most often on a single sheet, not a foldout unless runner or small stuff.  Dig out your 1956 MANs and see what I mean. Or better yet,look at Werwage's P47 I referenced.  Very clear! Lots of info!

Offline Shultzie

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 3474
  • Don Shultz "1969 Nats Sting Ray"
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2009, 10:05:39 AM »
That is what I LOVED about the old AERO MODELLER mags' and why I could hardly wait for the next issues..
Many even had not only the plans full size in the mags. but also included the full size pattern plans and drawings that could be removed and used while the creative juices were still flowing after reading the articles.

here is just one quickee' example: from Aero 1968
Don Shultz

Offline Jim Thomerson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2087
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2009, 10:09:48 AM »
Later Aeromodellers had something printed in such a way as to obscure part of the plan.

Alan Hahn

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2009, 10:20:34 AM »
My guess is that the guys who draw up the plans may like to get paid for their efforts.  :!

Did the old magazines have people on staff to make the drawings?

Clearly the business was a lot different back in that era.

Offline John Stiles

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
  • one shot=one kill
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2009, 11:30:48 AM »
That is what I LOVED about the old AERO MODELLER mags' and why I could hardly wait for the next issues..
Many even had not only the plans full size in the mags. but also included the full size pattern plans and drawings that could be removed and used while the creative juices were still flowing after reading the articles.

here is just one quickee' example: from Aero 1968
Hey......that's pretty cool, can I get you to post a full sized version ??? H^^ ;D
John Stiles             Tulip, Ar.

Offline john e. holliday

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22976
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2009, 12:02:57 PM »
R/C Modeler started doing the water mark and then went to publishing only part of the plan in construction articles.  There reason was some people were enlarging the plans and then selling them.  I know people get paid for their plans that are published.  So AMA has to make back some of the money.  You will not find the water mark on the full size planes.  Of course I don't know if there is a copy right on them or not.  Sure things are different now, as I remember paying for a set of plans with at least 3  designs on them for 25 cents.  The magazine only cost 25 cents back then too.  I also remember the partial plans with deminsions and full size parts.  There has to be a point when the magazine says enough.   
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Offline John Miller

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1728
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2009, 12:44:19 PM »
My guess is that the guys who draw up the plans may like to get paid for their efforts.  :!

Did the old magazines have people on staff to make the drawings?

Clearly the business was a lot different back in that era.

Warning, a long and perhaps rambling dissertation follows.

Publishing a magazine was no doubt a lot more profitable back in the early days. The publisher could get good rates on advertising. The TV was either not in wide spread use, or not yet invented, and the only methods of mass advertising a product was Newspaper, Magazines, and Radio. Modelers flocked to the magazines that catered to the hobby, as it was the main media covering the happenings, the latest, greatest techniques, and designs of the day. Companies producing model related products also flocked to the model magazines because they were the best venue to directly reach their market.

Plans have been a part of model magazines almost from the beginnings of the hobby. Having the plans in the magazines was a big reason many bought that issue, and for some time, the plans included a scale, or some method to assist the modeler with the efforts to enlarge the plan at home.

Later they began offering full sized plans for those who weren't "skilled", or patient, enough to hand enlarge the magazine plans. In the beginning, the plans were relatively cheap, often costing the same, or slightly more than the magazines cover price.

Most plans of the day were on one sheet. Some were actually quite crude compared to today's offerings, but the modelers of the day were able to build some very decent models from them, filling in the details from their own practises, and experiences.

Today's plans are larger, more detailed, multi sheeted offerings, and in many cases far more accurate than in the past. Cad drawings are a whole new ballgame, offering extreme accuracy, and the possibility of laser cutting.

The construction articles were, and still are, one of the main backstays of the model publishing business. Having a good article about a really neat model meant huge sales of that issue.

Those numbers showed the advertisers, which magazine might best carry their message to the most potential customers. Publishers were always looking for new subjects and designs. Revenue from advertising helped defray, the cost of the publication to the modelers, keeping the cost of the products more in line with what the modeler was able to pay.

Some articles were solicited from builders of successful models, others were submitted. Today, that's still, with a few changes, how it happens. Whether an article was solicited or submitted, the publisher offered a payment based on the amount of work performed by the author.

