Highlander

Takes me back to the golden age of science fiction and the covers of Popular Mechanics. Very well done.

Wow!

That is the theory. In practice, not always so. Which, after a jarring incident at Nats, is why I stopped judging for a decade or so.

I haven't kept up with the eternal -- "Pray tell...what is out of the box?" -- debate. Which always seems to morph into -- "If I (fill in the blank), is it still OOB?" Leading, of course, to --" If I build and Eduard ProfiPack and someone builds an Eduard Weekend kit, can they both be entered into an OOB category/". I thought that BKB was supposed to resolve all of that.

You raise a very good question. I see the issue, as a contest provider, about how to "bed down" the gargantuans. And it is not only size and weight. Power requirements have been an issue. The ability to judge, when a huge entry is covered by a glass case and the entrant, in spite of the rules, refuses to remove it. At one Nats, a huge, huge entry had to be placed in a distant corner of the contest room. The thing was about five feet high, had a footprint of about nine square feet, and must have weighed 30-50 pounds. The entrant had a meltdown, witnessed by a group of fascinated spectators, claiming that his entry would not be afforded the same security and ability to be fairly judged as the entries on the table. In some cases the power requirement has been resolved by a contest rule that all entries provide their own power. Sometimes resulting in battery packs on the floor under the table with wire bundles snaking around. Still, some folks show up asking which wind farm will be powering their entry. The glass case for a huge entry is not uncommon. And it is sometimes accompanied by the claim that the entry is so special that the case cannot be removed, even for judging. The general case is that entrants requiring special space, power, or covers must make prior arrangements with the contest director. The practice is that not everyone does so, claiming ignorance. All going to reinforce the stereotype of the entrants who don't read the registration, contest schedule, category, or judging rules.

Just went through the drill for another Con in another place. An ES with 150 rooms in the block. Multiple alternate hotels arranged. Sold out in six minutes. Before the block was released at least one person called the hotel front desk and booked a room block room, and then announced it to the world. Multiple folks with disabilities popped up explaining they had to be in the Con hotel. One wrinkle that has not shown up for IPMS is that folks were announcing the number of dogs they were bringing. That Con has gone through this same circus in the same ES for about six years. I have increasing hope that this Nats has finally broken the code.

A common technique, when facing a decision among alternatives that tend to the mutually exclusive, is to drive each argument to its logical extreme. In our case that would be a decision to have a society that is exclusively plastic or a society that is exclusively anything. In the former case, the models that are acceptable to the society would need to be plastic and plastic only -- in short, an absolute restriction. In the latter, the models that are acceptable to the society could be anything that anybody labels a "model" -- in short, no restriction whatsoever. I repeat -- arguments taken to the logical extreme. By examining the extremes, one can better evaluate the current situation and then consider where a future situation might best be. IPMS is not a a pure plastic society. And "anything goes" is not acceptable ... yet. I offer that IPMS is currently a mostly plastic model society. I also offer that IPMS, or, perhaps, ISMS, has been moving along the pure/anything continuum by increasingly relaxing the plastic standard. I observe that IPMS is now somewhere on the continuum where models that contain no plastic are quite acceptable. Paper has been mentioned. Gundams can be plastic but can also be snapped together and unpainted. Let me point out that Figures, where I hang my hat, have been a longstanding IPMS category commonly containing no plastic -- and requiring no construction. How far along the continuum to "anything goes" does IPMS want to travel? It seems that some voices feel that we haven't moved far enough. Arguments have been offered that some non-plastic efforts are difficult, requiring skill and technique. And, since the final result ends up looking quite spiffy, there should be a place for it in IPMS -- or ISMS -- or whatever. As stated earlier, I won't fall on my sword wherever along the continuum IPMS ends up. I am one with no interest in paper or pre-assembled or pre-painted models and don't care if I am pilloried for my lack of interest. I 'll pay attention to the mostly plastic models and ignore the rest. Whatever the Society is named. I do wonder when 3D printing will reach the point where one can buy the requisite plastic, liquid or powder grains, push the button, and create a model indistinguishable from the best product currently available. Or better -- no seam lines, no misalignment, angles accurate to the tenth of a degree, every rivet and handle perfect, and all surfaces thinned to scale. And I wonder how long it will take for technology to paint models, to include shading and weathering and chipping. I doubt the date will be far off.

