Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/28/2018 in all areas

  1. 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.
  2. 3 points
    A simple graphic illustration of why Telford works for The UK but not here.
  3. 2 points
    Kudos for one of the Head Judges and NCC member for monitoring and stepping up to answer a rules question in a concise manner. This gives us an authoritative determination of the rule, as opposed to the rest of us offering our opinions. I hope more Head Judges follow this example! GIL
  4. 2 points
    It's now halfway through March and I'm finally able to post something finished. These are my two latest finished armor models . This first one is of the Military Wheels 1/72 scale Soviet SG-122. It's a 122mm cannon mounted on a PzIII chassis and hull and covered with a casemate. It was a stopgap project that only had a bout a hundred or so built before the SU-122 was accepted: The next one is the Trumpeter 1/72 scale Russian SA-6 Gainful. I made this as an East German machine that was repainted with the West German insignia after the German re-unification: My apologies for the poor pics. These look better in person. Well, that's all I have completed so far. Stay tuned, I have more to come.
  5. 2 points
    Here’s an original that I stripped and rebuilt as best I could, then re-painted.
  6. 2 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.
  7. 2 points
    As one of the individuals involved, and as a proponent for Open Judging, I read the NCC's summary. While the mechanics of a possible Open Judging method were not fully developed at this time, I see several flaws in the NCC's assessment of how they believe Open Judging works. Here's my counterpoint to the NCC: There is no "Ideal" or "Standard" (other than the Contest Rules) that needs to be met in order for anyone to enter models. You can enter as many models as you wish as long as you pay the entry fee, the same as has always been done. Models are judged using the very same criteria set that is currently employed by IPMS. Rather than counting flaws and making cuts, each model is evaluated as to how well the modeler met the criteria. Nothing has been said about skill levels. Had these been mentioned, I would suggest that it would be initially left to the entrant to determine their own skill level. Once they've won Golds at their current level, they get promoted to the next level. But that's step 1,278. We're on Step 1. The judges would still be your peers within IPMS--It isn't as if IPMS will all of a sudden start using some "Intergalactic Model Judging Guild" to judge the show. Because the models aren't compared to each other, the judging can begin as soon as the first models reach the display room--they get placed on the display tables and are judged as they sit. Done properly, judges will be able to pick what shifts they want to judge, rather than having to cram it all into a few hours on Friday night. As soon as each model has the required number of judging sheets, it can be tabulated and the award determined. Class Awards, Best-of-Show, and Special Awards are judged as they always have been--all the Gold winners in a given class are compared and a "winner" determined. The work is spread out over several days. Start a Sign Me Up page or make other efforts to get volunteers to assist in tabulating the data, same as we do for other show volunteers. I'm sure there are folks who want to see how the sausage is made after the judging itself is done. IPMS/USA designs a standard, non-show specific Field Award (medals or challenge coins, ideally) to be used at ALL National Conventions. Order in bulk, the ones that don't get used this year are saved for the next year, or the following year, etc. Put that onus on IPMS/USA and the NCC. This will actually save money--ask me about the boxes of unneeded field awards left over from the 2016 Convention sitting in my garage. They cannot be re-used as contest awards--most of them will have had the plaques torn off and the wood used as model bases by the time they're all gone. In effect IPMS/USA tossed that money in the county landfill. Only the Class Awards, Best of Show, and Special Awards need to be designed and tailored to the current Convention's theme. That work will still fall on the host chapter. Not everyone wants a 'contest'. Many modelers want to be informed/educated, and many others certainly do just want to show off what they've done in a Display Only format. A model that doesn't win 1st, 2nd, or 3rd under the current system doesn't meet the IPMS Standard. While every model should have at least one comment, there is no requirement to comment on each model in the room. These comments are quick notes--"There's a seam on the right wing", not short versions of "War and Peace". Dragging out the "every model wins a trophy" argument is beneath you, Mark, and I wouldn't have expected to see it. Should the membership opt for Open Judging, it won't happen overnight. I estimated a five- to seven-year implementation plan when it was discussed, starting at the local level for a few years, then migrating to the Regional level. By the time it gets rolled out on a National level, most of the bugs will have been discovered and the wrinkles ironed out. Like anything new, it won't always go to plan--I doubt our current system was seamless and foolproof when it was first used, either. But the benefits of a properly designed and implemented Open Judging system--specifically the score sheet and feedback--outweigh the growing pains I know will happen. Ralph Nardone President, IPMS/Mid-Carolina Swamp Fox Modelers IPMS #33984 AMPS #2540
