Rolling Stone magazine is shrinking with the times.
After standing out for decades with different formats from other magazines, it will start looking like everyone else starting with the Oct. 30 issue, due out this week.
The adoption of a standard format could boost single-copy sales and reduce production costs for advertising inserts such as scent strips and tear-out postcards. The magazine says any cost savings, though, will be offset by the inclusion of more pages and the shift to thicker, glossier paper.
Like other devoted readers, Eddie Ward, 35, said he will miss the magazine's most recent format, which was an inch (2.5 centimeters) taller and two inches (5 centimeters) wider. But he looks forward to the change and might even buy a "more fashionable" bag to carry his belongings.
"For years since I graduated from college, I have refused to buy a small messenger bag ... since it couldn't fit my Rolling Stone," said Ward, a publicist who lives in New York. "I never wanted to crease the pages or put cracks in the cover."
Magazines constantly undergo redesigns _ The Atlantic, for instance, debuts new sections with its November issue out Tuesday. A few also have changed dimensions over the years, including TV Guide, which grew into a full-size format in 2005.
In fact, Rolling Stone has changed format three times before. Its first two issues in 1967 were the size of a tabloid newspaper because that was all its budget covered. In December 1967, the magazine added a second fold to become slightly smaller than a typical magazine.
It grew again, to 10.5 inches (26.6 centimeters) by 15 inches (38 centimeters) in 1973, when it also began printing on a four-color press. And in 1981 it adopted the feel of a magazine-newspaper hybrid with magazine-quality paper and 10-by-12-inch (25-by-30-centimeter) pages, the format just abandoned.
And size may not matter in the Internet era, though Rolling Stone says the Web site will remain supplemental to print, which has seen circulation stable since 2006 at about 1.45 million.
The decision to change officially came down to this: Why not?
"The size is a nostalgic element but not the iconic part of the magazine," publisher Will Schenck said in an interview. "Evolution and change is part of our DNA."
Will Dana, the magazine's managing editor, said the size change forced Rolling Stone to "think a little differently ... (and) open our minds out a little more." He said editors can now squeeze in more content and better sprinkle longer stories with photos, though he insists the length and types of stories won't change.
Rolling Stone said it will add enough pages to each issue to offset the loss of space from switching to the smaller size. The 148 pages in the next issue, for instance, accommodate about as much material as 100 pages in the old size.
Likewise, full-page ads will take less space _ though ad rates won't drop.
This summer, Rolling Stone produced one issue in both formats and sent 3,000 copies of the smaller version to selected subscribers. The feedback was mostly positive _ to the surprise of even many at Rolling Stone.
The new paper should make photographs shine more, and the smaller size will make it easier to carry and read. A glued rather than stapled binding should make ad inserts easier to produce.
The new size also will fit better on magazine racks and could help boost single-copy sales, which now account for only 8 percent of the magazine's circulation.
"We're expecting to get better placement," Schenck said. "Right now because of the size, it tends to be placed on the floor."
