Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/03/2017 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    My model is the Italeri 1/72 scale Fiat CR-32 Chirri." It represents an aircraft assigned to XXIII Grupo Caccia, Aviazione Legionaria. The unit was led by Lieutenant Colonel Andrea Zotti and based at Puig Moreno, Spain, June-July 1938. The unit formed part of the Italian contingent fighting for the Nationalist cause during the Spanish Civil War. I used the Osprey Fiat CR-32 Aces of the Spanish Civil War (Aircraft of the Aces 94) for inspiration; profile 28. I wanted to model Zotti's aircraft; he flew "3-4", but I only had the decals for "3-6". The model was built out-of-the-box except for the rigging. Took me 3-months to figure out I can't paint Italian camouflage with an airbrush freehand and another 3-months and a lot of Tamiya tape to manage that effort. I enjoyed the build; never worked harder to complete a model...
  2. 3 points
    Model built for a Local Boy Scout Troop to Honor a local pilots service. P-38J from 394th FS of the 367 FG. Pilot perished in the channel on July 20 1944. Pilot was 1st Lt William L Mushrush from Steubenville OH Minecraft 1/48th P-38J with True Details interior, Eduard tires and Karaya gun barrels.The Aftermarket stuff way surpassed the Minicraft kit. Uschi Lines for antenna into a filament spring( Which you really can't see🙃) Alclad Polished Aluminum over Gloss Black Thanks for Looking Regards Bill D.
  3. 3 points
    Gary and Jim are both mostly correct. But if it was personal risk only, it is a relatively simple ethical calculus. But when you consider the chance of also infecting others, (at the Convention or subsequently at home) you are in a sense asking them to take on the possible health consequences of a decision they were not involved in making. Each of us, when we risk exposure, are not just choosing for ourselves, but for everyone with whom we come in contact. And, to the observation: ‘But that means we need to avoid ANY non-essential contact and practice social distancing until there is a vaccine’ I would reply: ‘ Well, Yeah!’ This resilient organization has weathered at least one financial disaster ( when Treasurer absconded with the treasury many years ago). I have no doubt we will survive this, as well, if we want IPMS to go on. I know I do. Nick
  4. 3 points
    Hi, A few points and I will be quick. My comments are as a Modeler, IPMS Member, and a Vendor. Postpone the convention until 2023. Getting the already bought items like shirts, awards, etc for this years convention in 2023 would be a unique way to remember this time. So, all of it can be used and we all will have a great story to tell. Who here wants to take responsibility for someone healthy coming to the convention, getting the bug and either having the virus themselves or worse spreading it when they get home. Sure, some of you want to play fast and loose with it but until there is a therapy and/or a vaccine, it is a medical risk for everyone. In reality, while we all love to come to the NATS for the various reasons, it is not required to attend...it is for enjoyment. Yes there are many risky enjoyments that Many of us participate in. None of us will go flying without a preflight and none of us would go skydiving without checking the gear. If someone, with expertise told you there may be a hidden problem somewhere with the Plane or the chute rig, would you chance it?? No, no sane individual would. My wife and I are not in any of the risk categories for COVID-19, but our Doctors, including our Daughter who is a US Navy Doctor, say unnecessary exposure to others is to be avoided....period. To do otherwise is to take unnecessary risk.......and its is with your life people! Gary,GT Resin
  5. 3 points
    Another idea: Instead of trying to change three convention dates and contracts, just change one. Leave Vegas and Omaha as they are. If 2020 gets cancelled, move it to 2023. If the hotel is forced to cancel 2020, that gets us off the hook in San Marcos. That “ get out of contract free” card is only applicable this year, so can’t be played in 2021 and 2022. We keep those dates and contracts, and are free to sign a new one in 2023.
  6. 3 points
    This is the Platz 1:72 kit with Eduard photoetched interior panels, modified control columns, and True Details seats. I added wiring the seats, scratch-built the canopy piston housing and the canvas cover over the rear panel from CA-impregnated tissue paper, and cut the kit canopy. The wheel wells were detailed and the airbrakes were re-built and their bays were detailed. Anti-torque scissors were stolen from an F-80 photo etched sheet. The decals were sourced from 14 different sheets from Iliad, SuperScale, Fox One, AeroMaster, an Italeri B-66, and even a MicroScale railroad sheet. Weathering was limited to a wash and some scuffing on the non-skid panels. I finished it just in time for a club contest - but, since only four or five people finished their T-33s, the contest was moved to March!
  7. 3 points
    Let me re-make a point here. Where is it written that a person MUST care if they win or lose at the contest? I know several people who attend, put the model on the table, and enjoy the rest of the convention without another thought about the contest. They enjoy looking at a roomful of models without it impacting their self-worth. Winning an award is gravy.