The author could reap the highest rewards for the effort, by writing the article, doing the drawing, and taking all the pictures. In cases where the writing was weak, the publisher would use the editors to clean it up and make it more presentable. If the drawing was poorly done, or not up to standards, the publisher would contract a redraw to a draftsman who would redo the drawing to the standard the publication required. Editors liked, and still do, lots of good photos. If none existed, they could hire a photographer to take pictures for the article. Of course, all these options cost the publisher, and the payment to the designer was adjusted to reflect the costs.

It is no suprise that model magazines may have been a good money making business during those days, but as competition between the magazines, and other media increased, cost savings and enhanced income opportunities had to be found in order to keep the magazine afloat.

One augmented income opportunity was discovered in plan sales.

Plans were, and many still are, copyrighted. Large scale copy machines were unheard of, so the main method used to supply plans to the hobby was what we call "Blue Prints" using the Ozalid method many are familiar with from drafting classes in school. The other was to turn the process over to a professional printing company. The very best, but also more expensive method, is printing. One had to make a run large enough to get a cost discount on volume, so storage enters into the discusion.

Back in the day, plans were only available from the publisher for the reasons cited above. so the cost mostly reflected a modest profit to the publisher, after all, where else were you going to get the plans. Kinko's didn't exist.

Over the years, there have been a huge amount of changes in the business, and technology, that have affected the publishers bottom line. Those that didn't adapt, or could not, had to close up shop. Some very successful magazines have fallen by the wayside in the last decade or so. It's simply too much competition from too many areas for some.

Increased costs, and competition are the culprits.

Cost increases almost go without explanation. The cost of everything has increased, sometimes many times more what it was in the past. In the case of plans, consider the cost of acquiring, storing, printing, and servicing the plan sales.

Payments to authors have doubled in the last 10 years. Secure storage of plans is crucial. several decades of published design are no longer available from the publishers, due to warehouse fires. Ozalid or blue prints have lost favor with hobbyists, so today, most are printed, either offset, or, more likely, large scale copy machines. Have you priced Kinko's today? the average cost for one sheet is over $5.00.

If you've spent the bucks to purchase your own copier, and supplies, the cost isn't much less, especially when you factor in the price of the machine.

Servicing the request for plans usually goes through it's own department, staffed by at least one paid individual, whose salary must be paid out of the receipts from plan sales.

Now, let's look at what some of this competition is.

Magazine sales and subscriptions are in a downward trend. If we don't start supporting them, they will eventually have to close up shop. Competition comes from the huge changes in media fueled by the Internet. What the magazines used to do for us the hobbyists, is now done quicker, faster, and at less cost.

Forums, such as this one, disseminate information at literally the speed of light. I believe that many modelers today, seldom buy, or receive a magazine unless it's part of membership in an organisation. Their magazines are not wholly supported by advertising revenues, instead, they are subsidised by the organisation.

There are precious few independent magazines still being published.

Flying Models in the US, is one of the only magazines being published that cover all aspects of the hobby, and it's having problems due to lack of support.

Plan sales have become a large potential for what little profit is available to maintain the viability of the magazine, so it's no surprise, to me, that steps are now being taken to try and protect that source. Watermarking is one such method.

It does beg the question, "Why do this now? What use on the small published plan, does watermarking have on security?"

The answer is actually easy to surmise. Modern computer graphics programs are quite capable of enlarging the small published plan to usable proportions, thereby circumventing the possibility of a sale of that plan to an individual. Add to this the practise of individuals selling copied plans that were originally sold by the magazines. They are competing directly with the publisher, and at relatively no cost to themselves. If they use the small published plan as a base, there is absolutely no income received by the publisher. Even though most of these plans are copyrighted, the practise is growing. Costs of bringing suit on copyright infringement, usually cause such action to be deferred.

So, watermarking provides a method to discourage these practises. The published plans can show enough details so you can decide if you want to purchase the full sized plans. Very few modelers today have the time, skill, or will, to enlarge the small published plans these days, so encouraging the purchase of the plans helps the publishers bottom line, and believe me it's needed. The alternative would be to publish either only small parts of the plan, or none at all. Both of these options are counter productive, in my opinion.

In many cases these days, it's possible to purchase, on line, digital copies of published plans, including the articles, for a small cost. Though handy, and usable, this severely cuts into the magazines revenue.

Now, considering all the above, what might be some solutions to help the publishers? That presumes that the magazines are useful to you of course.

