SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

too much superdetailing?

18729 views
80 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
too much superdetailing?
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, January 2, 2006 12:41 AM
A comment to the FSM community.
While I am only returning to the hobby after a 20 year "rest". I do see that one paradigm still holds sway. That is that more detail is always better. I remember making this same comment to the staff of Scale Modeler Magazine 30 years ago. I see page after page of models in FSM that are detailed to museum quality, regardless of cost. And to be frank, it does make me feel a bit inferior. Most modelers do not build to such a detail level and we have no interest in participating in shows/contests. It's not simply a question of cost (althought that is a major component) or skill level. It's just that a great many of us aren't interested in getting into photoetched aftermarket detailing kits (that just happen to cost as much as the kit itself). I have done a bit of resin casting but to only make a single part this way simply isn't logical and certainly not cost effective. And turned gun barrels are simply too much. This moves the subject out of the field of a hobby and into being a fetish, almost a compulsion. Kinda like D & D players or Trekkies.
Just how many hours did it take Ken Hart to build that fine U-boat diorama in this month's issue? And how much did he spend?
Perhaps this is a reason we don't see so many young modelers anymore. They're scared away from the hobby.
Okay, so the models in FSM are extremely well built. How's about some scales to compare the level of time & money involved. Like the workbench reviews. Let's see a total price (counting comsumables like paint if they were bought to build the kit & not to restock one's toolbox) . How about showing this on most if not all the articles.
And more articles about out-of-the box builds.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Monday, January 2, 2006 10:32 AM
I second YOF's suggestions of showing the TC0B (Total Cost of Build) with each article and review. I build OOB as I find the kits themselves to be rather pricey, without the extras. I will admit that I have ordered some AM decals, though I bought them to replace damaged decals, not to augment the kits.

While I do enjoy seeing the models in FSM, I will admit to also feeling inferior, and it is a bit off-putting to read "I bought the so&so kit and added the whizbang cockpit and wazoo landing strut kit and vacuformed canopy, as well as a resin engine" and then finding out that the extras cost more than the kit did. And what was left of the original, the fuselage and wings?

So how about it? Can we get some perspective to the hobby?

So long folks!

  • Member since
    July 2013
Posted by DURR on Monday, January 2, 2006 10:58 AM

 Bgrigg wrote:
I second YOF's suggestions of showing the TC0B (Total Cost of Build) with each article and review. I build OOB as I find the kits themselves to be rather pricey, without the extras. I will admit that I have ordered some AM decals, though I bought them to replace damaged decals, not to augment the kits.

While I do enjoy seeing the models in FSM, I will admit to also feeling inferior, and it is a bit off-putting to read "I bought the so&so kit and added the whizbang cockpit and wazoo landing strut kit and vacuformed canopy, as well as a resin engine" and then finding out that the extras cost more than the kit did. And what was left of the original, the fuselage and wings?

So how about it? Can we get some perspective to the hobby?

 

 



 

 

Sign - Ditto [#ditto]  i have brought this up in 2-3 other forums also

 

i also feel inferior when i see " oh i fabricate this or that in my workshop with the $2000 worth of power this and that" that adds to the cost of the model too     slightlySign - Off Topic!! [#offtopic] just slightly

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Upper left side of the lower Penninsula of Mich
Posted by dkmacin on Monday, January 2, 2006 4:45 PM
I have begun to just OOB, saves the wallet and sanity!
The other thing that gets me is a "follow along" build with a kit that has been out of production for several years.
FSM ran one several issues ago with the advise to go to e-bay. . .guess what price went through the roof on e-bay.

Don

I know it's only rock and roll, but I like it.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 9:06 AM

I came back to scale modeling about 10 years ago after a 12 year abscence. Before I discovered FSM, and other modeling magazines, I built my kits straight OOB. FSM inspired me to try to do more with my models, to concentrate on the details, to make a better model. Personally, I try to put my money into research materials and use my experience in woodworking, blacksmithing, and drafting to enhance the finished model. I scratchbuild a lot of my details, and though I don't have that much experience (and belive me, I am no Pat Hawkey), I belive that I can build a very good model.

At the same time, I try to encourage anyone that has an interest in modeling. I've lurked on this forum far more than I've posted, and the quality of the work by my fellow modelers here is amazing, even humbling. It inspires me to do far better than I do now.

I would be interesting to see more in FSM on what goes into completing some of these kits; at the same time, I would also like to see more articles on the basics and out-of-the-box builds. Recently, FSM published an article on building a snap-together kit of a Corvette. I was very impressed, the final results were awesome.

If someone doesn't care to scratchbuild details, they are out there to buy. I would never criticize someone for using them.

Just my morning ramblings. I'd better go drink more coffee now...I was up far too late working on a PC last night.

Kent (Leaving the soapbox now)

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Pensacola, FL
Posted by Foster7155 on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:55 AM

I'll toss in my 2 cents on this disscussion since it comes up all the time on numerous Internet sites. However, I suspect my opinion will be in the minority. My views in this area can best be summed up in the phrases, "Live and Let Live" or "To Each His Own".

Yes, FSM and many other modeling magazines periodically show extremely detailed models and dioramas which cost hundreds (or thousands) of dollars and untold manhours to complete. However, these examples do not represent the majority of articles in FSM. The magazine has far more articles about simple, OOTB or very slightly detailed kits than these "super-detailed" monster projects. I personally enjoy seeing the entire range of expertise, effort, and level of detailing in our hobby today and would never tell FSM that they can or can't run a particular article.

