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
    Listen guys, this organization may be imaginary, but they've got standards! 🤣 Gotta love Star Trek, and the Reliant is one of my favorite ships. I really hope you changed that prefix code!
  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
    From Faller, N-scale (1/160);
  18. 2 points
    Another step on my journey down the road of the old Aurora WW I kits. This is their DH-4. It comes with the four bladed prop instead of two and with the dual rear Lewis guns. That gun mount was disliked by the gunners as being bulky, hard to bring to bear and used up a LOT of ammunition. I added my usual basic interior, but the rest is OOTB.
  19. 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/
  20. 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
  21. 2 points
    I agree....nostalgia builds are fun, and you can even limit what you do to them to make them a bit more "authentic" to their past. Look at some of the builds Ron Bell has posted here for very good examples. Here's my rebuild of the old 1/48 Aurora Me-109....which I built a few years ago to commemorate (and duplicate) my very first model build...minus the gluey fingerprints! GIL
  22. 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.
  23. 2 points
    Here's a trip down memory lane for you modelers "of a certain age". This kit was first released in 1958 and It was state of the art at the time. It has decent engraved panel lines, was light on the rivets (but I sanded them off anyway), and had the embossed decal locators, which had to be removed. I replaced the gear doors as the kit ones were just too thick and the decals are cobbled together from my spares as the ones in the kit were much too yellowed to use. The finish is Alclad over some panels primed in flat and the rest in gloss black. It I could have produced this model and taken it to a contest in 1959, I might have won something, but today, it's just a nostalgia piece, but it was fun to build.
  24. 2 points
    The ancient Monogram HU-16E Albatross, built OOB. Markings are USCG early 1960s, from the Print Scale sheet. The mold dates from 1957, kit was real pain to build. I glued the “moveable” gear in the down position to make it sturdy, and added some lead shot to keep the nose down. Paint is Tamiya white and some of my hoarded MM “Coast Guard Red-Orange” from their discontinued Marine colors line. All the orange bands and black stripes were painted- lots of masking there! I was impressed with how well the Print Scale decals went down over the big rivets... DUKW is the Italeri kit, in USCG colors from the same period....also OOB. Photo courtesy of Pip Moss.....
  25. 2 points
    Folks, a couple of comments have been deleted from this thread because their content was more socio-political and less modeling in nature. The comments would have been better suited for "The Bullpen". Follow the forum rules, and model-on.
  26. 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/
  27. 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/
  28. 2 points
    Dang Nick....learn the difference between a VALID question and a complaint.....All of us know how well our volunteers do. Gil
  29. 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
  30. 2 points
    OK, its not a real TNH, but the Tamiya 1/48 Panzer 38(T). The tank was developed in Czechoslovakia just before the war started. As a matter of fact, it wasn't even in service yet when the conflict began, so this example is rather spurious in its markings. The Germans thought so much of the vehicle they modified them slightly and equipped whole armored divisions with them (Rommels 7th in France for one) right up to the Russian campaign. The 37mm gun was as good or better as that mounted on any German tank at the time (with the possible exception or the Mk IV, but that 75mm was a short barreled infantry support weapon and besides that there were very few of them, even in France.) the armor was comparable and it was very dependable. The camo is typical per-war Czech camo. The little flag on the turret is from my imagination. I can't find many photos of pre-war Czech armor in Czech service, but it seems logical they would have some sort of national markings on their vehicles. I did this one strictly OOTB. These 1/48 Tamiya kits are just a delight to build. Fit is excellent and detail is very good. Tjhe length and link tracks are nicely done, but can be fiddly to get right and you can see a couple of my problem areas if you look closely. If you're not an armor builder but wonder what all the fuss is about with armor models, give one of these 1/48 kits a try OOTB. I bet you'll have fun with it.
  31. 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.
  32. 2 points
    I don't like their paints anymore so no effect for me. Using Tamiya and others Dave
  33. 2 points
    You could try to compare them visually with the new Foxbot set: More info HERE and HERE Regards, Aleksandar
  34. 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".
  35. 2 points
    Finished the Saturn Knight. Additional images can be found here: MK44 SaturnKnight And I got the family together for the weekend.