I believe PAMPA is leading the charge on possible solutions, by offering a special class of membership tailored to the internet. Magazine publishers may want to consider this avenue as well.

Converting to digital, and several offsite storage options make sense, and offer savings to the publisher, and eventually to the consumer.

Cost savings may be there for them to continue providing good service to us the hobbyists.

Either establishing, or perhaps better yet, aligning themselves with established forums, they can tap into an existing base of users. They may also be able to skim off articles and information, with permission, and a token payment, of course, that will help fill out the pages of their magazines, both electronic and hard copy.

Such movement, may also offer increased income opportunities from advertisers,, even if it's only providing links to advertisers web sites.

If a magazine is of value to you, consider subscribing and helping to build up their base, which makes them more valuable to advertisers.

We, the users of their products, should, as a first option, check their archives for the plans and services we desire. We should consider purchasing from the original sources whenever possible. Many plans and services are no longer available from the original sources, and those we can and should purchase from the providers of our choice.


« Last Edit: November 29, 2009, 01:39:39 PM by John Miller »
Getting a line on life. AMA 1601

Offline Hoss Cain

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 447
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2009, 12:50:49 PM »
I'm a staunch AMA supporter, but recently MA has begun to "watermark" plans so they are useless when copied. I really detest this practice and have started trying to get others to write to MA and AMA in protest. Please lend your voices! Here is the letter I sent to MA, Jim Cherry and Dave Mathewson:

//SNIP//


Please do not take my comments as argument, however there are events that some may not be familiar with.
Back in the '70s as a UAL pilot, with the possibility of getting furloughed, I opened a Hobby Shop in Mt. Prospect, IL. a NW suburb of Chicago. While there were a number of LHSs in the area, the big 3,(me a low 3rd) were Al's, Stanton's, and Aero Sports.
Around 1974, we noticed a number of returns on kits due to a shortage of parts. We found a certain group to be buying kits, removing a number of parts, copying the plans and reproducing partial kits of commercial kits. (Not many ARFs back then.) It started a system where we had to inventory each kit prior to being sold and having the purchaser sign that all was there. That took lots of manhours and also insulted the 99.9% of the customers who were honest.  In addition to cover such labor costs, the hobby shop had to watch the normal discounts we allowed to certain customers.

It was about this time that the late RCM started marking up their plans.

It only takes a few individuals to spoil the pot for everyone. Today eBay has LOTS of plans for sale. Where do they come from? I have my thoughts!

AMA purchased the huge John Pond collection and they, IMO, need to sell plans to cover that investment. Personally I no longer purchase plans, but have many from the JP collection plus from kits that I have built. Boy, those are well marked up with glue and paint. HA  ;D

While I am sympathetic to the customer, I can also well understand the AMA's position.
Horrace Cain
AMA L-93 CD and Leader
New Caney, TX  (NE Houston area)

Offline Geoff Goodworth

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 818
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #10 on: November 30, 2009, 01:19:53 AM »
This is an AMA issue and as one from Oz, you may think my opinion is irrelevant.

However, there are several issues that I believe need to be considered and one is a commercial attitude in the US that is different to Oz and the UK.

Computer magazines in Oz and the UK come with cover disks that contain fully functional software—often a soon to be replaced version—that is usually free and unrestricted and usually not available from the vendor via the web. Some of my mates in the US have over the years lamented the fact that the American publishers were not so customer focussed especially when I have shared CAD and other fully functional software with them.

As I understand it, Model Aviation is the journal of the AMA in the same way that Stunt News is the journal (some say newsletter) of PAMPA. I would be very unhappy if PAMPA started watermarking plans in Stunt News.

Given the current discussion about the Grondal Nobler, I am frustrated that the plan reproduced in the relevant issue of Flying Models is so small that I cannot read the details—especially as there are details in the accompanying pics that I would like to better understand. I have so many projects in the pipeline at present that, as attractive as the Grondal model is, I doubt that I would ever get to build one but I would like to be able to read and understand the details that have caught my interest. Having made that criticism, I can usually read the detail from the plan reproduction in Flying Models so, I generally do not have a complaint.

I also have a definite preference for using first generation copies to build my models so I buy my plans from the original source.

That said, however, the plans in Control Line News are not watermarked and can be read easily.

