Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post Reply
User avatar
Lancashire Lad
Frequent user
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 11:59 am
Location: Red Rose County
Contact:

Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post by Lancashire Lad » Thu Nov 12, 2015 3:05 pm

Having just received my printed copy, I was not amused to find that the quality of FM has been significantly reduced.
Yet another example of getting less for your money! :roll:

As a member of several years, and never having been one who is slow to complain, I have voiced my opinions directly to BMS, thus: -

Inferior Quality of Printing/Paper in Latest Issue of Field Mycology Journal (Vol.16 (4) Oct. 2015).

Sirs,
I feel compelled to write and voice complaint at the significant reduction in quality in the latest issue of Field Mycology Journal.

To my knowledge, there has been no prior announcement to subscribers that this was to occur, and similarly, there is nothing mentioned within the said issue.

The "weight" of paper being used has undoubtedly been reduced, now feeling more like typical 70gsm copy paper, rather than what might be expected in a flagship journal from Britain's premier Mycological Society.

The previous issue, having exactly the same number of pages, weighed in at 114 grams. This latest issue weighs 65 grams, proving conclusively that the weight/quality of paper has almost been halved.

The change from glossy to matt finish, allied to the use of this wafer thin paper, leaves it looking and feeling little better than might be produced via a cheap inkjet printer - or at best, a typical low end laser printer.

Photographs are particularly inferior when compared with previous issues. - Drab, dull, and lifeless, with much of the fine detail one would normally expect to see, just not there.

Whilst accepting that expenditure has to be kept under control, annual individual membership of the BMS in 2015 stands, (when printed copies of FM are required) at £64.00, with £29.00 of that specifically for receipt of those printed copies.
Or, as in my case, £92.00, with £30.00 of that being for access to electronic copies of journals, and a reduced sum of £27.00 for printed copies of FM.
With those annual costs per member, one would think that maintaining print quality of the journal should be well within the scope of the BMS's overall budget.

I am certain that I will not be alone in considering this to be an unwelcome change, and look forward to your response.

Yours, somewhat disgruntled.
M. Valentine

Regards,
Mike.
Common sense is not so common.

finiteplanet
New user
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 2:36 pm

Re: Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post by finiteplanet » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:01 pm

I have made some initial enquiries and it appears that neither the Editor of Field Mycology nor members of the BMS Field Mycology Committee had any prior knowledge that the print quality of this issue would be different to previous issues. This situation is being investigated as a matter of urgency to resolve the situation and find what has led to this drop in quality. In the meantime the Committee can only apologise to all readers.

Stuart Skeates

User avatar
Chris Johnson
Frequent user
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 2:06 pm
Location: Outer Hebrides
Contact:

Re: Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post by Chris Johnson » Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:11 pm

I have literally just received my copy and agree with everything Mike has said.

Rather than just complain, the publishers should be made to reissue it to the correct specification and standard.

Regards, Chris

Leif
Frequent user
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 9:09 am
Location: East Hampshire

Re: Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post by Leif » Thu Nov 12, 2015 8:27 pm

I too agree with Mike. I received mine a day or two ago and I was really shocked by the poor quality of the images, and the thin paper. Okay for junk mail, not for a journal.

finiteplanet
New user
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2015 2:36 pm

Re: Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post by finiteplanet » Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:10 pm

Good news. I have just heard that following a meeting between the BMS and Elsevier, the publishers, the latest issue of Field Mycology will be reprinted in its usual format and quality and distributed to subscribers again.

Stuart

User avatar
Lancashire Lad
Frequent user
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 11:59 am
Location: Red Rose County
Contact:

Re: Anyone else got thoughts on latest issue of Field Mycology Journal?

Post by Lancashire Lad » Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:22 pm

finiteplanet wrote:Good news. I have just heard that following a meeting between the BMS and Elsevier, the publishers, the latest issue of Field Mycology will be reprinted in its usual format and quality and distributed to subscribers again.

Stuart
Thanks for this update Stuart.

Undoubtedly the most satisfactory outcome to this episode.
(I assume that Elsevier will be taking whatever this costs on the chin - and hopefully won't stray from the straight and narrow in future. ;) ).

Regards,
Mike.
Common sense is not so common.

Post Reply