Schmitz

I'm no expert, but there is a fellow in my chapter that does a great job of this and has tried to show me the techniques for painting model car upholstery (he does use artists oil paints - if you're using model-paints or acrylics this might not help...) Best part is he has a number of write-ups and short videos posted on the "planetfigure" and "armorama" websites. Take a look here (I think he mentions the colors he used on the 2nd page of this thread): http://planetfigure.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13410 If you do a web search for figure painting articles by "Mongo Mel" (his user-name) you'll likely find other useful stuff. Good luck! Don

Smurf, no offense taken; I'm an opinionated SOB myself... I was a little curious, so I did some web surfing to read reviews of 2001. They take either your position or mine (about 2/3s agree with you - its clearly a love-it-or-hate-it type of film). I also researched Kubrick a bit; he is known for taking a book and telling a very different story in a film, while keeping the same characters and events as the book. Writers who have worked with him generally aren't completely happy (e.g. Stephen King and Anthony Burgess); even Clarke seems to have somewhat mixed feelings about this collaboration. I found a claim that many SF writers at the time thought Clarke had been "used" by Kubrick. Kubrick's 2001 clearly broke a lot of new ground and helped legitimize SF movies. Without it we may never have seen Blade Runner or Star Wars or Alien. On the other hand, if Kubrick had made a slightly more conventional and accessible film, we may have gotten even more quality SF sooner, rather than the niche films that only true-SF-geeks can enjoy. I wonder what 2001 would be like if Ridley Scott or James Cameron had made it... Note that I don't hate 2001, I just don't enjoy watching it (even though the images are technically awesome and I still enjoy re-reading the book) so I can't really call it a favorite. Nor is Marooned one of my favorites; I just used it as an example of a more conventional SF film made at roughly the same time as 2001, that tried to be a quality film (I don't think its fair to call it made-for-TV-quality), and that I can still watch without nodding off halfway through. Keeping me awake for 2 hours after a long day at work correlates well with my enjoying a film. The reason I questioned 2001 showing up on so many favorites lists is that I suspected a lot of the people putting it in their top-5 hadn't seen the film since a late-night showing at a college theater several decades ago (2001 doesn't show up on cable very often and even finding it on DVD is not easy). Before I got the DVD a few years ago I hadn't seen for it a long time, and I had a rose-tinted memory of it that lasted to just after the apeman tossing the bone into the air... Don

I never saw 2001 in Cinerama - all the movies I saw until roughly 1980 were on the (single) big screen of a small town movie theater that (judging by the layers of coke dried on the floor) was built sometime in the 40s. First time I saw it on a big screen was probably early 80s, at a just-off-campus theater that specialized in showing "cult" films to broke and slightly inebriated college students. For me, it was a real let-down. The special effects were awesome and way ahead of their time, but the characters were flat, the dialog almost non-existent and unbelievable, the lack of any sort of narrative/scene-setting seemed completely unnecessary. As a movie it was like a Warhol painting of a soup can: no matter how good the technique it was still just a soup can... Knowing that Clarke and Kubrick had worked together on the book and film, I really expected more of the ideas in the book to make it into the film. Maybe Clarke's ideas were too subtle (the relationship between intelligence and machines - in the book the monoliths are clearly machines) or too controversial for the times (questioning the existence of God), but I'm suspicious that Kubrick was just using Clarke for "cover" to do over the top, psychedelic visuals (it was the 60s) using "its science fiction" as a way to rationalize whatever he did. I didn't mean to compare the effects in Marooned to 2001; but for me it worked much better as a story, with believable characters and a clear plot. Don

I think it is called "gradient paper". You may find it at an art or scrapbook store. This place and probably lots of other photography store have a professional product called "graduated background" that is what you want but seems expensive. When I was web-searching for places with gradient paper, I found a suggestion to use photoshop to create a gradient image and have Kinkos print it on plain paper to whatever size you want. Don

I've got an offer from someone to pass a message on, so I'm set now. Thanks for all the replies! Don