To return to my remarks about Oz and the UK, there are few plans published in Oz but one UK magazine is interesting. RCM&E (formerly Radio Control Models & Electronics), known in the US as R/C Model Aeroplane contains a free plan every month. A few months ago, it was a plan for profile Midget Mustang CL model about 400 sq in (the size of the Brodak Shoestring). This model was very well received by the readership. These free plans are often models that can be easily adapted for CL use and recently, in two issues, there were nearly scale plans for a full fuselage Midget Mustang and Cosmic Wind about 305 sq in and designed by Tony Nijhuis. With a bit of enlarging, these would make very interesting CL models and the plans come free with the magazine. Although a dedicated CL modeller with a strong preference for stunt, I still buy about half the issues of RCM&E each year for the free plans that could be adapted or for interesting technical articles.

For an association journal, or club newsletter like Model Aviation, I would be very unhappy with watermarking of the reduced-size plans in the magazine. Maybe some people think differently but even allowing for postage and the exchange rate—the Oz dollar is worth less that the US$—my time is worth more than I am willing to waste trying to enlarge a plan from the reduced reproduction in a magazine build article.

Offline John Stiles

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
  • one shot=one kill
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #11 on: November 30, 2009, 02:00:39 AM »
This is an AMA issue and as one from Oz, you may think my opinion is irrelevant.

However, there are several issues that I believe need to be considered and one is a commercial attitude in the US that is different to Oz and the UK.

Computer magazines in Oz and the UK come with cover disks that contain fully functional software—often a soon to be replaced version—that is usually free and unrestricted and usually not available from the vendor via the web. Some of my mates in the US have over the years lamented the fact that the American publishers were not so customer focussed especially when I have shared CAD and other fully functional software with them.

As I understand it, Model Aviation is the journal of the AMA in the same way that Stunt News is the journal (some say newsletter) of PAMPA. I would be very unhappy if PAMPA started watermarking plans in Stunt News.

Given the current discussion about the Grondal Nobler, I am frustrated that the plan reproduced in the relevant issue of Flying Models is so small that I cannot read the details—especially as there are details in the accompanying pics that I would like to better understand. I have so many projects in the pipeline at present that, as attractive as the Grondal model is, I doubt that I would ever get to build one but I would like to be able to read and understand the details that have caught my interest. Having made that criticism, I can usually read the detail from the plan reproduction in Flying Models so, I generally do not have a complaint.

I also have a definite preference for using first generation copies to build my models so I buy my plans from the original source.

That said, however, the plans in Control Line News are not watermarked and can be read easily.

To return to my remarks about Oz and the UK, there are few plans published in Oz but one UK magazine is interesting. RCM&E (formerly Radio Control Models & Electronics), known in the US as R/C Model Aeroplane contains a free plan every month. A few months ago, it was a plan for profile Midget Mustang CL model about 400 sq in (the size of the Brodak Shoestring). This model was very well received by the readership. These free plans are often models that can be easily adapted for CL use and recently, in two issues, there were nearly scale plans for a full fuselage Midget Mustang and Cosmic Wind about 305 sq in and designed by Tony Nijhuis. With a bit of enlarging, these would make very interesting CL models and the plans come free with the magazine. Although a dedicated CL modeller with a strong preference for stunt, I still buy about half the issues of RCM&E each year for the free plans that could be adapted or for interesting technical articles.

For an association journal, or club newsletter like Model Aviation, I would be very unhappy with watermarking of the reduced-size plans in the magazine. Maybe some people think differently but even allowing for postage and the exchange rate—the Oz dollar is worth less that the US$—my time is worth more than I am willing to waste trying to enlarge a plan from the reduced reproduction in a magazine build article.
Thanks for the post, sir! Very enlightening. I'll be looking for RCM&E H^^
John Stiles             Tulip, Ar.

Offline Tom Niebuhr

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2767
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #12 on: November 30, 2009, 08:10:55 AM »
John,
Thanks for the comprehensive answer.

While I sell some plans from my personal collection, I will not sell plans that are available from the original magazine source.

The internet has changed the world. The magazines are no longer making large bucks, so it is understandable, with the costs of publishing construction articles, that the plans must help to cover these expenses. I would like to see all the details in a magazine plan since I have always been interested in how other people do things. Yes, it is frustrating to have some of these details covered up,but maybe this is necessary.

Likewise it frustrating as a kit supplier, to have hundreds of hours of work copied. Particularly with small margins.