  8. 3 points
    I finally finished this baby last night. My first competed build for 2019. It's the Tamiya kit built in Operation Iraqi Freedom (thanks for correcting me, Rob) scheme. I used mylar for the optics and a resin set from Red Zebra for stowage. I also printed out cardboard boxes for MREs from Freddie's set and assembled them for a neat look that breaks up the stowage on the tank. I added a boom mic to the tank commander with copper wire. I used the hairspray technique on this one and tried to bring out the NATO woodland scheme underneath like the original. It didn't work out too well in that the top coat was very tenacious and didn't want to come off easily. Final weathering with Wilder oils and Flory pigments. I also made use of an item called "ceramic wire" for the aerials. I'm pretty satisfied with this build. The kit is highly recommended.
  9. 3 points
    I've finally completed a kit! For me it's nothing short of amazing! 😊 This is the Trumpy Type 63 107mm rocket launcher. I've got the Revell-Germany MAN 5T Mil GL truck about to move to the paint booth right now.
  10. 3 points
    A simple graphic illustration of why Telford works for The UK but not here.
  11. 3 points
    http://culttvman.com/main/a-modelers-guide-to-painting-the-starship-enterprise-by-gary-kerr/ http://culttvman.com/main/a-modelers-guide-to-painting-the-starship-enterprise-pt2-by-gary-kerr/
  12. 3 points
    Sorry, but your first model is just not complicated enough. Well, now I have to go shoot myself. Make sure you keep posting photos. So my survivors will know why I offed myself.
  13. 3 points
    Actually it works best if you use an "Old Guy" computer!
  14. 3 points
    Yes! I look forward to buying you a beer! And we can discuss whether the line between passion and insanity is raised or recessed. Regards, Nick
  15. 2 points
    I saw a description of pandemic relief as a three legged stool. Leg one is self quarinitine and social distancing to reduce spread. Leg two was an effective treatment after someone developes it. Leg three of the stool is a vacine to prevent people from getting it. Right now we only have one leg(distancing) and the hint of a second leg(treatments that are showing promise but aren't a sure thing). It is very difficult to stand on such a stool with confidance. I have had three heart procudures since March(the last one in a covid restricted hospital) and much as I would like to attend(had my reservations already) I am not going to sit on that stool this year. Hope to see you all in Vegas
  16. 2 points
    Excellent looking model of a lesser known variant! I've always felt the Hurricane overall gets the short shrift most of the time in the tall shadow of the more storied Spitfire. That's a great tribute to the harder working Hurricane for your collection! Gil
  17. 2 points
    Mark, so far nothing is proven about this virus. Although other forms of Corona virus do become less virulent in warmer months, that has not been proven with this particular strain. Witness the fact that as of yesterday Australia has reported 130 cases. Right now they are in the heart of a very hot summer. There is no hard evidence that this will go way as things warm up. It is a wait and see thing and not something you can plan on. I do agree that it is way too early to cancel now, but not too early to have a backup plan.
  18. 2 points
    This week’s update on the PZL-23B covers the fuselage and wing details. I assembled the wings and then added the photo etch details like the entry steps and hand holds, wing joint covers, and aiming scales to the nose. The engine was then mounted. I needed to paint the base coat on the fuselage prior to mounting the exhaust as it runs along the fuselage. The underside was painted using light blue and the top was painted olive drab. The two color reference photos depicted a panel pattern on the wings. I duplicated this by adding a little green drab to the paint and painted the alternating panels on the wing tops. The main landing gear shrouds house landing lights. The kit provided the clear covers for them but no details behind them. It was just an open hole. I used a clear sprue from my scrap bin that was fit into the hole. I trimmed it flush then drilled into it with a drill bit to make the reflector. Then a smaller drill bit to make the bulb area and finally a tiny one to simulate the filament of the bulb. Stay tuned as next week as I apply the decals and final paint to finish this unique Polish aircraft. You can see all the details and photos from the start in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-pzl-23b-karas/
  19. 2 points
    If we didn't try new things, judging would still be 6 AM Saturday morning with the venue closed all morning instead of someone saying "Hey why don't we judge Friday nights?". One of the best ideas ever. If you are not changing, you are dying a slow death. Sure, some things don't work but many do. Some great ideas. Dave
  20. 2 points
    I heard "if it ain't broke don't fix it" from my Dad starting about age 12. He was a mechanic and that was his frame of mind: cars either worked or were broke, and if they were broke you put them back the way the manufacturer built them. He sent me off to engineering school, where we learned that the people who designed things were constantly innovating and making tradeoffs trying to make things work better, because their competitors were doing the same thing. It's not obvious to me that everyone who didn't win would leave on Saturday morning. Many attendees would have already made travel plans, bought banquet tickets, raffle tickets, tour tickets, have non-refundable hotel reservations, be waiting for the vendor clearance-sale, or want to take one more circuit through the contest room. A modeler with vendor-money left in their wallet isn't about to leave. As long as there is stuff to do on Saturday afternoon there is no real reason to pack up early. There would be a tendency for non-winners to start packing up around 3-4:00 PM Saturday afternoon to beat the rush, but you could minimize that by having some "big event" about that time: a big name seminar or a pre-awards happy hour that was already included in the price of registration, so that people would want to stay for what they had already paid for. I'll be the first to admit trying this would be an experiment; we wouldn't know if it would work or not. That is the nature of innovation: you study it as well as you can and make contingency plans, but in the end you don't know if it works until you flip the switch and see what happens.