  8. 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.,
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. 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:
  12. 2 points
    Now Blue Oyster Cult is stuck in my head! Great build! Dave
  13. 2 points
    The "moving venue" is, in my view, an excellent approach. As Kevin mentioned, attendance at the convention can be built in to the "family summer vacation". Wife and I have visited all fifty states/state capitols/multiple National Parks and Monuments, State Parks, beaches, mountains, prairie land, and historic sites of all kinds as we travel to and from a Nats. This is a definite advantage that the current system has over a permanent and fixed location, or even two or three fixed locations. I would suggest that having a fixed location would result in the need for the hiring of a professional staff to plan and execute many of the administrative functions at a convention. Some immediate effects would be 1. conventions become more expensive with higher costs being placed on the attendees, and 2. a huge burden being placed on the nearby IPMS Chapters who would, year after year, be called upon to provide staff to run the convention activities. 3. Fewer participants would attend from those areas farther away from the convention, an issue that we currently experience, but that would be multiplied year after year as those out-of-towners loose interest in returning to the same city, or 2 or 3 cities, year after year. 4. I don't believe any research has been done in this area, but a sedentary venue would most probably result in a concentration of attendees within a single day's driving distance from the event, and an unintended concentration of winning entries from that same radius of attendance. Over a number of years such an issue could have a very negative impact on IPMS. The current system allows for any chapter, in any part of the country to offer a bid for one of two convention dates, either two years out or three years out. In many cases, bid preparation results in a number of chapters working together, leading to cooperation in other areas among those chapters in issues not related to a bid. The current system creates opportunities for attendees in the nearby area to volunteer their time during the convention, serving in staff positions. The fact that the convention will rotate to another part of the country means that these volunteers will not be expected to serve every year in these roles, and that others who cannot travel long distances to conventions will have the opportunity to serve on staff. The current system does not favor those living in an area that is close to the convention site year after year, benefiting from lower transportation costs. That particular happenstance rotates through the IPMS population due, in fact, to not having a permanent location. Clearly, my personal preference is to continue the current system which allows for bids from any chapter, located anywhere, relying on the Host chapter(s) to plan and execute a successful and enjoyable convention. And, at the same time, providing attendees the opportunity to visit a part of the country they've not visited before, or visit that part again due to the variety of sites and activities which call for a 2nd visit. I'm very much looking forward to going to the Chattanooga Convention in July/August of 2019. Wife and I have not visited Nooga and we've already got a list of places to eat and things to do on our way there, while on site, and on the way home.
  14. 2 points
    Alcohol! Two parts single malt scotch to 1 part water chilled to 17 degrees Fahrenheit.
  15. 2 points
    Found a model of the Spook almost a year ago & finally finished it. The colors are not according to any scheme. If you do a google search, you'll even find him wrapped in a British flag & bowler. The blue is Tamiya Flat Blue; the cape & mask are Model Masters Gunship Gray; his hat band is Model Masters Light Gull Gray; and his hair is Tamiya rattle can primer. I mean, he's 57 years old. He has a right to gray hair. The glossy finish is Future or whatever they call it these days. Had to show that I could actually finish something even if it did only have 4 parts.😊
  16. 2 points
    To make the wings he used elements from a different model and plastic plates.
