Jump to content

Rivet counting and TLAR...my own epiphany


adfogel

Recommended Posts

*TLAR=That Looks About Right

 

Alright, now that I have your attention I’ve been giving this never-ending debate/argument some thought off and on over the years (as I am sure many of you have as well). I like to read what people from both sides have to offer on the subject. Some of it is posturing and some of it is genuinely constructive. A recent exchange between two of my fellow modelers (both of whom I respect quite a bit) finally clicked the light on for me about this subject. And through all of the posts that I have read I must admit the one thing that seems to never be brought up is the word “perception”. Think about this for a moment using the word “perception”…what exactly does it mean? Well, Merriam-Webster says:

 

Function: noun

Etymology: Latin perception-, perceptio act of perceiving, from percipere

Date: 14th century

1 a : a result of perceiving : OBSERVATION b : a mental image : CONCEPT

2 obsolete : CONSCIOUSNESS

3 a : awareness of the elements of environment through physical sensation <color perception> b : physical sensation interpreted in the light of experience

4 a : quick, acute, and intuitive cognition : APPRECIATION b : a capacity for comprehension

synonyms see DISCERNMENT

 

The most striking definition given, for me as it applies to this discussion, is “a mental image”. And, in this light, what exactly do each of us, as modelers, perceive when we open the box and look inside? Are we pleased? Are we disappointed? Doesn’t our reaction come from what we perceive said kit should represent? And does this perception carry over to every kit we inspect? Or do we go out of our way for certain subjects and give leeway to others due to our own perception as to how relevant said kit fits into our personal modeling collection?

 

As it’s been a recent topic lets look at it this way using the following targets :winkgrin: (all 1/48 scale):

 

Monogram/Revell F4U-4 Corsair

Hasegawa F4U-4 Corsair

Academy F4U-4 Corsair

 

Using myself as an example, when I open all three kit boxes for inspection I see each kit as a basic representation of the -4 Corsair. To my eye, they look the part and I do not perceive any glaring and nasty errors. So, right off the bat all three qualify as a potentially worthwhile build. I then move along and look for less obvious things like the offset stabs, canopy shape/profile, cockpit and gear bay details (if present) and so forth. From there, I know that the Monogram kit suffers from an incomplete and not entirely accurate cockpit. The Academy and Hasegawa kits are better but still (by today’s standards) lacking in finesse and detail. The Monogram kit has no gear bay detail and the folding wings option really knocks it down the accuracy ladder. The remaining kits are again not bad but not what some of us expect to see nowadays. But, even with all of this info in my mind, I personally perceive that all three kits remain viable and build able representations of a -4 Corsair. Why? In my mind’s eye I perceive them as acceptable but not entirely accurate representations. I know the limitations of each and what I can expect of each. I can consult (and have actually) with folks who know said subject better than me. And I can use every available reference to find out what is and is not accurate about said kits. But ultimately the choice is my own, as a modeler, how I perceive the accuracy of what sits upon my shelf.

 

Where the problem seems to lie is when I start espousing my perceptions as the BEST perception about said kits. What my fellow modelers and enthusiasts perceive as important may not even register on my radar. And there’s really not a thing wrong with that either. Where things quickly fall apart is when folks from either side start flinging insults around at one another without understanding exactly where the perceptions of their fellow modeler are. Quite frankly, whether both sides like it or not, we do in fact need one another. Our perceptions are fueled by our passion for any given subject. Sometimes we can temper our enthusiasm with common sense and sometimes we don’t. For me, I realize that the Monogram -4 Corsair is a relic of time past and that it is certainly been superseded by the venerable Hasegawa and Academy kits. This is my common sense kicking in. However my passion for the Corsair in particular combined with my enjoyment of building the older Monogram kits gives my perception more weight than my common sense. There is nothing wrong with this at all. There really isn’t. And if I don’t share the same perception as my fellow modelers it does not mean that my perception is any more or less valid. It’s of my own mind.

