Jump to content

ghodges

IPMS/USA Member
  • Content Count

    6,319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    158

Everything posted by ghodges

  1. I totally agree with the Tamiya Fine White primer as a good starter for any light color paint overcoat. Another need is to then "polish" that primer coat a bit. It usually has a very "baby powder smooth" finish when correctly applied, but I recommend using either a very fine (1000grit or higher) sand paper, or very coarse paper towel (if no fine sand paper is at hand), in order to have a nearly glass smooth surface to apply your gloss paint to. In my experience, as nice as the TFWP is, it's a "dull white", and not a bright white color, which is what you need for an airliner. If you normally use enamels or lacquers, I recommend Model Master Gloss White, thinned with lacquer thinner, and misted on in a few fine coats. It's a much brighter white, which I believe you'll see as soon as you apply it over the primer white finish. Decals can be applied directly over the gloss white, and then you can then apply the clear gloss of your choice to seal them and add a bit more shine. Others who use acrylics can recommend a good acrylic gloss white to use, but the point I'm trying to drive home is that as nice as the Tamiya Fine White primer is, it is not as bright a white as a gloss white paint, especially for airliner liveries. Hope this helps! GIL
  2. You're right.....all of us who tout GSB are really just aiming to undermine IPMSUSA and ruin the Nats. It can't possibly work (because it's never been done). And of course you, like the NCC, want a fully written and detailed proposal to be examined and parsed (and then dismissed) because it doesn't look plausible on paper (to you). That can never be done, so people who want complete assurance that it'll work with no problems or adjustments will never be comfortable with any "proposal". As I said before, I'm not saying you're wrong, but GSB proponents are making it work NOW. But, since you think you have a better idea, exactly where are YOU implementing your SWS? Where are you putting your ideas on the line to be tried? If we agree that the 1-2-3 system (although it does work) is the least beneficial to IPMSUSA for future growth of our Society, then start working towards making a change where you are. You may indeed have a better way, but I guarantee that even if you crossed all your T's and dotted your I's in a "proposal"; it would be dismissed by IPMSUSA and the NCC just as quickly as GSB (or simply put out in a "survey"). Show them how good your idea is by making it work at a successful local and/or regional show. As for our show, Jaxcon, we're looking to keep growing our show so that we HAVE to "scale up" our GSB system. We're already 1/3 the size of the Nats and hope to hit 1/2 (1000+ models) in the next 5yrs. We currently judge those 600+ models in 4-5hrs with only 20 or so judges. So yes, I DO think that 4 to 5 times that number of judges over 2-3 days could judge 2000-2500 models. Until that's actually put to the test, you and I will just have to agree to disagree. Part of this debate and discussion has a LOT to do with breaking "traditions". As I stated above, IPMSUSA does NOT like to do that, and thus not only do you have to prove a new system will work, you have to overcome people's wanting to poke holes in new ideas and their loathing of change. Best of luck, whichever side you end up on, I've covered everything I can think of. Y'all can have at it the rest of the way! GIL
  3. DAK: Again...you're holding on to some old ideas and misunderstood some of what I said. The one thing that would have to be allowed for is judging while people are in the room. I've also done this at a 1-2-3 show and agree that it CAN be a problem. However, the answer is simple: demand good etiquette from the attendees! Judges will have to be avoided by those who are milling about. People placing models can do so in a quiet, polite manner, and then move off. If someone wants to hover, then the team leader nicely asks them to move along. If they fail to do so or start interfering in the judging (talking, questioning, etc.) the team leader gets the head judge and the attendee is put on notice of being disqualified. Failure to cooperate or repetitive hovering will result in disqualification and possible banning from future shows (this is already policy among the judges themselves!). It IS something new to be learned by attendees, but it is also easily explained and easy enough to police. Judging time? As it is now, a judge (or team) donates at least 4-5hrs on Friday evening. If they arrive at the show knowing their assignment, and having communicated with each other ahead of time, then they should be able to get together for an hour or two 2-3 times over the two days. So perhaps they judge for one hour on Thursday afternoon to get started. Then they get together for 2 hours on