Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

And I am talking about colour profiles, I am talking about e.g. the armament diagram on page 26 in Dual volume 26 (Fw 190 vs. B-17). The back cover promises "unrivaled detail", yet e.g. that diagram is very much lacking in true detail. Original handbook drawings would have provided much better information and detail. The same applies to the really awful cutaways of the Air Vanguard series. Compared to a cutaway by e.g. Mike Badrocke, AV's cutaways look aimed for children. So far the Air Vanguard titles have been very lukewarm at best as the old Aircraft in Profiles managed to squeeze more technical information within 24 pages than AVs do in 64, in part thanks to a much better layout (minimum blank areas and tighter font).

So, the question is that are current readers so easy to fool with colourful eye candy?

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I think it is a matter of what the target market is for say an Osprey book. I have a small number of them and enjoy them for what they are. A broad stroke covering of a particular subject matter. While lightish, I do find them well written.

I am mostly commenting on the Aces series. Not familiar with the versus series other one of the tank volumes.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

They could be considerably more detailed within the same page count very easily. E.g. the above mentioned Duel volume has about 3800 characters per full text page. E.g. an old Aircraft in Profile has over 7000 characters per page. But even Osprey has done better ocasionally. E.g. the Elite volume 38 (NVA and Viet Cong) hasd its pages properly filled with smallish print giving over 8000 characters per page.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I think Ospreys are heavily slanted toward modellers and modellers are an increasingly aging demographic with, frankly, failing eyesight. Tiny print is a no-no.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I don't buy that. Especially as a quite significant improvement would be possible by eliminating the wasted space (e.g. in the Duel series 30 % text per page). Besides, if one can't read "tiny" print, can he really build accurate models. And I would say that e.g. the Duel series is not primarily for modellers.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Be serious. You can't have pages stuffed with text with margins of 1 cm!
Osprey is no fanzine. They publish commercial books for the general public.
What you call "wasted space" is a layout to appeal to customers' eyes.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

CJE: Are you saying that the old Profiles were non-commercial fanzines? Or Monogram Close Ups? Or JaPo books? Or 4+ series? Or Aerofax series? Thus far I have never met anyone who like wasted space in their books just for the sake of "appeal". In fact, negative comments on Osprey's wasted space are quite common on e.g. Amazon customer reviews. They would be even more common if the they were given a chance to have 90 % more text for the same price.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Jukka. I am working on my third book for Osprey ( not in the Duel series). I agree that previous posts have stated that they are "lightish" in content but that is what they & the buyers want. In the latest book it is 30,000 words, 70 photos & 30 profiles. The profile artist takes the profiles very seriously (in my case Chris Davey) but I will say that they try to depict 'clean' aircraft. However, I reiterate the style works & people in the main buy and enjoy-why would Osprey continue if it wasn't working?

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Chris, perhaps buyers have no choice. Why doesn't Osprey test it? I.e. by doing e.g. an Aces volume with the same number of illustrations but 50 % more text by a tighter layout. For the same price. And then ask the readers do they want X amount of information for price Y or 1.5 X amount for price Y. I truly wonder who would prefer less for the same price.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I've been following this discussion with interest.
From the beginning it appears to be a case, to use a metaphor, of someone going into a vegan restaurant and being upset they can't get a nice steak. Osprey books are know for being shorter, illustration heavy, mostly introductory books. The illustrations are the main selling feature of most of their series as most of their regular customers realize. A quick glance at their website shows the importance of the illustrations to their business model.
As to doing text heavy books, they have tried this. The old Battle Orders series was very text centred, with a layout similar to what the OP requested. The series was cancelled due to poor sales. It is apparent that Osprey is releasing their text heavy titles as part of their general history books, not part of their series which have a rather rigid design outline.
Osprey has hit on a formula that obviously works for them so why would they change it?

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Why don't you ask them? Their website includes a readers' forum, after all: https://ospreypublishing.com/forum/

Do let us know how you get on.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Nick, I think only Osprey members can post on the forum.

I think the Battle Orders example is really poor as it was a series that catered for more specific readers.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

No. It is like ordering a half-litre cola and receiving a quarter-litre cola.

You also missed my point. I did not suggest deleting illustrations to make room for more text, I suggested that blank areas by eliminated for more text. Poles apart. In fact, in e.g. Duel volume on Jap. vs. U.S. cruisers there are numerous examples in which by eliminating the blanks on the page the photo could in larger by 50 %, thus providing more visible detail.

