Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About KurtLaughlin

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • FirstName
  • LastName
  • IPMS Number
  • City
    Beaver Falls
  • State
  1. Ed, if you look at the link in my post above a guy is selling an exhaustively detailed, inside and out, 1/35 tank model *kit* that requires the same or more of the basic skills needed to assemble an injection kit into a *model*. I guess because he is selling it it is "commercially available", so it could legitimately entered in to the armor category. (I'm sure that would cause some consternation when it was discovered that it was a "3-D printed model".) My question would apply to something with the same level of detail but entered by its designer and not offered for sale. KL
  2. Gil, this impression of the process of making a 3-D printed model grossly - by like two orders of magnitude - the amount of effort needed to go from a printed plan to a plastic part. Hopefully that's not the type of thinking behind the NCC's decisions. We're not in Star Trek where you can talk to "the replicator" and get a finished model three minutes later. I really have no interest in 3-D models. I was just reading the Journal over my cereal and started thinking . . . OK, it's not scratchbuilt, fair enough. But isn't there also a rule about no prototype kits or test shots? Yup. .
  3. I got the new Journal yesterday and noted the rule change that (essentially) says that 3-D printed models cannot be entered as scratchbuilt models. However, rule I.4 says "Pre-Production Examples. "Test Shot" or pre-production examples of kits not yet commercially available may not be entered in any national competition for awards" and Rule II.4 says that "Simple conversions may be entered in regular categories. More extensive conversions, however, must be entered in the appropriate conversion category." So, a 3-D printed model is not scratchbuilt, it's not an extensive conversion, it's not
  • Create New...