  21. 2 points
    Here is another 2020 completed build. This build started life as a Jimmy Flintstone resin body and interior and morphed into what you see here by utilizing a lot of scratchbuilding and kitbashing. I used more different materials on this from brass, resin, styrene sheet, old necklaces for chain, Bic pens for exhaust stacks and a little bit of 3D printed parts.
  22. 2 points
    Hard to believe how old this kit is, but you made it great. Your motto should be MAGA 'Make Aurora Great Again".
  23. 2 points
    This weeks’ update on the AH-64D Apache Longbow covers the assembly and details of the fuselage. The landing gear was built and detailed with photo etch. The fuselage had some vents cut out and replaced with photo etch parts. I drilled a hole thru the vent then cut out with a hobby knife and finally shaped with a small file to fit the photo etch piece. The engine exhaust was then assembled and detailed with photo etch. Once assembled the fuselage was base coat painted with the black green color. Have a few more details to add to the fuselage then on to the rotors and chain gun. You can follow the build in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-apache-longbow/
  24. 2 points
    The next build is an F-16C from 61st Fighter Squadron. I am using Tamiya’s F-16C as well as Ares resin accessories. The Ares accessories include the resin cockpit, resin wheel wells, and the resin exhaust. This is a commission build for a veteran who worked with the 61st FS at MacDill AFB in the 1990’s. The decals for this will be custom made for this aircraft. To start with I washed, trimmed and shaped all the resin parts. The ejection seat uses photo etch details like signs, seat belts, and handles. It was weathered with pastel chalk. Moving to the dashboard I used a photo of a real F-16C dash and made decals for the digital screens. Added some photo etch details and detail painted the rest. For the cockpit tub I added the photo etch details and detail painted the knobs, switches and joystick. The cockpit side walls were added completing the cockpit. There will be some trimming required to fit the resin cockpit assembly into the fuselage which I am working on now. You can see all the other photos in my build log at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-f-16c-from-the-61st-fighter-squadron/
  25. 2 points
    Dang Nick....learn the difference between a VALID question and a complaint.....All of us know how well our volunteers do. Gil
  26. 2 points
    I thought long before writing what I am about to write, but finally decided that I would do so even if I take flak for it, or risk crossing a line. I do not understand why this question was started here on the IPMS/USA website, or what it has to do with GENERAL MODELLING, All About Building Models. How does asking this question relate to building models? We are not supposed to bring politics into discussions on this site, but that is where this thread appears to be headed where people state their personal biases on what they do, or do not build and then make comparisons to current politics as justification. I do not believe that anyone has deliberately tried to be insulting, but I have read comments that I believe are biased and if I were thinned skinned could cause insult, and for that, and the above reason, I do not think that these types of discussions belong here on a modelling site such as this one. I feel that this discussion should be shut down before it goes any further, if for no other reason that it has nothing to do with modelling. Thanks for reading, John
  27. 2 points
    1/48 Accurate Miniatures Wright Patterson AFB P-51 NA prototype 1/48 Ta 1831/48 prewar Tamiya Zeke
  28. 2 points
    I've had this one done for a while and just got around to rigging it. Usual out of the box with a minimum interior added. The decals were way gone and I didn't want to spend stupid money for new ones, so these are spurious markings I cobbled together and a paint scheme that is an amalgam of several I have seen. The rockets were used to shoot at zeppelins and observation balloons, but most sources cannot site where one was actually shot down with them.
  29. 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.
  30. 2 points
    2021 is at the Rio?? Ok, that is a good location just off the strip. When my wife and I go to Vegas, we like to stay in either Caesar or the Bellagio, but we generally go for a particular show(Elton John last time). We are going in December to see Andre Bocelli and staying at the MGM Grand. The Rio is home to Penn & Teller. They put on a great show! Worth seeing! Plenty of other entertainment if you get bored with looking at models. Also some great stuff for significant others to do while you are ogling models. If she goes off to the gaming tables, you can use her winnings to finance you plastic habit it she wins and justify it if she loses.