The amount of detail and effort put into any particular project is a personal choice of the modeler. No one - except perhaps the modeler's family - has the right to question the amount of time or money they wish to put into a particular project. How many people out there put thousands of dollars into aftermarket parts for their personal car or truck? How many spend hundreds of hours over a year or more hand-crafting a piece of wood furniture from scratch? Scale modeling is no different than any other hobby in that there are varying levels of interest, ability, and dedication in terms of all resources.

Requesting to know how much time and money went into a particular project is a dubious question at best. There are so many variables that making conclusions based on this information is virtually impossible. Let me explain...

There is a local modeler who creates "huge" military dioramas. We're talking 3 feet square, 2 feet tall, and using up to 8 or 9 models and 20 or 30 figures. I noticed his work at the first local model contest I attended after re-entering the hobby following a 20+ year lay-off. I was in AWE. They were amazing. I finally had the opportunity to meet and talk with this particular modeler over the past year and discovered some extremely interesting (and enlightening) information. First, NONE of the model kits he uses in his builds were purchased at full retail price. They are all either gifts, sale items, garage sale purchases, or extremely reduced retail purchases. Second, ALL of the ground work including all buildings, bridges, trees, and foliage are scratch-built and the cost is pennies-on-the-dollar compared to aftermarket equivilents. Third, he builds his kits OOTB and I was amazed to learn that the FAMO in one of his recent dioramas was completed in only 3 days!!! It looked like something that should have taken a month or more to build! Finally, I asked him how long it takes him to build a complete (3' x 3') diorama. His response...2 to 3 weeks!!!

All of this serves to illustrate that simply asking how much a project costs or how long it takes to build is a moot point. That which takes one modeler 3 days and maybe $20.00, could take another modeler 2 months and cost $50.00.

I am currently building a DML StuG III Ausf F. This project includes a CMK barrel and resin manlet, a complete Jaguar resin crew compartment including the gun, and a Royal Model detail set including both PE and resin components. So how much is all of this going to cost? Well, if a modeler today wanted to duplicate my build they would have to do some searching since many of these items are out of production. Assuming they could find everything at full retail price, they could be spending upwards of $100.00 or more. How much am I spending? All of these items cost me $50.00 in a grouping and also included a PzKpfw III engine compartment which I'm saving for another project. Is this too much? Am I wrong in wanting to build a detailed or super-detailed model?

As a side note, I assist our local modeling club with junior 'Make-N-Take' model building classes about every two months. On average, we have 14 kids between 8 and 12 who thoroughly enjoy these events and learn some basic modeling techniques. Do any of the volunteers try to impose "advanced modeling techniques" on these new modelers? Of course we don't! But the kids sure do enjoy seeing some of our detailed models and dioramas...at least the gazillion questions they ask would indicate they enjoy it.

Everyone has their own opinion of the maximum effort and expense that should be put into a project, but it's only that...an opinion. What's right for one modeler in not right for every modeler. To many modelers, super-detailed projects serve as an inspiration and are nothing more than a pure joy to see. Let everyone enjoy the hobby in the way they want to enjoy it...Live and Let Live!

Robert Foster

Pensacola Modeleers

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 9:34 PM
Well Foster, your point about live and let live is well taken. But you made other points that I have a problem with. For example the point about OOTB builds shown in FSM. The Jan 06 issue is right here.( Excluding the kit reviews & tech articles-which is the real reason I buy FSM.) The number of build articles is 5. The number of articles on OOTB builds is zero. Dec. 05 issue: 7 build articles. OOTB builds - 2.  July, 04: build articles - 3, OOTB builds - 0. Total build articles in 3 issues: 15, OOTB build articles: 2 (and zero scratchbuilds).
Perhaps superdetailing is not a good word. How about detail purchasing. As I do not consider scratchbuilding the same thing as detail purchasing. The encouragement of purchased detailing kits. Being resin, photo etched, turned, prebuilt, or prepainted.
Your point about the local diorama builder is another example. Built his kits in 3 days and his complete diorama in 3 weeks. Does this guy have a regular 8 to 5 job? Does he have a life outside of modeling? How many hours of that 3 days was spent working on the model? It's nice that he has the time to do this. I'm lucky if I get 30 minutes every other day to work on a model. And where does he find yards sales that he regularly finds kits? I live in a metropolitan area with about 3 million people. My girlfriend loves these sales & fleas markets. And I have never seen more than a handful of model kits in them (usually half built by some kid who lost interest and never a high quality kit.)
You, yourself, say you spent $50 on purchased details. I have to tighten my belt to spare $30 to buy a kit. Spending $50 on details is quite out of the question. And I make a good salary. A very large number of modelers and readers are in the same boat.
I submit that the number of modelers that super detail and purchase detail is really but a small fraction of the totallity of scale modelers. And you are quite right. The occasional superdetailed kit is indeed an inspiration. Seeing nothing but superdetailed kits is showing off. Or is it marketing?
All I'm saying is yes, you have the right to spend as much as you desire to build a kit. But how's about a bit more representation in the pages of FSM for the average modeler and a bit less for the deep pockets and professional skills. 2 items that the majority of modelers will never have. And a lot of us don't aspire to.
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:19 PM
I don't think anyone is telling anybody they can't use super-detailing. All we are asking for is some perspective on the cost of the build.

Someone mentioned Matt Usher's Snap-tite 'Vette. I just happen to have that issue handy. Let me start by saying that I am in awe that he took such a toylike kit and turned it into a show stopper. Truly a testament of skill and detailing! In fact it inspired me enough, and I'm such a fan of the Sting Ray body style anyway, that I went out and bought the Revell 67 427ci Roadster! So, Matt's article sold another kit, which is really what the magazine is all about, isn't it?