ABOVE ALL I hope that all people reading this will subscribe to Flying Models. This is the only magazine that consistantly covers all aspects of model airplanes. They need and deserve our support.

Tom Niebuhr
Blue Sky Models
AMA 7544

Offline Mark Scarborough

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5918
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #13 on: November 30, 2009, 02:27:27 PM »
John, having personally attempted to write comprehensive and accurate responses on occasion, I appreciate the time you put into drafting yours.
However one salient point I think that is over looked, one that is important to ME, and John, I think important to you as well.
I design my own planes, I spend days, weeks and months agonizing over just how to best impliment a certain feature. I spend many many hours drawing the plans trying to accuretly display the features of the model. If I were to come on here and see someone offering my plan as I have seen MANY MANY people do,,, It would break my heart. Its a passion, a labor of love, and while I would never make any money, let alone a profit from the planes I have done, I want to know that someone appreciates the work I did.

So in light of the fact that , while in a good natured, well meaning way, there are people that have no appreciation, and offer to "copy" their set of plans for someone, its really not right. If its my drawing, heck most times, I have given copies of my drawings away for postage, just let me know that you are interested. Many times , its the only real payback I get for my work.

as for watermarking the plans,, I have mixed feelings. I see the point and totally understand and agree with the premise. However, there are less obtrusive methods, that while they render the plan in the magazine impossible to copy, they would still allow you to be able to actually review the plan for information.
For years the rat race had me going around in circles, Now I do it for fun!
EXILED IN PULLMAN WA
AMA 842137

Offline Randy Powell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 10476
  • TreeTop Flyer
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #14 on: November 30, 2009, 02:59:13 PM »
I'm with Mark. And I do hate the watermarking that is used. I don't mind the concept at all, but when the plan becomes completely unreadable since the watermark is not only in the foreground, but much darker than the plan, it makes it impossible to even tell if I want the plans.
Member in good standing of P.I.S.T
(Politically Incorrect Stunt Team)
AMA 67711
 Randy Powell

Offline Richard Grogan

  • AMA Member 85745 Stunt Hangar
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1373
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #15 on: November 30, 2009, 03:06:02 PM »
I'm with Mark. And I do hate the watermarking that is used. I don't mind the concept at all, but when the plan becomes completely unreadable since the watermark is not only in the foreground, but much darker than the plan, it makes it impossible to even tell if I want the plans.
I agree. They could easily make the watermark more transparent and still get their point across. They may as well just talk more about it in the text and not even print it. Just another reason for those who don't want the (RC) magazine in the first place, want it even less!sheesh..
Long Live the CL Crowd!

                  AMA 85745

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12899
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #16 on: November 30, 2009, 03:49:11 PM »
I agree. They could easily make the watermark more transparent and still get their point across. They may as well just talk more about it in the text and not even print it. Just another reason for those who don't want the (RC) magazine in the first place, want it even less!sheesh..

I've got the September and December issues open in front of me, and while the watermark is there and obvious, I can see the plans through them quite clearly.

Given that many of the Flying Models magazine plans are now being printed on 1/2 a page as sort of a "here we can prove we have plans", I like what MA is doing better.

Best would be no watermark at all, but as has been pointed out that takes $$ away from the folks that worked hard to author and edit the articles; it's hard to come up with a copy-protection scheme that doesn't leave some sort of artefact.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Alan Hahn

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #17 on: November 30, 2009, 06:09:59 PM »
I just looked at the current issue. There is the electric RC racing plane plans. IThey actually take up 3 pages, but to be honest, in my issue at least, the water mark is the least of the problem---the plan itself was really faint and nearly impossible to read. So they could do a better job, otherwise why waste 3 pages of the mag.

With respect to watermarking in the first place, I am not sure who they talk to about financial strategies, but I think they could do something that would irritate less but accomplish the same thing.

Ok, but my guess is that the other option is to forgo any build articles.

Another point is I don't quite understand why every mention of MA has to bring back this war mentality about RC. If you think about modeling that way, then you have to accept that in those terms, RC won and CL lost. It's over--the battle has moved to new fronts.

I don't think that way--I enjoy almost everything in MA (and Flying Models)---except perhaps giant scale. If god had meant man to make giant models, he would have made them big enough to fly in! LL~

This is my opinion of course.