Friday morning. and then perhaps they use Friday evening to finish up for 1-2 hrs as needed. The judging team could even go out to dinner with wives or friends on a Friday night before showing up to finish up (something not possible now). I agree that this will be something NEW, and it will require a team leader to communicate and coordinate with his two fellow judges so that each of them CAN attend seminars, do lunch, have free time to shop and admire models. However, once the new system is implemented, the teams should actually fall into a routine of sorts. AND, since many genres aren't as "populated" as the aircraft and armor areas, in fact, many of the genres may be pretty much done before Friday evening "judging" (the time used to be sure everything is done). Also, (as added insurance), if some judging had to be done on Saturday morning, it could be done then. While you doubt this could be coordinated (and I agree it could be tough to start if a Head Judge or team leader was lax), I (as a judge) would LOVE to know what I was assigned to do and to be able to get the jump on things! The Nats is the one show that does have enough judges (100 or so on average), and the actual "pool" is even larger. It's also the most experienced group of judges compared to locals and regionals. An adequate number of teams could be assembled and assigned ahead of time, though I freely admit there could be a steep learning curve the first couple of years. If someone feels they need more time for other things at THAT show, then they simply don't volunteer to judge that year (the exact same as now). Holding space? Judging models before they enter the room? Where did you come up with that? This is not Amps and I certainly never said or implied it. All models would be judged in place on the tables in the contest room, just like now. Missing a model? Judging a model more than once? Extremely doubtful, since the team would be able to mark the entrant's paperwork with the model AS judged. Also, the real plus with GSB is there's really NO reason to move a model since they only have to fit into the broadest of "categories" (unlike now). Anything can happen (of course), but you threw that in there without any real probable cause. The 3 man team approach requires no more paperwork than now. The only difference is that instead of 3 lines on their sheet they'll have about 30 lines to record results on (and I don't propose having teams judge more than that at a time unless they HAVE EXTRA time). As it is now, a team will generally judge a category with 20-30 models in it, tops. The splits are designed to keep it at those numbers. The GSB "categories" or display zones (whatever you label them) can be designed the same way (much the same as now). Thus teams will still judge approximately the same number of models as they do now, but they won't have to wait and do it all in one night (unless they prefer to). The other "individual" way does require more time and paperwork, but it's also spaced out over 3 days (including Saturday, which the recorders already work now). That's why I prefer the traditional 3 man team approach. To note another change; the idea that you're going to take pics and show EVERY winner at the banquet has to be tossed. Since you'll be awarding so many more models, it just cannot be done. My proposal would be to simply list the bronze and silver winners in the Journal (their name, and the number of each they got), and then show pics of the Gold winners at the awards ceremony and in the Journal. Want your model up on the wall at the banquet? Up your game and win a gold! That will greatly reduce the stress of WHAT has to collated and coordinated for the awards ceremony at the Nats, while giving plenty of time to sort and record the bronze and silver winners for publication months later. Standards? You are ENTIRELY wrong in citing that old IPMS story....THAT was a proposal to have a MINIMUM standard to ENTER at the Nats, and had NOTHING to do with judging standards during the contest. There IS a standard we use now in our Nats 1-2-3; the BASICS. GSB will use that SAME standard, but draw lines to say which award goes with what level of building and finishing basics (go back and read the Pittsburg GSB standard in the post above by DM). Anyone who thinks there is no "standard" to be met in order to win in 1-2-3 or GSB, or that having one is "dangerous", is beyond help from any of us! Am I seeing pie in the sky, or painting a really rosy scenario? Perhaps....but I did so at YOUR request to "flesh out how" GSB could actually work and be scaled up. In reality (not just theory), we're doing this at Jaxcon. We were able to do it (hiccups and all) last year with over 600 models, and did so over 4-5 hours in one day (we're a 1 day show). The idea is to streamline and improve our system so that we handle all those models and more in an even easier manner with time to spare. We'll see.... This is why I say that GSB has to be PROVED at the local and regional level first. It has to be fine tuned so that we do it as normally as we now do 1-2-3. If that CAN be done, then it CAN be used at the Nats. If it IS pie in the sky, then it'll die its own death of natural causes and shows will revert to 1-2-3. Writing, proposing, and debating GSB will do nothing. Actual trial and error is what's needed to make the switch to GSB. GIL