  31. 2 points
    I don't like their paints anymore so no effect for me. Using Tamiya and others Dave
  32. 2 points
    Noel, IPMS/USA is what I consider a supply-and-demand organization where the contest is concerned. There are a lot of A/C categories because they are the most popular plain and simple. As an ex-head ship judge for the society, Nationals chairman, and ex-NCC member, I can tell you our categories are based on what shows up on a consistent basis. The head judges for each category have yearly records for numbers entered as well as the type of models. When I was a head judge, if there was a consistent and potential growing number of say, Martian aircraft carriers over a three year period, I would put in a request to the Chief Judge that a category or split be added to next year's contest to accommodate the increase in those models. If the request was granted by vote of the NCC, the category was added on a three year trial basis. This was done to insure that it wasn't a one time occurrence, and could be removed if numbers went down for three consecutive years. Under-attended categories also face removal by the same system. I realize this sounds like it would take some time to expand category numbers such as automotive, but that's the tried and true way IPMS/USA regulates its categories. Furthermore, the NCC must consider the cost to the host chapter when adding categories. Ideally, every category should have a sponsor which never happens; so the host chapter must foot the bill for un-sponsored categories from their profit margin. In short, "build it and they will come".
  33. 2 points
    Finished the Saturn Knight. Additional images can be found here: MK44 SaturnKnight And I got the family together for the weekend.
  34. 2 points
    And yet again, when some low performing modeler berates one of our members with the painfully monotonous myth of IPMS rivet counters, our knee- jerk reaction is to rend our garments, beat our breasts, and fall on our xacto knives in shame. People will believe what they want to believe whether it is written on a bathroom stall wall or on the idiotnet. Nothing we can say or do will change that! Nor should we change. All IPMS has done over the past 50 years is give credibility to a hobby that was not taken seriously, help plastic modelers increase their skills and enhance their enjoyment of the hobby, demand that kit manufacturers take this hobby as seriously as we do and organize competitions that are as scrupulously fair as human integrity will permit! We have NOTHING to be ashamed of or apologize for. My personal experience of the people such as those whose uninformed comments you had to endure is that they are poor modelers whose work will not stand up under the most cursory of assessments. What we should be ignoring is the whining of these cry-babies whose skill level is so low that they are simply not competitive when faced with the standards of excellence that IPMS encourages and rewards in it’s members. Let’s all show a little more spine! Why should we seek an association with such narrow, hateful little minds? Regards, Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge
  35. 2 points
    Two models completed in one year so far!! WooHoo!! 😁
  36. 2 points
    This week’s update on the F-22 is a small one. Between my oldest son’s graduation from college and life getting in the way I was not able to spend a lot of time on the bench. However I was able to complete the main weapons bay doors. The small doors had 14 parts and the larger doors had 50 parts each. The braces are 1mm X 1mm styrene stock and the hinge shaft is 28awg wire. Next I will be assembling the photo etch replacement missile bay doors and then priming all the doors for paint.
  37. 2 points
    Comments that are critical of ‘finding the flaws’ and ‘ignoring the bigger picture of what the model actually represents’ ( I don’t even know what that means) frustrate me as an experienced and scrupulously objective judge. As long as we as judges are required to identify three winners and X numbers of losers in a finite amount time, we will need a system that is efficient while also is able to be fairly applied to all entries. While theoretically you could compile all the things done correctly on each entry, that would be too time consuming. So efficient knowledgeable judges will start be looking for where most builders make common mistakes. These are craftsmanship competitions NOT an assessment of how much enthusiasm the modeler has for his or her subject. Likewise, the judges are not trying to answer the question: ‘What is the artist trying to say?’ In modeling contests, as in war, the winner is often the one who makes the fewest mistakes. There is a very simple way for the builder to get past this first cut of common faults. Read the Competition Handbook and do what it tells you to do. Despite this, the common errors appear with predictable frequency- admittedly more at the lower level shows than at the Nationals- but they are always there. Most categories will thankfully contain the gross misalignments, the wide-open seams, sloppy paint work, the silvered decals. Once these are out of the running, the really hard work in a 1,2,3 system begins. Now comes the necessary nit-picking. Now some of the virtues of a G,S,B system become apparent. But under either system, there are going to be disappointed entrants. If you do not want to be one of them, you have two choices: build better models or keep your models on the display-only table. Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge
  38. 2 points