Offline Jim Thomerson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2087
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2009, 11:15:16 AM »
Flying Models does not watermark their plans. Tim must be referring to the small plans shown in their ad for their plans service. Nothing wrong with that.  It is interesting to compare the two most recent issues of Flying Models and Model Aviation.  D>K

Offline John Witt

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 508
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2009, 12:21:55 PM »
Well, Flying Models may say they have plans, but you can't actually buy them. 

I sent an order to them several months ago. After some time, I called and was told "oh yeah, I'll get your order moved to the front of the queue. Several weeks later, I called again, got the same lie. After several more weeks, I called again and got the "our printer is broken" story. The most recent call, a couple of weeks ago, I got a different story, which was even less definite: " I'll find out where the order is and call you back". Needless to say, I've heard nothing.

I don't really mind so much not getting the plans, as being lied to time after time. Do they think I am stupid? Flying Models is doomed if they treat many people like they've treated me.

As far watermarking goes, it only matters if you're trying to get plans for nothing.

John W
John Witt
AMA 19892
Edmonds, WA
"Houston, Tranquillity Base here. The Eagle has landed."

Offline Dick Pacini

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1649
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2009, 12:33:47 PM »
Well, Flying Models may say they have plans, but you can't actually buy them. 

I sent an order to them several months ago. After some time, I called and was told "oh yeah, I'll get your order moved to the front of the queue. Several weeks later, I called again, got the same lie. After several more weeks, I called again and got the "our printer is broken" story. The most recent call, a couple of weeks ago, I got a different story, which was even less definite: " I'll find out where the order is and call you back". Needless to say, I've heard nothing.

I don't really mind so much not getting the plans, as being lied to time after time. Do they think I am stupid? Flying Models is doomed if they treat many people like they've treated me.

As far watermarking goes, it only matters if you're trying to get plans for nothing.

John W

The plans are not sold by the magazine, but rather Carstens Publications  I recently ordered 2 plans of my own airplane from 1973 and had them within 2 or 3 weeks, even rolled in a tube per my request .

Send them a followup email and ask what is going on. 
AMA 62221

Once, twice, three times a lady.  Four times and she does it for a living.  "You want me on that wall.  You need me on that wall."

Offline Mark Scarborough

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5918
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2009, 01:09:33 PM »

As far watermarking goes, it only matters if you're trying to get plans for nothing.

John W
John,
I respectfully disagree, before I chunk down 15 or 20 bucks for a set of plans, I want to study the construction techniques a bit. and besides that, even if I never plan on buying, or building the plane, I like to study how other people solve problems. It really helps when I design my own stuff. I dont think I should have to buy the plans to be able to inspect them for my purposes.
that said, yes in todays world its pretty easy to scan and scale a drawing from a page so something needs doing, but, ,, not sure the best solution is the huge watermark,,,
For years the rat race had me going around in circles, Now I do it for fun!
EXILED IN PULLMAN WA
AMA 842137

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12899
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2009, 04:16:04 PM »
Flying Models does not watermark their plans. Tim must be referring to the small plans shown in their ad for their plans service. Nothing wrong with that.  It is interesting to compare the two most recent issues of Flying Models and Model Aviation.  D>K

OK, I was a little unclear -- I was looking at the watermarking in MA, and comparing it to the teeny (unmarked) plans in FM.  I can see through the watermark, at least on my issues of MA, and I can read the plans.  The FM plans are sometimes so miniaturized that I can't read them at all.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Serge_Krauss

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1330
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2009, 04:36:26 PM »
One of the main reasons I bought model plane magazines over the years was to see the plans in the construction articles.  Before profit margins were so small, and yes, copiers were available to make inferior and poor enlargements, it was understood that a construction article in a magazine was indeed meant to facilitate construction. One was often expected to copy the plan, using the squares provided to scale up what was necessary. I did that building a Roy Clough design and others.

When EAA was really a homebuilder's (or would-be homebuilder's) dominated organization, the classifieds contained a lot of original plans for sale. Some of these were by private parties, who stipulated that the plans were "unused". This was an honest attempt to protect the designers from having their design's full-sized plans distributed for profit to others, a very understandable courtesy. This can and should be done for active designs.

These two memories are not in conflict, for I believe that the magaizine's worth is greatly contained in its desemination of useful information. Now that MA has lightened the plan and darkened the watermark, it is proportionately less value to me; I can't see them. If it were on the news stand and contained unusable drawings, I would probably leave it on the rack, unless something else endeared it to me.

