Dakimbrell

Thanks for the clarification. I don’t think I have ever heard it referred to that way, but I know what you mean. In my view, the change is inevitable. The current system is starting to crack primarily due to the categories that get heavily entered. 1/2/3, isn’t cutting it very well. Cost of a GSB would be about the same because if you keep splitting categories you need more awards. I like the body of work contest design. Instead of all the categories, you just have the three tier divisions and the entrant puts all his entries together. All are basically judged as one entry. The award goes to the builder, not the model. Award cost would not be much different, overall. Deciding who is a novice, is no problem. Leave it to the entrant. But once you enter a division, you no longer can go to a lower division. I.E. enter the masters division, you can’t go back to the other two. A bronze in the Master division would be more prestigious than a bronze in Novice. Of course, the judges reserve the right to move a model, as always. You keep the Best of and Judges awards and any specialty awards. Like I say, I believe the current system will start failing in a few more years....if it is not failing right now and we are too close to see it. Dak

Gil, I not sure what you mean by “flawed counting based system”, please elaborate. I think the current system will need a total revision in about tens years. It is fast falling behind the curve of contest entries. Stratified competion along with the GSB system and body-of-work design offers the best flexibility, speed, and ease. Let’s face it, the nitpicking over exactly which single model is better than others is far from the best system for a creative activity. I have lost track of the numerous times my team has agonized over which of two extremely good models is “best”. Or which is the least bad. Dak

Thanks, Ed. The model looks far better in pictures, but the look you describe is exactly what I was going for...that aged look. Dak

However, I think the perception Gil speaks of is a myth. IPMS judging is....today.....fairly well balance and easy going. By my personal standards, sometimes to liberal. Those I have met, who are the most critical, are simply a sour grapes bunch. They are extremely lazy and find it easier to bitch, than improve their skills. AMPS is far more critical in their judging. The problem IPMS has with the “public” is more to do with the fact too many are ashamed to talk about the hobby and the Society. In my local group, I am virtually the only one who will talk to people at the store and chat up the club or IPMS. I’m not saying IPMS is perfect. If it was up to me, the contests would be organized more along the lines of novice, experienced, and master divisions. This would give the beginners a better chance and more prestige to those more skilled builders. But generally, I’ve been happy with IPMS the past 15 years or so since they got away from the old aero-centric silliness and accepted there are more models than airplanes. Dak

Just making a point about the wording which illustrates my point....different things bother different people. For me it is lack of consistency. Particularly in detail and weathering. I have often see models with one area very well detailed and others ignored. Also weathering like muddy tracks, but hardly anywhere else. I think the current guidelines work well, but some judges still tend to ignore things. That is why I like the collective judging method used by IPMS. It is the superior methodology. Dak, national judge.

Well, Nick, you did use the word precision and the word accurate is in the definition... I looked it up. Is the precision measurement of the wing height from the ground done with hard inflated tires or with bulged tires. If you want precision in the wing span, then shouldn't you be concerned with the thickness of the canopy, too? I would think in true scale a 1/72nd trailing edge would probably be sharp enough with which to shave. If you measure the wingspan, do you also measure the propeller blade length? This is what I mean by too many variables. Who has ever put a hard measurement to a car model? Additionally, different things upset different people, just like the Tiger I I mentioned in the earlier post. And judges often don't pay attention to reality, even when they are faced with photographic proof. While it is true IPMS judging has really improved over the past twenty years, there are still moments when things are over looked. However, we have to have some standards with which to work. There is a different mix of judges at every National and many become enamored with specific models. The rules for craftmanship are the only things that keep things in check. That the judging must be done in such a limited also means measuring every model for precision work is impractical. But checking to see if the all wheels touch the ground, that wings are level or that the gun barrel is not warped are quite proper things to check. Dak, National Judge