    This week the Raptor build is moving forward with many details. To start with the kit does not come with any weapons so I purchased some Eduard Brassin AIM-9X and a few AIM-120’s to load up the weapons bays. I finished the main landing gear bay walls then moved on to the exhaust. The photo etch kit supplies the inside details of the exhaust. Once installed they were painted then weathered with pastel chalk. The top part of the fuselage is also the top of the main landing gear bays. I added the kit parts then detailed them with more wire and cable mounts. I turned to the intakes by painting them white and adding the decals. I like that the intakes assemble on the edges instead of the middle. Makes the intakes look seamless. Finally I assembled the fuselage halves together. This was a bit tricky especially around the intake openings. But once I got it lined up and some minor trimming they fit well. Will need some minor putty in a couple of areas to smooth out some minor gaps. The next step is to address the fuselage and some overly thick RAM panels. See all the photos and notes from the start at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-f-22-raptor/
  39. 2 points
    In an effort to collect Medusa kits whenever possible, I came across this kit at a not so recent JerseyFest (or was it the old Resintopia?). The kit came fro the Morland Studios. The kit comes in 6 parts plus a 60mm round base and the figure is scaled to 32mm. Following the card, I tried to copy the image. The small size of kit was a real trial to my limited abilities. The sculpted base comes in 2 parts, and they are made to attach together, but sitting on the round base, there was extra room. I decided to fill the black base. In the pic you can see gray Aves to fill the basesplitting the difference between rocks and sea. I also used V's Plastic putty to fill the seam between the monster/sea and the rocks. I made the tip of the snout of the monster shades of gray as if it was turning to rock, again a la the Clash of the Titans remake. Don't know how well that comes across being so little of the monster is seen. From there, I concentrated on the TINY details for the figure. There was no decal for the shield, so I tried my best, thinking of the Clash of the Titans remake, and painted on a scorpion. Finally adding some gloss to the scene, and gluing Perseus in place, I was finished. Thanks for looking. Size comparison to a Quarter
  40. 2 points
    Let me now provide the history of the preparation of this ballot It began after last year’s National Contest with the annual forum debate on open judging (GSB) vs. 123. I joined the discussion and innocently made what I believed to be a practical suggestion: attach a simple tear-off ballot to the National Convention Contest registration form, deposit it in a box at the time of registration and add them up. That was rejected by the IPMS leadership, but, to their credit, they asked a working group of those interested in the question to create a ballot that would be included in an issue of the Journal so members could vote. I was one of the group, as was Rusty White. Again, to the credit of the leadership of IPMS, we were to be allowed to prepare the entire ballot. Our goal was to prepare a dispassionate, objective description of each system. It would be brief, fair, balanced and unemotional. At the beginning of the preparation of this ballot, I offered to write the initial description of our current 123 judging system for this ballot. However, Rusty White, who, from the start, had arrogated to himself the position of working group leader, rejected this offer and unilaterally decided to have someone from IPMS administration prepare the portion of the ballot that would describe the 123 system for the voters. I can only assume that Rusty decided that I, who he perceived as having some deep-seated and unalterable pro-123 bias, would somehow scupper the attempt to create a fair ballot. No one else in the group was allowed any input in this decision.There was never any question about the group’s other members being able to be objective about GSB open judging. I, however, was apparently not to be trusted to be fair. The irony is that I worked as hard as anyone in the group to prepare an accurate and fair description of open judging. We argued back and forth to create what you now see as the “position paper” for open judging. I insisted, as did others, that it take the form you now see. We wanted to provide basic facts and let the members decide. The Forum can provide the platform for debate and comment. We did not want that discussion to take place on the ballot. Then, without any warning or preparation from Rusty, the entire ballot suddenly appears as you see it. The working group was not permitted to sign off on it in it’s entirety. We never would have! And that is because the “position paper” for 123 was everything the group wanted to avoid. It is not brief or fair or balanced or unemotional! It is electioneering ON THE BALLOT by the very people who will be counting the votes. If I sound like I am whining, it is because I am. I am trained as a scientist. I want facts obtained honestly and objectively. I also have great respect for fairness in any vote. This ballot, as presently constituted, is not fair and should be seen as an embarrassment to this organization! I worked hard on this project. So did the others. We deserved the opportunity to produce something we could take some satisfaction in, regardless of the outcome of the vote. That opportunity was taken away from us by the very person in the working group who assumed the leadership position for himself and got out- manouvered. Please don’t blame me. Thank you. Regards, Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge.,
  41. 2 points
