Poll: Accurate and boring vs. approximate and interesting

Discussion in 'General Card Modeling' started by Leif Oh, Jan 23, 2005.

  1. Leif Oh

    Leif Oh Member

    In his review of the Modelart P39F Airacobra, the builder, Damraska, on his own site makes the following distinction, comparing the Modelart kit with the Halinski kit of a similar Airacobra:

    "The two models represent opposite ends of two spectrums--accurate and boring (Halinski) versus approximate and interesting (Modelart)."

    That certainly would seem to merit some discussion. Any takers, or hot feelings on the subject?

  2. NOBI

    NOBI Active Member

    Hi there,

    Interesting to make a poll with this subject. for me i like to build a detail model what can proud to show everybody when finish because papermodel in not popular here so if somebody see my detail model and they must say WOW and got hook on this beautiful hobby but i build an easy model what not take time to finish too becasue u will bore when u stick in same model in long time and u need to relax with something, easy building model is good choice for relax like my design hehehe easy but beautiful
  3. cmdrted

    cmdrted Active Member

    Actually yes you have opened a pandora's box. On any given day there is a craving to cram as much detail as possible into any type of model. This sometimes results in, oh yes I can tell the differance between the altimeter;s 5" diameter and the tachometer's 4.5 " diameter. Right. There is a differance between what your eyes tell you is asthetically right and what is technically right. In some scales such as 1/50 aircraft and thru a clear canopy I don't think it is easy to see the painstaking details that some of us put into these kits. There is also a phnenominum I've seen at some hobby shows where you can see the details down to screwheads and threads but your mind just processes it as one complete assembly. Unless you focus on the details they actually become a blur. This is in no way a slam on some of our work. From you guys here I've learned to raise the bar and not settle for mediocre. But in some of my personal builds Ive gone too far for accurate and waisted the effort because you really can't tell the differance... there is more to say but I guess the answer is a balance, if it looks pleasing then that is the right level, but don't leave out the Revi gunsights on a Me-109 or the rigging on a WW1 stringbag. Not every wire but enough to show they were there.
  4. Leif Oh

    Leif Oh Member

    And what an apt and most painstakingly crafted illustration to underline your point, Ted! - L.
  5. Darwin

    Darwin Member

    well voux my deja. I think I've been through this discussion a few times before....the last time involved standoff scale in RC aircraft. My two cents is that I have seen approximate-scale builds that gave a better impression of fidelity to the prototype than totally-accurate-to-the-blueprint models. There is plenty of room in the hobby for both, and it is always good to have change-of-pace options to stave off burnout.
  6. Jimi

    Jimi Member

    A very interesting topic. :D For me, what people may think as boring might be interesting for some. Maybe, it's one of those intangibles. it's more a question of taste and preference or reasons. personally, like the survey, i would like to build one really detailed one that might take decades to build than finish 1 model a week. It makes me feel like a kid that's imagining the comic's contents of next month's continuation of "spiderman" when spiderman fell into a large pool of insecticide!
  7. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    It's an interesting question, but one that I believe depends on the individual modeler and what they enjoy doing, as Jimi said.

    Ted wrote "But in some of my personal builds Ive gone too far for accurate and waisted the effort because you really can't tell the differance..."
    I don't know if Ted meant it the way I read it, but I don't think the effort is wasted if you, the modeler, enjoy going a bit further and challenging yourself to try and show more detail than the kit provides, even if the casual observer doesn't get it...as long as it was fun for you, you know it's there and you feel a sense of accomplishment in going that extra bit for yourself.

    One thing about details on a model, particularly at the smaller scales, is something I read in a book written by one of my favorite miniaturists, Lloyd McCaffrey. This fellow has built some amazing little sailing ships, usually in wood, but card and paper find its way into his models from time to time. But the thing he mentioned that stuck in my head is that in making some details the art is in the perception, not necessarily in the actual detail...you might not be able to create that gun sight in 1/200 scale as an exact miniature, but if you are able to create the impression of the sight in miniature, whether by shading, tricks of optical illusion or whatever, or if you work to show a rivet or screw head is there right down to the perception of a 3D portrayal, well that's the art in your creation and something to be very proud of...so what if John Doe who doesn't know all the work, effort and time you spent putting those details into that build can't see or appreciate it, as long as you do and you're happy, well, there you are!