But, he's also used Bare Metal Foil, Ken's Kustom Fuzzi-Fur, a PE set, had some styrene kicking around and has a punch and die set. None of which I am prepared to go out and buy for a $15 kit. What I would like to know is how much was the kit, and how much was the addons?

I'm not knocking his use of the addons, and I'm pretty sure if I switched kits with him, his OOB would end up looking better than my superdetailed one! The point I'm laboring to make is that models can always look better if cost is no obstacle.

So long folks!

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Pensacola, FL
Posted by Foster7155 on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:25 AM

 young old fart wrote:
Well Foster, your point about live and let live is well taken. But you made other points that I have a problem with...

Users of this forum have "counted articles" for years. You say there aren't enough OOTB articles. I say there aren't enough Armor articles. Someone else says there are too many Armor articles. Another says there are all Aircraft articles. The bottom line is that FSM, by it's very nature, is trying to appeal to ALL modeling genres and ALL levels of modeling skill. It's an extremely difficult task given the restrictions...just ask anyone in the Sci-Fi genre. I personally feel that 2 OOTB articles in 3 issues is a pretty good representation...you don't...we'll just have to agree to disagree.  

 young old fart wrote:
Perhaps superdetailing is not a good word.

Perhaps not. I have actually seen few articles in FSM that I personally consider "super-detailed". The 2 articles on Cut-Away aircraft come to mind and those were really inspirations. 

 young old fart wrote:
Does this guy have a regular 8 to 5 job? Does he have a life outside of modeling? How many hours of that 3 days was spent working on the model? And where does he find yards sales that he regularly finds kits?

Let's see...

Yes (he's an engineer), Yes (married with no children and his wife supports his efforts), 14 - 20 hours (he says he averages 4 to 6 hours at the workbench during the week and 10 - 12 hours on the weekends), and yard sales are only one of the four sources I mentioned where he gets kits. I've found kits at garage sales probably 3 times in the past 6 months and I only go out out once or twice each month.

 young old fart wrote:
You, yourself, say you spent $50 on purchased details.

Not to be picky, but false. I spent $50 for all the detail sets AND the basic kit - which retails for about $25 or so. 

 young old fart wrote:
I submit that the number of modelers that super detail and purchase detail is really but a small fraction of the totallity of scale modelers. And you are quite right. The occasional superdetailed kit is indeed an inspiration. Seeing nothing but superdetailed kits is showing off. Or is it marketing?

I thought you said the term "super-detail" was not the best one to use?

In any event, when I open a typical issue of FSM, I most definitely do not see "nothing but superdetailed kits". If anything, I consider the majority of articles in FSM to be extremely "basic" in terms detailing. However, I also realize that FSM is trying to cater to everyone. If the pages of FSM started showing 2 or 3 OOTB articles in every issue, I would definitely quit purchasing the magazine...the inspiration would be gone.

Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree on the entire point.

Have FUN modeling...

Robert Foster

Pensacola Modeleers

Moderator
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: USA
Posted by Matthew Usher on Thursday, January 5, 2006 4:14 PM
First, thanks for the kind words about my Corvette article. I think I can address some of the cost-of-build issues.

The kit was around $11 at my local hobby shop.

The photoetched parts were $13 -- however, the set includes parts for '63-'65 Corvettes, and I have lots of parts left over for future projects.

The same its true of the flocking -- a little goes a loooong way. I've been using the same packet for a couple of years now, and I think it was only a dollar or two.

A sheet of Bare-Metal Foil is around $5. I use a lot of it for masking and trim, and even then a sheet lasts a long time.

The punch-and-die set was handy for the project, but not essential. A couple of years ago, I made a resolution to resist buying kit after kit, and instead I put my modeling budget into tools. That's when I purchased the punch-and-die set (it's from Waldron, by the way). It was expensive, but I use it all the time, and it's made modeling a whole lot more fun.

One thing I always do when I justify the cost of modeling is a "cost versus time" calculation. I maybe dropped $30-40 on the model, but I spent a lot of enjoyable evenings working on it, and I had a lot of fun discussing it with friends when I took it to my monthly model club meeting. Money well spent in that regard.

Matt @ FSM

(By the way, one of our sister magazines, Classic Toy Trains, just ran a review of a new MTH O-gauge Pennsylvania Railroad locomotive. The price? $1,099. Model building may not be so expensive after all!)
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Thursday, January 5, 2006 8:27 PM
Matt,

You're welcome! I really did enjoy the article.

And Thank You for providing the out of pocket cost on the add-ons. This is precisely the thing I'm wishing for. I don't knock the use, I just want to know the cost.

I knew you had the punch and die kit, and hadn't bought it just for one model, and it's a tool on my "need to buy, just not now" list (as opposed to my wife's "what? Is he nuts? list) as I can think of many benefits of ownership.

I might be tempted into buying the flocking, I suspected it wasn't very expensive as I'm experienced with flocking used in woodworking and other crafts. I'm also tempted to buy some BMF, but am leery of the PE as I'm sure it's a swift descent into add-on addiction! Trebling or quadrupling the cost of an $11 model is one thing, doing it with a $50 model is quite the other!

I'm struggling with the idea of decanting vs using the rattle can. I've gotten pretty good at rattle can spraying, at least for simple color jobs. I think I'll stick with the rattle can for now, somehow I can see myself making a big mess. Besides, as an acrylic user I would have to invest in cleaners and thinners I don't really require.

So, here's to hoping that we can see a little list at the end of articles like yours, it wouldn't take up much room:

Kit $11.00
PE $13.00
Flocking $0.50 (approx.)
BMF $1.00 (approx.)
Misc Paints/supplies $12.50
Total $38.00

Thanks again!