  17. 2 points
    Thanks Gil, I hope, however, that someone will help me and will go to the museum and take some photos of this plane, or maybe someone has them? Unfortunately, I can not make it out of Poland too far for a trip to the museum, I do not have so much money for such a madness. But once, who knows, it will be possible to organize such a trip, such a dream of life, see aerial museums in the USA. For now, I hope that he is a modeler who is interested in the American air races of the Golden Age and will help me. As for the idea using elements from Wedell Williams 44, he is very good, I have such ideas from the beginning. I mainly use the fuselage and maybe the engine, the wing fins and the engine cover need to be redone. in the hull also need to make many changes because in the model 45 the hull is bigger and has a slightly different shape. But quite similar, so it will be suitable for modifications. I once made a 1/32 model Laird Turner LT 14 "Meteor" with a larger model (1/30) so this time I will do with a smaller bit bigger. As for interior furnishings, it is very poor and simplified in the Williams Bross model, so it is not a good model. In addition, the hull frame in model 45 had to be significantly different because the wing structure was different and additionally had a retractable landing gear. This is how the hull construction looks like: I used two models of Williams Bross 1/32 type 44 "Red lion" for this modification
  18. 2 points
    Dak, you make a valid point. However, I would suggest that it isn't limited to the IPMS/USA. The current "I'm Offended" culture that has developed in this country has to be a major factor. Keep in mind that practically anything that exists has the potential to offend anyone, but it has gotten completely out of control. Consider the efforts to make the Washington Redskins football team change their name because 'Redskins" is offensive to one small tribe. Other people are offended by the use of certain words, while others by actual historical events. Look at the complaints that started with objections to the Confederate Battle Flag...actually the Battle Flag of Northern Virginia...and expanded to statues of Confederate heros and schools that were named for men who had virtually no connection to the Confederacy other than fighting for the South. Political views are now subject to similar bias. Liberal viewpoints are widely publicized, while those of a conservative bent are castigated or banned. I was unable to market an article to a magazine I wrote for because the model in question....a Peterbilt 377 with an American Bald Eagle w/crossed American & Confederate flags on the air dam....was refused because "it might offend someone". If I did that model today as an ebook, I would be forced to apologize for it, accused of being a racist and required to remove the ebook from the marketplace. And if you want to get an idea of just how hypersensitive people are getting...as well as ignorant...I very recently had a magazine article corrected by my editor because "I've never heard of it, so I'm sure no one else has ever heard of it!" What was it? Believe it or not, a Mexican Jumping Bean. Instead, the editor changed Mexican Jumping Bean to simply 'jumping bean", thereby identifying every bean on the planet as a jumping bean! And if you think all of the above is a recent development, it's just the extreme result. Tony Weddel, a deceased aviation artist and my friend, quit doing heavy combat aviation art back in the late '70s or early '80s because he could no longer sell the art or prints. Why? Because people didn't want to purchase art that depicted violence. Result? He wound up doing pretty paintings of aircraft against storm clouds or toned down combat...unless a client specifically requested heavy combat. That, by the way, leads to your comment about viewing scenes of violence in model dioramas. Incidentally, it's also the reason why I've never created a crucifixion diorama of my own....it would offend virtually everyone who saw it. I have no idea where this is going to end, but if you build models, dioramas, articles and/or books for a living, it's already having an impact on what you can produce without offending someone. And it doesn't matter if it's a group or a single person. Dak, in case you're wondering, I'm 76 and I have no more problem viewing real life scenes than you do. I knew a preacher who I offered a copy of my P-38 CD-ROM to, warning him that it had a lot of nose art images containing pinup or semi-nude figures. His response? It's history. It'll be interesting to see what kinds of responses I get to this little tirade. Richard
  19. 2 points
    Anyway, here is my last acquisition I got last year as a Christmas gift to myself. I didn't post it above because for some reason the camera could not focus on the box and all my pics were blurry. This time, after considerable effort; I have a pic to show: I had wanted that since it came out. I figured it was time since I had Christmas money to burn. I hope to get started on it this year.
  20. 2 points
    What's an allowance?
  21. 2 points
    Lousy modelers need an organization to help them rationalize their lousy results! l
  22. 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.