Plans suppliers should be protected, but that does not go for small plans in construction articles. If they are useless, then the article is more toward the infomercial end of things. It isn't fair to the retailer to read the article on the stand to see whether it's something one wants to purchase, and I'm not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to AMA, since it is supposed to bemy fellow members and I. If it's sold to AMA with the understanding that construction drawings will appear, then it's sold to us. I'm not entitled to full-sized plans without buying them separately, but I feel entitled to legible and useful reductions in the article.

SK

'sorry, but I don't see construction offerings as very valid without readable drawings, even though optically challenged copiers are available.


Offline Jim Thomerson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2087
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2009, 06:07:50 PM »
I went through several back issues of both magazines.  Tim is right that maybe half the FM plans are half page. I had not noticed because they are clearly printed and I hadn't had any trouble looking at them. Bifocals are a good thing! Not all the MA plans are watermarked, but I though the ones which were were far inferior to the FM plans in print quality. 

Offline W.D. Roland

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1152
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #25 on: December 22, 2009, 06:52:17 PM »
The new plans with watermark are impossible to even view.
If the lines were darker it wouldn't be such a problem but they are so light as to almost be a gray.

I can understand AMA's attempt to stop copy/enlargement of published plans in today's world of feed the government, everyone needs every cent they can get their hands on.
Our dues support the AMA but I bet all AMA employees would like a raise. Can't blame them.

I think plans in the old days were done at the designers/authors expense?
This may not be the case today?

I am one who uses magazine plans as 3veiws to base my own plans on so I was happy to see Dec 2009 article and plans on the Lt-14 as am currently drawing up a set from a small 3 view. I though great, I can check some of my demensions. Then I opened the magazine, strained my eye balls and then decided my work was going to be just fine....

Anyone remember Scale R/C Modeler magazine where Norm(?) would only publish a part of the plans?

I do miss having magazine plans that were readable like the neato one posted below.
Notice the link to the rudder.
David Roland
51336

Offline Warren Wagner

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 277
  • Bradenton, FL
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #26 on: December 22, 2009, 10:01:31 PM »
Back in the June 2007 issue of Model Aviation, there was a terrific construction article by Pat Johnston, and the subject was his version of the venerable Mustang.

Pat is a terrific and prolific designer of controline models, he's also a master of CAD drawings, and writes an comprehensive, interesting article, filling with lots of construction photos.  But what really put the crown on this article is two, full page construction drawings, showing every detail with great clarity.  It's a pleasure to pick up a drawing of that quality, and just spend time studying all the details that go into making this superb Mustang stunter.

This article has been read, underlined, and highlighted a dozen times, and because of the completeness of the article, I'm inclined to want to build the plane.   The full sized plans are rather expensive in this case (2 pages), but I don't think I'd be satisfied with any attempt to enlarge them at my local Kinko's.

Fast forward to the December 2009 issue of Model Aviation, and in it is a superb effort (notice I did NOT say construction article) by Jim Young of a very interesting and complex design, a Turner Special.  The text is terrific, the photos are terrific, and then you get to the construction drawings........yuck !!   I can't even read them, thanks to a very ugly watermark to prevent copying the plans.  What an insult to Jim to have his 3 pages of drawings made almost unreadable by a watermark.

Did I spend any time studying the drawings?  No!   Would I ever be interested in ordering a set of plans and building the plane?    I don't think so.   I can't tell from the distorted plans whether I would be interest or not.

The principle of adding a watermark to increase plans sales just might back-fire on the AMA plans sales.   How many people that might be interested in building a published plan,  just turn away and lose interest because they are not able to judge from the watermarked plans whether it is something they would like to build or not ??   !!

And as far as the subscription to Model Aviation is concerned, watermarking plans would be a deal-breaker for me....as much as I fully support the AMA, I would drop the subscription to Model Aviation if it were possible.

And as always, these comments are JMHO>

Cheers.

Warren Wagner

Warren Wagner
AMA 1385

Offline john e. holliday

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22976
Re: Model Aviation Magazine - Watermarking Plans
« Reply #27 on: December 25, 2009, 10:42:14 AM »
Maybe someone could make a suggestion to the people in charge to put a little note in the corner for all to see that plans are copy righted.  I sort of glance at plans as I am more interested in construction photos.
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.


Advertise Here
Tags: