# OGR magazine-Solved



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

I know its been a while since i've posted. still working on the house finally starting to feel like a house. but any who, about 6 months ago i had submitted some photos to Alan Miller over at OGR magazine. he repsonds with joy and was going to use one of my photos in the january issue. upon publishing the photo i would receive 2 free issues and a 50 dollar check. we had discussed this id say somewhere in september. so december rolls around and no magazines no check nothing. i emailed alan and explained that they were in the process of a move and would send my issues and payment asap. few more weeks go by and still nothing. another email and he explains there working on it now. now in february and still nothing. now a few days ago i called him and left a voice message on his phone and not even a response. this is extremely a poor business model. hearing everyone complain about the forum and how they operate reflects on their poor business model. at this point i don't even want the money i just want the copy of the jaunary issue so i can display it.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

njrailer93 said:


> I know its been a while since i've posted. still working on the house finally starting to feel like a house. but any who, about 6 months ago i had submitted some photos to Alan Miller over at OGR magazine. he repsonds with joy and was going to use one of my photos in the january issue. upon publishing the photo i would receive 2 free issues and a 50 dollar check. we had discussed this id say somewhere in september. so december rolls around and no magazines no check nothing. i emailed alan and explained that they were in the process of a move and would send my issues and payment asap. few more weeks go by and still nothing. another email and he explains there working on it now. now in february and still nothing. now a few days ago i called him and left a voice message on his phone and not even a response. this is extremely a poor business model. hearing everyone complain about the forum and how they operate reflects on their poor business model. at this point i don't even want the money i just want the copy of the jaunary issue so i can display it.


Welcome to the club. Your article may not be in the January issue, or used, ever. It happened to several friends of mine, too, people I respect. I hope it is different for you, but it was not for my friends.


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

I know for a fact they used it I saw the issue unfortunately someone gave me a copy and I think the mrs threw it out on accident


----------



## seayakbill (Jan 16, 2016)

njrailer93 said:


> I know for a fact they used it I saw the issue unfortunately someone gave me a copy and I think the mrs threw it out on accident


So it is possible that you received the magazines but the check was a no show ?

Bill


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

seayakbill said:


> So it is possible that you received the magazines but the check was a no show ?
> 
> Bill


No one of my club members had the January issue and passed it along to me. I had no idea that they even used it until he showed me


----------



## lionellines (May 18, 2011)

For what it's worth, I had a similar experience with CCT.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

CTT always paid me promptly. OGR was more difficult to work with, and just stopped communicating with a couple of friends. Strange. 

Having worked with both I prefer CTT. I do so few articles any more than they seem to take them all, so I don't work with anyone else now.


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

Lee when I submitted my stuff to ctt they were great prompt communication and prompt payment I assumed I was going to get the same treatment


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

njrailer93 said:


> Lee when I submitted my stuff to ctt they were great prompt communication and prompt payment I assumed I was going to get the same treatment


To be fair to Alan Miller - not one of my favorites but perhaps not the complete reason OGR is difficult to work with - I think the way OGR is run, Alan doesn't have as much control over the magazine as his title and predictions of publications and publication dates he gives prospective authors might indicate. I think the magazine, not just the website, is heavily "edited" by higher ups with a regard to advertisers and that last-minute change in direction and content of an issue, based on ad content and major advertiser comments are common. I had problems with articles I did (published) and several that OGR actually came to me and requested, and I did write for them, but they were never published or paid for, and they just stopped communicating, and a similar story for some I helped friends to work that got accepted at OGR and then fell in a black hole. That ultimately soured me on ever working with the organization again. 

I have never had anything but first-class treatment from CTT. In all my years of writing articles in many, many different industries, only one other publisher, McGraw Hill's _Electrical World_ magazine, ever was so uniformly friendly, transparent, and reliable. In that case, the editor was a good friend (and that many who introduced me to my future wife). I count Roger Carp and and Carl Swanson as friends - really nice guys, who love toy trains.


----------



## Lehigh74 (Sep 25, 2015)

I found it interesting that OGR is now parroting RMT email adds. I get an RMT email about their current "blowout". The next day, I get the exact same email from OGR.


----------



## Guest (Feb 2, 2018)

Anyone looking to publish a story or photos of their layout should contact *Roger Carp at Classic Toy Trains*. They do it correctly and are really nice folks do deal with. They keep their promises!!!!!!!

I know from past experiences with both publication companies.


----------



## DMASSO (Jul 25, 2015)

Yes Roger is the one that did our club in 2015.


----------



## bluecomet400 (Sep 13, 2015)

njrailer93,

Was there a written agreement that you would be compensated? I don't buy OGR Magazine, so I'm not taking sides here--just wondering what you have from them in writing. 

I had a similar situation a few years ago with an artist who is well-known in our hobby. There's no problem with a businessperson profiting from our hobby, but when they do it in an unethical way, it takes away the enjoyment of toy trains. 


John


----------



## DMASSO (Jul 25, 2015)

In the magazine it says featured articles will be paid for upon publication.


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

I can see in days past where being featured in a magazine might carry a bit of prestige with it. But quite honestly, I just don't "get it" in this day and age, where any of us can build a cool website and post images/videos ala Eric's Trains (for example)... and simply dispense with all the run-around that seems to come with magazine editors, publishers, etc... 

If you don't want to go the route of your own website, then there's always online forums like MTF, where you can post terrific images and/or videos. And voila, you're work is published for the world to see immediately. No hassles... and you don't need to deal with anybody futzing up your work the way THEY want it to be. I'm currently in the middle of a bit of that with a toy train magazine -- namely, "we want only this kind of photo, and it can have only one train in it... blah, blah, blah." And quite frankly, it can be frustrating to work in that kind of a "cookie-cutter" formula environment, when in 10 seconds you can post something here for everyone to enjoy. True... it's not as structured as a magazine issue, but it's equally valuable in terms of sharing your work among fellow peers in modern-day "real time". In that regard, I sometimes wonder if print magazines are simply operating on borrowed time.

In my case, the magazine (certainly not OGR) approached me after seeing photos of the layout's construction on the builder's Facebook Page. And I'm happy to oblige, but it's certainly not something I'm driving. If the article comes together, that's great. But if it gets bogged down with insufficient traction to move forward, or if we can't agree on the article's theme/angle/whatever, it's not the end of the world either. Because I can just as easily post great images and videos right here NOW, rather than sit on good content while somebody else decides whether they're gonna use it or not. And in that regard, I don't need to manage which images I'm using here vs. those images the magazine wants to publish. Who needs that?  

And furthermore, I would NEVER sell my images to any media company outright. I own the copyright -- they just purchase a license to "use" them for a specific purpose at a specific time. That's a definite deal-breaker if anybody suggests they "own" my images, 'cause that ain't gonna happen. Ever! 

I'm busy enough with other things on my plate. So when it comes to trains, I just want to enjoy what I have and share it with fellow model train enthusiasts... like the song says, My Way! 

David


----------



## Spence (Oct 15, 2015)

David; I must say that you are extremely eloquent in writing your posts. I wish I were half as good as you are in writing. Over the last few years I've enjoyed reading them. First on OGR and now here. :appl::appl:


----------



## ogaugeguy (Feb 3, 2012)

Rocky Mountaineer said:


> ...And furthermore, I would NEVER sell my images to any media company outright. I own the copyright -- they just purchase a license to "use" them for a specific purpose at a specific time. That's a definite deal-breaker if anybody suggests they "own" my images, 'cause that ain't gonna happen. Ever! ....David


:appl:Great point, David. As a commercial photographer who owns your own photography business and studio you're cognizant of the value of retaining ownership and full rights of the images you create. I'm glad you've mentioned that to all on this forum who aren't equally aware of the importance of retaining ownership of their photographs.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

ogaugeguy said:


> :appl:Great point, David. As a commercial photographer who owns your own photography business and studio you're cognizant of the value of retaining ownership and full rights of the images you create. I'm glad you've mentioned that to all on this forum who aren't equally aware of the importance of retaining ownership of their photographs.


Geez, I take so many pictures of the same scene - a half dozen of each, that selling one doesn't limit me in any way. It's expeditious just to take the standard terms, which really aren't bad - at least not where I publish. I just sold two articles with eight images to one magazine. When I do I delete those from my library and I've never regretted it. 
. 
I have something like 100,000 images, vaguely organized by subject (each is titled several key words). The ones I've sold, I'll never miss. Heck, I don't even miss the 99,800 I've never gone back and looked at again!