    Interesting. In my opinion, the referendum implies an immediate change to our system. As such it will of course be rejected. Let me explain. I have been a judge at IPMS National Conventions for 20 years. I’ve also been the head judge at the Three Rivers IPMS contest for about that same length of time. Our show uses open judging. There is a common thread to the discussions on this and other forums regarding the GSB system. The topic is nothing less than radioactive. This is not intended to be an ad hominem attack on any individual or group of individuals, but again through years of experience I have some idea of how these things work. Mr. Dedig has a very good point. One could easily see his description of “Lobby Champion” in the definition of the 1-2-3 system. It is not so much a definition as an indictment. I will interject in the definition below. Definition: Currently, model entries are evaluated based only on the entries in that year’s contest - comparing them only to each other. Entries aren’t compared to any “ideal”, “perfect-model”, or “national-standards” criteria. Nor are entries judged, based on any perceived personal expertise of the entrant (“beginner/advanced/master modeler”). This is absolutely true, and the inherit weakness of 1-2-3 contests. Much of any judging team’s time is often spent finding the “best of the rest” to fill out the 3rdor even 2ndplace winners of a category. The first plane winner may be obvious, but the rest could have so many problems that the team simply adds up the flaws of one model vs. another to determine the remaining winners. This frequently results in models winning at a national level that would not win in the open (GSB) format. Is that what we’re striving for? I’ve heard the argument that this point doesn’t matter. The three best models on the table in that group on that night won. Well how about the larger categories with 20-30 models that typically attract very good builders? I know we tend to split larger categories, but occasionally that can’t be accomplished due to the finite number of splits available. So here some very good models will not place, where in the first example, some not very good models will. There are no “ideal”, “perfect-model”, or “national-standards” that I am aware of. But there are good and bad paint jobs, decal applications and basic construction. These can be dispassionately scored and the results evaluated. Perceived personal expertise of the entrant? We don’t do that now and would not in the open system either. Judges are your IPMS peers, who volunteer a portion of their convention time to support the contest. They follow the guidelines in our Modeler's Guide To IPMS Contests. On average, we get 204 judges each year to cover 2,350 model entries. They ‘score’ an average of 600 winning models. Want to require those 204 to spend three times longer at their tasks, to ‘score’ all 2,350 models? Currently, any judge can leave comments on any entrant’s model-entry sheet; want to require them to leave comments for all 2,350 models? Are you going to make the commitment to help accomplish that task? We do evaluate all 2,350 models now. Some take very little time due to obvious flaws. Depending on the open judging format, this may not be necessary in GSB either. A scoring sheet does codify the results and focus judges’ evaluations. It does take more time. But judges at Telford use one and I haven’t heard any complaints about that. I’m not sure why this would take three times longer. Also, comments would not be required. A recent Regional Convention that I attended (and judged) solicited comments from judges. Some were helpful; most were not. The scoring speaks for itself. If you score 3 out of 10 in decal application the judging team doesn’t have to comment that the model didn’t place due to poor decals. Recording results for just the 600 winners now requires 8 staff, transcribing scoring from just 200 sheets of paper, to provide entrant and model names for those winners. They work all Friday night and into Saturday until Banquet time. To do the same for 2,300 entries, are you ready to sacrifice your own convention time to help do that task? This could be an issue, but perhaps not. We have run two Regional Conventions using the GSB system in Pittsburgh. One serious advantage is that judging can take place at any time. Our shows were two day events and judging began on Friday evening and continued through Saturday. Teams came and went at intervals. For a National Convention this would be a challenge to coordinate. But it could be done with proper planning. At the other Regional I mentioned, the judging time commitment was no greater than the typical 1-2-3 event. In no way do I wish to denigrate the efforts of the National’s staff. You all do absolutely excellent work and deserve all the credit we could possible give. The virtually flawless execution of the awards ceremony is evidence of the work of this group of people. For cost efficiency and planning, the 1-2-3 system pre-defines the maximum number of awards to be purchased and presented: 200 categories X 3 awards in each = 600 awards. G-S-B method leaves open the count of potential awards to be purchased (from 0% to 100%), for approximately 2,350 entries each year. How many ‘extras’ of each award level should a host chapter plan to order, ‘just in case’? Just one per category (200 more)? Two or more per category? 