A definite no to a totally digital copy. As #5, I also look forward to LF dropping through the letterbox; everything else then stops for a couple of hours.
Didn't I hear that physical books are on the rise in general?
As a publisher of both print and digital journals in the past, I proposed a process for producing a digital version of LF to the MT more than 10 years ago.
It's not a matter of can we produce a digital version, but how it is distributed. The digital version exists at the point that the plates are made-ready for the printing press, albeit in a much higher resolution than would be required for an on screen version. However, the process of producing a suitable file for online viewing is very straightforward.
For some reason the club became very hung up on 'security', in that they didn't want any old T,D or H being able to read 'our' magazine. Whilst an uncontrolled, unsecured PDF file might facilitate a wider circulation, a page-turning service that could only be accessed by entering your club online credentials would narrow this and restrict any uncontrolled circulation. The MT protested that a member could pass his/her credentials on to other non-members. I countered with the fact that I could pass my printed copy to whomsoever I saw fit. The 'security' paranoia persisted, Barry Sweeney (club IT guru) departed the MT and nothing further came of the project. You could argue that a wider readership might promote a wider membership. A missed opportunity, in my book.
We used a 'page-turning' app (PC & mobile device) called FlippingBook which would give the club all the security and creative control necessary to manage a digital LF, along with other benefits, such as a tie-in to Google Analytics which would allow the editorial team to analyse reading habits, to determine 'what's hot' and 'what's not' and thus to be able to fine tune content for maximum interest.
Ultimately it felt a bit like banging my head against a brick wall.
Embrace the idea and the process is straightforward and cost effective.
We have been revisiting this recently due to the issues with international delivery, but it would be an electronic version sat alongside the printed version, potentially using Flipviewer or similar to ensure the security. There's no timescale for anything yet but it's clear to everyone that it will happen eventually, it's the way the world is going. It's a bit rich though for some members on the one hand to discuss cat removal and how to get through an MOT, then on the other suggest they want an electronic version of Lowflying due to environmental reasons, be honest, it's a convenience factor.
We've recently changed to a paper sleeve to replace the polythene, there remains question marks over whether in itself doing so is more environmentally friendly mainly due to the increased weight affecting transport, but for most of us we'll definitely recycle the paper sleeve whereas the polythene would get thrown in the general waste bin and likely ends up in landfill rather than carrying tomorrows cornflakes. Such is life.
As said in post #13 there is already a pre-print version in pdf format which is distributed to the Leadership Team prior to going to print enabling a short time to spot any errors and make any adjustments. I receive this every month and could if I wished browse the whole (pdf) magazine and completely ignore the paper version when it hits my doorstep, it simply isn't the same though. The paper version carries more than just the words and pictures, you get a 'feel' for the club, whats going on, events that have happened or are about to happen, news and comment, it's very different to how it feels skimming through the pages of a pdf. Often it's only after the printed version has landed that we discuss further aspects that were obviously there in the pre-release pdf, but simply didn't stand out. This is my personal view but I have had experience of receiving both for a number of years and there's no way I'd support dropping the printed copy and having solely an electronic version, and my view has actually changed on this. So there goes the environmental factor.
Stu.
Caterham and Lotus Seven Club Leadership Team Member
The register for all numbered limited-edition Caterhams ....... www.thecaterhamregister.net ...... www.instagram.com/thecaterhamregister
It's a bit rich though for some members on the one hand to discuss cat removal and how to get through an MOT, then on the other suggest they want an electronic version of Lowflying due to environmental reasons, be honest, it's a convenience factor.
You have hit the nail firmly on the head there, Stu. Similarly the volume of LDPE each year saved by using a paper envelope is less than many people's weekly shop. Fortunately the paper envelope looks great which is a big advantage. I endorse it for that reason.
Going electronic (thank you Steve for your professional experience) will only be an advantage IF we abandon print at the same time. Printing fewer than 3,000 copies of LowFlying won't save money, using electronic publishing will add cost. (Steve, perhaps you can confirm this assessment). The only saving would be on postage, which I accept is increasing.