If anyone knows Gary and could get a message to him I'd appreciate it - please let me know... Thanks! Don

Yes - they moved a few years back. The barn used to be a hardware store - its in the retail section of a residential neighborhood, only a few miles from where it used to be in Dormont, but I'd need a GPS to get between the two locations. I live in the north suburbs, AB Charles is in the south, and I have to cross 2 rivers and go through a tunnel to get there from my house - which by Pittsburgh standards means it might as well be in West Virginia - so I don't get there very often. I'm not a regular enough customer to follow the in-store politics; but for a long time it was AB Charles & Son. The father died a few years ago and Scott (the Son) took over and followed through on his plans to expand (another rumor had it they lost the lease on the old store - I'm not sure). The new store doesn't have the narrow aisles and the long accumulated film of cigarette smoke of the original - whether you see that as a plus or minus is up to you... Strangely, my wife is a bigger fan of AB Charles than I am - she can always do my Christmas shopping there in about 10 minutes - and the guys at the counter always know exactly what I want from the sketchiest description. Don

I'd heard about the Spare Time shop for years and finally made it there a few years ago while on a long business trip. Definitely a good shop, but I think AB Charles in Pittsburgh is at least as good. Esther's Hobby in Millvale (a Pittsburgh suburb) is also good - not as big or well stocked as AB Charles but its in an old neighborhood and building with lots of character. If you go early, check out the P&G diner across the street for breakfast. Don

If you're flying Southwest into Phoenix (I think PHX is one of their hubs, and I've always had good service from them), they'll let you pay $10 extra to guarantee you a spot in the first group onto the plane - still behind those paying business fare, put ahead of about 80% of everyone on the plane. If you're cheap like me, you can check-in online exactly 24 hours before your flight and be close to the front of the line, but the $10 extra seems worthwhile if you want to be sure to get an overhead bin for your model case. Don

Still another reason to build old kits is the variety of subjects; the high-end kits are mostly wildly popular subjects (ala Tamiya's 1/32 Spitfire). Being cheap and plentiful means no-worries when you decide to pull out the razor saw and attempt some major plastic surgery. Finally, some of the older kits are surprisingly accurate and well engineered (probably because the hobby was still popular enough back-when to justify putting lots of work going into the design and tooling). Some of the Revell real-space kits that were done in the 60s are really nice, as are a lot of the Monogram and AMT car kits from the mid-80s through early-90s. Even if the fit isn't perfect, I like having separate parts to work with and knowing that there actually is a scale carburetor on the motor, even though it can't be seen under the air-cleaner. Sometimes it seems that Tamiya's goal is to mold an entire car/plane/etc in 3 or 4 (extremely intricate and detailed) parts that seamless snap together, reducing the entire hobby to an exercise in masking and painting. Don

James, Others have noticed this - it seems to be some weird interaction between the latest Invision software and at least some versions of browser (some of the newer versions of Firefox seem to have the problem). You could try Google's "chrome" or even plain old Internet Explorer (both seem to work OK for me on this otherwise horrible Vista laptop...) Don

Are you talking about looking at digital pictures on a monitor? I was just reading that a typical (cheap) LCD computer screen has really poor color reproduction. Even the high-end "professional" displays need to be calibrated to get the colors "right". Don

I found this page with a web search: http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=186679 If you poke around on their forum there are several threads on the topic. Most common suggestions for thining were plain water and water-mixed-with-isopropol. This is a gaming-miniatures site, so they may not have to worry about masking - but presumably their pieces get some amount of handling. Don

Thanks Ed - this is still one of my all-time favorite models (and it makes the point that when it comes to highlighting and weathering, less really is more). I have a similar picture sitting on the disk of a dead PC - this reminds me to buy the cable I need to try to recover that stuff. Don

