New iss of Planet Studio
12 messages in this thread
Barbara:
I just got the "second" issue of Planet Studio, and I must say I am
dissapointed. The cover story, which takes up almost a fifth (3 of 16 pages)
of the issue, is a review of 3DS r4. Now, I'd wager that anyone who's willing
to shell out $100 for 96 pages a year already HAS the new r4 release! (That's
$2.88 for a review on a product you already own.)
This is followed by a page ($0.96) of press releases — ALL of which are in at
least two other magazines to which I subscribe (and I pay much less for press
releases in those mags).
I've got no problem with the articles by Ed Kellerman, John Ellis or Brian
Rudolph. As for the reviews of Mirage, Liquid Speed and Penello, I was afraid
that I'd find them to be 100% pro — and while the first two were, I have heard
the praises of Mirage sung by many, and I happily own LS — the Pennello review
does have two negative comments (even though they were small). Now, I'm not
looking for bad reviews, just realistic ones. Most software has SOMETHING not
to like about it — that's why there are upgrades!<g>
The reviews of 3DS-related books were welcome, and I'd like to see you expand
this area to include books about animation and movement (like the Muybridge
books that have often been recommended on this forum).
As for Brian Rudolph's "Ask Doc Planet", I have the same criticism for this
that I do for all similar columns in all periodicals — Who is it who has time
to write down their question/problem and send it in to a magazine, who may or
may not choose it as one to be answered, and then wait for a couple months to
see if there's a solution? From glancing over the questions in this issue, it
looks more like a partial FAQ list — which is fine, but I think it would maybe
be a little better if maybe Brian didn't stick to the Q/A format so
religiously. In other words, if he, from his perspective in Autodesk, sees
some issue that obviously needs addressing, based on support calls, dealer
feedback, CIS questions, etc., he could take the whole page to discuss the
issue in depth. I think Jonas could write some great stuff for this mag too,
FWIW.
While I think this newsletter may hold some promise, I don't think I can
justify the price based upon current content. There's just too much wasted
space (literally and figuratively), and it seems like you don't really grasp
the niche market that you could be filling. I don't want the info I can get in
CADANCE, CADalyst, CGW, Computer Artist, 3D Artist, Computer Pictures, etc. I
want something unique, and something more than I get from the time I spend on
CIS daily. And right now, I just don't see that.
I think I'll be sending my invoice back "CANCEL".
Dave
Hello Dave,
Ouch!
I had to read your message twice before I realized that you were happy
with 12/16 of the content! 😉 And really, that pleases me, because
this is only the first "real" issue of the newsletter (Bill Allen
told me it took him several issues to "get it right"). Besides,
although I'd love to please everyone all the time, I know that's not
possible.
But I want to address the issues you brought up.
Obviously, a number of people who read Planet Studio will already own
R4. But I've seen a lot of people here and on the Internet
questioning current owners, asking whether the upgrade is worth
getting. And that's what this article aims to tell. Plus, to give
an idea of what's possible with the new release. I too am sorry it
could not fit onto 1-1/2 pages instead of 2-1/2 (not 3–the TOC and
title take up 1/2 page). But it needed big graphics and I did not
want to compromise the text, either. I agree it is long; I'll choose
to err the other way in the future. Still, I hope other people find
it helpful. If not, we won't do this type of thing any more.
On a related note, you'll see the text point size go down in the next
issue to accommodate more info. I don't want people to have to use a
magnifying glass, but I think it can stand to shrink.
So you found nothing in the news section that you hadn't known? Geez,
I'm really sorry to hear that. I will certainly pull that section if
it proves useless. But I also realize that you personally subscribe
to *lots* of publications, as well as CIS–and not everybody has all
those resources. So maybe you're in the minority. I'll wait to hear
from more people before deciding to yank it.
By the way, your cost calculations are not based on the charter
subscription rate, which will remain in effect for the forseeable
future. So the news page really costs $0.61 and the R4 article and
images $1.80. 😉
I'm glad you like the articles by Ed, Dave, John, and Brian. These
guys are great, as are the other writers I get to work with.
And I'm glad the reviews were 'critical enough.' They're there to
explain products objectively and to help you make buying
decisions–and because people on this forum asked for them! I ask
the writers to tell the truth and disclose what kinds of users will
be best served by the product. I don't care whether the overall
impression is good or bad–just as long as it's helpful and honest.