  23. 1 point
    John.....This is just a personal guess, but my understanding is that the purpose is to find out whether GSB or 1-2-3 is preferred among those who DO care. After all, if you have no strong opinion, you're going to simply go with the flow when you attend, and aren't necessarily interested in the direction of IPMS over the next decade (and probably aren't voting in the first place). If you believe that one or the other is better for IPMS, or if you simply like one better than the other, then your vote needs to be recorded one way or the other. As for having it as needed to actually place a vote in order to vote in the general election, I think that's meant to (again) avoid apathy. Only a fraction of the membership will vote either on-line or by mail. If you allow people to abstain or cast a "don't care" vote; IPMS learns nothing as to the preferences of 1-2-3 vs. GSB. I can see where some people like yourself feel like they're being forced to enter into a fight they don't care about. But, I think if you stop and consider it more as a referendum on whether we should change for the future or continue with the status quo for the future; you can come to an easy decision personally. GIL
  24. 1 point
    Here’s another save from someone’s childhood (before pic at end). Stripped, fixed in spots and 100% hand painted back to glory...no airbrushing here. Here’s a few progress pics. Tks for looking and your comments are welcome.
  25. 1 point
    I could have titled this post as "The Rest of the Story." In the November/December 2018 issue of the IPMS Journal, my article on building the AMT 1/25 kit of the 1972 Chevrolet Blazer was printed. Along with the story of building the Blazer, there was a secondary short amount of text on building the MPC Car Trailer as found in the old MPC 1973 Chevrolet Caprice Classic and a brief comment on the car that would be on the trailer. In the magazine, you saw this picture: Now you get to see what was missing . . . because it wasn't done. Now it is. Comments welcome. Ed
  26. 1 point
    Wow, you did some outstanding and unique models Pete! Sensational work! I think I've seen the six-wheeled Marlboro car once. Gil, that submarine was a stroke of genius! With all the models I've built in my life, I think I only have about three or four unique and different models. This first one was a modification of the Tirpitz into a "what-if" modern ship... complete with a helicopter deck! Aside from that, all I have are the Japanese Zero egg plane I did for a one-hour build contest. And yes, I did finish that in one hour as you see it in the pic. My prize was a 1/32 scale Visible P-51 Mustang. ...and the rival set from the anime movie "Porco Rosso" which isn't that unusual, except the Savoia S-21 never existed. Other than that, there are these movie and TV cars along with two Tom Daniel's designs. That's about the extend of my unusual models in my collection.
  27. 1 point
    Hi, Peter, I would say you have quite an imagination. I liked every one of these simply because you did not repeat yourself when building them. Excellent quality and details. Thanks for sharing. Ed
  28. 1 point
    Welcome to IPMS/USA! You mentioned having been a mech on USMC H-34's in the early 1960's. Did that perhaps include the USMC H-34 squadron TDY at Danang in 1963? Our C-123 squadron was there on the other side of the runway, on a temporary duty six month "Joint Training Exercise" from Pope AFB NC. At the time we joked that our "joint training" was mainly providing live targets for VC practice AAA ....and at low altitude and about the world's slowest airplane to shoot at, they still had trouble hitting anything. But as we all know they got better, so the "joint training" must have been effective.