Stephen
Democratic dissent is not disloyalty, it is a positive civic duty
Further to my post above, I would add that I wasn't and wouldn't advocate a digital-only option. What's good for one may well not suit the other. Using the systems that I had in place, the two versions coexisted quite happily together.
From a personal point of view, having collected over 20 years worth of LF all nicely bound, pragmatism took over when I had to admit that I was never going to go back and thumb old issues and anyway, we have the digital archive for that, which is much more effective in locating articles that you once read, but have no clue as to when!
So now, I fall between both camps. I no longer keep back issues and in the absence of an online version, I still thumb the printed copy. Given the opportunity, I think I would opt for the online version, not as Stu rightly points out, for any altruistic environmental reason, but simply one of convenience.
That said I absolutely respect other members who chose to remain with the printed edition.
#15 - It is true that decreasing print volumes will incur higher unit printing costs because there are basic 'make-ready' and plate production costs etc that remain constant.
My strategy would be to launch a digital version and initially, provide this hand in hand with the printed version. Yes, there would be an annual cost/subscription for whichever page viewing system was adopted (circa £1k/pa) plus some administrative effort.
I would the monitor the 'take-up of the digital option and reduce the monthly print run until it became uneconomical to persist with the two versions. At which point the 'difficult' decision to drop the print version, might need to be made.
On the other hand, if this is about giving members a choice (would you like in green or blue Sir?) rather than saving money (or the planet), then for a quite modest increase in annual costs, just provide both.
I prefer digital copies as I tend to read it at work. I have a Readly subcription anyway, and bringing the paper copy in just makes more stuff for me to carry in my bag.
Thanks all for the answers. I'm not suggesting exclusively one route or another. I just don't want a paper copy, simple as that really. The fact that it is a drop in the environmental ocean is neither here nor there in my view. I love a lot of the content, but would prefer digital.
#17 that would be interesting sums to see (aka, I'm not convinced). To cost overall more to include a digital distribution feels strange. We could take an example of 50% digital and 50% paper...?
A definite no to a totally digital copy. As #5, I also look forward to LF dropping through the letterbox; everything else then stops for a couple of hours.
Didn't I hear that physical books are on the rise in general?
#10. Why?
Col
As a publisher of both print and digital journals in the past, I proposed a process for producing a digital version of LF to the MT more than 10 years ago.
It's not a matter of can we produce a digital version, but how it is distributed. The digital version exists at the point that the plates are made-ready for the printing press, albeit in a much higher resolution than would be required for an on screen version. However, the process of producing a suitable file for online viewing is very straightforward.
For some reason the club became very hung up on 'security', in that they didn't want any old T,D or H being able to read 'our' magazine. Whilst an uncontrolled, unsecured PDF file might facilitate a wider circulation, a page-turning service that could only be accessed by entering your club online credentials would narrow this and restrict any uncontrolled circulation. The MT protested that a member could pass his/her credentials on to other non-members. I countered with the fact that I could pass my printed copy to whomsoever I saw fit. The 'security' paranoia persisted, Barry Sweeney (club IT guru) departed the MT and nothing further came of the project. You could argue that a wider readership might promote a wider membership. A missed opportunity, in my book.
We used a 'page-turning' app (PC & mobile device) called FlippingBook which would give the club all the security and creative control necessary to manage a digital LF, along with other benefits, such as a tie-in to Google Analytics which would allow the editorial team to analyse reading habits, to determine 'what's hot' and 'what's not' and thus to be able to fine tune content for maximum interest.
Ultimately it felt a bit like banging my head against a brick wall.
Embrace the idea and the process is straightforward and cost effective.
A view from a current team member ....
We have been revisiting this recently due to the issues with international delivery, but it would be an electronic version sat alongside the printed version, potentially using Flipviewer or similar to ensure the security. There's no timescale for anything yet but it's clear to everyone that it will happen eventually, it's the way the world is going. It's a bit rich though for some members on the one hand to discuss cat removal and how to get through an MOT, then on the other suggest they want an electronic version of Lowflying due to environmental reasons, be honest, it's a convenience factor.