  4. GSB CAN be scaled up to the Nats....BUT you have to throw out the idea of trying to judge everything in just one night. The reason we judge everything in one night under 1-2-3 is the need to wait until EVERY model has been entered so they can be judged one against another. There's no need for that with GSB. Each model is being judged against a standard, and it can be judged as soon as it hits the table, as long as their are judges available. There's a couple of possible ways to do this, neither of which require scoring, points, or math on the part of the judges. The first way, and the most familiar way is to retain our teams of 3 judges and they evaluate each model in their assigned area (for ex. 1/72 prop) and decide what award (if any) each model in that "category" deserves. BUT, the team has 2-3 DAYS to get it done. They can meet several times at their own convenience to judge their assigned area, moving on to what's arrived and hasn't been judged yet each time, and having to be done with all of them (like now), by 11pm on Friday evening. This WOULD require that the Head Judges organize, assemble, and assign their judging teams BEFORE the Nats starts. However, with the ease of modern communications that should present few problems, especially after the first year or two. After that, experience and even repetitive assigning would ease the job. The second way is that each judge works independently, at their convenience on their assigned area. Again, they have 2-3 days to get them all judged; BUT, in this case they would need to hand in their work each time they took a break to a scorer. The scorer would be tracking the awards (if any) each judge thinks a model should get. Under this method you could have a "category" (and each model in it) actually judged by as many as 5 judges. In the end, the scorer simply looks at what the majority of the judges thought an entry should get and marks it down for that award. This method does require more "paperwork" by the staff, but it also allows easier organizing of the judging pool and for more opinions (and perhaps a fairer outcome) in the actual judging. Keep in mind that the National Judges are the MOST experienced at their craft. They KNOW "excellent" from "very good" from "good" from "not good enough". Currently, they use that knowledge in comparison to other models beside each other. They can just as easily apply that knowledge to award a gold, silver, or bronze based on a written standard. A team of 3 might operate this way: the FIRST thing they do when they look at a model is ask each other for an immediate opinion. If they all agree, BAM, they're done! They mark that award (or no award) down for that entry and move on to the next. Thus the BEST and the WORST entries will be done quite quickly. If there's a split in the thinking, then they discuss it (as they do now) and come to a consensus. This will happen with those entries that appear to be on the cusp....should it get a bronze or no award? Should it get a silver or a gold? The key is to have the standard written so that it's easily understandable. As I said, the Nats judges already know what's right and wrong when they look at a model. All they need is guidance on where to draw lines for each award. The golds and "no awards" are easy.....it's the standard for the silver and bronze, where there ARE some problems on the models that require some thought and care. If the Nats were to stop trying to judge everything in one night, and allow the judges (in teams or individually) to judge their assigned areas starting on Thursday morning; then 2500 models COULD be judged by 11pm on Friday evening. It can be done, but you have to let go of old habits and ideas to do so. GIL
  5. And now you've added actual buildings to your building! Always entertained and amazed by your work Duke! GIL
  6. In my experience, the Woodland Scenics do have a heavier or "better" adhesive that makes it tough to remove them if you use them as masks. That makes sense since they're designed to be a decal (marking) permanently applied. Age can weaken that adhesive though, some some of their items do work as masks, though I'm not sure how you'd tell how old a particular sheet is. Architectural dry transfer lettering, on the other hand, seems to work better as masking. I believe that's because the adhesive is weaker (being designed to be applied to paper) and they can usually be pulled up with a strip of tape. There are a LOT of fonts available, but you need to have a very good and well stocked store with architecture supplies nearby. A large university book store is usually the ticket for those! GIL