  29. 1 point
    Thank you, Mr. Filippone! I did, in fact, sail through my civics classes with flying colors! So, I'm putting your post down as one vote against using my response as toilet paper. 🤣🤣🤣
  30. 1 point
    Greetings The two replies offer more "definition " than anything in the original posting. Thank you Barry and Gil for clear and detailed information. Your replies shall be 100% more effective in informing members of some of the details regarding "Open Judging" and 1-2-3 Judging. As President of Three Rivers IPMS, I will do my best to ensure our club members are reading this forum and actively involved in this discussion. A. IPMS E-Board please try for an open mind regarding this subject.The survey looks to be a step. B. Thank you Gil and Barry for your time. Regards Bill Dedig
  31. 1 point
    Nicely written tip! Thanks for the link! GIL
  32. 1 point
    Lots of work completed on the AR-196A. First, assembled wings and found that the fit to the fuselage has an issue. There is a large gap on the port side. The other side and bottom also have small gaps. These were all filled, filed and sanded. Then the floats were assembled and detailed with photo etch parts. The oil cooler was replaced with photo etch parts and added some more photo etch details to the fuselage. The rear machine gun was then detailed, painted, and mounted. The dolly was then assembled and painted. I painted the “wood” to look weathered and aged. Painted a brown base, then dry brushed tan and finally lightly dry brushed light gray. Once the paint was dry I used dark brown and black pastels to add weathered and dirt to the surface. Now working on painting the base coat on the aircraft. The first color of the scheme is done. Letting it dry overnight before I mask and paint the other color. Many more photos can be viewed on my blog at https://davidsscalemodels.com/build-log/1-48-arado-ar-196a/
  33. 1 point
    Attempting to get back to actively building with the old Monogram F9F-5P recon Panther. Planning to mark it as VC-61/VFP-61. Will have to finagle the markings from other sheets as the kit only comes with Marine squadrons. Good kit for its age. Not very many parts. Certainly not up to the detail of the Kitty Hawk Cougar or Banshee. I made 1 major error. I glued the upper halves to the lower wing before installing the lower wing to the fuselage. The instructions read to glue the bottom half of the wing to the completed fuselage. I think I've salvaged it by cutting the port wing off. It will require a little putty work to correct. Won't do that again. The initial primer work is done. Will assemble this weekend & shoot the 1st coat of Dark Sea Blue. Had hoped to have it ready for Blizzcon next weekend. Don't think I'll make it.
  34. 1 point
    It's tough to make a criticism of a Nats convention hotel here in the USA without coming off as a bit whiny. We're simply at the mercy of the venue the host chooses to use. They, on the other hand are at the mercy of the "calculus" Nick describes in balancing costs vs. what we cheap model building convention goers are willing to pay (and we make Scotts look like drunken sailors! !) And, the E-board, who ultimately decides which host gets to throw the Nats is at the mercy of who bids, IF more than one host does for any particular year.... Are some hotels and "chains" better than others? Sure...and even within certain chains some franchise owners are better than others, so that's why one Marriott might not measure up to another. It's tough to beat Embassy Suites...I mean- FREE HAPPY HOUR and FREE BREAKFAST!?? But not every city/host has one of those available. And, some cities have great convention centers but NO connecting hotels, meaning we have to walk more than we want. And parking? Heck, we've been VERY fortunate for the most part so far....I paid $65+/day in downtown Philly this last summer (off site too)! I cannot recall any convention approaching that (yet). Want to talk Nats hotels? How about the MOTEL used in DC in the 80's? How about the Phoenix show hotel where we had to walk 3 blocks in 100+degrees to get to the convention center (but there were nude statues to cavort on along the way....)? Or the hotel (Oklahoma?) where the second floor on one side of the main lobby didn't connect to the 2nd floor on the OTHER side of the lobby (very sad story behind that one actually)? Or the downtown Miami hotel where you might not want to linger in the parking lot or tour the neighborhood it was in? Or the St. Louis hotel that had banquet rooms SO small that many of us had to watch the awards via closed circuit TV? And those are just MY experiences..... The solution is to simply reserve and stay where it suits you. While most modelers actually scrimp and save a few bucks by opting for a local motel and NOT staying at the convention hotel; you can always book yourself into a hotel with ALL the amenities you're seeking, even if it costs a few bucks more per night. Don't like walking? Find a cheaper motel and use the difference for cab fare back and forth. In other words, MAKE it work out so you get what you want or need when it's not handed to you. The bottom line is that every host does the best they can to give the best "bang for the buck". Some hosts are simply better off when it comes to a hotel chain and convention center combo. Others have to take what they can and make the best of it. I've never know ANY of them to not try to give us the best that they can for the price range we've all become accustomed to expect for a Nats. We're accustomed to "rock bottom" prices and we've actually been spoiled more often than not for those low prices! And as for working a "deal" with a chain.....that's been tried and tried. The sad truth is that IPMSUSA is not worth their time and effort, especially when they look at all of the other business conventions that use more room nights and less floor space than we do. We come with some baggage (space needs) that most conventions our size don't; and we just cannot compare or compete with the others. And then there's the fact we tip lousy.......so do NOT look for us to work any deal with anyone nationally anytime soon. I have to agree that in the end, it's the SHOW that sticks in my mind more than any hotel room much more often than not. And, even the shows with less than ideal hotels often seem to become funny stories and flavorful backdrops to those shows where we had to be inconvenienced a bit. GIL
  35. 1 point
    For me it was with transparent green from Vallejo mixed with future. SPRAY... not enough... SPRAY... not enough...SPRAY... ARRRGGHHH too much. 😞 😉
  36. 1 point
  37. 1 point
    Here it is. Finished it back in early December. The Paper belly tank is from the 1/72 Italeri P-47N kit Paint is RAF Dk Green over RAF sky gray. Modelmaster enamels with Testor's dullcote. Decals are Superscale 72-886 First time for me posting pictures on this forum. Thanks for your feedback back in October. Got 3rd in our local P-47 contest.
