Jump to content

Dakimbrell

IPMS/USA Member
  • Content Count

    548
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by Dakimbrell

  1. GSB works and there is no doubt. But does it work on a scale as large as the National is yet to be proven. Trying to implement a partial use as you describe would be a judging nightmare and in the end prove little, if anything. At any rate, it does not address the issue of OOB our living it’s usefulness. Dak
  2. Most of these are still heads above the kits from the 50s and 60s which were the subjects of early OOB entries. There is nothing wrong with doing older kits OOB. But I can avoid competing against myself by putting my 1/35th DML Sdkfz 234/2 (done OOB) in regular open top AFV and the Sdkfz 234/4 kit in the appropriate OOB category. Dak
  3. No, I am advocating the elimination of a category that has outlived it usefulness and original intent. While the scenario I suggested may not be happening exactly that way, the OOB categories are clearly being used as the way for many to spread out their entries (because of no sweeps) without having to build something different. I am not saying there is anything unethical about this, just that this is not what was originally intended. Why not simply eliminate OOB and create more regular categories? By doing away with OOB, we could simplify the contest and create more regular categori
  4. I agree with your premise, but in todays world the difference between most OOB entries and many in the regular categories is negligible, based on what I am seeing entered. People tend to go for the best kit available on a subject, because they want a nice looking model. While the regular categories do see some highly detailed and corrected models, more and more are, or are almost, out-of-the-box. And by almost, I mean adding things like a wire antenna instead of the plastic one from the kit, or perhaps new tool clamps to replace crappy molded on version. This is why I am suggesting OOB is obso
  5. I have addressed this question before, but here is a perspective from the Chattanooga show. We were working on armor and the particular category had three very nice pieces. The problem was which was going to be 1st place. The favorite was a very nicely detailed model and we were about to go with it until I noticed this beautiful work was flawed by a very basic item....the builder had not drilled out the M2 machine gun barrel. A truly trivial element, but it was inconsistent with rest of the work. A massive amount of work and such a simple thing overlooked. It got a 2nd, so it wasn't throw
  6. So, over the past five years, how many OOB fifty year old kits have you built? What is the oldest edition of a kit you have done OOB? Dak, The Renaissance Modeler
  7. Part of the problem here is that how you view models depends on what you build. I see this primarily based on armor models and what I saw this year judging some of the OOB categories. My point is that even the non-multimedia tank kits are so much better, they have now become the standard. There is no need for dollars worth of extras...that has become a myth. The 1/35th DML Jagdpanzer IV L/48 I am building needs nothing. The only thing I am adding are Fruilmodel tracks, two figures, and a wire antenna. However, the kit DS tracks look fine, and are light years ahead of the Tamiya tracks
  8. According to the 2019 category list 730 was Figure Vignettes. Hardly any solstice for someone with a tank having a driver, loader and commander filling the hatches. It hardly seems fair to force a guy into dioramas when all he did was use the three kit provided figures in a prize cow model. (I agree you have to cut it off somewhere, but I think the line needs to be revisited.) This is true of virtually all the categories and always has been so. As noted, most people will start with the best kit available and rarely willing choose a fifty year old kit with weak details. How many Monogra
  9. That pretty well supports my case for a skill level based contest. In a skill based contest, the entrant would get to choose at what level he wants to compete. Perhaps the way to go is regular categories and then super detail categories in place of OOB? These days, the OOB categories are pretty much the same level as the regular stuff due to kit design, so create categories for those who go way beyond the kit, but are not scratch builds or conversions. Something like using all the PE available and resin replacement items like tires and such. Dak
  10. If most of the OOB categories were eliminated, those categories could be changed to allow a broader range of entries. Dak
  11. While this is basically true, the reality is often in favor of more and nicer detail. Most people want to do the nicest model they can and that means picking a "better" kit to start with. This is precisely my point; things have changed and the original intent is no longer valid. Certainly, beautiful kits can be trashed and poor kits turned into fine art, but it all rests on the skill of the builder. That is true in every category. I think the OOB categories no longer reflect the changing modeling scene. People are wanting to do scenes which contain more than allowed in the main ca