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

Lee Willis said:


> Geez, I take so many pictures of the same scene - a half dozen of each, that selling one doesn't limit me in any way. It's expeditious just to take the standard terms...


Lee, it's not about how many images you capture. Rather it's about what the other party DOES with even one of YOUR image(s). You might have captured 12 images of the same scene, and think you're good with the 11 you don't "sell off" to a trade publication.

And that's all fine and good, when you see them using the one image you sold them (i.e., for use in a magazine article)... but then they love it so much they run a big ad campaign with it. I realize most folks never even think twice about IP T's & C's, 'cause they're so thrilled just to "be published".  But a lot of entities take advantage of photographers this way by placing what's called a "rights grab" in the very fine print of their so-called standard terms.

For most folks, the above scenario isn't gonna happen (i.e., having an image be the center of a big ad campaign). But it's an example of what CAN happen when folks essentially "give away" their work, because they're so excited just for the initial recognition. And then the entity you sold the image to, doesn't owe you a dime for the extra usage rights you've given them -- essentially for free.  If you're OK with that, then there's no harm done (to you) -- aside from the fact it's sets a standard that corporate entities will then continue to negotiate for the next time around with another unsuspecting content contributor.

David

P.S. By the way Spence, many thanks for the very kind words!


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Rocky Mountaineer said:


> Lee, it's not about how many images you capture. Rather it's about what the other party DOES with even one of YOUR image(s). You might have captured 12 images of the same scene, and think you're good with the 11 you don't "sell off" to a trade publication.
> 
> And that's all fine and good, when you see them using the one image you sold them (i.e., for use in a magazine article)... but then they love it so much they run a big ad campaign with it. I realize most folks never even think twice about IP T's & C's, 'cause they're so thrilled just to "be published".  But a lot of entities take advantage of photographers this way by placing what's called a "rights grab" in the very fine print of their so-called standard terms.
> 
> ...



Fine. I understand. I'd be proud it if happened. Isn't my image that makes the ad campaign. It is their talent and such . . . It really isn't about the image. They are welcome to it if they have the talent ans where-with-all to make something great out of it.


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

Lee, I don’t specifically blame Alan miller for this fault. I’m sure he’s just a middle man in this scenario from his emails seems like a good train guy who is just looking to promote the hobby anyway he can just like all of us here on mtf. David although I am by no means a professional photographer I do see your point. Selling a single photo is like selling your soul to the devil. But I think there’s a certain kind of satisfaction being able to proudly display your own images in any train publication. Like I said at this point I have 0 interest in the money it would of ended up going back in the train fund(or booze) I’m just interested in getting my hands on a copy of the magazine


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2018)

The guys at OGR have been pulling this same nonsense for years. It happened to me a couple years ago and I received messages from prior Featured Modelers with the same story. 

I have no interest in naming names, but I do think that anyone who is the primary contact during the Article building process is Guilty of something. They may not be calling the shots, but they are at least complicit in the whole scheme. It has just happened far too many times for someone that involved to be innocent.

Mine was the same: Promises not kept, etc. And when payment ultimately did arrive it was far less than agreed. And I have it IN WRITING! The whole thing. Copies of every email and 2 uncashed checks. An easy win in Small Claims Court if I had wanted to waste the time. 

I didn't want to waste the time and they probably were counting on that too. The sad thing is that it was entirely unnecessary. I would have happily submitted my article without any promises. I didn't really care about the money either, to be perfectly honest. I thought it was super cool that my layout would appear in print. A stroke of my Ego for sure, i'll admit. 

I happen to believe however that once they made certain promises and agreed to an amount of payment, they should follow through. They didn't and in the end the whole experience was unnecessarilly
tarnished. 

Ultimately, I didn't cash the checks. Just a reminder to me that it wasn't about the money. My own Moral Code in tact. Did it prove anything to the folks at OGR? I think it did. I think it reinforced the idea that they can get away with it. Which made it all the easier to pull the same nonsense on you. Sorry about that! Maybe I should have Sued.

Emile


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

I have sent one last email to Allan miller kindly explaining that if I do not receive the payment and magazines in which I was published in I will be contacting the better business bureau.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

njrailer93 said:


> I have sent one last email to Allan miller kindly explaining that if I do not receive the payment and magazines in which I was published in I will be contacting the better business bureau.