So long folks!

  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: USA
Posted by MusicCity on Thursday, January 5, 2006 8:44 PM
I have to agree with Robert.  I think the builder himself (or herself) has to decide what the goal of a particular model is to be.  Whether it is just to pass the time and enjoy building something, or whether it is an attempt to make something as realistic as the builder can do.  I use a lot of resin and photoetch on just about everything I build because my goal is to build a model that is as accurate, realistic, and detailed as I can get it.  The kit makers don't provide enough detail to suit me and I don't feel like I can  scratchbuild it well enough to suit me, so I go the aftermarket route.  I also spend anywhere from 300 to 600 hours building each model.  Right now I'm building an F-105D Thunderchief for a man who flew them in Vietnam and the goal is to reproduce his airplane as accurately as I can get it.  In addition to the 1/32 scale kit he provided 11 (yes, eleven) aftermarket sets for it, and we will also have custom decals made for his aircraft tail number and name.  I started it in September and it will be spring before it's complete.

You talk about the cost of a model and all the aftermarket parts, so let's break things down a bit.  Let's say I spend $100 on a kit and add another $100 in aftermarket parts for a total of $200.  If I spend 400 hours building it (not uncommon for me, that's about the cost and time of my A-10) that's $0.50 an hour for a hobby that I enjoy.  Show me another hobby where you can get by for $0.50 an hour and have a lot of fun.  Show me another hobby that over a period of several months will ONLY cost that much.

Let's further assume that instead of that I bought a $40 kit and threw it together in 100 hours.  For the same 400 hours I'd have to build 4 kits for a total cost of  $160 or so.  Which way is more enjoyable?  That depends on the person doing the building.  Personally I'd rather spend $200, take my time, and build just one, but that's my personal preference.  I'm not in any hurry to finish a build, after all building them is the fun part.

I say to each their own.  If someone wants to build straight OOB and do a great job then I'll applaud their work.  It someone wants to spend a bunch of money on aftermarket parts and does a great job I'll applaud that as well.  If someone wants to throw something together in a few hours and then expect me to give it the same respect I'd give one that had a lot of time and effort put into it they are going to be disappointed.  It's not the kit and it's not the amount of aftermarket involved that makes a beautiful model, it's the builder.  I'm only mediocre so I rely on aftermarket.

If you want to see me really stand up an clap for one, show me a model where the builder scratchbuilt most of the detail.  Take a look at some of Pierre Greutert's builds some time.  You won't find many though because he puts several YEARS into each one.

Scott Craig -- Nashville, TN -- My Website -- My Models Page
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Thursday, January 5, 2006 9:15 PM
 MusicCity wrote:
I'm only mediocre so I rely on aftermarket.


Pffft! I've seen your work. If that's mediocre, I'm quitting now!

So long folks!

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, January 5, 2006 9:29 PM
Yes, yes, Bgrigg, This sort of end of the article note is what I would very much like to see. That and hours spend. (Waiting for paint to dry doesn't count.)
Sure, everyone is entitled to spend as much time and money on their kits as they wish. All I'm asking for is some yard stick for those of us who would some idea of what is involved to achieve the results shown in the article. If someone takes 40 hours or 400 is not my call. But it is my call if I want to know the cost in time and money to achieve such results. Skill is a factor too. A much more skilled builder is going to do a lot more in 5 hours than I will in 10 or 15. I think we all know that. But if I know so & so spent 400 hours on a single build, (which by the way is 10 work weeks) I'm not gonna feel quite so bad about my results  after 40 hours. I build custom motorcycles as a hobby too and in 400 hours I can have a bike built & painted & ready to ride. And I don't just show it. I get to ride it. and sell it for 2 or 3 times what I spent to build it. Building models is, for me, a relaxation break. But I think a broader image of the hobby should be represented in the pages of FSM. Not just the pros and the people who do spent that kind of time on a kit. Like I said, the occasional $200 build is inspiring. But when FSM shows mostly $200/200+ hour builds (or more) the view of the hobby is getting slanted. Or has the hobby left people like me behind?
I may enjoy Star Trek but I have no wish to become a Trekkie.
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Panama City, Florida, Hurricane Alley
Posted by berny13 on Friday, January 6, 2006 9:19 AM

Doesn't it all fall down to the person doing the building?  I have several kits that I bought AM parts for, because, I want them to be a show case in my collection. When you have a 1/32 scale F-4E, it just begs to be detailed.  Many more are just built OOB because it will not be a show case.  Do I enjoy building OOB models?  Yes I do, but at times I just want to take it one step beyond.  My completed, or part completed models are not the quality seen in FSM, but for me that is OK.  I know I don't have the knowledge to get up to that level of work. 

I think it is a great idea to show cost at the end of the article.  It might give some of us a reason to get an AM part for a kit if we know it wan't double the price in the end.  I can't see spending more for AM parts than a kit cost.   

Berny

 Phormer Phantom Phixer

On the bench

TF-102A Delta Dagger, 32nd FIS, 54-1370, 1/48 scale. Monogram Pro Modeler with C&H conversion.  

Revell F-4E Phantom II 33rd TFW, 58th TFS, 69-260, 1/32 scale. 

Tamiya F-4D Phantom II, 13th TFS, 66-8711, 1/32 scale.  F-4 Phantom Group Build. 

 

  • Member since
    January 2003
Posted by Jeff Herne on Friday, January 6, 2006 10:39 AM
I'm going to try to take of my FSM hat and put on my modeler hat, because it's raised a few questions that I've pondered myself.