I'm happy to know you liked the book reviews, too. While Planet
Studio will stick mostly to things related specifically to Autodesk
products, I'm willing to cover related stuff as well. I suspect the
Muybridge theories are covered well elsewhere, but maybe not. For
instance, Digital Video magazine did an "Animals in Motion" series in
the August/September and October/November '93 issues.
As far as the Doc Planet column goes, you're right–who wants to send
in a question and wait 2 months to see whether or not it'll be
answered. So if Brian chooses your question to include, we'll get
back to you with an answer right away. The Q & A bit is really just a
format, though. We were going to do it as tips, but there's another
tips column (readers' tips) on the way. Doc Planet is perfect for
questions small in scope. What you suggest about using a whole page
to discuss an issue in depth–that's an article! And believe me,
Brian, myself, and other of our current and potential contributors
are on the lookout for those kinds of questions to answer in
full-blown articles.
Ah, Jonas. I too think he could write some great stuff.
Unfortunately, he's been too busy to write (I know; I've asked). Keep
watching, though; I'm persistent! 🙂
At $59/year the price Planet Studio is high. But our goal is to make
it worth it! It is a newsletter–not a magazine–so you won't see
ads. And unfortunately, we don't see the market being big enough to
support the economies of scale needed for a lower price. Believe me,
we have only lost (I mean invested!) money in this publication so
far. But if it does, we'll certainly lower the price. (There are
business reasons for that, not just altruistic!) The ideas and tips
you'll get from it will be at least as useful at $59 as a plug-in
will be at $295. (Incidentally, if you're spending time on CIS
daily, you're shelling out a lot more than $59 a year!)
You're dead wrong about my not grasping the niche we should be
filling. I don't want to duplicate what's in CADENCE, CADalyst, CGW,
or any of the others, either. This is the ONLY publication to focus
SOLELY on Autodesk multimedia, and that's the audience we're here to
serve. Planet Studio has the resources of Digital Video magazine,
we're fortunate enough to have a terrific stable of contributors, and
I personally have 7-1/2 years experience in computer
graphics/publishing. What's more, I am truly committed to making this
a great publication.
Even though your criticism may sting, I find it immensely helpful. So
thanks, really. I hope that you will give us another chance. I will
listen to your requests and do what I can to fulfill them. So keep
the comments coming. And we'll keep improving Planet Studio with each
issue. I promise.
Barbara,
Sounds good to me. How do I sign up? :> I'd also love to get a copy of that
first issue.
Aaron
Hi Aaron,
Sorry so slow to respond…
The best way to sign up for Planet Studio is to call 1-800-441-4403
during Eastern Standard Time business hours. It's no problem to get
a copy of the freebie sample issue–just tell Debbie (that's who
you'll talk to!) that you want it.
Thanks for your interest. And please let me know what you like, don't
like, and would like, okay!
Thanks Aaron,
–Barbara
Barbara:
I understand that it can take some time to get in "the groove", but
that's exactly why I've tried to be harsh this early on — to try to
make it take _less_ time than it might otherwise — and thus to make
each issue worth more than the price I'm paying.
The other problem I have with a 3DS review is that this is a dealered
product. Isn't it the DEALER's job to provide the demo/overview of
the product? Sure, he's trying to sell something, but he also should
be able to provide specific answers to specific questions — and for
something as complex as 3DS, AND when the probibility that the reader
already owns or uses a version of the program, I'll bet a 2-1/2 page
review isn't going to be able to cover the fine points of the
questions that person may have.
As far as diminishing the text size, I think that's a good idea.
There are quite a few magazines directed at the PC-Video/CG/Animation
market available gratis for those who qualify. Laserprint the press
releases (in B/W) on a separate sheet and stick it in the envelope
(get the releasors to foot the bill) — just don't waste a full page
of 4-color/glossy to do it, especially, as I say, it's information
that people can get elsewhere. I'm out here in Wichita, Kansas, but
I can go down to the big-chain bookstore and find CGW, Computer
Artist, CADENCE, and quite a few others on the shelves. Just don't
backtrack over ground that others are covering, is all I'm saying.
Let me put this another way: 1)There are no ads to underwrite
publishing costs, so all costs are carried by the subscriber. 2)You
print product reviews, which, if favorable, amount to advertising for
the creator. 3)Creators of products want you to print "free"
announcements. 4)See item #1.
Yes, to some extent, the "free" announcements are a "public service",
but again, AVAILABLE ELSEWHERE.
Yes, I was basing my prices on the PUBLISHED rates, as listed in the
"premiere" issue. If you've changed that, then I stand corrected.