2,350 awards – just in case? This is an issue. But does anyone seriously think that 0%, no winners at an IPMS National Convention, or 100%, where everyone goes home happy is realistic. This type of argument clouds the issue and exaggerates the risk. Many shows of late have opted for medals as awards. These are relatively inexpensive. Extras could be ordered and some may not be used. If there are not enough, have more made and sent to the winners after the event. This is not a perfect solution, but we could ask other societies such as AMPS or the figure modeling groups how they handle the logistics. Also, there are no categories in open judging. We group the models together along natural lines: aircraft, armor, etc., just for ease of viewing. Our convention attendees want a ‘contest’. How many ‘For Display Only’ entries do you ever see at any of our conventions? I don’t even understand this point. GSB events are no less a contest than the current system. “Critiquing entries to determine 1-2-3 vs G-S-B rankings is a distinction without a difference.” If this is true why is there resistance? “Want to be the one of the few entrants not even good enough to earn a Bronze award – ‘not up to national standards’?” Old line dating back to an unfortunate incident at a National Convention. Every model going home without at least a third place award feels precisely the same now. Our current processes are predictable and efficient. Our contest results and awards are a fair recognition of our entrants’ outstanding model-making accomplishments. The volunteer efforts of the judging corps are effective, without overwhelming our available judges. Our current system isn’t ‘broken’ and doesn’t need to be ‘fixed’ – unless what you ultimately want is for every contest entrant to always be a winner! This is true. Except for the last sentence. I’m not even going to address that because it lacks serious merit. To sum up (a little late for that), the arguments against GSB on this forum seem to be more of an attack on an alternative. “This can’t possibly be done because…” Well it is done by AMPS, MFCA and local and regional IPMS shows. It is out there and it is gaining support. The purpose is to reward excellence and encourage improvement in modelling skills. I realize that we will never shift overnight from one style to another. That would be a recipe for failure. But to dismiss the open system out of hand, or continually attack it without considering its merits is also wrong. I think the National referendum should be something like this. “Would you like to see IPMS/USA experiment with the open GSB system at a future National Convention?” There are some excellent modelers who are also excellent judges and event coordinators who would support this. And by support I mean would sponsor trophy packages, offer to judge and help organize the experiment. Members could be solicited from the end of the prior convention, for let’s say a six month period to indicate if they would participate in an open judging experiment and approximately how many models they would enter. These models would not require any more space since they would be entered anyway. The distinction would be that a certain number of tables would be segregated for the purpose. Since we would know approximately how many models would participate, would could evaluate the number of awards to order. If it fails, it fails. At least the question would be addressed and long standing argument, both for and against, settled. At this point we honestly don’t know whether the topic would be accepted by the membership or not. I do know that after judging at our show, even some diehard opponents to GSB have been won over. They have said that our system is actually easier than they ever expected. Isn’t it time that we fairly approached this topic on a national level? Barry Numerick
  42. 2 points
    I think what's interesting is that the 1-2-3 description actually is written as a NEGATIVE towards GSB! Here are some examples: 1) " Entries aren’t compared to any “ideal”, “perfect-model”, or “national-standards” criteria". Strictly speaking that's true, but they make it sound like having a standard to WIN an award (NOT enter the contest) is a bad thing. Every club that does GSB KNOWS that to be false! And there IS a Standard in GSB... Those same BASICS! 2) "Judges are your IPMS peers"... Seems to imply that GSB uses wizards or outsiders from the GSB galaxy to judge at those shows. Nope! Turns out it's ALSO your "IPMS peers"! 3) " Recording results for just the 600 winners now requires 8 staff, transcribing scoring from just 200 sheets of paper" (etc)...Implies that GSB judging would be IMPOSSIBLE at the Nats because of the logistics of how 1-2-3 is done. FAILS to point out that EVERY GSB system used or proposed does NOT use that 1-2-3 system of recording. IF GSB were ever to be used at a Nats, the system would be entirely different. 4) " How many ‘extras’ of each award level should a host chapter plan to order, ‘just in case’? Just one per category (200 more)? Two or more per category? 2,350 awards – just in case?" This next paragraph rightly points out the differences between the number of awards needed between the two systems. However, it WRONGLY implies that you could NEVER know how much you need! This is dealt with by EVERY GSB show in the nation EVERY year; so it IS something you can "learn". Would GSB be a "higher cost" system? YES! But then THAT is the crux of the debate: Should IPMSUSA look to reward MORE deserving builds than they do now? And with the profits that are being made, IPMS CAN afford to by some more awards! The debate, and the PURPOSE of this survey is to try to determine if the general membership thinks that's a good idea or not. 5) " Our convention attendees want a ‘contest’ "; THAT is a BLATANT assumption, and actually not true! There's enough of a question about that to lead to this survey being done! It also implies that GSB attendees aren't looking to "win" (as opposed to "contest" attendees). Baloney! GSB contestants want to win as MUCH as they can; they just prefer to do so while NOT "beating" anyone else, and (when they do win) not limit anyone else's ability to win. 6) " How many ‘For Display Only’ entries do you ever see at any of our conventions?" What has THAT to do with models in a CONTEST, be it GSB or 1-2-3? People who want to compete enter the show, be it GSB or 1-2-3. Those who prefer to display do that, no matter what format is being used there! 