  38. 1 point
    Well, it's the second day of a new year and yesterday I actually finished a Shelf Queen of four years. This beastie fought me like the Boeing 737 did but I am more thrilled with the finish of this model that the other. I present to you my first model of 2019, the Heller 1/72 scale C-118 transport plane: It feels good to start the year with this thing out of what's left of my hair. Unlike the Boeing, I think I'll be taking this to contests. It most likely won't place, but it's gonna look great on the tables! Thanks all for looking in, comments are welcome!
  39. 1 point
    Actually, I am referring to some old hands more than newbies. Several old hands I know have come up sharp because they failed to keep up with the rule changes. One, who was a long time National attendee and vendor, found his model un-expectedly put into the dioramas. Dak
  40. 1 point
    Interesting to read the quite passionate differing posts in this thread.Judges at model competitions are 'Damned if they do and damned if they don't'. Some are very pernickety and others have a bit more of a liberal approach. Nothing wrong with either as far as I am concerned. Not keen on judges being encouraged to speak directly to modellers and give a verbal critique afterwards as (a) It can lead to unpleasantness (b) Judges give enough of their time to do the judging without having it prolonged by individual discussions afterwards. At the end of the day does it really matter that much whether your models win or not? I have placed models into competitions. You win a few and you lose a few because judging is subjective and it is just someone else's opinion after all. I certainly don't lose any sleep over a judge's decision about any of my models. A late very good friend of mine and past senior champion of many IPMS UK Nationals as they were back then had a nice philosophy about entering models into competitions. His take was 'No matter how your model is judged, it will be no better or no worse when you take your model off the table to when you placed it on the table'. Me? I am just a Serious Modeller Who Doesn't Take Himself Too Seriously.
  41. 1 point
    I found this overlay on MapPorn. Its missing a few countries, but it gives a general idea.
  42. 1 point
    Noel, I disagree with you on the Civil War PC stuff. I was just out at Barnes & Noble where I saw numerous magazines related to the CW. At least one had a Confederate flag prominent on the cover. I think your take is a bit tainted with over conservatism. Times change and the attitude of people change. I grew up in the heart of Civil War country. My great-grandfathers fought for the South. One was part of the militia that captured John Brown and stood guard on his body. But I think a large portion of the Confederate monuments SHOULD be taken down because they are used as rally points for the neo-nazis and KKK. The world lost the right to the swastila because of Hitler and company. America gave up the confederate flag when the KKK and others started using it as a symbol of terror and no one spoke out against it. Things like the changing name of the Redskins is a result of pubic pressure. If the people as a whole didn't care, there would be no change. It is not always mere correctness, but a sea change in public awareness. The pictures from Dachau changed the way many felt about Jews, the war, and racial superiority, in general. I have no problem with re-enactors, or models of the Confederacy. I don't have a big problem with models of aircraft flown by hardcore Nazis like Rudel. But it does make me angry that stuff related to Rudel can be displayed at a contest, but a scene depicting something like the train at Dachau in 1945 is forbidden. I think IPMS has often acted on the opinions of a tiny handful obsessed with not offending anyone. BTW, my family goes back before the Revolution, so if you aren't Native American, you're all immigrants. LOL I think Richard Marmo has some very good ideas. Posting shots from a contest on YouTube would be a way to go. Put up something every year showing the National and the works displayed would be a good way to go. Show the stuff as ART. Show the content of the vendor's rooms. This is the kind of thing which spikes people's interest. Dak
  43. 1 point
    It's what your wife took away from you after she caught you in the hobby shop again Mark.... GIL