Human sight is more complex than simple optics. Look at a 1/72 scale plane from 2 feet away and thanks to stereoscopic vision your brain knows its is only 2 feet away (not 144) - so it expects to see detail. Look at a real aircraft with butt-joined panels from 50 feet away, and since your vision is good at recognizing lines it will see the panel lines even though there is no measurable gap or difference in color - your vision picks out the tiny discontinuity in the way light reflects at the edge. Highlighting panel lines and painting in shadows and other such trickery is sort of like heavy stage-makeup on actors in a play: it lets us see what we expect to see under unusual lighting conditions and viewing distance. Human viewers will think such a model looks more real, even though a camera will think otherwise. BTW, one of the coolest things I've seen at a model contest was a dio of an aircrew getting a plane ready for an airshow: some of the little guys had buckets of paint outlining the panel lines, another was leaving the air out of the tires so they "bulged", another guy was sanding the paint of the leading edges of the wing. Had me laughing out loud. Don

You probably need a note if it is attached too, otherwise a judge may try to pick it up and find half the model in his hand and the landing gear, tires, etc. still glued to the base I still get a chuckle remembering one of our local shows where someone entered a plane without enough nose-weight (or maybe it shifted in transit?) and they "fixed" it by gluing the nose wheel to the table. You can imagine how that turned out... Don

I've seen a few members in my local club hang-up the hobby over the years. A few of them were really top-notch modelers. In every case I think there were either outside interests or pressures that kept them from putting time into the hobby the way they wanted to. One got into racing (including doing track time in his own car), another became interested in civil war re-enacting. One of them had "gone commercial" doing resin-casting and commission work, and was putting lots of time into modeling trying to earn a living. In every case I think they were happier after quitting, and some of them have drifted back but are not nearly as active as when they quit. The modelers I know that have been at it the longest - and most successfully - have a number of interests besides modeling: an interest in history, or old cars, or movies, etc. Often those other interests relate to their modeling interests, but they're a change of pace. Most of them only finish a few (1-3) models a year. The other thing I've noticed is that if its too much work to model - because you have to move stuff around to get to your workbench, or you don't have the right tools, etc. then its easy to find something else to do. If thats the case maybe take a break and spend some time fixing up your workspace. In the end its a hobby, and when it stops being fun you'll find all sorts of reasons to spend time on something else. Don

Sometimes I'm able to pull a damaged decal off with masking tape. Just use a small, fresh piece of tape, rub it over the decal to be removed then pull it off. Usually a few applications will take the decal off. If it leaves tiny bits of decal behind they can be scrubbed off with a Q-tip dipped in Solvaset. This doesn't always work, but its hard to screw things up any more by trying it. Don

My daughter goes to school in Philly, so I get to drive across the state several times a year to move her in, move her out, etc. A friend who knew I was going this weekend gave me a pointer to this place: Simeone Museum If you're into vintage racing cars, this place has some great stuff: GT40 MkII and MkIV, a Cunningham, a "hippy" 917, a Daytona Cobra, '58 Ferrari Testa Rosa (just like the new Hasegawa kit), a Maserati, assorted Jags, Bugattis, gull-wing Mercedes - lots more. The only down side is that cars are displayed against the wall of the building so you can't walk around and shoot photos from all angles and the fact that their website is so good you can see most everything they have online. Definitely worth a visit if you're in the area. Its located a few miles from the Philadelphia airport - you can get to it without having to drive through downtown Philly (one of my least favorite things to do!) They weren't very busy when I was there - the lady at the desk said they opened less than a year ago and hinted that there weren't a lot of visitors. Intersting thought: the building is basically a warehouse - it has a big space in the middle that they use for special displays (they have a vintage motorcycle collection there now - at least 30 bikes) - it would be an awesome place for a model car contest - and the museum might actually appreciate the exposure! Don

