Is it me or is the physical quality of Beadwork going downhill? The pages are paper-thin and you can see the print from the previous page... The quality of the work inside is great, but when I tear a page while leafing through the magazine, that's a problem... Anyone else notice this?
I haven't noticed a difference, but to make sure, I weighed the new issue against and old issue from December/Janurary 2011, they both have exactly 96 pages and the cover, and they come out to be 1 gram difference, not really enough to have changed to a lighter weight paper. So I would say they are really the same.
What I did find, that the older magazines, the examples I pulled out are October/November 2003 and August/September 2007. At that time the magazines had 120 pages not the 96 of today. Not sure just when they cut the number of pages. I could dig till I find that issue, but I don't think it is that important.
Way to go Sue! Pulling out the scientific experiments to compare the paper quality in the magazines! I love it!
I also haven't really noticed any difference...so I also pulled out some of my back issues to compare...I used the Oct 2011 vs Oct 2010. (both have 96 pages)
And I do see what you are talking about...there is something about the paper in the Oct 11 issue that feels slightly thinner or less sturdy than the Oct 10 issue.
But the difference is more noticeable when comparing the entire magazine rather than comparing one page against another page...I know that sounds weird, but when you hold the Oct 11 issue in your hand, it is more floppy as a whole than the Oct 10 issue. Maybe they are using a lighter weight cover paper?
But like Sue said, it is only a difference of 1 gram of weight, so it isn't immediately noticeable. But I also haven't ripped any pages (yet) nor can I see the printing from the reverse side without a light directly behind the page.
Maybe Interweave has switched to a more environmentally friendly printing process? (hopeful thinking) Maybe this newer paper has more post consumer recycled content in it? (more hopeful thinking) I don't know the answer, but there is a slight difference.
The way I look at it is that I know the ecocnomy sucks...I know people and businesses are having to make changes to make things more economical...and I know that Interweave has tried several things this year to bring in more revenue...and they are now back to their original format of Beadwork Magazine.
And I know that I love Beadwork Magazine and I don't want it to go the way of other publications, like "Step by Step Beads" for instance! So if they are using cheaper paper to save money, it doesn't bother me at all, as long as they are still publishing this wonderful magazine with the same high quality projects and articles!
I have also noticed that Beadwork Magazine has a lot less advertising pages than B&B for instance...and I like that as well...so if they use cheaper paper rather than more advertisers, I think that is another wise choice!
I agree with Tia and Sue - I don't think the actual thickness of the page has changed, but it could be in the printing process or maybe in the paper itself.
As Tia said, I like the fact that Beadwork doesn't have all the advertising that the "other" magazines have. I've been re-organizing and clearing out my office/workshop at home and decided to thin out the magazines by pulling out all the double sided ads, the "lap litter" (loose reply cards), etc. (All those extra pages DO take up a lot of room.) I noticed that there were far more pages culled from the "other" mags than there were from Interweave magazines.
As an LBS owner I have noticed that our Interweave magazines always outsold the "other" magazines - which is one of the reasons why we don't carry the "other" magazines any more. Keep up the good work, Interweave!
Apache Junction, AZ