Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/23/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I agree, but at the same time realize these are things often hard to judge without first hand knowledge. Every operational vehicle I have been on or in is covered with foot prints. Still, many build their models as a case of immaculate perception. But it isn't fair for someone to do things correctly, but lose to a model with a lot of inaccurate, but aesthetically appealing details. I would love to see someone do a piece for the Journal on the basic dos and don'ts of modern armor stowage. It wouldn't have to be an in depth thing, just a photos and such showing authentic things. The more people know will make them better builders and judges. Dak
  2. 2 points
    This is what I have been working on for the last few weeks. Love these kits. This makes #6. The base kit builds like this: MK44 AmmoKnight. But I glued on a few greeblies and used lots of putty. To get to this point. I'm still tinkering with tiny details but the majority is finished.
  3. 2 points
    I don't like their paints anymore so no effect for me. Using Tamiya and others Dave
  4. 1 point
    I also find this an interesting discussion about the shade of paint. Considering that most of what we model is kept outdoors, I honestly doubt that "scale effect" is really the culprit, although I won't suggest it doesn't existence. Having spend many years on a flight line, paint fades with exposure to sun and weather. In a row of aircraft, each painted the the same FS code, you can easily spot the newer painted aircraft in any color. You could also see where repairs had been made by the splotches of dark paint. Often hatches were cannibalized from other aircraft and they would stand out as differant shades. This was especially true of the birds in Vietnam. They got pretty beaten up. The only time they looked "correct" was straight out of the paint shop and then only for a month or so, until the sun did it's work. Even the grays painted on the tankers and some of the naval aircraft had amazingly different shades.
  5. 1 point
    Contact John Heck at artdirector@ipmsusa.org. He's the guy that actually puts the mag together and I know he's always looking for material.
  6. 1 point
    My pet peeve are tanks and figures in a diorama that were apparently “beamed in”, because there are no tracks in the snow/mud to show how they got there.... or the aircraft on the grass at the edge of the taxiway - apparently not even the wheels of a 10,000 pound aircraft can flatten that tough grass!
  7. 1 point
    When painting modern US armor, I just go for "what looks right". The only time the tanks look the same is when they are fresh from the paint booth.
  8. 1 point
    And for out desert tan tanks, in the motor pool, the sun faded the top surfaces and any side surfaces that got direct sunlight. The side that was shielded by another tank or faced away from the sun looked very yellow compared to the sun faded bleached look of the upper surfaces. One tank, one paint scheme, two different shades.
  9. 1 point
    Agreed. And I would suggest that sloppy construction would be at the head of the list. Just because someone produced a fabulous model or diorama, that doesn't mean it should get a pass for glaringly open seams, glue smears on a canopy or window or a thumbprint in the paint. O.K., I'm being somewhat facetious, but you get my point. At the opposite end of the spear would be those details that are kinda, maybe, probably wrong but that fall into the artistic license category. For example, a tow chain that's just a tad too, big or small for a tank or truck.
  10. 1 point
    Maybe you did, but I haven't worried about the exact color since 1976. Even though the Haze Grey was manufactured in a modern plant under peace time conditions, we still mixed the cans of paint to ensure consistency. Anyone that thinks there is an exact shade of paint beyond a color chip, is living in a cloudy cookoo land. The true check of a beginner is the "What is the best shade of...."question. The smaller something is, the darker the same shade of paint will look on it. I always find it a bit silly when a friend uses a real car paint on his model. Dak
  11. 1 point
    What can I say, David. Everything you and I say...as well as everyone else who has commented on this thread...is absolutely correct. Which comment/observation applies depends on the particular moment and the specific project's reason for being.
  12. 1 point
    As for the question of what part of modelbuilding do I enjoy? It depends...and varies from one project to the next. Building for a client? Then the client controls the answer. For a magazine article or print book? Then it depends on the deadline and how much space I have. Many, if not most, of my article subjects look better in print than they do in person due to limited time. And no, I'm not Shep Paine reincarnated, so I can't produce one of his Monogram dioramas in a month's time. Building for myself? Depends on the mood I'm in. Producing a model for one of my Modelbuilding Guides? Then I pay attention to everything from seams to details to aftermarket additions to paint to research to research to research. Building for an IPMS/USA Nationals? Haven't been there or done that and probably won't...unless I can figure out a way to make San Marcos in 2020.