We've recently changed to a paper sleeve to replace the polythene, there remains question marks over whether in itself doing so is more environmentally friendly mainly due to the increased weight affecting transport, but for most of us we'll definitely recycle the paper sleeve whereas the polythene would get thrown in the general waste bin and likely ends up in landfill rather than carrying tomorrows cornflakes. Such is life.
As said in post #13 there is already a pre-print version in pdf format which is distributed to the Leadership Team prior to going to print enabling a short time to spot any errors and make any adjustments. I receive this every month and could if I wished browse the whole (pdf) magazine and completely ignore the paper version when it hits my doorstep, it simply isn't the same though. The paper version carries more than just the words and pictures, you get a 'feel' for the club, whats going on, events that have happened or are about to happen, news and comment, it's very different to how it feels skimming through the pages of a pdf. Often it's only after the printed version has landed that we discuss further aspects that were obviously there in the pre-release pdf, but simply didn't stand out. This is my personal view but I have had experience of receiving both for a number of years and there's no way I'd support dropping the printed copy and having solely an electronic version, and my view has actually changed on this. So there goes the environmental factor.
Stu.
Caterham and Lotus Seven Club Leadership Team Member
The register for all numbered limited-edition Caterhams ....... www.thecaterhamregister.net ...... www.instagram.com/thecaterhamregister
You have hit the nail firmly on the head there, Stu. Similarly the volume of LDPE each year saved by using a paper envelope is less than many people's weekly shop. Fortunately the paper envelope looks great which is a big advantage. I endorse it for that reason.
Going electronic (thank you Steve for your professional experience) will only be an advantage IF we abandon print at the same time. Printing fewer than 3,000 copies of LowFlying won't save money, using electronic publishing will add cost. (Steve, perhaps you can confirm this assessment). The only saving would be on postage, which I accept is increasing.
Stephen
Democratic dissent is not disloyalty, it is a positive civic duty
Further to my post above, I would add that I wasn't and wouldn't advocate a digital-only option. What's good for one may well not suit the other. Using the systems that I had in place, the two versions coexisted quite happily together.
From a personal point of view, having collected over 20 years worth of LF all nicely bound, pragmatism took over when I had to admit that I was never going to go back and thumb old issues and anyway, we have the digital archive for that, which is much more effective in locating articles that you once read, but have no clue as to when!
So now, I fall between both camps. I no longer keep back issues and in the absence of an online version, I still thumb the printed copy. Given the opportunity, I think I would opt for the online version, not as Stu rightly points out, for any altruistic environmental reason, but simply one of convenience.
That said I absolutely respect other members who chose to remain with the printed edition.
I appreciate that you weren't advocating digital only Steve. I only wished to point out that adding digital distribution adds costs.
Stephen
Democratic dissent is not disloyalty, it is a positive civic duty
#15 - It is true that decreasing print volumes will incur higher unit printing costs because there are basic 'make-ready' and plate production costs etc that remain constant.
My strategy would be to launch a digital version and initially, provide this hand in hand with the printed version. Yes, there would be an annual cost/subscription for whichever page viewing system was adopted (circa £1k/pa) plus some administrative effort.
I would the monitor the 'take-up of the digital option and reduce the monthly print run until it became uneconomical to persist with the two versions. At which point the 'difficult' decision to drop the print version, might need to be made.
On the other hand, if this is about giving members a choice (would you like in green or blue Sir?) rather than saving money (or the planet), then for a quite modest increase in annual costs, just provide both.
I prefer digital copies as I tend to read it at work. I have a Readly subcription anyway, and bringing the paper copy in just makes more stuff for me to carry in my bag.
#12
Use of current technology Colin. Just like digital print I suppose.
Gary
1996 Classic Live Axle 1600 X-Flow
Thanks all for the answers. I'm not suggesting exclusively one route or another. I just don't want a paper copy, simple as that really. The fact that it is a drop in the environmental ocean is neither here nor there in my view. I love a lot of the content, but would prefer digital.
#17 that would be interesting sums to see (aka, I'm not convinced). To cost overall more to include a digital distribution feels strange. We could take an example of 50% digital and 50% paper...?