Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ghodges last won the day on October 2

ghodges had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

481 Excellent

About ghodges

  • Rank
    Lord of the Sprue

Profile Information

  • FirstName
  • LastName
  • IPMS Number
  • Local Chapter
    IPMS First Coast
  • City
    Orange Park
  • State
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,585 profile views
  1. Excellent! Even with the quick build, I notice that you still improved the finish with some post shading that adds to the overall look nicely. Thanks for sharing! GIL
  2. Welcome to the monkey house John! Glad to have you here with the rest of us! GIL
  3. "Back in the saddle again"......Lookin' good Duke! GIL
  4. Actually looks good for your "3 hour tour"....my only critique would be the base appears to be backwards... but maybe that's just me! 😀 GREAT job Duke! GIL
  5. That's some very sharp detail painting on those cockpit panels. Sweet! GIL
  6. Lovely build and a great looking scheme! I take it those landing gear were fixed? Guess that wouldn't matter much to a plane designed to cruise rather slow for jumps....Thanks for sharing and congrats on another British build! GIL
  7. Those are some very sweet builds! Speaking of Bill Ritter....I'm proud to say I was drooling on builds of his way back in the early 80s when you guys used to come over to Columbus for Blizzardcon. Pretty sure these are 3 impressive builds of his from those shows.... Monogram 1/48 F-84F with impeccable NMF and Monogram 1/48 A-1 Skyraider.... And by the way, I believe that's the AURORA 1/48 A-7D, heavily modified and corrected, and built before Monogram even got that mold and tried to correct and release it as an A-7B. Anyway, glad to be a fan of him, Bil D., Barry, and all you 3 Rivers guys! GIL
  8. Super looking Crusader and it compliments that group of Sundowners perfectly. Congrats, and thanks for letting us ride along! GIL
  9. Very cool looking Trip-Trey Crusader! Did the conversion or kit come with the raised wing and off set flaps and slats, or did you do that work yourself? Certainly adds to the coolness of your build! Thanks for posting! GIL
  10. First you have to designate whether you're discussing your topic as applied to contests and judging, or just building for yourself. If you're building for yourself, anything goes. BUT, the caveat to that is when you build something of spurious genealogy with weird paint and it looks funky (as you intended); expect to be questioned on it at a meeting or on line. You cannot build "outside the ballpark" and expect others to understand, agree that it's "right" the way you built it, or like what you produced. The only aesthetic involved there is whatever beauty your eye beholds. In the context of contests, there ARE expectations to met. To answer your first question, craftsmanship is always more important than accuracy. A poorly built but accurate model will not attract many second looks, nor impress any judges. The BASICS that IPMSUSA judges by are simply expectations of craftsmanship that must be met to be competitive and win. As for accuracy, IPMSUSA doesn't judge it. It's discussed a LOT because (usually) it allows Joe Blow to show off his area of expertise to others at the meeting or on line.However, it's craftsmanship that almost always determines the winners and losers, with degree of difficulty being the first tie-breaker, and "accuracy" only as an absolute last resort. As for the aesthetics, I prefer AUTHENTICITY over accuracy. By that, I mean there's a ballpark you can stay inside of and meet people's (and judges) expectations while straying from absolute accuracy. If your scheme calls for OD over Neutral Gray, then the top better be some sort of muted camo green and the bottom better by some shade of gray. BUT, there's plenty of room withing shades of both of those colors to allow for variations that some experts might raise an eyebrow at. The same goes for any other myriad of details or markings....if you get it in the ballpark, generally the aesthetics will be acceptable. The only time I believe that accuracy must equal craftsmanship would be a build for posterity, say for a museum, or for a veteran. That type of build comes with higher expectations, especially if your model will be used to educate any viewers. GIL
  11. Very nice! That kit was WAY ahead of its time! GIL
  12. I see this as good news, but not GREAT news. The Tamiya P-51B/C WAS a quantum leap over the old Monogram/Promodeler issue, and was a step better than the newer Accurate Miniatures issue. The new Eduard B/C will be a STEP forward, but not a leap. It will probably be very worthwhile to the accuracy fanatics because the wheel wells and cockpit floor will be correct and they will not need to spend money on aftermarket corrections. But for the large majority of builders who simply want a nicely detailed and well fitting B/C Mustang....it already exists. I wish Eduard continued success! If they can make a lot of money on Mustangs, chances are they may eventually get around to something more needed....(insert YOUR wish list here). GIL
  13. If you've stayed at the Embassy Suites at any of the other conventions that had one....then you KNOW why you WANT to stay in THAT hotel! With free breakfast AND free happy hour, I'm not surprised that it's probably sold out already. Oh yeah...the rooms are just about the biggest and nicest compared to any other convention hotel. You can bunk 3 persons separately and 5 comfortably if you don't mind snuggling up to someone....makes for a cheaper stay! GIL
  14. Again, this is a matter of PERCEPTIONS.... As Nick rightly points out, experienced judges KNOW that the models get judged fairly DESPITE knowing who built what. You don't need a "name".....many builders have "signature" bases and others have signature styles. Despite that, those models are put through the grinder of the "basics". They're not given a pass nor assumed to make the cut. And, since your entry number at the Nats is your iPMS#, there's no need to read a name to avoid sweeps. Any models with the same IPMS# in the same category are by the same builder. However, if we were to simply have the names in plain view, the majority of attendees, who do not and have never judged, would BELIEVE that it gave the "honchos" an edge. Thus it's worth it to have the names turned under just to cut down on the belief that some builders have an advantage attached to their name/reputation. This is not a case of hypocrisy, but instead a case of trying to alleviate unfounded fears and beliefs by those not INTIMATELY familiar with the judging process. GIL
  15. Terrific looking T-Bolt! Nice scheme choice too, with the checks and invasion stripes adding some pizazz to an otherwise dull OD/gray camo. Congrats, and thanks for sharing! GIL
  • Create New...