Adding details or spending money on aftermarket serves three purposes. We do it because we want to enhance the basic kit, convert it to a similar variant, or correct a problem. When it comes right down to it, there's nothing that says you're obligated to do any of those things, so it falls on a matter of personal preference. Some guys don't like to build OOB because it's not challening enough, so they'll add as much detail as they can. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

And, as someone noted previously, FSM covers a wide array of subjects, and caters to a very diverse audience. We have armor, ship, and aircraft modelers whose personal preferences range from 1/72 WWI tanks to nothing but 1/32 F-15 variants.

With that in mind, ponder this if you would. As a community, "average" modelers today are far more skilled than "average" modelers were 10 or 15 years ago, and the "average" kit is better-fitting and detailed. Couple this with the fact that the same modelers we have today are the same group we had 10 tens ago, it's inevitable that our abilities are going to improve over time.

We also have to admit that new modelers are not joining the ranks they way they did in the 1960s and 70s when we were youngsters. Those of us that stayed with the hobby have learned lots of new techniques and skills, and we're the ones that are increasing the average skill level of the modeling community as a whole. But that comes at an expense too, namely in that not enough new modelers are filling the ranks. Inevitably, we all stop building models.

The new modelers coming into the hobby are also learning considerably faster than we did, because they have access to vast resources that we didn't. In the old days, we'd go to model club meetings once a month, we got the early issues of Scale Modeler (I'm talking the mid-late 70s for me, long before FSM evolved), and that was about it. We learned by making mistake and ruining models. We didn't have the internet and modeling websites like Hyperscale, Armorama, and Steelnavy. We didn't have forums like FSM where we could post a question and have an answer within minutes.

So new modelers have it made in the shade, and most new modelers that are serious about the hobby don't stay new for long.

The quality of the average kit today is also incredible compared to what we were building years ago. Sure, that stuff is still great and fun to build, but could you imagine what kind of impact a Dragon 3-in-1 Tiger, or a Tamiya 1/48 scale P-51 would have had in 1977?

And putting my FSM hat back on for a moment...

I admit I build OOB, usually more often than not. That's the part of the hobby I consider fun. But when you try to convey that enjoyment with the photos and the written word, something is lost, because the reader isn't sharing the enjoyment of the build, or the results. So the stories that grace the pages of FSM have to accomplish something, they have to inspire and motivate, teach you something, or "wow" you. In an ideal world, a good story will do two of those things, and a great story will do all three.

Sure, you can be "wowed" by a basic build with minimal superdetailing like Matt's Vette (which is even prettier in real-life). I definitely learned something from it, and it motivated me a bit because I'm a self-proclaimed car-model wimp who can't spray gloss paint worth a hill of beans.

But the reader expects to be impressed by our stories. Sometimes he's not and we hear about it, and sometimes he is we hear about that, too. It's a rare occurance when an OOB build teaches, inspires and educates at the same time. And it's no fault of the author or modeler, it's just that many of our readers don't need to be motivated or inspired, or even educated, by every page they read. It's inevitable that every issue is going to have something that someone doesn't care for, hence the "too much armor, too much aircraft, not enough ships" threads we see on a regular basis.

Back to the average modeler hat again...

A long time ago, when I was a rookie modeler, I used to complain that I never placed at contests, that no one ever commented about my models at club meetings, and that many people were just too serious about this hobby. Well, I still think that some of us (myself included) take this a bit too seriously. But I've kept those models I built all those years ago, and when I look at them today, I wonder to myself how I could have thought that this was a Best of Show candidate when it obviously wasn't. But my skills have improved because I've motivated myself to learn new techniques, I've spent money on tools instead of more kits, and I've spent a lot of time here and on other modeling sites, reading and asking questions.

This is supposed to be fun. If you think building OOB is fun, then more power to you. If you think adding every aftermarket part is fun, go for it. Each to his own. Personally, even though I'm pushing 40, I'd rather play hockey than golf or tennis, and I can't stand NASCAR but I'll watch Formula One. I fall asleep watching basketball, but I'm rabid at hockey games. It's that same individuality in our everyday lives that makes this hobby so interesting, because we all look at it from a different perspective. I don't think any less of anyone who builds OOB instead of scratchbuilding. At this point in my life, I'm more likely to learn something from the scratchbuilder, but that doesn't mean that I can't improve my basic skills too.

No matter how you look it, it's a GREAT time to be a modeler. We've got more kits than we ever dreamed, the quality is getting better every year, and technology has brought the modeling community together like never before. I can chat with a ship modeler in Australia, or an armor modeler in Germany as easily as sending an email to Matt in the next office.

So there's my long-winded theory on the evolution of Joe Modeler...lol.

Stay tuned, film at 11 :-)

Jeff

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Friday, January 6, 2006 7:55 PM
Jeff, thanks for the short dissertation!Tongue [:P]

As one who might be able to influence the decision, you've ignored the Total Cost Of Build question entirely. I feel that including it lends a perspective to potential builders. Sort of a "Do I or Don't I" thing where knowing how much of what they see is AM and how much is skill. Then they can decide whether or not to spring for the extra dough and buy that PE kit. Or hold off and learn to sharpen their skills.

I do agree that now is a great time to be a modeler!

So long folks!