 

Now, if I ask for help (whether it be for accuracy or finding enjoyment) I’m asking not only for assistance but, potentially, a change in my perception. Think about it…I’m asking my fellow modelers to help me see something that I cannot see. It may be a misshapen canopy or it may be clarity for correct marking or it may even be a cry for help from the dreaded AMS monster. Think about this before ripping off a comment like “Well, it’s quite obvious you don’t give a darn about building accurate models!” or “Just shut up and build the darn kit!” Step back and realize that your friend, your kameraden, an acquaintance or even a total stranger are offering their perception up for change…and as we all know perception is power. When you bash someone’s power base (rightly or wrongly) you’re bound to set off lots of fireworks. Disregarding, degrading or snidely remarking about someone’s perception of a given subject should not be taken lightly. To do this to a person’s perception is akin to telling them “How you see this subject is faulty, ignorant and uneducated”. That’s not only insulting it’s unconstructive. Are we here for constructive advice? Are we here for both validation and advice on any given subject? Are we here to share each of our own gifts with each other? I like to think so…and I like to think that you all feel the same way. Maybe that’s a bit naïve on my part. God knows I’m as big a simpleton as anyone out there. But I’m a firm believer in a “half-full” existence and if I can help anyone else’s glass get “half-full” then I’m doing something right.

 

I don’t want to see the end of either side of this debate. When used constructively both sides benefit us all. What I would like to see is some empathy, some understanding of why we may perceive the same subject on different levels. We all sit at the table of modeling. As acquaintances, friends, family and kinfolk we have a wealth of inspiration, constructive advice, assistance and good intentions to offer one another. Instead of whipping out the quick, passionate quip we may want to stop and say “Hey, ya know, I never really thought of perceiving that subject the way you do. Can I pick your brain for a moment?” and see what lies behind the perceptions of our fellow modelers. After said conversation we may still disagree (and probably will…LOL!) but at least we can have a respectful understanding of one another. And when we do need help, when our perceptions may be awry, we not only know where to go for clarity but we know that a handshake and smile await us. :smiley14:

 

Opening up the floor for friendly discussion,

 

Lee Fogel

IPMS #35509

Member/contributor of Modeling Madness, Hyperscale, Britmodeller and Halsr

Edited by adfogel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Lee,

 

What I have read above in your initial post can be characterized as "philosophy." I was forced to take a course in philosophy in college, and I admit I struggled with what I considered an inexact science. The philosophy addicts called it "social science," but I was an engineering student who was thriving on "real science." Later in life I now understand "philosophy" better and can indulge in it quite handily. Perhaps I absorbed something in that class that I do not remember but can still apply in practice.

 

Thanks for developing your -4 perceptions of the three kits. What pleases you is the most important factor in each kit, not what pleases someone else. Personally, I have not built any of them as single-engine prop naval aircraft are not in my perceived range of interest. On the other side, many modelers would never touch the kits I enjoy. So what?

 

Model kit collecting and building is a lifetime hobby...or is it a hobby of a lifetime?

 

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to put your perception into perspective. We're not talking world peace, feeding the hungry, curing cancer, etc. What really matters is what matters to you when you build this kit. Is this a subject matter of which you want to build the most accurate version? If so, then your perception needs to be as abstute as your desire for perfection.

 

Like Ed, this isn't my genre. I probably haven't built a Corsair since I made that Monogram one in the 1970s, folding wings and all (probably no paint on the blue plastic).

 

If I were to build a Corsair, I'd look for a fairly accurate one that built up easily and wasn't too expensive. True accuracy wouldn't matter to me. I would just build it for enjoyment (not saying that those of you who need to fully accurize are not enjoying it), a simple OOB build to me.

 

Conversely, if I were to build a modern US armor kit, I'd like to find the most accurate one or at least one that I could live with the errors or could fix them myself.

 

When I open a kit box, I like to see crisp detailed and flash-free parts that hopefully assemble without much ado.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a recent experience that speaks to this topic. Having been with the IPMS review group for a few years now I've built and reviewed a number of kits for this web site. Most recently, the 1/48 Tornado IDS from HobbyBoss. I happened on another review at a different site and the all things that really appealed to me about that kit had the opposite effect on the other reviewer. Oddly enough, the one area of the kit I felt weak was not addressed in the other review. It made me wonder if I missed something critical the average modeler out there should know.