  12. I don't know, with most modern kits available, it seems to be more of a case of picking a well detailed model, than actually doing a superb job. Would a Lindberg Ju-88 stand a chance against a modern version? Yes, I there is always a chance, but realistically? I find I build almost exclusively OOB these days because the kits have almost everything I need. My two winners at Chattanooga were virtually OOB. But, would not newer categories also attract entries? There are a lot of people doing vignettes with no clear category for them. You either build bare bones or risk ending up in d
  13. When Out-Of-The-Box was started in the late 1970s, there were a lot of kits that needed work to be competitive, so it made sense to have way for those who just wanted to do a nice looking model without having to super detail a kit, to compete. However, it is now 40 years on and the quality of kits has dramatically changed. So, I have to think we are perhaps past the point where OOB serves a true purpose. I now hear people talking about picking a well detailed kit for the OOB category and I never see anyone doing old Aurora kits OOB. Perhaps it would be better to dump OOB categories and
  14. Of course, this only reflects part of the reality. Some, like myself, attend only every couple of years. Location also changes the people who attend. For example, I plan on going to San Marcos because it is relatively close. My pount being that while the attendance at a specific National may be only a fourth of the membership, those who actually attend the events may be a good bit more, when viewed as part of a big picture. Dak
  15. Perhaps, but a vast majority of the membership, I imagine, have not been judges at the National level. It is not so much an attitude as perspective. If you judge as many contests as I have, you develop an understanding for the methodology involved. Those who have never judged have lots of ideas about how things should work. However, they do not realize some things have been tried in the past, or always grasp the logistics involved in implementing a new method. This does not mean they are wrong, just hat there is a bigger picture which needs to be considered. Trying to change the
  16. It does put things in context. The whole thing should be of interest to all members. However, having not done judging at a National limits your perspective. Dak
  17. Not always the case. Some are very good, and some are also rans. And the opinion of the judges is just that, an opinion and you will find disagreement on some winners every year. And just because the model won in one contest, doesn't mean it would win in another. Did you compete this year? Dak
  18. LOL Obviously, you've never competed under such a system. In fact, I have found both the AMPS and MMSI systems to be tougher than the IPMS system. In the IPMS system, all you have to be is better than the other stuff on the table. With the others, you have to be good, period. Yes, I agree the original question was not phrased well. Too many people have a different concept of what the GSB system would entail. Much more detail is needed to get an accurate response. Dak
  19. I am constantly amazed with the number of people who have no confidence in their abilities. I have no problem going head to head with the top builders. Granted, I prefer not to compete against a master scratch builder, but beyond that, I’ll play with the masters. Dak
  20. Lets be clear, the skill level format is totally based on what level the entrant wants to do. The Idea is to allow newbies to enter without having to compete with the super builders. There is no restriction on them from doing so, if they wish. There are many extremely talented first time contest entrants. (Am I the only one who has noticed as the number of entries goes up and the categories stay the same, the percentage of winners goes down? Last year, it was 1 in 4; this year 1in 5.) Dak
  21. The skill level contest design I have proposed addresses almost all of the issues noted above. There would be no need to track winners any more than we do now. Dak
  22. It’s not that the minds are made up, but that many have been dealing with the same questions for forty years. Dak
  23. No. Any changes if any would be years down the road. Currently, the GSB system has not been used on a contest the size of an IPMS National. There are many logistical problems to work out. Dak
  24. Many, like myself, have enough ego that we would enter in the master division for the prestige. I have no doubt there would be some who would try for the easy win. But does it really matter? With no sweeps, they can only win one award in one category and in large categories many could win. Additionally, the judges can retain the ability to move models if they think they would be competitive in advanced or master. At least the novice doesn’t get thrown in the deep end unless they want to go there. At this year’s event there were 3112 entries. Out of that we had to pick les
×
×
  • Create New...