I doubt that will do any good. Based on my experience, they really don't care.


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2018)

Lee Willis said:


> I doubt that will do any good. Based on my experience, they really don't care.


I agree 100%! 

NJRAILER93, you've left messages and they have failed to respond. I believe THAT is their message for you!

Emile


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

At this point if anyone has the January issue or ogr I would buy it


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2018)

njrailer93 said:


> At this point if anyone has the January issue or ogr I would buy it


Barnes and Nobel carries OGR Magazine. I don't hold that against them.

Emile


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

Thy do but they released the next months issue already and I asked if they had any old copies and they didn’t unfortunately


----------



## balidas (Jun 3, 2011)

Are there any hobby shops in the area? They generally keep previous issues available.


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

You know what that’s a good idea I’ll stop by the hobby store tomorrow and see


----------



## ogaugeguy (Feb 3, 2012)

I wonder when the proverbial shoe has been on the other foot, how many times has OGR sued those who have broken contracts and/or defaulted on financial payments.


----------



## Lehigh74 (Sep 25, 2015)

njrailer93 said:


> You know what that’s a good idea I’ll stop by the hobby store tomorrow and see


Let us know if you find one. If not, its a good excuse for me to try Hennings and Bussingers this week to see if they have it.


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

so i did get a response. im going to summarize. he forwarded my email i sent to rich and linda melvin. he said there have been a number of hiccups with the move and they will make things right in short order. so hopefully we will see results but in any matter im gonna pop by the hobby store today and see if they have a copy anyways.


----------



## c.midland (Sep 22, 2015)

njrailer93, I have the OGR issue. If you run into anymore problems, or can't find the issue, you're welcome to mine.


----------



## pennwest (Sep 21, 2015)

I have a copy that I'd be happy to send you as well.


----------



## njrailer93 (Nov 28, 2011)

Thank you guys for offering me your issues. As luck would have it I decided to clean out my car yesterday and I found it!! And I got a email from Alan Arnold himself apologizing over the whole matter and said he would take care of it personally. So off to
Michaels to get a frame and proudly display it.


----------



## Guest (Feb 5, 2018)

Someone must be reading the MTF forum posts, particularly when it may have an impact on them. Anyway, I hope it all gets resolved for you.


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

Passenger Train Collector said:


> Someone must be reading the MTF forum posts, particularly when it may have an impact on them. Anyway, I hope it all gets resolved for you.


You can rest assured that they read the stuff here on MTF. And it iritates them to no end that they can't just delete it here as if it never existed like they do with content on their own forum. 

I too hope at least for the OP's sake (since it was important enough for him to post here) that this actually does get fully resolved. They get enough free content from forum contributors, so they can certainly afford the $50 in this case for something that was published in the magazine a couple of months ago. 

David


----------



## Rocky Mountaineer (Sep 19, 2015)

Lee Willis said:


> Fine. I understand. I'd be proud it if happened. Isn't my image that makes the ad campaign. It is their talent and such . . . It really isn't about the image. ....


Lee, this is actually a topic for its own thread... but let me just say I understand completely what you're saying. OTOH, I'm also trying to sensitize folks to the fact that they truly need to be careful of what they "give away" -- even when they sell something. And it's an important mindset... similar to someone applying for a patent to protect their IP. I never thought that way when I was a young kid or even a college student. I created tons of things in the early "computer science days" of the late-1970's / early-1980's because I enjoyed doing it. We did stuff that would make Bill Gates and Steven Jobs drool, because that kind of stuff wasn't even taught in schools yet. But it wasn't until later years in my life that I realized some folks made a good living off patents they registered for stuff we didn't even think twice about "protecting"... like the guy who patented intermittent windshield wipers. And heck, even with the patent protection, he spent most of his life fighting in courts with the likes of Ford, Chrysler and GM who installed intermittent windshield wipers on cars without compensating him appropriately. Without the patent(s), he wouldn't have had a leg to stand on against the corporate entities in court. But if the patent had been respected from the beginning, he could have had a nice ongoing annuity (of a few cents per car that was equipped with intermittent windshield wipers) during his career and in his retirement years -- instead of the multi-million dollar awards from his legal cases that he unfortunately ended up spending on even more legal cases later in life.  I guess good deals are hard to come by in the harsh business world when big money's at stake.