I don’t think the “hobby” is dying. There are way too many new kits produced too think it is dying. And I disagree our models are toys. To me, they are ART. The same as any sculpture or painting. No to models come out looking the same. Every builder interprets the subject in their own unique way. If you want to expand IPMS membership, quit trying to appeal to children and aim at college age to mid twenties age people. Architecture, engineering, art schools, and history are all related to what we do. Run ads in college papers and such. But strict accuracy in a model seen at most IPMS contest is a myth. There are too many variables. That doesn’t mean some don’t get stuff wrong. And yes, I find it irritating when see someone get simple things wrong or ignore that heartless bitch gravity. For example, I once saw a Tiger tank with the entire engine deck HINGED....not lifted off....up because the builder didn’t understand there was a hatch for the engine. He told me it was the only way it could possibly work! In that case accuracy was an important feature. Dak

Nick, While I like accuracy, it is pretty absurd to think it can be achieved at our level of model work. Accuracy as you describe requires extreme information. That is not available to most of the people nor are thy interested. There are simply to many variables to consider and even top people writing the books make mistakes. For example, you do an airplane with interesting markings in a photograph. Are those markings the same on the other side? With only one picture, you can’t know. Or there is a tank with a distinct feature. Maybe it got knocked off in the first few minutes of battle. Years ago, a guy kept telling me the measurements in several books were wrong on tanks. He had been measuring them in museums where they were missing parts. The books took those parts into account, he did not. The old 1/48th Lindbergh F-86 still looks like an F-86. If the difference in scale measurements is 5% or less, humans can’t normally see it. Dak

Gil, If you took the time to read my earlier posts, you would see I have already emailed the NCC regarding the matter. Additionally, you will see I have no problem if they do not agree with my reading f the rules. I simply will not bring the model aircraft to the contest. The rules clearly state the figure would not be judged unless in a diorama or vignette category. Since the actual model is not altered in any way, I fail to see this as a problem, myself. As to your remark, you know this is blatantly untrue. Over the years, the rules have changed allowing things not in the box to be added. And the type of models being entered reflect this, also. So, please explain how a figure that cannot be judged effects the judging of a model? Are you saying all figures should be excluded from all categories because they might effect the judging? I'm not sure I understand this remark. I do not want to put this model up against the "honchos" as you call them, which is the reason I sent the NCC an email. Do not get angry because I found a loophole in the rules. I ALWAYS make sure my entries conform to the rules and I have repeatedly emailed the NCC for clarifications. As I said, if I can't enter the airplane in OOB, then I simply won't enter it. I was not planning on doing so before I discovered the loophole, so it is not a problem. I will continue to build and display my works as I see fit and if they do not conform to the rules, then I don't enter them. I am not whining about how unfair it all is, merely trying to take advantage of a loophole. Do you think figures included in the kit should be judged in OOB? I would think as part of the kit, they should be. Dak

Jim, This is the Revell 1/32nd He-162. I has won several awards for finish, but will never see a national because the seat is crooked. The seat and bulkhead are a CMK aftermarket and is molded crooked and I did not catch it until it was too late. Given the three category 137B, 2018 winners, it would never make the final cut, so why waste space in the car? The V-1 is the 1/32nd Bronco kit. Fairly well done, but modified, so it can never be OOB and the figure is clearly not a crewman, so it could be bumped into dioramas. personally, I always want it in Field Rocketry because it was operated by artillery units, but most times, they want to put it in jets, or drones. I choose not to enter them to avoid problems. Dak

Pete, The situation is not the same. In this case, having read the rules, I found a loophole which would allow me to enter a model I had originally not intend to bring along. I have helped sort out the armor at nationals and in those cases the wailing and gnashing of teeth was because people ignored the rules which had been available for a long time. In my case, if the NCC says no deal, then I simply will not bring the model and no hard feelings. Jim, First, I am adding nothing to the model. The figure in no way alters the model and the rules state the figure will not be judged....I am not asking for it to be ignored, merely seeking to confirm my understanding of the rules. As to why I don't think my airplane would be competitive in other categories...…60 years building models, 53 years entering contests, and 40 years judging under IPMS, AMPS and MMSI rules. I am a strong midrange, multisubject, model builder, not a specialist. Additionally, I am a real gambler, not just metaphorically and there are some games I do not play or bets I do not make. At Chattanooga, I expect a strong turn out from Atlanta and most likely the mid west states. My gambling instincts tell me it would be a pore bet to waste cargo space on a model that, at best, would have a one in three chance of placing. My handicapping would only give it a 7 to1 in a regular category. For example, the U-boat is a bit different. The differences between submarine OOB and regular submarine categories is marginal, hence it is a better bet. Dak