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:25 AM
Well, I think my initial comments got misinterpreted. I wasn't trying to say there is too much superdetailing in the hobby as a whole. I was speaking about within the pages of FSM. Of course each individual modeler has the freedom to do whatever he or she (wonder why women are not more represented within our hobby?) desires. That's what a hobby is all about. But I have to wonder if the price isn't part of the reason more young people aren't getting interested. Yes, the kits of today are light years ahead of what we built 30 years ago. But I do have to wonder just how much of that is necessary. Granted some of the old Aurora and Lindberg were the most godful, cheap, & inaccurate kits around. But how many of us cut our teeth on such kits. And loved every minute of it! Maybe we could attract more new modelers (and readers) if such kits were around today. (and if we could figure out how to beat the Playstation/X-Box thing). Or has the staff of FSM in particular & the Industry/hobby as a whole given up on getting new, young modelers into the hobby?
I built many a kit that I paid less than $2 as a youth. Figuring in the continued worthlessness of the dollar, that cost today would be, what?, $10 or $12 dollars now. Not many kits for sale for $10 or $12 dollars. To be honest, about half of my stash  to be built are the old Monogram armor and Revell ship kits. Yes, my modeling toolbox currently has a cost about $2000 (and it's still a bit light) but almost all of my tools are multi purpose. Few were purchased exclusively for modeling work.
And I would very much like to see the end-of-build cost list and a total time shown at the end of the article, neither of which were addressed by Jeff.
  • Member since
    April 2004
  • From: The cornfields of Ohio
Posted by crockett on Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:29 AM

 Bgrigg wrote:
Jeff, thanks for the short dissertation!Tongue [:P]

As one who might be able to influence the decision, you've ignored the Total Cost Of Build question entirely. I feel that including it lends a perspective to potential builders. Sort of a "Do I or Don't I" thing where knowing how much of what they see is AM and how much is skill. Then they can decide whether or not to spring for the extra dough and buy that PE kit. Or hold off and learn to sharpen their skills.

I do agree that now is a great time to be a modeler!

 

Hmmm.....total cost of a build? Wouldn't this be like a quote? and really I don't see  much point. I mean prices are regionally different, to include the metered cost of expendables? Maybe I'm just not clearly understanding the "total build cost", but the magazine would be in a real pickle with it's ad revenue if they started quoting MSRP on aftermarket items. Plus, the fact that some individuals would pass up a kit because they may be intimidated by a "figure $" that can only be approximate.

Coupled with the fact that costing out these kits would become repititious after awhile, I mean most of the 3&1 tank kits would be approximately the same? I guess I'm just too dense to understand the point of it. For me the question is not how much the goodies cost, but what is MY TIME worth?

 

Regards,

 

Steve

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Piscataway, NJ!
Posted by wing_nut on Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:40 AM

 Bgrigg wrote:
Jeff, thanks for the short dissertation!Tongue [:P]

As one who might be able to influence the decision, you've ignored the Total Cost Of Build question entirely. I feel that including it lends a perspective to potential builders. Sort of a "Do I or Don't I" thing where knowing how much of what they see is AM and how much is skill. Then they can decide whether or not to spring for the extra dough and buy that PE kit. Or hold off and learn to sharpen their skills.

I do agree that now is a great time to be a modeler!

 

The problem with that is even if the reader bases his or her decision on buying the kit and then loading up on the PE and AM stuff just because it is now within their means, they may not posses the needed skills to get it all together.  Some of the resin and PE sets I have used, these are “kits” themselves require a level of skill that may be beyond, “Now that I know what it costs, I can do that.”  As someone said earlier, what one person can do in 5 hours, he may not be able do as well in 10 or 15 and that applies to scratch building and AM stuff.

 

As usual these types of discussions raise many points with all being hard to argue with since they are the writer’s opinions or ideas.  And I don’t think that a little box at the end with a 1-5 rating for difficulty, cost, complexity, build time etc. will be a bad thing.   Actaully... I wouldn't mind see it there.     But whatever the criteria used to devise that rating… once its there I am sure that will propagate another thread not to dissimilar from this one.Wink [;)]

 

Marc  

  • Member since
    July 2013
Posted by DURR on Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:58 AM

 young old fart wrote:
  (and if we could figure out how to beat the Playstation/X-Box thing

 

maybe if  they made the xbox / playstations as a kit Clown [:o)]

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Saturday, January 7, 2006 10:23 AM
 crockett wrote:

 Bgrigg wrote:
Jeff, thanks for the short dissertation!Tongue [:P]

As one who might be able to influence the decision, you've ignored the Total Cost Of Build question entirely. I feel that including it lends a perspective to potential builders. Sort of a "Do I or Don't I" thing where knowing how much of what they see is AM and how much is skill. Then they can decide whether or not to spring for the extra dough and buy that PE kit. Or hold off and learn to sharpen their skills.

I do agree that now is a great time to be a modeler!

 

Hmmm.....total cost of a build? Wouldn't this be like a quote? and really I don't see  much point. I mean prices are regionally different, to include the metered cost of expendables? Maybe I'm just not clearly understanding the "total build cost", but the magazine would be in a real pickle with it's ad revenue if they started quoting MSRP on aftermarket items. Plus, the fact that some individuals would pass up a kit because they may be intimidated by a "figure $" that can only be approximate.

Coupled with the fact that costing out these kits would become repititious after awhile, I mean most of the 3&1 tank kits would be approximately the same? I guess I'm just too dense to understand the point of it. For me the question is not how much the goodies cost, but what is MY TIME worth?

 

Regards,

 

Steve



Of course it would be like a quote. Frankly I don't see your problem with the magazine quoting MSRP. They already do in the New Products section and also in Workbench Reviews. Yes, prices do change regionally, and from country to country. I long ago learned to quickly convert US to CDN for my purposes. Having an idea on the cost associated with AM parts would benefit the potential buyer by allowing them to know ahead of time what the full cost would be. Some of the people who read FSM have an hour or more drive to the LHS or don't have a computer to search online. What a surprise for them to discover that the kit is $130 and the AM another $50! I fell in love with the Fw 200C-4 Condor kit in Workbench Reviews in the Nov 05 issue, but at $129.95 MSRP that will remain a long distance love affair for quite some time! I'm glad the price was shown before I drove a two hour round trip to the LHS. (actually it would have taken me less then 20 minutes, but I'm making a point here! Work with me, people!)