The combination of the sculpting and painting of her hair is very, very good. As is the lighting on her face.

I agree with Paul's sentiment. If we are going to be a "all models for all people using all media" then "plastic" is not an accurate description of the Society. However. I was there when paper first showed up. The entrant wanted to know where he could enter his paper, pre-colored, pre-printed masterpieces. Our club had a hurried conclave and, with me against it, the paper maker was allowed to enter in whatever category that he wanted to. The winning argument was that he had come so far and tried so hard and was a good all-round guy, so we oughta let him enter. Judging was a nightmare ... plastic against paper. Where the paper entries met none of the IPMS judging criteria. He wanted to know why he hadn't won. Now paper is common. As are snap together Gundam and other plastic thingys. My voice is in the minority, but I feel that we should be a plastic modeling society -- maintaining our adjustments with vacuform and resin. I don't resonate with the "we need the entry fees" point of view. Or the "we need to be inclusive, not matter what is entered" argument. My point of view is not a fall on my sword position. I just ignore the paper and the pre-painted stuff.

Absolutely brilliant! Nice conceit. Oh, from the Cambridge Dictionary: conceit noun (COMPARISON) [ C ] literary a clever or surprising comparison, especially in a poem Other folks have clearly not stayed current with their Cervantes.

I just wanted to recognize the thinking that has gone into the reservation system(s) parameters. That thinking was reinforced by action addressing the reprobates who have already attempted to game the system. So far, the host's preparations are refreshing and encouraging. Two points. First, as I read things, the hotel reservation system is light years beyond what was routinely promised and routinely failed in the past. It does seems a bit beyond the charter of the host to dive deeply into each hotel's specific reservation system; their arrangements with the flagship hotel seem a giant step forward. Second, one of the issues in the past has been the "foot in the door" phenomenon -- folks making reservations and then manipulating them to the disadvantage of other attendees, the hosts, and IPMS. For example, the requirement for a minimum three day reservation should relieve the phenomenon of Friday and Saturday being entirely booked, blocking folks who want to make reservations for three, four, or five nights. It should also address those who make reservations for four or five nights, only to cancel all but one or two at the last second. And it should stabilize the count for the hotel's room night requirement.

I congratulate the host chapter(s) on their approach to making the Nats room block reservation process about as fair as it can be. Details on the Nats website. The thinking was innovative, addressing several problems endemic in the past. The process protects the host chapter from excessive cancellations that drop the room night count right before the Nats. As I read it, it will be difficult to game the system. I predict some wailing and whining and demands for preference ... from the usual suspects. I do hope the hotel and the chapter stick to their guns. Good work, guys.

Vos soupçons sont incorrects. C'est à cause de mes horribles résultats en français au lycée. Deux mots, c'est le mieux que je puisse faire. J'aurais préféré une petite amie française.

Détail incroyable.

When Sprue Brothers put the entire Eduard line on sale --- if it had Spitfire on the box and I didn't have it, I bought it.

Didn't someone just release a Sabre A? If so, the universal rule of kits applies -- "As soon as you scratch/modify/jigger a venerable kit to create a modeling miracle, somebody will release a version that contains all modern quality and accruacy." As my buddy, who did a magical job on a U-2.

I am quite glad to hear your information. One of the criticisms I hear from non-IPMS members, and some IPMS members, is the attitude that they receive from --- well --- some of the more selfish and narcissistic members that they observe and interact with during a Nats. A minority, a small minority, but a loud and assertive and off-putting segment of IPMS. Who seem to live by that old rule of thumb --- "I got mine, intercourse you." As I have pointed out elsewhere, I also see it in action when the luggage carts disappear from the Nats host hotel the day before the Nats end. Upon reflection, I am even more glad to hear your information. If I hear you right, the grifters who elbowed their way to the front of the line, even before there was a line, have received their due comeuppance. Good on both the hotel and convention staff.