Nick, now you are being condescending. I am not a novice and have plotted categories like a degenerate gambler at the roulette table. If you bother to read my previous posts, your questions would be answered. In short, if I can't enter it where I want, I see no point in bringing it. See above posts. I don't bet the hard ways at the craps table; I do place bets. Jim, you have never given an answer to my question. Dak

Jim, Don't take this the wrong way, but you are missing the point. This model is an interim project for me; a simple study in painting and weathering. I think it will look good and based on my study of the OOB categories, I feel it would be competitive there, but no where else. I want to move on to other, more important projects and not spend a lot of time on a subject of minimal interest to me. I am looking for opinions about the figure, not suggestions about whether to enter it in OOB or another category. Building the model my way is more important than entering the contest. I have contacted the NCC and have asked for a ruling. I don't even want to bring the model, if I can't place it in OOB. An OOB tank takes up very little space in the car. Large models of even small aircraft take up far more space as well as being more delicate. I read the rules closely before I enter a National and do my best to conform to the established rules and I have no particular problem with them. However, as noted in the rules, not everything can be covered until it comes up. Additionally, you are coming off somewhat condescending. I have plenty of contest experience over many years, in several different regions and I build six to ten models.....mostly dioramas.... a year. You may have also noticed my name on Journal articles for the past couple years. My original IPMS number was way lower than my current one, but I dropped out for several years getting my current one on my return. The standing question is....does the addition of a non-kit figure violate the spirt or letter of the OOB rules? I say it does not, for reasons stated earlier. Dak

I have been entering contests for 50 years. During that time I have learned there are some areas you don't compete in unless you are prepared to go all in. With this model, I am not. My current project has no seatbelts or a dozen items I regularly see in winning models in categories like 103, 120,131, 135, etc. As for OOB, note that one category...132... only had two entries, this year. However, as in shooting craps, past performance is not guaranty of future performance. I make no assumption that OOB is a cake walk, but the is a definite difference in truly competing and merely being in the category. Traveling 900 miles, I choose to bring those models, which in my opinion give me the best chance. It is a distance thing, a couple hours away, I might say what the heck, and bring it to show. But twelve hours on roads I know are going to be bumpy, no way. I have several other pieces which could take up the same space and are a lot easier to transport. As for the U-boat, that is a different thing. I have two of the Bronco kits and plan to build one full hull and one in a diorama. Since there is not a lot you can do to a submarine model before it becomes a diorama, OOB seems like a good place to enter it and I always include figures with all my models. We began discussing the concept at my local chapter and I felt the question would be a good one to discuss and get some broader opinions. So, do you feel the figure on the OOB airplane violates the OOB rule? if so, why? Dak National Judge

First, a clarification. The Me-109 shown above is not the model I am talking about. In fact, it is not even my model, it is just being used to illustrate my point. My model will be on a scale scenic base with the figure standing on the airplane and that will not change. All I am seeking is a clear understanding before I pack up and transport a large model 900 miles (1800 miles round trip) to Chattanooga, only to find the entry MUST go in a category where it does not have a snowball's chance in hell of even placing. If the head judges consensus is no to the figure, then I will make no plans to bring the model to the contest. The model I have under construction is being done as a study in assembly, painting, and weathering. The kit does not even have seat belts. I have neither the interest or time to turn it into a competitive model for a category like 131 or 135. Having read the 2018 rules, several times, my view is even though the figure is not part of the kit, it in no way violates the letter or spirit of the law because figures are only judged in the diorama and vignette categories. The pilot figure can be ignored just like any other model with a figure. In fact, I am planning on an OOB submarine with a similar display. An OOB 1/35th Bronco Type XXIII U-boat with a crewman standing on the hull. Again, the model itself will in no way be altered. Certainly, all figures are used to enhance the model, but they are regularly ignored while judging and I see no difference here. As you can see from the pictures below, figures are common in the OOB armor. These appear to be Tamiya kits and come with figures, which raises the question.....if figures are actually part of the kit, should they be judged in OOB classes? But that is a separate issue for another day. Dak National Judge