Time is a completely different thing. Joe Modeler may take 400 hours to complete a kit because he scratchbuilds details none of us will see, and Frank Kitt may do the same model in 40 because he builds OOB. Joe might get paid $10/hr at his night job as a janitor while Frank pulls down $1000/hr as a top level criminal lawyer. What is their respective time worth building the kit? But I like to read how much time it took as well, by all means throw that into the list...

So long folks!

  • Member since
    April 2004
  • From: The cornfields of Ohio
Posted by crockett on Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:03 PM
 Bgrigg wrote:
 crockett wrote:

 Bgrigg wrote:
Jeff, thanks for the short dissertation!Tongue [:P]

As one who might be able to influence the decision, you've ignored the Total Cost Of Build question entirely. I feel that including it lends a perspective to potential builders. Sort of a "Do I or Don't I" thing where knowing how much of what they see is AM and how much is skill. Then they can decide whether or not to spring for the extra dough and buy that PE kit. Or hold off and learn to sharpen their skills.

I do agree that now is a great time to be a modeler!

 

Hmmm.....total cost of a build? Wouldn't this be like a quote? and really I don't see  much point. I mean prices are regionally different, to include the metered cost of expendables? Maybe I'm just not clearly understanding the "total build cost", but the magazine would be in a real pickle with it's ad revenue if they started quoting MSRP on aftermarket items. Plus, the fact that some individuals would pass up a kit because they may be intimidated by a "figure $" that can only be approximate.

Coupled with the fact that costing out these kits would become repititious after awhile, I mean most of the 3&1 tank kits would be approximately the same? I guess I'm just too dense to understand the point of it. For me the question is not how much the goodies cost, but what is MY TIME worth?

 

Regards,

 

Steve



Of course it would be like a quote. Frankly I don't see your problem with the magazine quoting MSRP. They already do in the New Products section and also in Workbench Reviews. Yes, prices do change regionally, and from country to country. I long ago learned to quickly convert US to CDN for my purposes. Having an idea on the cost associated with AM parts would benefit the potential buyer by allowing them to know ahead of time what the full cost would be. Some of the people who read FSM have an hour or more drive to the LHS or don't have a computer to search online. What a surprise for them to discover that the kit is $130 and the AM another $50! I fell in love with the Fw 200C-4 Condor kit in Workbench Reviews in the Nov 05 issue, but at $129.95 MSRP that will remain a long distance love affair for quite some time! I'm glad the price was shown before I drove a two hour round trip to the LHS. (actually it would have taken me less then 20 minutes, but I'm making a point here! Work with me, people!)

Time is a completely different thing. Joe Modeler may take 400 hours to complete a kit because he scratchbuilds details none of us will see, and Frank Kitt may do the same model in 40 because he builds OOB. Joe might get paid $10/hr at his night job as a janitor while Frank pulls down $1000/hr as a top level criminal lawyer. What is their respective time worth building the kit? But I like to read how much time it took as well, by all means throw that into the list...

 

I guess what I mean is the prices are already available, and some kits maybe on sale. A few clicks on the mouse and a little math-presto, total build cost. The Magazine may quote MSRP, and the model retailers who buy advertising may have the kit discounted. Some people would read the article, see the MSRP figures and decide " I can't afford that". This could potentially hurt sales.

 

steve

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Saturday, January 7, 2006 10:05 PM
If all I had to do is smurf around the interweb researching prices, I wouldn't need the magazine either! Lots of other magazines that do review do it. Road & Track comes to mind. I'm not put off buy the newest Bugatti Veyron 16.4 with it's $1.2 million price tag.

Well, actually I AM put off by it. Do you think maybe Bugatti should sue R&T? Clown [:o)]

The people who would be put off by a price tag would be put off by any price tag everywhere. The manufacturer knows this, however their target audience probably doesn't care, so the sales go on. I think the TC0B is a good idea, you don't. Ain't freedom of expression fun? Big Smile [:D]

So long folks!

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • From: Queensland ,Australia
Posted by richard bent on Saturday, January 7, 2006 11:26 PM
Hi guys, first of all let me say I am enjoying this discussion, there are several points of view all of which are very interesting. First of all could I make a comment on the TCOB from here "down under", as its is mostly irrelevant to me as the costs listed in FSM are in US$ therefore don't really apply to us here in Australia.  Could I also comment on the "young people being scared away from the hobby" personally I think this has more to do with the way kids are brought up today and the way society conditions them than the cost of models. For instance in Aust. I can buy  the latest Dragon 1:35 tank kit (which i personally love because it has a lot of the goodies already in the box, even tho it ain't cheap) for around $60 AUS  and the latest playstation games are about $90 and some kids have dozens of the things. Kids would rather spend hours and hours on the games console than take hours and hours to make a model, although I do generalise somewhat, but generally speaking kids want instant fun not hours of work to make something.  From what I observe a lot of parents spend a small fortune on their kids, so I dont think just the cost of models is keeping young people away. just myMy 2 cents [2c]  Have a good one!!
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: Left forever
Posted by Bgrigg on Saturday, January 7, 2006 11:47 PM
True, quoting US dollars isn't pertinent to Australians, any more than it is to Canadians. But I know what the currency rate is for Canadian, and you probably know how much it is for Australian dollars, and we both can do the math. Mind you, they sell most of the magazines within the US, so we'll just have to deal with that!