I have never said that I oppose extensive illustrations per se. But I oppose meaningless illustrations. E.g. in the Weapon volume on the M16, one entire spread is wasted on a comic book style colour art that serves nobody's needs, not a modeller's, not a wargamer's, not an enthusiast's. Not anyone's over 12 years. The same space could have been used to illustrate the gun's gas system in detail.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I have also been following this discussion with some interest, mainly because I consider myself a "fanboy" of the Osprey stuff, but also because I find it mildly amusing what arguments are coming up to aim some flak at Osprey...

first of all, noone I have ever talked to or discussed about Ospreys has put the words "definitive" or "ultimate" in their mouths when describing a new Osprey tome.
for the money they cost, I consider most of them great value though! of course the authors play a big role in how good the average Aces, Combat Aircraft, Duel or whatever turn out, but guys like Chris Goss, Mark Lardas, Mark Stille, Andrew Thomas or Robert Forsyth (just to name a few and I have surely forgotten some others) know their stuff, and their volumes can be seen as great introduction, if not much more, to the topics they cover;
as someone here came up with a culinary comparison, let me bring another one...this whole complaining thing here is like going to McDonals, ordering some fries and a BigMac and then complain about the Burger not having 5 different salads, 4 different sauces, only one kind of cheese and not that great tasting bread, and all this for 4 Euros quid...
if you want a bigger better Burger with more taste, more stuff inside, more beef, more sauces etc. GO AND MAKE IT YOURSELF...
for our discussion here...if you want a book for ten Euros quid that contain hundreds of drawings, hundreds of pictures, thousand and thousands of words, new eye witness accounts never published before etc. GO TO ARCHIVES, FIND THE STUFF AND F$%%ing WRITE THAT BOOK YOURSELF...and do not forget to publish it for maybe a max of 20 Euros, because thats the max price I have ever seen asked for the typical Osprey book...

just to put some beef into my argument...I have just finished reading the IJN BB vs USN BB Duel... if you want some serious books about this topic (or if you want further reading), go and get Morrisons USN history for starters, add "Neptunes Inferno", some Friedman and Polmar books about Naval gunnery and BB development, add some books about the Philippines sea battles and also find some illustrator willing to draw you some technical stuff about guns, aiming devices etc....and now be prepared to put some hard earned dinero down -I hope you get the idea!

the downline is simple - if you dont like Ospreys, do not buy them, avoid them, make a cross whenever you see them or put some silver bullets in your gun and shoot each and every bookseller offering them (pun intended);
I will continue to buy them (albeit only in pdf form - my library is quickly outgrowing my space available) and for about 10 Euros I pay for them (adding up to about 30 Euros maybe a month altogether for all the tomes I buy) they do provide great value.

And I am looking forward to the new books from Chris, Robert, Andrew or whoever will write them...

btw Chris, may I ask will the HE-177 Combat Aircraft be yours? I have seen the cover art already, looks very nice I have to say....

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Since you feel strongly about this, I thought perhaps you’d find it worth signing up.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I have no contract for a He 177 book.....yet?

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Looks like "He-177 Units of WW2" is by Robert Forsyth due out July. There is also an existing Classic. Would be nicer if Classic would do a Ju-90/290/390 book, IMHO. Big empty hole there unless your German is good enough for Ott.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Robert Forsyth recently did “Shadow Over The Atlantic” for Osprey, all about the Ju 290 and FAGr. 5.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

I was about to post the same, that FAGr 5 book is great and it even contains colour profiles of the Junkers...

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

And I have it (I buy a lot of books). It is a good & interesting book, but a comprehensive history of the Ju-90/290/390, in the manner of the better Classics, it is not. The material would make a fair nucleus for such a book, if Forsyth & Classic wanted to pursue it though.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

1. The case of battleship vs. battleship. First, why should one need to find "find some illustrator willing to draw you some technical stuff about guns, aiming devices etc" when excellent illustrations exist in original manuals, patent drawings and factory drawings? In most cases these technical illustrations are much more informative than modern simplified art. In case of aircraft, another excellent sources are are period professional journals like Aircraft Production. No need to pay prime sums for eye candy.

2. And where did I supposedly suggest that "if you want a book for ten Euros quid that contain hundreds of drawings, hundreds of pictures, thousand and thousands of words, new eye witness accounts never published before etc."? Rarely one can read a sentence so ridden with horse manure. I suggested that useless comic book style art be replaced with more informative illustrations from e.g. original official manuals and that the text be increased by optimizing the layout. Although increased word count might increase costs a bit (if authors are paid per word) while the reduction in those commissioned comic book drawings would compensate for that. Again, no need to "be prepared to put some hard earned dinero down".

3. Just look for the old Profile booklet on Concorde. It has only 42 pages in basically same format as Osprey's. And it is a prime example that an excellent basic reference that puts many 200+ page big books to shame can be done within very limited space through optimal layout and thorough prioritizing.

Re: Osprey's obsession on colour eye candy
 

Jukka, take it up direct with Osprey—who, unlike everyone here, could actually DO something about your proposals—then tell us in a new thread what response you got. Otherwise, enough. At present you're just wasting everyone's time.