I understand the fiscal problems associated with doing a non-ad
underwritten publication for a small niche market — but if you don't
fill the niche for me, then I can't help with your publication costs.
>>(Incidentally, if you're spending time on CIS daily, you're shelling out
>>a lot more than $59 a year!)
I feel I'm getting MUCH more out of my daily CIS excursions than for
what I am paying. Again, that's not the feeling I've gotten yet from
PS. Oh, and it's $59.95/year.
I didn't mean to say you didn't understand the publishing business —
I just meant that you seemed to want to bite off too much for a
16-page publication.
I haven't yet made up my mind about the subscription…. Plus, we've
been without a bookkeeper for a few weeks, so it's extra tough to get
things processed, but I'm thinking on it.
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the time you've put into letting us know what you want.
Your points are well taken. Be assured that we'll be considering them
when planning future issues.
You're right, it does "take some time to get into the groove" when
trying to target the editorial. You're also right that feedback will
help us do it better and faster. We'll certainly consider *any*
feedback–harsh or not!
–Barbara
Let me get this straight: you're willing to pay $5-10 an hour for CompuServe
because you absolutely must know every possible hint and tip for 3D Studio
within hours of its public disclosure, but you're disappointed when a
relatively less expensive alternative (Planet Studio) doesn't have even more
new information and up-to-date news?
What do you want, a personal tutor who was taught at Tom Hudson's knee? I
think what you want are hard-won secrets, and those are very, very expensive.
Heck, I'd pay $200 an issue for a newsletter called "Things You Don't Know
Yet."
I can't comment on the other parts of your critique, I'm sure Barbara
has enough. However as far as my own "Doc Planet" column goes…
The question and answer format is just that…a format. Nobody really
sends in questions and expects to wait two months for an answer. The
questions in that column are chosen by two criteria: 1) I have been
asked that question time and time again, so a lot of people must need
that clip of information, or 2) I find a snippet of information that
is very interesting and I think would help out a large group of
people (whether or not I have been asked that question a number of
times).
As for the request to expand some of the questions into full page
detailed answers, that's what the articles I write are! I have been
asked more times than I can remember, How do you convert FLC to AVI
and back. So I wrote a more detailed answer to that question.
If you know of topics that you think a lot of people need mor
information on, please bring them to my attention! I want to write
articles that will be useful to as many people as possible.
I guess Brian what I object to is the implication that "Joe Smith from Michigan
writes, "Dear Doc Studio, I have been having a problem…" is a specifically
submitted question. Really, this falls more under a "Dave's Pet Peeves"
heading than a mag criticism. Many magazines do this, and it just irks me.
The Aldus magazine specifically states that the q&a stuff they print for their
various products comes from FAQ on the tech support lines, etc. Planet Studio
says something like, "If you have a question for Doc Hollywoo (– oops,
_Studio_ <g>), send it to, etc…". That's not to say that you _wouldn't_
answer a submitted question, should it be deserving, but the little italic text
could read "Questions are a mix of submissions and FAQ's from Autodesk's
support services" or something.
Okay, so I'm picking nits. I've got to have SOMETHING as a hobby, don't I? <g>
Keep up the good work!
Dave
<< "Dave's Pet Peeves">><<Okay, so I'm picking nits. >><< what I object to is
the implication that "Joe Smith from Michigan writes, "Dear Doc Studio, I have
been having a problem…" is a specifically submitted question>>
Well Dave,
You are definitely picinicing…uh..I mean..pit sitting…er..you know. <g>
Actually, most of them are submitted questions. Either to me in Product
Support, or here on Compuserve, or via the internet or Global Village…or by
being stopped in the hall by some Autocad tech…<g> They have been asked and
answered, and now I am recounting them in PS because I thought it was a useful
question.
Ah well…you may be right. As a format it might leave something to be desired.
But I feel, if the information gets out to the public, I don't care what format
it gets there in.
-Brian
>>>I just got the "second" issue of Planet Studio, and I must say I am
dissapointed. <<<
I would like to see a format similar to Lightwave Pro. The have
plenty of tips and techniques in each issue by people that work on
Babylon 5, seqQuest, etc. I would compare it to the 3DS Special
Effects book, only not as big or split up into 12 issues.
Of course, I don't see a need for Planet Studio when I can get more
info right here.
>>Of course, I don't see a need for Planet Studio when I can get more info
>>right here.
Right now Tim, that's my feeling exactly. I feel that PS COULD be great — I'm
just hoping and waiting (and ranting! <g>).
Dave