Thanks for all the info (keep it coming!). I'm used to wet-sanding paint with micro-mesh cloths/pads to get a high-gloss finish, and one of the advantages of that technique is being able to remove dust, runs, etc. Mirco-mesh is intended for polishing scratches out of plexiglass, and its supposed to work - without gumming up - on (well cured) water-based acrylics. There was a fellow named Bill Cunningham (from Florida I think) who made the cover of Scale Auto a few times back in the 90s who claimed to polish Future over acrylic paint. Some of the big name car modelers pooh-poohed using floor wax - according to them only real automotive paint could achieve a show-winning finish - but that didn't seem to stop Bill from winning at a lot of big shows. But even on hard-drying paints like lacquer the micro-mesh takes a light touch - if you sand through to bare plastic often the only way to recover is strip the whole body and start over. Having a smooth paint surface to start with helps. Gloss rattle-can paint always orange peels, at least a little - with the micro-mesh pads you end up having to take off about half of the paint thickness just to get to smooth. I'm hoping the airbrush will give me an edge by putting down a smoother finish to start with - then you can start with finer grits of micro-mesh. Sounds like a bit of a learning curve to get high-gloss with acrylics, but even if I stick with lacquer for just the body and use acrylics for everything else it would make life easier (assuming I can spray the acrylic in my work-room, and only go off to the garage to spray the smelly stuff). I'm going to stock up on some Tamiya acrylics at the Nats and see what I can do with it. Don

I haven't seen the spit trick, but have seen 5 min epoxy used as a filler on wing-roots and similar big gaps: goop the epoxy on and wait for it to just start to stiffen, then smooth it out and clean up the excess with q-tips dipped in isopropal alcohol. Plan on using a few q-tips - throw them away once they get covered with epoxy. I usually get a big sticky mess when trying to use 5min epoxy for anything, but the alcohol does magic. Don

I mostly build cars - and admit to being a very slow modeler. Until now most of my painting has been with Krylon spray cans. For car models the Krylon was great; the paint was incredibly easy to use, cheap, readily available in some of the more commonly used colors (flat and semi-gloss black, aluminum, white, various grays), and the gloss colors worked well with a polishing kit. Only if I was stuck for a color match would I pull my airbrush setup out of the box. For ventilation, I do all my spraying (Krylon and air-brush) in my garage with the door open (and the car parked outside). As you may have discovered or read about in another thread, Krylon has been reformulated to be "greener". One result is the paint goes on heavy, another is the colors have changed (the new "matte aluminum" looks nothing like the old "dull aluminum" - its a grainy bright-silver disaster). I'm thinking its time to take the plunge: switch to water based acrylics, make a more permanent airbrush setup - ideally in my modeling room (a spare bedroom on the 2nd floor of my house) and figure out how to really use this stuff. I'm also hoping if its more convenient to paint, I'll also get more modeling done. So I'm wondering : Is there a consensus as to who's acrylics work the best (I'd like to stick with a single brand if possible)? Especially if I want high-gloss finishes on a car model? Will one of the small spraybooths (I'm thinking a "peace keeper") control the overspray and odor of acrylics enough to use it in a finished room (don't want to repaint the walls and carpet) in the main living area of my house? Any advice/experience would be greatly appreciated! Don

I've got a pair of very thin needle nose pliers from Sears (bought many years back) - the jaws are about 1/16 wide and 2 inches long and smooth-faced. They do most of the jobs a tweezers will do and seem to give a little more control over the part you're holding. Don

For those who have built this kit, I'm trying to decide between: - Gluing the interior bucket and firewall to the chassis, installing the engine, doing all the engine detailing and then try to slide the whole assembly into the body. - Following the directions (glue the interior bucket into the body, then glue the chassis to the bottom of the interior, then do the final underhood detailing with the model totally assembled). The first approach seems more likely to get everything lined up, but I'm worried about actually getting the chassis+interior to fit into the body without a lot of prying that might damaging the paint. Any tips? Don

David, Not exactly what you're looking for, but my daughter got me a small but nicely detailed Serenity Christmas tree ornament. It comes with a little desk stand too. You could probably do some super detailing and repaint it if you want that "I made it" feeling of accomplishment I found it for sale at amazon (a little pricey - I'm guessing my daughter paid less somewhere as she is a starving-art-student): http://www.amazon.com/Firefly-Serenity-Veh...3505&sr=8-4 I'd also love to find a kit; I might even try doing figures if any of the characters are available in resin (Jayne carrying Vera would be wayyy cool...) Don Don