Thank You " G "----T.B.

Hey, jeffpez!  Just some 2-cents worth on the points derived from your original posting.  Working in reverse a bit, the number of kit announcements may seem to be declining but it is still difficult to keep track of all that is happening in the kit release world, plus there is an issue with currency since so much is covered here on the web - paper mags have a tough time keeping up (I find the real value is in the mag's kit reviews which are actual builds and not just a survey of the kit contents...)

The term for 'greeblies' has come about over time but really is essentially 'kit bashing' of another degree & a technique used more and more after 2001: A Space Odyssey where movie SFX model shops enhanced the base model designs with many small, highly detailed parts (usually from stacks of commercial plastic model kits) depicting functional features.  The result was a visual complexity that promoted the illusion of full size machines, directly analogous to the multi-layered and weathered painted finishes we use on our models - and with the same goal.

A few months back, our local model club had a themed 'build challenge' aimed at taking three model kits and 'bashing' them to make something new (and not necessarily "real").  We posted the results on our 'Hampton Roads Scale Modelers' website if you are interested in taking a look.  I did one that I am thought turned out really well (using an Airfix Ka-25 helo, a 1/76 Fujimi Stug and a 1/48 Minicraft P-38) and was a blast to do and which illustrates the 'greeblie' concept.

By the way, I agree with the contrast in some of the articles.  This might be improved by using some photo-editing tools to change up the background colors, though this might present a challenge.  It also could have not been apparent until the proofs came out, perhaps too late to correct it.  Still, images have improved greatly for the most part (as I realized when I was leafing through some old Scale Modeler mags...talk about contrast!)

Kind regards, Robert

I was referring to the new product announcements in the beginning of the mag, not kit reviews. It seems that there has been a slow but steady decline in the number of new kit announcements listed each month.

If you look at the engine deck of Monogram's 'Galactica' you can see multiple Tiger tank hulls. There's a couple of other parts that you can identify here and there as well even in the kit form. A guy in our club had a resin B-Wing kit where you could clearly see part of the wing from a F/A-18 worked into the lower wing. 

If you visit the Udvar-Hazy expansion to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum you can see the mothership from 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind'. And it's covered in kit parts including the tanks from railroad tanker cars. 

Probably the most over the top though is the Italian space epic 'Starcrash'. If the FX look like they were done by some guy in his basement- well they were done by a single guy working our of his garage. I've seen the movie's FX trashed but frankly I have a lot of respect for one guy building all the models and then filming them - all by himself. And some of the ships like the 'Starhawk' look pretty good.

However the real cherry on the top of 'Starcrash' is the 'floating city.' It was added to the script last minute and the FX guy had to build and film it in a single weekend. And he filmed it in in loving detail, if you watch the Blu-Ray version (yes I own it!) you can see what look like Thermos bottles with rubber band tank treads wrapped around them and spues with the parts still attached cemented in there. And the whole thing spray painted garish shades of the primary colours. It's awful, painful, and utterly wonderful all at the same time. 

I couldn't find a really good photo of it online: 

I have not noticed either a decline in number, nor in length of the review.  Most of the reviews are a page.  On a really hot kit they may have a two-page review.  There is an occasional half page.  I suspect that the length of the reviewer's manuscript influences the length of a review somewhat- it seems like most reviewers are independent contributors. I suspect too that the editors outline a page count and organization for a good bit of time before the deadline for that issue going to press, and they are reluctant to alter the number of pages for regular areas like reviews, new products, hints and kinks, etc.

The number of reviews sometimes surprises me with how many reviews they do each issue.  To me the reviews are one of the big features of the mag, and I think they do a good job.

Just as an aside, and still kinda/sorta on topic: It's fitting that Bandai has production rights to the SW franchise models, considering the number of Bandai  (mostly 1/48 armour) donor kits that were used to create the original studio models. 

I remember the Jagdpanther casemate. It's down in the wedge-shaped well behind the starboard docking tube.

PS: Every time I watch the old '70's BSG, I can't help seeing the upper hull of Tamiya's West German Marder APC on the top of the forward hull behind the bridge area.

GMorrison

The science of using Greeblies is called Gizmology.

 

In Shep we trust.

   Awesome Baron, another reason to watch Stsr Wars...like I needed it...but I'm gonna have to look for it now. LOL 

    Pez, I haven't noticed a decline in production of kits as much as "new" releases of the odd variant of exsisting kits, i.e. Tigers, Panthers, some aircraft. I have a broad interest so I keep my stash well supplied, however a person with limited interest I can see becoming bored or disenchanted with the hobby.

No, I didn't like the article nor many of the others but that doesn't mean you still can't learn anything by reading them. 

Is someone who searches thru their spares box a Gizmologist?

Another observation based on the last year or so - is the New Product section getting smaller? As great as the new kits are as well as all their after market goodies does anyone else think their numbers are slowly shrinking?

armornut

   Greeblies are little parts that take up space and have no practical purpose except for conveying the impression of a working system.

    Lucas Films originally produced Star Wars and in building the Star Wars "universe" model makers attacked thier spare parts bins to build ships and equipment to populate said universe. Basically if it fit and looked practical it was used.

Like the Sd Kfz 251 on the bee-hind of the AT-AT

The science of using Greeblies is called Gizmology.

Hi ;

    I do know where you speak of . Have you ever built a Jagdpanther ? If not , it isn't that easy to pick out , But it's there . Now the Mark Fit Strong is setting solution for decals , of the liquid sort . Greeblies : a full article was done some time back on the use of lots of little bitty parts from many diverse sources and parts boxes . Best description -" Greeblies " ! T.B.    P.S. For instance I have a group of boxes with car , airplane , truck , ship and sci-fi model stuff , all little parts , Engine parts etc . Those are Greeblies .

 Oh -Note; I am 74 .

So I guess you didn't like the article.

Tamiya Mark Fit Strong is equivalent to MicroSol & MicroSet

The Jagdpanther casement would refer to a part from a kit of the WW2 German Jagdpanther. As mentioned, they built those ships from lots of model parts and just used what ever look right.

   Greeblies are little parts that take up space and have no practical purpose except for conveying the impression of a working system.

    Lucas Films originally produced Star Wars and in building the Star Wars "universe" model makers attacked thier spare parts bins to build ships and equipment to populate said universe. Basically if it fit and looked practical it was used.