  7. The nice thing about a forum is that you can kick ideas around and given time and effort (by a poster), those ideas can be fleshed out and then debated. However, I'd like to make a few comments based on long, hard experience (not hypothesis). 1) I've been a proponent for change in IPMS for decades. I support not only GSB, but also for ANY club to be able to use ANY format that they're comfortable with, no matter what the "policy" is of the Eboard (that "democracy" mentioned above). It has put me at odds with people on the forums and even caused animosity with people I'd never met OR even debated with on the forums (reputation as a boat-rocker). And, it was the reason I was fired as an RC....not being willing to knuckle under to the "company line" and putting my Regional club's concerns ahead of Eboard dictates. My point? Do NOT be fooled into thinking that IPMSUSA is willing to change from ANY discussion, poll, or "will of the people". 2) I was a part of a GSB committee over a decade ago that went "through channels" and made a GSB presentation. The NCC listened politely, thanked us, and promptly canned our idea. It was clear they NEVER intended to give it a fair consideration as those in charge preferred 1-2-3. As I've mentioned above, I understand their position: why "fix" what isn't broken (in their view)? Well, the "why" is because of how it makes IPMSUSA look to the uninitiated and non-member modeler. While 1-2-3 certainly works for contests, it is also a harsh environment for anyone who may not take the hobby as serious as others. My point? The NCC has NOT changed and those in charge STILL prefer 1-2-3 (and not without some good reasons); thus do NOT expect to "persuade" the NCC to adopt and implement change at the Nats. 3) Just as there are several ways to skin the cat, there are several ways to run a GSB show...so which one is best? Here's where I say you fish or cut bait! If you think you can make it work, then do so! I know of several VERY successful and long running GSB shows (Pittsburg, Chattanooga, etc.) that are doing just that. We in the First Coast club have also switched to GSB and we think we have a way to make it work. We made it through the first year successfully (though not without a couple of real hiccups), and now we'll try to smooth those out and do it even better in 2020. My point? Stop debating and start looking at how the successful shows are actually making GSB work. 4) As suggested above, let the people speak! The survey is a good step as it may shed some light on the views of the membership. However, what will count is whether those same people support GSB by supporting and attending those shows. Despite whatever I might think, if the PEOPLE do not help GSB grow in popularity, then it doesn't deserve to be considered or implemented at the IPMSUSA Nats. My point? The Nats will only change after GSB has become the "norm" at most shows across the country, and after it has been proven it can work and be adapted to the largest and best attended shows. I think that GSB offers many more advantages to the GROWTH of IPMSUSA compared to 1-2-3. However, it should be implemented by the groundswell of its success and adoption by most of the IPMS shows, and not due to some polls or votes. GIL
  8. David: email me at slowhandshodges@bellsouth.net and I can send you an outline. Otherwise, you can search some of the GSB topics on here and get a LOT of explanations of verious ways to do it. GIL
  9. Welcome Trevor! Glad you're here! Sure is nice to know that there are people like you doing what they can to keep hobby shops and plastic modeling alive. GIL
  10. David: I believe you're getting bogged down in your own argument about art. This entire discussion centers on our PR problem, which in turn hinges on how people outside of IPMS perceive us. Whether or not we see ourselves as artists doesn't really matter. What matters is (from your perspective) is whether being seen AS "artists" will help us overcome the PR problem, or re-enforce the already existing problem. I don't see how being artists helps much. Let's refocus and try looking at it this way: Let's say we're a society of DANCERS (yet a different art form). Lot's of people like to dance, some more than others, and some are better at it than others, be it through a natural talent or practice. THAT can be exactly equated to building models. Now, as a dance society, I believe IPMSUSA would be equated to and viewed as (for ex.) "ballroom" dancers: a group who know what they're doing and are serious about their craft. I do not think IPMSUSA would be looked upon as a DANCE CLASS, where people go to learn how to dance and get better at it. So, we would NOT look appealing to join to the "average" person who likes to simply hit the clubs and dance. There