That's sort of what I'm talking about here... and unfortunately nowadays photographs are often treated as a "dime a dozen" type commodities, because everybody is running around with cameras in their iPhones today. Even Sports Illustrated magazine gets most of its photos from freelancers now, since the magazine disbanded its professional photography staff a couple of years ago. And one of the Philly TV stations has a commercial running now, where the weather girl is hyping the fact that they've received almost 30 THOUSAND photos from viewers highlighting weather events last year.  Now I'm sure people have become numb to the whole concept of the "rights grab" fine print that comes with submitting these photos to the TV station(s). Heck, they may not even READ the fine print, 'cause they're happy just to have their photo appear on the 11 o'clock news or in the TV station's Facebook Page -- much like we all click "I agree" without really reading the latest software license that pops up on our computer screen during a software update, because we just want to use the darn software!  Sure... admit it... we all do it.  

Again, it's all about the mindset and picking the battles that need to be fought vs. letting other stuff just slide by when that's the better route to take. And I get the fact that I'm a bit "old school" in this regard. But nonetheless, it's something I'm keenly aware of -- particularly when there's a business arrangement in play. Personal sharing of photos is one thing. But when the conversation turns to business matters, all parties should make it a win-win game in every sense of the word.  That's all I'm really saying. 

Unfortunately nowadays, for every person who does want to protect their photo images, there's probably 1,000 people out there who don't even know what they _could or should_ get for their time and talent.  

David


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Rocky Mountaineer said:


> Lee, this is actually a topic for its own thread... but let me just say I understand completely what you're saying. OTOH, I'm also trying to sensitize folks to the fact that they truly need to be careful of what they "give away" -- even when they sell something. And it's an important mindset... similar to someone applying for a patent to protect their IP. I never thought that way when I was a young kid or even a college student. I created tons of things in the early "computer science days" of the late-1970's / early-1980's because I enjoyed doing it. We did stuff that would make Bill Gates and Steven Jobs drool, because that kind of stuff wasn't even taught in schools yet. But it wasn't until later years in my life that I realized some folks made a good living off patents they registered for stuff we didn't even think twice about "protecting"... like the guy who patented intermittent windshield wipers. And heck, even with the patent protection, he spent most of his life fighting in courts with the likes of Ford, Chrysler and GM who installed intermittent windshield wipers on cars without compensating him appropriately. Without the patent(s), he wouldn't have had a leg to stand on against the corporate entities in court. But if the patent had been respected from the beginning, he could have had a nice ongoing annuity (of a few cents per car that was equipped with intermittent windshield wipers) during his career and in his retirement years -- instead of the multi-million dollar awards from his legal cases that he unfortunately ended up spending on even more legal cases later in life.  I guess good deals are hard to come by in the harsh business world when big money's at stake.
> 
> That's sort of what I'm talking about here... and unfortunately nowadays photographs are often treated as a "dime a dozen" type commodities, because everybody is running around with cameras in their iPhones today. Even Sports Illustrated magazine gets most of its photos from freelancers now, since the magazine disbanded its professional photography staff a couple of years ago. And one of the Philly TV stations has a commercial running now, where the weather girl is hyping the fact that they've received almost 30 THOUSAND photos from viewers highlighting weather events last year.  Now I'm sure people have become numb to the whole concept of the "rights grab" fine print that comes with submitting these photos to the TV station(s). Heck, they may not even READ the fine print, 'cause they're happy just to have their photo appear on the 11 o'clock news or in the TV station's Facebook Page -- much like we all click "I agree" without really reading the latest software license that pops up on our computer screen during a software update, because we just want to use the darn software!  Sure... admit it... we all do it.
> 
> ...


I completely agree with you David. The reason I take so many pictures is that I always want one "to sell the copyright." If I was ever lucky enough to get one priceless one - let's say my shutter clicks just as the Hindenberg explodes, I would not sell it (well, yes, for enough money, always but . . . .  ).

I've published eleven engineering books full of drawings and tables and charts I made - every one - and in those, I did negotiate with the publisher, CRC, that I have ownership of the raw material. So yes, you gotta think things through.


----------