It appears that, as in every year and in spite of solid, repeated, and guaranteed assurances -- every year, the usual suspects have scammed their way into early access to the Nats room block. It also appears that some action has been taken (and I speculate) to either remove the scofflaws by revoking their reservations ... or ... additional rooms have been added to the room block to compensate for the fraudsters malfeasance. It is an annual event, linked inextricably to the Nats. I made a post on FB (I think) some time ago, predicting it --- not much of a strech. This, however, is not my observation. My observation is that it never needed to happen. I attend other conventions with a similar demand for hotel block rooms. These other hotels did have the same issue ... a decade or so ago. The solution has been to block the room block. In short, the reservation app does not permit even one of the block rooms to be reserved until a specific release is entered and the block opens. Nobody can assign a block room ... even the hotel staff. It works. And has removed the opportunity for the usual miscreants to cheat. I don't get why IPMS Nats hosts haven't figured it out.

Can you tell me where to get a copy? It is bound to be better than the IPMS one.

My question is: Which Eduard kits contain their new decals? A secondary question is: How can you tell, by examining the decal sheet, whether the sheet contains the new decals? I have researched these questions online and have received several positive and definite ... and different ... answers. If this topic has been addressed elsewhere, a link would be appreciated.

There is a post by Mike Oberholtzer on the Question Resulting from Reading 2023 Financial Statement thread addressing the involvement of an IPMS technical consultant in the Nats ... The IPMS's (read "EB's") involvement over time and in depth through the technical consultant is more than I had imagined. To be fair, it is also recent.

I hold that the IPMS big picture is all about the Nats. Local clubs who have five IPMS members, renew their registration, and obtain IPMS insurance are pretty autonomous. Regions are more administrative oblasts than agents in conducting modeling activities; Regional contests aren't planned and conducted by the Region, but by a club or clubs in a Region. Regions are really just a guy who monitors annual renewals and hopefully negotiates an annual contest. The main event each year for IPMS is the Nats. The EB selects the club(s) that conduct it and is involved in the finances. Most importantly, the EB directly provides the focal event of each Nats -- the Contest. The contest structure and judging apparatus are provided through the NCC. The EB has complete control over the contest ... however wisely or unwisely they exercise that control. The EB provides the umbrella under which the Nats happens. Most members only "see" IPMS in the form of the Nats (and the Journal thing). Yes, lots of things influence the success of a Nats. Most of those things, with the exception of the contest, are conducted by a host chapter. Which was, in theory, vetted, selected, and monitored by the EB - a specific VP, as I recall. Fairly or not, each EB winds up responsible for Nats that were approved by a previous EB -- but it is still the EB. Also, fairly or not, the EB has had to face a dearth of willingness to host a Nats and has had to recruit candidates and, sometimes, take whatever they can get. Given that I currently hold these beliefs, I also believe that the EB can't do a Pontius Pilate, wash their hands, and walk away from a Nats disaster. I've never seen a contest that was a disaster, but I've seen contest room, registration, and awards presentation disasters -- at least in my opinion. So, if the Nats tube; I hold the continuing entity called the EB to be significantly responsible. And if they soar (as I hear Madison did), then the EB deserves considerable credit. BTW, this discussion begs the question on what is a successful and what is an unsuccessful Nats.

To your points above. I agree that the Journal was roughly equivalent to the commercial modeling magazines, was on a par in terms of their quality, and, dollar for dollar, was the best option available. Our now departed editor did a superlative job, month after month, with occasional lateness lapses. And, for a small hobby organization (5,000 is small) we received way more than we paid for. The hard, cold fact is that we elected the EBoard (EB) to run IPMS and make decisions on a pretty much real-time basis. We have seen a lot of breakage lately, some caused by recent EBs themselves, but, however one evaluates cause and effect, the current EB is the EB that has to deal with it. I agree with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and "don't let the inmates run the asylum" maxims, especially with the IU and J, but it is water under the bridge now. The current EB can direct change as they see fit and we can accept it or move on. I embraced the change in the IU and J by having my wastebasket embrace it. Others will differ. The current EB met the annual acid test via a successful Nats. The next test comes next year. So, the beat goes on.

When will folks learn to leave well enough alone? BTW, this jingle always reminded me of the new utopian Marxist world order. Everyone is different and everyone is the same.

Now, I am being educated. So, rather than salaries, IPMS pays consulting fees. If we define consulting as pseudo-salaries, things make sense. I understand that consultant (or contractor) status has several legal, tax, insurance, liability, and other advantages. Correct?