would actually probably be an intimidation factor of not being ready or worthy to be a part of a group so far "above" their own level. No matter how much they might respect and admire IPMS (as dancers) for being good at that "art", it does not help us overcome the PR problem that EVERYONE is welcome and IPMS IS a place to learn and become better at your craft. You are quite correct in that much of the general public probably looks on building models as playing with toys. But, we're not concerned about the general public...we're concerned with changing the minds of model builders who are not IPMS members. THOSE people do not look at the hobby as being merely for kids, or playing with toys. But MOST of them also are not as "invested" as we are in the hobby. The PR problem for that group of initial joiners is for them to see us as a group that WANTS beginning and "average" modelers (which is actually what most of our membership considers themselves, artist or not). No matter how we view our hobby, no matter whether we're artisans or merely plastic hackers; there are 2 PR problems to overcome: the idea that we are an "elite" group that requires a level of expertise to be a part of (the intimidation factor); and the insidious reputation (deserved or not) we have as accuracy anal color nazis. GIL
  11. Looks like a good, common sense solution to getting a more accurate layout int he nose. Thanks for sharing! By the way....look into "Albion tubing"....they have a good variety of very thin metal tubing and rod; much thinner than available at hobby shops and made from brass, copper, and steel. I believe Sprue Bros. carries the stuff. GIL
  12. I have fond memories of Strete Hobbies in Columbus OH......It was the typical hole-in-the-wall shop that existed from at least the 1960s til the mid 90s. The owner at the time I lived there (Bob) was a bit of a curmudgeon til he got to know you (and vice-versa). Only after a few years did I learn he also ran a mail order company called "Imported Specialties" that had all sorts of "goodies" from England, Europe, and the Soviet Bloc. He kept these items in the back room and didn't even bother to tell we locals about them! Interestingly, the way he did business with the Eastern European modelers was simple....he'd fill a medium sized cardboard with the cheapest jeans he could buy and send it to them. They'd take the jeans as payment, refill the same box with merchandise and mail it back to him! It was a simple barter system that worked until after the Soviet Union fell in 1990. GIL
  13. Got mine in FLA this last week! GIL
  14. While I agree that modeling at least involves an artistic bend, I might not go so far as to to label it AS art. And, in relation to our PR problem, I don't think we want to put model building on too high of a pedestal, which trying to equate it to "art" might do. Why? Because, as pointed out above, there are SO many levels of model building. However, the VAST MAJORITY of model builders are simply that: "builders". It's a hobby; perhaps one of several they pursue. Most model builders are not as "serious" or as "dedicated" as they perceive the typical IPMS member to be. And keep in mind that ANYONE who belongs to a model club, whether they belong to IPMSUSA or not, is seen as an IPMS "type" by them. Don't forget how intimidated YOU may have been by your first invitation to come join the local club (I know I was!). Thus, IPMS not only has to overcome the PR problem of being too nitpicky and accuracy anal, it has to overcome that initial feeling that you need to be a GOOD model builder to belong. In a way, IPMS has impeded this by doing its job: helping its members learn how to be better model builders! As cited above, just take a look at what shows up on our tables at meetings and in contests and the average, everyday non-member is blown away! It's NORMAL to think that they do NOT belong in our group! Yes, we want to trumpet our successes! BUT, we need to temper that with a very clear message that IPMS invites and encourages the beginner builder and the run-of-the-mill "I do it for fun" builder to join our ranks. They need to know that there as many of THEM in IPMS (and probably more) than there are "artists" who turn out head turning masterpieces. GIL
  15. Got my Journal and the card with the ballots for both the election and the survey is in it. I'll be sending mine off tomorrow! GIL
  16. Doesn't seem to be black electrical or "friction" tape either, which was common at the time. Of course, they could have simply painted masking tape....easy enough to do and it would account for the "blending in"..... GIL
  17. Welcome back to the funny farm Cezary! Unpack, make yourself at home, and post some pics of your work once you're back in the saddle. Glad to have you here with the rest of us plastiholics! GIL