  36. 2 points
    Here are the final photos of my conversion of a Monogram F-105D kit into the prototype YF-105A, and here is the Build Thread And for a little comparison, the original Monogram F-105D alongside: If you check out the build thread, you will see that it was a long ride... Ed
  37. 2 points
    Two models completed in one year so far!! WooHoo!! 😁
  38. 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
  39. 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/
  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
    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
  42. 2 points
    What's an allowance?
  43. 2 points
    Seems I'm a broken record in this area with my Airfix locomotives. I get one a year and do them. Nice kits of interesting subjects and they are something different to build. This one is of a Battle of Britain Class locomotive used in the 50's and 60's. Each engine was named after a fighter base, or ace or something linked to the Battle of Britain. This one is the Biggin Hill, a fighter base around London. One quirk is that the name plate on the engine side should have an RAF blue background and not red. Other releases of the same kit have the blue, but I got 'lucky' and go the wrong color. The decals were old and yellow, so they spent sometime in a sunny window and then a coat of gloss coat to keep them from shattering.
  44. 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/
  45. 2 points
    One of the benefits of creating box dioramas is the ability to control perspective. The topic of forced perspective is covered in both Shep Paine's How to Build Dioramas and Ray Anderson's The Art of the Diorama. In my diorama Witness, I attempted to create forced perspective outside the "box" so to speak. The diorama was inspired by the movie Close Encounters of a Third Kind and a modeling theme of my particular IPMS chapter to create something from the movies. I envisioned a witness to the event who has pulled his car off the highway in the mountains and observes a roadblock on the highway below and below that (on the desert floor) the alien craft by the highway with two army tanks next to it. But above this witness, is another witness who is on a desert dirt bike and spies on him through a pair of binoculars. The diorama is on four levels which represent four scales: 1/12 for the man on the dirt bike on the top level of the diorama, 1/87 HO scale for the witness who has pulled off the road on the next level, 1/160 N scale for the government roadblock on the next level and 1/220 Z scale for the tanks and the huge alien craft. The viewer looks at the diorama from the perspective of the 1/12 scale man on the dirt bike and sees the cars and highway become smaller and smaller as it is farther in the distance. Below is a side view of the various levels and the view from the viewer's perspective. An "out of the box" experience! (See planning this diorama on our site at https://midnightoilstudios.org/2018/05/13/witness/)
  46. 2 points
    I did find the Batmobile on eBay for a decent price. My local Hobby Lobby has listed the Tamiya Gama Goat for $12.49 on clearance. I bought two. They were regularly $49.99 so it was 75% off.
  47. 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.
  48. 2 points
    Latest finished piece.
  49. 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.
  50. 2 points
    Hey Ron...First off...I think you'll enjoy build scale cars, if you like 1/1 cars. OK..to try and answer your questions... Personally... I strip all the chrome(using concentrated laundry bleach...Clorox is what I use) from every build that I do. The Chrome that's applied to most of the the kits are way too brite for the smaller scales. I will leave the chrome for 1/12th and larger builds. To re-chrome....I shoot a Black or Blue High gloss base coats. Alclad II has Chrome that has a little learning curve. You can use Alclad polished Aluminum as it works good too. I also use ALSA Mirror Chrome which has a small learning curve but does not rub off when dry. If you want to leave the chrome and just touch up where it was cut from the sprue...then you can use a small paint brush( 3 0 or smaller) and a dab of Model Master Chrome Silver #FS 17178. Model Master has another chrome paint but it's not as good. I've used both and this one works the best between the two. Put a small amount of paint in a mixing pallet and add a drop or two of Lacquer thinner. Don't mix it in just let the thinner hit the edges of the paint and then load you brush and apply to the spot on the part. NOW...since MOLOTOW has come out with 3 paint pens and a refill bottle...all one has to do is just touch the part with it and it's rechromed. But...the small down side of it is..it takes at least 3-4 days for it to dry. It's is remarkable how well this paint looks when applied. If you can work with the dry time...then Molotow is the way to go. You can do a search on the web and watch a a few videos that's out there on it. Well Ron...I hope I've shed a little light on the chrome thing for you. Just remember there's no right or wrong..it's what ever works best for you. Gary
×
×
  • Create New...