    I for one love to see the superb details you folks create in your models (and yes, it is noticed by fellow modelers who are similarly afflicted with this desire), and I enjoy the challenge of trying to do the same in my models...sure, I'm more often than not not successful, but the fun for me is in the attempt...and on the rare occassion that it comes out right, at least to my eye, well, that's the icing on the cake. It's not boring to me, but fun, and I'm sure others feel the same way or they wouldn't go through the time and trouble to attempt those details...right Ted? :wink:

    Well, that's my two cents worth...in 1/400th scale. :lol:


  8. Gil

    Gil Active Member


    Damraska has a point but after viewing Modelarts P-39 the impression that it was printed on sheet metal was felt. Boring is not an appropriate word use for the Halinski P-39 as the model has very subtle but impression creating nuances that move it far beyond a tampo printed soda can....,

  9. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    My trouble is, the models I make in my head are perfect. So I end up researching the research, putting off projects until I have ALL the information I need to complete that perfect model not just in my head, but on my work bench. Result is, of course, I never make anything.....

    Tim P
  10. Renaud

    Renaud Member

    calculations and accuracy

    Exactly such as you...I start my calculations with three figures after the decimal point, in the end, I find it not enough, I am satifyied only when using numbers up to eight or ten figures. And I use diagrams to draw curves where I can make sure that each number is close to his exact value, changing x scale or y scale, to make the bend of the curve enough visible... and I find my huge square paper sheets on purpose. I am definitely out of time...

    When the time his hot aboard a ship, wood shrinks but steel expands, and it is enough to drive my paper mad.
  11. damraska

    damraska Member

    I am in Nobi's camp. I love really accurate, detailed kits because the finished products look fantastic, but the construction process often drags. Taking on a quick side project now ang again fulfills my need to get things done.

    Regarding the Halinski and Modelart P-39s:

    If you strive for detail and accuracy, you will want to build the Halinski P-39N. The landing gear and cockpit are very detailed. The color matches the prototype and includes subtle weathering details like smoke stains and chipped paint. The model represents an aircraft flown by the number two Russian ace of World War II. However, the finished plane looks lackluster because of the solid olive drab paint scheme.

    If you want to build something more quickly and easily, with racy nose art that stands out, you will gravitate to the Modelart kit. However, the overall color is a bit off and the plane apparently lacks nose art found on the right side of the plane. (There were three known planes named Air A Cutie so the model may represent a prototype without nose art on both sides of the aircraft.) The landing gear and cockpit of this model are significantly less detailed than those of the Halinski kit. Those requiring detail and accuracy from a model will not like the Modelart offering.

    In the plastic model world, a builder can pair the most accurate kit of a given subject with the desired paint scheme. In the card model world, the manufacturer chooses the paint scheme and the builder must live with it. And so, we face choices like the one described above.

  12. ShaunGamer

    ShaunGamer Member

    I agree, boring and interesting are not the correct words to use.
    (I would say accurate and requiring motivation vs. approximate and easily achievable.)

    I try accurate every now and then, although I cannot compete with what others do in this group. I have completed a few models that have a more than acceptable level of detail. These do get a lot of comments but my most talked about models are my Flying Circus Triplanes from Fiddlers Green. (An example is my Avatar) They are simple models that are quick to build, but look excellent all lined up on a shelf.

    So although accurate can be exceedingly satisfying, approximate can be just as good for the ego in its own way. :D

    I guess it comes down to what the modeller enjoys!!
  13. silverw

    silverw Member

    wunwinglow coment

    Hey Tim... I thought it was just me...
    I think I've got that "_____I-TUSS" thingy again.

    Somewhere I read that "If there is no passion, ... it's WORK!"

    On Oct 9, I set aside my 'Dreadnought" build to do the 'ARROW' build. That went sort of OK, but , I had to conceed in the end, that I would have to do another build, with the rest of the details that I didn't have time to do right now!

    Time came to get back to the 'boat', but like you say, wanting to get more details, and more perfection has prevented me from doing anything!!

    I sure hope the 'passion' returns soon.! :shock: :shock: :shock:

  14. Leif Oh

    Leif Oh Member

    I recognize that feeling, Bill!

    PS. I added a poll on the subject. Time to replace the Christmas wish-list poll anyway, right?