 

I'm not a rivet counter. Overlaying parts on scale drawings is not part of my modeling technique. Not to say I don't admire the folks out there who do that for they produce some amazing work. The success of a model for me is not in how new the mould is but by the joy I get from building it. Some of my best projects were old kits I found on discount at the local drug store. My objective is too produce a cleanly built model no matter the starting point and have some fun in the process of doing it. When that doesn't happen anymore, its time to find a new hobby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, I fall squarly in the TLAR camp. If it looks right, it is right (to me) and THAT is where perception comes in. I'm a lot more forgiving and less critical when I take that look compared to others. I approach plastic models as being scale representations and not scale miniatures. To me, a representation has room for error while a miniaturzation is just that, the real thing exactly shrunk down.

 

I have no objection to model builders who demand that extra level of miniature engineering for themselves and their own model building. I DO object when they project that philosophy onto the worth of a kit (it's "accuracy") or the worth of another modeler's build (it's "quality"). THAT is where most arguments start; the perception of the value of a kit or it's build. As Lee pointed out, that's almost as varied as there are modelers!

 

This is a hobby. Build your models to suit yourself. If you choose to compete within this hobby, then build to a competitive standard that YOU are happy with and let the accolades fall as they may (or may not). Feel free to point out your perception of omissions and errors in kits in your builds and reviews as many other modelrs will be interested in knowing about them, even if they decide to ignore your perceptions. Just be sure to label them as your perceptions and not "fatal kit flaws".

 

The idea of criticizing another person's building style is just plain bad manners. Like mom always said, if you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing! There is NO expectation of anyone building anything to please YOU. Admire what ya like and leave the rest alone. If a builder is having FUN, then they're building their models the RIGHT way, and your perceptions don't count a whit! Cheers!

 

GIL :smiley16:

Edited by ghodges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for your thoughts on my post. I sincerely appreciate reading your thoughts about this as well. And I feared that I might come across as a bit of simpleton on this but it just seemed to hit me earlier this week. Strange how a sudden thought can just move into something of an epiphany. And I guess that is what this observation about where "perspective" fits into our hobby.

 

I really do tend to lean to the TLAR side of building. As mentioned by a fe of you, what we are really doing here is replicating something as opposed to constructing an exact copy. I wish I had room for a 1/1 scale Corsair but, alas, my budget and property simply won't allow for it. :rofl: So, I do the next best thing and replicate my passions in a smaller scale. For som subjects I freely admit that I really am just happy to have it on my shelf and, as a TLAR build, it's just as rewarding as a rivet-counting build (of which I do occasionally). Perhaps I am saying that my perception is based on my interest/passion for the subject at hand?

 

I do think that I am taking this into a bit of a philisophical direction but really why would it be anything but that? We're laying out what our building philosophy is for one another. That warrants, IMHO, some form of repsect and restraint from everyone else in the room. Our choices are our own and if we decide that a purple Corsair is 100% acceptable in our perception of what we wish our collection to be then so be it. It's when we say to our fellow builders "Yes, this is right and you all are gonna have to believe me" and they reply "You're stupid, ignorant and obviously off your rocker" or "You mislead me into finishing MY Corsair wrong" or even "Your idea behind this is ignorant and therefore so are you" then we attempt to invalidate another's work. By simply asking "Hey, I don't get this. But can you explain to me WHY you did what you did?" we avoid immediate and blatant dismissal of one another and encourage healthy conversation and, dare I say, enlightenment. We don't have to agree at all...but any time we can walk away from a discussion enlightened we allow ourselves to be educated. And maybe, just maybe, we can shake a few more hands along the way and cultivate a consistent and complimentary level of respect for one another as both modelers and as adults.

 

Thank you again for the honest and thoughtful repsonses, gents. You've all given me plenty to think about as well and I sincerely appreciate your observations. :smiley14:

 

Ed, no question that philosophy is a field of landmines...it really is. And what tends to frustrate many folks is that you do much stepping forward and back (and even side to side a bit) only to feel like you have not accomplished a thing. But in the grand scheme of philosophy there is no accomplishment. There is only the journey and the rewards from the journey you take. For me, in my readings and the classes I took, what stood out for me was that learning the ability to view things with a philosophical slant can enlighten you in many other areas of your life. And I don't think I had applied this to modeling...not on this level. So, for me, it just hit me smack in the face earlier this week and I wanted to share my philosophical epiphany with you all.

 

Later,

 

Lee

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...