  13. 1 point
    Wow, after a considerable time, I finally managed to get back to the workbench. Here's my latest progress on several models. I'll start with the church. Since I was putting a brown wash on the Austratt turret base, I also experimented with it on the side of the church building: Later on I'll drybrush some lighter grey over that to see how it looks. Speaking of the Austratt turret, here is the base with the brown wash on it. It can barely be seen in these pics but I assure you it is there and visible: I had also tried a dot filter on the sides of the turret as well, but it is not very visible here either: Later on I glossed this turret, then did a brown wash on the rivets, protrusions and seams and then dull coated this: Again, not very visible in these pics; all the effects can be seen better in person. After all this, I've declared this beastie done. Moving on, I experimented again with a dark earth drybrush on a portion of the church roof. The left side is not drybrushed, the right side is: That drybrush was done over a base coat of Oily Black paint on the tiles. Continuing on with ground elements, I was able to move forward on my George Creed Tribute Build for my friend. I first shot a modulation of a lighter green over the cab, trailer and missile: The missile was also drybrushed at this time. After that, just for fun I fitted the missile onto the trailer to see how it looks: I then detail painted the tractor portion with some Oily Black on the chassis and suspension as well as finished off the painting on other parts: That chassis and suspension later got a dry brush of steel over it. After that it got glossed for a wash. There seemed to be no markings on this tractor; at least the instructions didn't show any which I thought as odd, but I moved on. I wanted this done so I glossed the trailer and the missile and added the decals to both of them: Here is the missile and trailer all dullcoated after the decals had dried: My George Creed Tribute Build is finally done. After this I also moved ahead on my Israeli Nagmachon. There was a lot to before the photo etch went on. First off, I painted the photo etch. Then I glossed the model and added the decals plus a medium brown wash: Next came the dull coat and drybrush of a light sand over the details, as well as the painting of the machine guns: Finally the tracks and last side skirts were installed. This one is ready for the photo etch screens: And finally, I did manage to get some progress done on one of my aircraft. The Israeli Sufa needed more seams and gaps filled so I added some more Mr. Surfacer 500 to them: After some sanding and repainting, it looks much better. It still ain't perfect, but I'm far more happy with this: Next up will be the other two camouflage colors. And that completes my progress for this month so far. Hopefully I can finish that Nagmachon and Sufa this week. Thanks all for looking in, comments are most welcome.
  14. 1 point
    Mike, Yes, white can be tricky. Only way I can get it right is that since white covers so poorly and you may have different colored things on your model such as fillers, PE parts or other colored plastic, to get one color that the white can cover, first apply a light grey primer, then a coat of FLAT white that covers the primer evenly. When that is set, if it is at all rough, go over it with either very fine sandpaper (600 grit or higher) or very fine steel wool being careful to avoid burning through the white. Gil Hodges has even been known to use a small piece of burlap as a buffer as it is soft yet has just the right amount of "grit". When you've removed any orange-peel, apply fine coats of gloss white until a nice even color is achieved. As painters say, keep a wet edge. If you apply gloss white over gloss white that has started to "skin" over, it won't mix with then paint already applied and will sit on top and may orange peel. Then leave it alone for at least a day so the top coat can set. It's a little involved, but does produce an even coat of white. You can use this same procedure for other "problem" colors such as red or yellow, just use the flat version of those colors for the coat between the primer and top coat.
  15. 1 point
    The 1/48 Hasegawa F-8E Crusader is now complete. This was a decent kit to put together. The fit was pretty good except the canopy. It seems it’s just a hair to thin for width. Trying to fit it to the fuselage was difficult and still ended up with a slight edge. The cutting edge decals were a little thick. The rest of the kit was fine and the instructions were very good. So now it sits on the display shelf with the other VF-111 aircraft. Check out the entire build from start to finish at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-f-8e-crusader-from-vf-111/
  16. 1 point
    For those who might be interested :BUILD THREAD Here are the finished pictures of my 1/72 scale Muroc Models F-8C conversion of the Academy F-8E kit, with raised wing and dropped flaps and slats: Had a few little glitches here and there, but I'm glad to have it in the collection! Thanks for looking in... Ed
  17. 1 point
    I just got my first box of True North paint in. Haven't used it yet and know nothing about it beyond their website and a couple of telephone conversations with the company president. I'll let you know what I think about it as I start using it. About all I can tell you right now is that I'll be using it in my next Modelbuilding Guide ebook, I opened a couple of bottles and I like what I see, definitely thick enough to hand brush nicely, still thin enough to airbrush without being prethinned AND it isn't an acrylic. Oh, yeah, one more thing. The FS numbers are on the back of the label in font that's large enough to actually read. Odd place, you say? Well, it beats having it squeezed down to the point you need an Optivisor in order to read it on the front of the label.