  15. DN

    DN Member

    It all comes down to reaching this magical threshold of actually finishing a model. Those who get there, usually tend to raise the bar for themselves next time and try something more difficult, those who don't go in the opposite direction. Fortunately, there are models out there for both groups. And one more thing - perfectionism can be a killer in our case.
  16. Leif Oh

    Leif Oh Member

    I hear you, Roman. - L.
  17. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    ...or maybe it is because I love to do the research so much, I never want it to stop!

    Tim P
  18. Ashrunner

    Ashrunner Member

    I love looking at well detailed models of anything. I just don't have the desire to put so much time into doing it myself. However, I don't see anything wrong with me acquiring a highly detailed model to build. I don't have to put in all the detail, if I don't want to. I really just want my model when either sitting on a shelf, or hanging from a ceiling somewhere, to look like a Spitfire, and for the well-informed to be able to tell the model number. No dig intended here against the great model producer (as I am a magic key holder and have been for a number of years), but when I got my Fiddlers Green aircraft superpac CDs, I dove right in and built a number of the main reasons I bought the CDs...World War I aircraft. Then I decided I would build my (cough, gag, cough) favorite Navy plane, the Panther. After doing everything possible to bend and roll and fold the fuselage to get it to look right, I tossed the attempt as I just couldn't get it to look like the Panther. The same thing happened with the Me-262 and then I took on the F-15. Well, after finishing that model and putting it on my shelf, I was disappointed, but figured, it "looks a little like the real thing." I thought that until a friend of mine who, like myself, is airplane crazy, visited and was looking at my "paper airplane" collection. He needed three looks at the F-15 to see the resemblance. That did it. No F-15 air superiority fighter has ever gone down in flames (E models have) until that day...I lit the tail end, and chucked the thing off the back porch and watched it hit and burn (it was fire season and about 95 degrees that day). I bought Dr. Zarkov's three F-15s the next day. I haven't started one yet, but I know when I do and when I finish it will look like an F-15 and I don't have to use all 1,100 parts for it to do so. So, back to the purpose of this rant...bring on all the detailed models you want. Just make them digital so folks can reprint what they mess up. After all, the reason for buying a model is to make it show it off.
  19. cardfan

    cardfan Member

    I like them all. I build Fiddler's Green stuff because they are relaxing and usually quick to build. I have tried some of the more complicated European stuff and that has been fun. I even bought a couple of the old Maly cds and have been working on cleaning up some models and building those, hey I think they look cool.
    I believe the best thing about our hobby is that there seems to be something for everyones tastes and abilities. Not to mention I get to watch ongoing builds of projects all over the world!
  20. bfam4t6

    bfam4t6 Member

    For me it is just relaxing. I love to add as much detail as possible. The more realistic it looks the better. But, I do get "bored" sometimes. Eventually I get so excited to see the finished thing that I set aside a few ideas and keep working ahead instead of spending 2 months building a cockpit. So for me I just add as much detail as I can stand and then move on. You guys do make it worse though :D . For example, after seeing Swinger's work on the Ju-88 I'm a little bit more determined to add lots of extra detail to the B-17s. I'm sure I'll end up drawing the line a bit shorter than Swinger did but I think it's fun to have something to strive for. If you strive to build every single WWII Allied bomber (i'm somewhere along those lines :D ) , then you may settle for a bit less detail and end up building a few more models than you would have otherwise. As long as your goal is met then it's worth it. If you plan to build an EXACT replica, then you may be able to find joy in each section. For me, each little detail can become it's own model. The cockpit for example could be set on display by itself. As well as things like the engine in the cases of some of the Halinski kits. Being able to put all of those little "models" together is enjoyable to some people, but it definitely takes more time. To others, the only model is the whole thing in its entirety. Loosing a few details here and there means nothing as long as you can recognize what it is that your building. I think that whatever you prefer, it should be fun.

    The brain is basically divided into two major sections, the calculation/problem solving half, and the creative/artistic half. My cello teacher helped to explain this to me but when you think about it it makes sense. The reason things like building models, painting, playing cello, etc is fun is because of the feeling of timelessness. The creative side of the brain essentially takes over and leaves the calculating side to rest. The calculating side would be the side that determines time. Assuming you enjoy what you're doing, and hour can go by in a minute. For me this is true. I often stay up WAY to late on school nights building models simply becuase I loose track of time. My cello teacher is no brain surgeon, but it makes sense to me. Just thought I'd throw that in there because he brought this up one time after I told him that I built paper models :D

Share This Page