Model Forum / General / Models / January 2006

    I think it's an incredibly well-built and detailed model spoiled
by a poorly-conceived finish.  But that's just my opinion and if the
builder is happy with it more power to him.

    That said, while it didn't get my Peoples' Choice vote I might
well have voted with the judges in its contest category.  Interesting
dilemma, isn't it?

-- snippage ---

It's a fantastic model but the panel lines are over-emphasized, in my
opinion. He did what scores points at the shows; black panel lines are
popular. I also don't want to belittle his effort in any way at all.
It's a fabulous, fabulous model. I just would have done the panel lines
differently.

Reminds me of when I brought my brother to a show. He confronted an
expert modeler and asked him why his panel lines were black when they
wouldn't be on the prototype. Of course, I was mortified... but the
expert, unshaken, said "it's what the judges like". Talk about Kodak
moment.

--- Tontoni

It's a drag queen as far as finish goes. It looks like a 3-D version of
a rendered architectural drawing. Nice build, horrid over application of
makeup.

Second time around for this thread.  I did not comment on the first time
around, but this time I have to put my 2 cents into the kitty.

Peteski, you said it very well in that the modeler took artistic license
with this kit.  The way I figure it, he bought it with his money, his
paints, and used his art to build and paint it.  So who are we to say that
and what he wanted to do is inappropriate.  There are so many more models
out there that look like crap and they walk off with first place.  At least
this modeler has the ability to build an excellent model and used the
paints - air brush - in a manner that many of us only dream of.

Think of model ship builders of old,  depending on where they spent most of
their time at sea was how they depicted and detailed the ship they built.
Some ships had oversized sails, so where did they spend their time.  While
others had oversized hulls, guns, decks, etc.  It is a matter of
perspective, and he who owns the kit does what he wants with it.  That
brings to my mind one of the past contest here in Austin, one of the car
club guys decided to NASCARize a German Panther tank.  The armor guys were
not too thrilled when they saw the sacrilege done on one of their subjects,
and moved the Number 24 tank out of the armor section into the
miscellaneous.  Not too much tolerance shown there.

Soap box mode off.

Ray
Austin, TX
===

It is an incredibly well-built and well-detailed model.

That being said, when I saw it in Atlanta this summer, I had the same
impression of over-done panel lines.  They appear even darker in person than
they do in FSM.  It is legitimate criticism.

However, I have never nor will I ever approach the quality of construction
and the depth of committment that the model represents.

Art

(snip)

    I wouldn't characterize it at criticism - more of an observation.  That
said, I agree and there was some talk in Atlanta among other folks I met
that it was indeed overdone.  I feel it's well overdone and a cursory
look at Hercules images in a quick Google search will show truer
appearances.

    Again, I concur but the rest of the model was top-notch.  Stunningly
top-notch.  In 1/72nd, the model is still big but it's still 1/72nd to
me - kudos to Mr. Voitech.  I wish I had the ability to do similar work
in 1/48th as I have five Italeri Herky kits to build...
    I know, I know...  Don't say it...

Frank Kranick

This thread seems to have a life of its own.  It was beat to death the last
time it came up and I still have not heard anyone address anything of
significance other than the dislike of the weathering and an unasked
question about why it won.

I would suggest that a good starting point for a real objective view  would
be the IPMS National Competition Handbook.  You can view and download it at;

http://www.ipmsusa.org/CH_index.html

If you go to the section about judging aircraft you will find a lot of
"construction" type criteria such as alignment, seams, lack of glue joints
and things like that.  These, as would be expected at this level of
competition, weed out the field pretty fast.

Accuracy of the paint is addressed by the following:

"Different operating environments can change colors in different ways. All
paints fade from the effects of weather and sunlight, and viewing distance
alone can change the look of virtually any color. Poor initial application
and subsequent maintenance compound these problems. Therefore, aside from
gross inaccuracies such as a light green "Red Arrows" aircraft, color shades
should not be used to determine a model's accuracy or lack thereof."

May I suggest that the amount of flawless scratchbuilding on the engines and
interior, coupled with the extensive exterior work may have lead the judges
to the conclusion that it was the best model on the table?

I was not able to attend that convention, but those whose opinions I respect
that did attend have said they agree with the judges.

Norm

I haven't seen the cover in question yet but I have seen C-130s up close
and not a lot of panel lines stand out.  Most of the ones I've seen are
big smooth grey birds of the Pa. ANG based at Harrisburg.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.