  18. That's one of the fun parts of the hobby...learning new things! That first pic not only shows flush guns, but only 2 guns/wing. While the taping of the gun ports makes sense if only for the purpose of keeping debris out (and would pose no problems firing through), the taping off of the ejection chutes makes no sense, as it renders them useless unless it's removed before flight, and can't be clearly seen in pics taken on the ground. I'm surprised this isn't better documented and more well known. It'll be interesting to find the answers! As far as modeling goes, it would seem you have the documentation for some leeway, though I still believe it'll raise a few eyebrows! GIL
  19. Holy cow! That is some SHARP camo painting! What green were you using, that covered so well without brush strokes? GIL
  20. Very intriguing....I've never seen a P-40D/E without the guns. Even on war weary trainers, if the guns were removed, the bump fairings are usually still present. I'm not aware of ANY version of the P-40 with "flush mounted guns". I have seen some pics of guns protruding on some P-40Ms without the bump fairings, but the barrels still stick out very noticeably. I would concur that the wartime censors, for some inexplicable reason, wanted to try to make it look like that group was a training group instead of an Alaska based defense group. I found another pic of a P-40E the same squadron in front of a hangar and you can just barely see the vestiges of tape streaming back on the wing bottom from the leading edge...but no protrusions in the leading edge and no gun barrels showing. This was 1942, and we were concerned about defending the west coast and Alaska and the censors would have wanted to keep the Japanese as much in the dark as possible as to our strength and where groups were stationed. I also doubt the pics fooled anyone... If I was building a model I'd have it armed, unless you wanted to actually do a "censored" model as in the pics! And then ya better document it for the judges! GIL
  21. Glad you're here! Make yourself at home and post some of your work. Cheers! GIL
  22. Paul: I can see where you'd be frustrated since you're stuck with some very lousy looking parts. Have you actually tried to take the warpage out, and do you know how? If not, and you'd like to try, email me at: slowhandshodges@bellsouth.net and I'll try to help you get them where you might be able to salvage them and at least build the kit. GIL
  23. Noel (and all): I totally agree with you, and IPMSUSA has JUST begun to try to step us in the direction of de-emphasizing the contest. They've recently mandated that beginning this year and at all future conventions the host MUST have as many Display Only tables as their venue can provide. Of course that is AFTER they've taken care of the contest area first, so it will vary from show to show. Still, up til now, "display" has been only an occasional afterthought. Now IPMSUSA is going to encourage guys who don't want to compete to bring their stuff to display. Personally, I've reserved 2 display tables for ANYONE that'll be dedicated vacuform and resin models. There are two major differences here in the USA as compared to the UK and Telford. First and foremost, our Nats is the way it is because it started out with a competition format and has steadily grown from there. It's a VERY successful show, and the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies to a great degree. Would it be as big and successful with less of a contest here in the USA? Perhaps.....but I'm not sure any host wants to take that financial risk since the current format is a "money maker". In other words, we're sort of stuck with what we have because it's what we've always done and it works well! The second difference, as I mentioned before, is our vast distances to our shows. Anyone in the UK is a day's drive from Telford. Even a lot of Europe can be there in a single day's travel time WITHOUT having to hop on a plane. That makes the transport of models and stuff needed for booths much more practical. I consider the upcoming Chattanooga show to be an easy drive, and it'll be close to 7hrs. I plan to drive to the Texas show in 2020, and that will involve two days of driving and probably no less than 20hrs travel time. The rest of the shows involve airplanes where you're lucky if you can carry more than one model on, not to mention the hassle of TSA security checks! Only in the eastern US, or possibly southern CA, where there's a greater density of clubs per state, could we possibly have what Telford has with club booths...but with no tradition of doing that, the "clubs" never really consider it. Rick Jackson NAILED IT in his post above. Just bring your models, put them on the contest tables and go enjoy the show for the sake of the show and don't worry about winning or losing! GIL
  24. That's one pretty P-38! Love the NMF and the markings. Did you paint the d-Day stripes o the bottom, or are they decals? Congrats Bill, and thanks for sharing! GIL
×
×
  • Create New...