7) " Want to be the one of the few entrants not even good enough to earn a Bronze award – ‘not up to national standards’? MISLEADINGLY implies that a Standard that determines WINNERS (not the ability to enter the show) is somehow mean. Well, how does it feel in a 1-2-3 show to go home EMPTY HANDED and not knowing if you even made the cut? BOTH systems still have "losers"...but GSB will have FEWER "losers" than 1-2-3! 8- " Our contest results and awards are a fair recognition of our entrants’ outstanding model-making accomplishments" BLATANT BALONEY! In ANY 1-2-3 category with 10-25 entries at the Nats there are 7-22 that go home with NO idea of how they did!! There are HUNDREDS of outstandingly built models that go COMPLETELY unrecognized because the judges decide that there are 3 there THAT day that are "better". The "fair recognition" is ONLY truly fair for the top 3 winners! There's a LOT of advantages for 1-2-3 in IPMSUSA, and the system has some positives that make it preferable to many. There was NO need to write the above in such a negative way. Instead of touting the positives and advantages 1-2-3 offers IPMS members, it's written to PUT DOWN GSB. As the IPMS USA Chief Judge, I could understand if Mr. Persechetti wrote an enthusiastic support for 1-2-3. However, he chose to write it as a condemnation, and actually showed his ignorance of GSB in doing so. I'm greatly disappointed and disgusted with his lack of character and honesty in this matter! Gil
  43. 2 points
    Trumpeter KV-5 built as a BeutePanzer. Because why not. Needs some minor clean up before paint. Added lots of pieces from the spare bin or items I recently picked up at local shows. Lionroar tow cable ModelKasten clamps Tasca jerry cans with scrap PE bracket Aber tow loops for the Tiger 1 MIG productions resin tail light Copula, Notek, horn, etc from Dragon bits and pieces Still need to make the brackets to hold the spare wheels and tracks. A couple of color studies:
  44. 2 points
    Lousy modelers need an organization to help them rationalize their lousy results! l
  45. 2 points
    Just got the Tamiya engraving set. Stupid expensive at $30.00 a blade, but far and away the best panel line engraver I own and that is saying a lot. I have a drawer full of panel line scribes. The difference is that these give you a flat bottom with square sides and no ridges on the top. They are so expensive because they are tungsten carbide and are very sharp. Don't bother buying the special handle for them. They fit in a pin vice with the proper collet. I use my large Tamiya pin vice and really like it because it has a decent diameter and with the knurling it is easy to control the angle of the blade. As to the cost, well they are $30 from Tamiya but if you shop around and buy them all together(so you only pay one shipping fee) and they can be had for less than half that. Oh and although my photo shows all 4 blades they are only sold individually and each one comes with the case for all of them. Not sure why but that is the way it is.
  46. 2 points
    Another completed build that was started over a year ago. It's an NHRA class Super Comp dragster build using a Revell top fuel kit as the base. The body and chassis has been shortened to better represent the dimensions on a super comp car. The graphics are fictitious in nature and were created on my home computer and transferred to decal film. The scoop is a resin piece that I created the master for using Renshape. And, the engine, interior and chassis is loaded with added details for wiring, plumbing, etc. If you go to my Fotki link you can see the entire buildup in pics. which also shows the change in graphics after a failure in clear coat application. http://public.fotki.com/1320wayne/my-drag-models/sportsman-cars/super-comp-dragster/
  47. 2 points
    The M42 Duster is finished! It will go into the GJ VAMC display case later this week, at which time I'll take some photos of our 2 cases and post them here. The Duster was a challenging build, but turned out pretty nice! I added an M60 instead of the .30 cal MG and also a few pieces of stowage. Weathering was purposely kept to a minimum, and all the interior photos of the turret I found showed that everything was painted OD. The decals (except the stars) were from that Tamiya kit that I have now disposed of. Please check out the photos and tell me what you think.
  48. 2 points
    Rusty says it best and I wish I could instill that attitude in all my model buddies. While I go to contests and enter models I no longer worry or care about not winning. I still chat and discuss when something wins that I feel shouldn't have (as all modelers tend to do). My theory or mentality is that if I win I was fortunate enough that 3 fellow model builders (hopefully) thought my entry was better than the others presented on that day and time. If I don't win.....Guess what? I will still build models to the best of my ability and will still enter contests until I can no longer build.
  49. 2 points
    Personally, I've never thought of them as smelling pleasant; just stronger or not so strong. And, I've always used enamels and lacquers which have the heaviest fumes. That said, I do have a "fondness" for the smell of paints, thinners, and glues; but I think it's simply because I associate them with the fun of model building; not with any direct olfactory stimulation. To paraphrase Robert Duvall in "Apocalypse Now"...."I love the smell of Dull Coat in the morning".... GIL
  50. 2 points
    IMO, FWIW, this is an over-read of the Guidelines which appear to be far more concerned with speech than markings. The simple rule for nose-art/figures/scenes used to be, that if it didn't have to go behind the curtain, it would be OK -- it would after all be sitting on the contest table for all to view.
×
×
  • Create New...