I agree that the "average" kid will spend more money on Xbox or PS2 games than on kits and they have a heck of a lot more disposable "income" than I ever had as a kid! Instant gratification is IN!

So long folks!

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, January 8, 2006 8:09 AM
Instant gratification? Well, I want Jeff Herne's skill and quality, I want it to cost $25 total and I want it now! (FOFL!!!!). And the turning the X-box's into kits (ya gotta build it before ya can play with it) ain't a half bad idea.

Honestly, though, am I the only one that budgets a build before I start? Modeling is my "cheap" hobby. I have a rough idea of what I personally am willing to spend on a kit (time and money). And if I see an article in FSM that I might want to try, the TCOB would give me a yard stick to measure by. I know that I should double (or even triple) the time shown because I know my skills and available time. And to be honest, I don't think prices for new kits vary all that much regionally. Maybe it does in other countries - well, come to think of it, even in other countries once you figure money conversion, it doesn't vary THAT much. I have Squadron Shop right down the road from me and their prices are a bit below LHS retail. And everyone that has internet access can check them no matter what country you live in. I just recently lost my supply of $25 Tamiya armor kits. The retailer was living off of old stock and they ran out. Now they have restocked and guess what? The prices have doubled. No more Tamiya armor for me for a while because I consider $50 too much to spend on a kit. My personal limit for a kit. I am working now a 1/48 Monogram Me-109G that I paid $22 off Ebay. Really too much for this kit but I wanted it. Am I gonna spend the other $27 of my limit on AM stuff for it? Nope. But that's all my personal decision. If someone else wants to spend $200 and 400 hours on a build, more power to them. But let's at least get the yard stick.
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Upper left side of the lower Penninsula of Mich
Posted by dkmacin on Sunday, January 8, 2006 8:53 AM
I go back to my first post to clearify my point, I build for the easiest critic in the world, ME.
I build for my shelf, myself. OOB makes sense to me. But, in some cases what I call OOB is not OOB to the rest of you.
I have been modeling for quite sometime so my supply of "add on" materials is vast, wires, gears, glues, paints, decals, spare parts box(es), PE frets, PE pieces, flocking, etc. So if I add some stuff, I still consider it OOB, though "Out of Surplus Parts" may be closer to reality.
I do not consider it superdetailing, or plain detailing and neither would anyone who would see it! LOL.  The modeler who is inspired to add working zues fasteners to a 1/43 scale race car has my attention and admiration, but not my desire to duplicate, no matter the cost. My skills being what they are, I could not duplicate it anyway! (The mind is willing, but arthritic fingers are no longer capable, if they ever were!)
For me, personnally, it doesn't matter if the builder spent $5.00, 0r $500.00, a weekend  or several years on his masterpiece, It inspires me to get to the bench to build and enjoy, with no thought of duplicating it.

Don


I know it's only rock and roll, but I like it.
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Nashotah, WI
Posted by Glamdring on Sunday, January 8, 2006 9:49 AM

Going back to quoting prices, I would like to see that done at the end of an article.  I don't want to see the MSRP though, I want to see actually what the builder spent on the build.  We all know we can find the kit cheaper on the internet, so lets reflect that in the magazine.

Or would the LHS start boycotting FSM? Smile [:)]

Also, do we not want to show the price because it will demonstrate our obsession with the hobby?Laugh [(-D]

On a side note in regards to PS2 or Xbox games, I said last year I would never again buy a game for more than $30.  I have a load of games, and I have been burned to many times on $50 games and I end up beating them in 5 hours, and they have no replayability.  The only 2 games I broke my vow for was Grand Theft Auto: San ANdreas and Star Wars: Battlefront 2.  Both which I knew for a fact I would get hours of playability out of, and I was right.

Robert 

"I can't get ahead no matter how hard I try, I'm gettin' really good at barely gettin' by"

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Pensacola, FL
Posted by Foster7155 on Sunday, January 8, 2006 11:16 AM

This disscussion has taken a few turns and is really leaning to two different directions.

The first item of focus is on the quantity of "detailed" model builds in the pages of FSM and I think both I and Jeff Herne adequately addressed that issue. Articles in the magazine run the gammit from OOTB to super-detailed with no level of construction getting any more or less exposure than any other level. Appealing to ALL levels of modelers is the goal of the magazine and will likely not change in the near future.

This second item of focus - money - raises some interesting questions. Would the inclusion of a cost breakdown really help a potential modeler? Here are some thoughts.

If my current StuG III project were to be published in the magazine and they wanted a cost breakdown, I would provide the following:

  1. DML kit #6033 *
  2. Royal Model detal set #109 *
  3. Jaguar resin interior set #63507 *
  4. CMK barrel and manlet #HB001 *
  5. TOTAL COST - all items with the "*" = $50.00 USD

Would this really help a modeler decide whether or not to build a model? Would it represent what they would pay to build the same kit to the same level?

What if an FSM employee built a model and the list looked like this:

  1. Tamiagawa kit #A8765 - Free, gift
  2. Aber PE set #A8765B - Free, donated by Aber for evaluation
  3. Blackbox cockpit #A8765C - $10.00, found in discount bin at LHS
  4. Plastruct sheet and rod styrene - Approximately $1.00 out of existing stockpile
  5. TOTAL COST - $11.00

Would this breakdown help any more?

I personally have no opinion one way or the other. FSM can include (or exclude) any information they choose. After all, it's their magazine. An inclusion of a "price list" might help a few modelers, but IMHO, I think most modelers would simply look at the list, say "that's interesting", and move on to the next article.

Any thoughts?

Robert Foster

Pensacola Modeleers

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.