  18. 1 point
    Hi Gil, No the conversion kit came with only the nose, canopy, a new launch bridle attachment point and some decals. The wing, etc. rework was first done with the kit parts, as I was only going to do the flaps, etc. When I finally decided to do this aircraft, the wing tips looked so cool that I just had to raise them, and used the Wolfpack designs conversion kit for that. But, the Wolfpack kit didn't want you to raise the wings, so I had to modify them also. Everything is explained in the build thread, linked to in the first sentence above. Ed
  19. 1 point
    First you have to designate whether you're discussing your topic as applied to contests and judging, or just building for yourself. If you're building for yourself, anything goes. BUT, the caveat to that is when you build something of spurious genealogy with weird paint and it looks funky (as you intended); expect to be questioned on it at a meeting or on line. You cannot build "outside the ballpark" and expect others to understand, agree that it's "right" the way you built it, or like what you produced. The only aesthetic involved there is whatever beauty your eye beholds. In the context of contests, there ARE expectations to met. To answer your first question, craftsmanship is always more important than accuracy. A poorly built but accurate model will not attract many second looks, nor impress any judges. The BASICS that IPMSUSA judges by are simply expectations of craftsmanship that must be met to be competitive and win. As for accuracy, IPMSUSA doesn't judge it. It's discussed a LOT because (usually) it allows Joe Blow to show off his area of expertise to others at the meeting or on line.However, it's craftsmanship that almost always determines the winners and losers, with degree of difficulty being the first tie-breaker, and "accuracy" only as an absolute last resort. As for the aesthetics, I prefer AUTHENTICITY over accuracy. By that, I mean there's a ballpark you can stay inside of and meet people's (and judges) expectations while straying from absolute accuracy. If your scheme calls for OD over Neutral Gray, then the top better be some sort of muted camo green and the bottom better by some shade of gray. BUT, there's plenty of room withing shades of both of those colors to allow for variations that some experts might raise an eyebrow at. The same goes for any other myriad of details or markings....if you get it in the ballpark, generally the aesthetics will be acceptable. The only time I believe that accuracy must equal craftsmanship would be a build for posterity, say for a museum, or for a veteran. That type of build comes with higher expectations, especially if your model will be used to educate any viewers. GIL
  20. 1 point
    Talk about a blast from the past. This is another that has been on my shelf since 2012! Sculpted by Chris Elizardo, and produced by "Teddy Novak". It came as a one piece bust approx 1:4 scale. With no eyes, It was also another easy one to do. Using the following image, I matched up the colors the best I could. First step, as usual was to get the base colors down - A few days later, I was able to get another session in and get the bust finished. I was thinking about added the snow and what not, but decided to keep it simple. Thanks for looking.
  21. 1 point
    This week’s work on the Hasegawa 1/48 F-8E Crusader starts at the wings. I detailed the bay under the main wings by adding some styrene rods and 32 AWG wire. I used some reference photos to duplicate the placement of them. The wings were then installed in the raised position and the aircraft wa base painted with Gull Gray and white. The kit only comes with rockets for weapons and I wanted to use missiles so I looked through my extras bin and found two AIM-9 sidewinders. I used decals from a spare decal sheet then I added the IR head using the tutorial in my tips and tricks section: https://davidsscalemodels.com/tips-and-tricks/how-to-make-laser-and-ir-sensor-heads/ The jet exhaust was weathered with blue, brown, gray, and black pastel chalk. The decals are being placed now. The Cutting Edge decals were a little on the thick side so getting them to lay down took lots of effort as well as lots of MicroSol. Most of them are on just need to do the small stencils the finish up the cockpit and canopy. Check out all the details from start to finish on my blog at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-f-8e-crusader-from-vf-111/
  22. 1 point
    Spurious Works For Me. It is all about having fun, right! Were you able to carbon date that plastic?
  23. 1 point
    A blob of glue is sloppy modeling, lousy craftsmanship, pure and simple! It is what eliminates an entry loooong before accuracy is even thought about in the judging process. Nick Filippone, Seniors National Judge
  24. 1 point
    Revell's big Saturn-V with a few minor mods. Botched it at age ten; still a challenging kit. Still got my scrapbook, too.
  25. 1 point
    Finished the Saturn Knight. Additional images can be found here: MK44 SaturnKnight And I got the family together for the weekend.
  26. 1 point
    I have always wondered what kind of upfits or refits occurred before the Motion Picture Enterprise hit the big screen so I came up with my version of a "tweener" Kongo represents the time period between the Star Trek tv series and the Motion Picture Enterprise. Kongo has phaser bumps/turrets, a scratchbuilt torpedo pod on the connecting dorsal, the deflector has been recessed into the secondary hull, I painted/added the windows for the arboretum and gave the ship custom nacelle caps at both ends courtesy of JT Graphics. The ship was finished in a 4 color Aztec pattern to more closely resemble her big screen sister.
  27. 1 point
    Some updated pics, kind of gives an idea where I'm going with this. Pictured are the arm positions and some of the TA-50 equipment of the figure, not pictured are the grenades, AN-PRC25 field radio, butt pack ect…..
  28. 1 point
    The interesting thing about discussing cost of military aircraft is that the development cost is always included in that discussion which really distorts the figures. When you talk about the F-35 they say it is 90 million per aircraft. The F-15 by comparison was 27 million. That was in 1972 dollars and for about 1300 aircraft. The F-35 is in current dollars and is for 1,800 aircraft. If there is a world wide demand for the aircraft that cost will go down even further. The latest contract dropped the cost by 5%. Out of 1,800 aircraft to spare 7 for the Thunderbirds hardly seems but a drop in the bucket. I can also see the Blue Angels going that route also. The last time both teams flew the same aircraft was the F-4. Also, it is not as if the aircraft are purpose built for the teams. Airframes circulate through the teams on a regular basis and are returned to full combat duty when they are done. The demonstration teams only have them on loan. Incidentally, the teams have had a requirement since they converted to the F-16 that the aircraft can be converted to combat ready within 48 hours. Google "Thunderbird F-16 Warbird" to see one actually meet that standard. Interesting story.
×
×
  • Create New...