another cool online fly fishin’ mag
Blog › Forums › Fly Fishing › another cool online fly fishin’ mag
- This topic has 13 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated Dec 2, 2009 at 10:59 pm by
regan c. kenyon jr..
-
AuthorPosts
-
Nov 23, 2009 at 9:13 pm #4601
dan berger
MemberIf you want to waste a few minutes of your day when you should actually be working…
Tight lines,
Dan Berger
Cabins, WV
http://www.mtnriverhome.comNov 24, 2009 at 2:01 am #40379Zach Matthews
The Itinerant AnglerHey Dan –
I think if you’ll dig a bit in the archives, you’ll find several lengthy posts on This is Fly.
Nov 24, 2009 at 3:29 am #40380anonymous
MemberI’m probably just getting old but after flicking through several/many
Nov 24, 2009 at 2:16 pm #40381dan berger
Memberthanks Zach, sorry about that, it was new to me.
Nov 24, 2009 at 5:28 pm #40382regan c. kenyon jr.
MemberI’m with you Will.
Nov 25, 2009 at 2:40 am #40383Jay Hake
MemberA guy named Nicholas Carr wrote a really interesting article in The Atlantic magazine last summer. It is called Is Google Making Us Stupid?. Basically, the premise is that the brain appears to operate differently when searching and reading information online, as opposed to in a traditional print media, with peoples online activities being more information gathering based, as opposed to deeper comprehension.
I have noticed this problem myself. I cannot concentrate long enough to read a long article online. I always feel the “need” to multi-task. If I want to actually read something that is published online, and really digest and contemplate it, I actually need to print it off on a piece of paper and go sit somewhere where I am not in front of my computer(s).
Maybe I am an old fart at 37, and maybe I have fried my eyes from too many hours staring at the computer screen as a lawyer, but the combination of the format, colors, and layout of This Is Fly is almost impossible for me to read (especially when coupled with my above mentioned inability to concentrate online). I was really excited about the concept when it was first announced, and I still click through some of the issues, but I am literally unable to read full features. I respect the huge effort these guys have put into it, as well as their alternative approach, but I just can’t do it.
I think this is why Catch works so well. Less text, more photos, more video. It takes advantage of what a really good multi-media computer can provide.
Anyway, I know this is a big aside from the beginnings of this thread, but, do others find themselves with this same problem? By the way, if you are interested in Carr’s article, you can find it here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google
I would recommend printing it off, grabbing a beer, and sitting on the couch to read it. 😉
Jay
Nov 25, 2009 at 3:29 am #40384anonymous
MemberI love “This is Fly.”
I’m a 35 year old fart.
It’s refreshing to me.Nov 25, 2009 at 5:12 am #40385
Bob RigginsMemberA guy named Nicholas Carr wrote a really interesting article in The Atlantic magazine last summer. It is called Is Google Making Us Stupid?. Basically, the premise is that the brain appears to operate differently when searching and reading information online, as opposed to in a traditional print media, with peoples online activities being more information gathering based, as opposed to deeper comprehension.
Jay
I generally agree, but most of the stuff posted on the internet isn’t worth reading. In printed media, at least an editor is looking at it before it goes to print. I think you get used to seeing poor writing on the interned and tend to dismiss even the good pieces.
Between internet stream of concious writing, without any self discipline, and texting shorthand, the art or writing has taken a major hit.
I haven’t had time to read the article, but one area that Google has the potential to make us smarter, is the wide range of research that is available.
Nov 25, 2009 at 10:21 am #40386Morsie
MemberWhen editing a piece for a magazine the difference between what I read on screen and what I read as hard copy is so vast I can barely relate the two. Somehow the two read quite differently (to me anyway). I always do my edits on paper.
Morsie
Nov 25, 2009 at 1:31 pm #40387Zach Matthews
The Itinerant AnglerGuys –
Not to knock This is Fly, which I think actually fills its niche well, but at the end of the day you are literally getting what you pay for when it comes to quality writing.
Nov 28, 2009 at 3:04 am #40388
J.T. GriffinMemberJay, I’m glad you brought that up. I can never read TIF either and I thought something was wrong with me. I think it tries too hard.
Zach, good point about getting what you pay for.
Nov 28, 2009 at 11:01 pm #40389Jay Hake
MemberJay, I’m glad you brought that up. I can never read TIF either and I thought something was wrong with me. I think it tries too hard.
Zach, good point about getting what you pay for.
No, it’s not just you.
Nov 29, 2009 at 1:51 am #40390david king
MemberTIF has a really intense edgy modern design esthetic which is attention getting and I enjoy it. I get a kick out of the mix tape in every issue too. I think a lot of the content is interesting in the sense that you get a feel for what is going on in many areas of fly fishing mostly by participants. The writing is informative and adequate but you really have to be interested to read a big article online. They used a famous Diane Arbus picture in a collage which suprised me. Its the kid with the grenade.
Dec 2, 2009 at 10:59 pm #40391regan c. kenyon jr.
MemberAnd here we thought you were giving us your all on here Zach.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.