  44. 1 point
    EJ, In the photography forum under "on the bench" there are more pics from when I started this kit back in 2014. I will add some other pictures soon. I used the Squadron "USS Wasp In Action" book for reference and internet photos. I don't know if thatSquadron book is still available. Thanks for looking. Mark, Thank you. This took on a life of it's own and I'm glad it is over. I enjoyed most of the time on it but it did get to me after awhile. Thanks Tony; always appreciated. Bill
  45. 1 point
    Yes, I introduced the other judging structures so that people could read for themselves the various ways scale models are judged. I'm willing to discuss methods other than IPMS, bu tin this case my reply would have been very heavily slanted away from the topic at hand. No harm, no foul, and I agree, it doesn't work for some folks. The comments about the people who project were not directed towards you at all...apologies if you thought they were directed at you. As for the rest, you "get it". Like you, I am able to judge pretty much any category at an IPMS show. Why? I build all types of models, and I have an understanding of the rules particular to those categories. It isn't difficult. It doesn't take a degree in Advanced Engineering to do. Honestly speaking, I prefer a Model Show (exhibition) to a Model Contest. But exhibitions without contests will never fly in the U.S.
  46. 1 point
    Meng 1/32nd Komet with Aries figures ( I think). Dak
  47. 1 point
    It has been a while since I have seen a thread this judgmental! Everyone builds for their own reasons and nobody shares your exact reasons for building. I will repeat that, nobody shares your exact reasons for building. There is a psychological theory that identifies this. It is called the illusion of central position. It says that we all believe that we are normal and everyone has the same experiences and beliefs as ours. This is the illusion or delusion if you will. Each of us builds to satisfy something internal and none of us is trying to satisfy the same thing. The "haters" group you mention are probably right-brained people. More artistic and creative. They enjoy creating something that doesn't exist. They don't care that it wouldn't work in the real world, only that it is from their imagination. A large portion of IPMS tend to be more right brained. More technical and analytic. They want things to be orderly and precise. Just look at IPMS judging criteria. The judging criteria are all about building technical skill with not the slightest nod to originality or pure creativity. It is quite rare in IPMS for a totally creative model to win except in a specific class. This has been a complaint from automotive builders for years. Artistry is not considered. I do not say any of this to be critical, only as an observation for the divide that separates us. To paraphrase, we are a people divided by a common hobby. Neither side is "right" for anyone other than themselves. Recognize is and get along. Try to force your opinions on others and suffer.
  48. 1 point
    Is glorious model of heroic space traveler of Soviet workers' paradise!
  49. 1 point
    Most of my attention for this build has been directed at the "victim" B-17 - Because of the windows, the interior was painted. When closed up you can't see in...🙄 More damage Zinc chromate color has been added as an undercoat in prep of the hair spray and salt techniques. A tube was added to act as a brace for the rod connecting it to the base/ Olive drab color added
  50. 1 point
    After every build I usually clean up around the desk, and I notice this little mini which had fallen on the floor and got covered by a box. She's Miss Pumpkin Witch, from The Predastore. Since Halloween is right around the corner I decided to move this model to the front of the line. The 1/35 mini is part of the pin-up limited edition series. Mine was number 18 of 200. The model comes in 3 parts - the body/pumpkin, the arm with the knife, and the hat. As usual it's starts with a two tone priming - And then a base coat. What you're seeing here are the stocks before trying a smoky color. That ended up not working and decided to just take it easy and make a very pale purple stockings - Here we have a few highlights on the pumpkin, skin and dress. I also started detailing her face. WOW it's tiny! Thanks for looking.
×
×
  • Create New...