When is a model no longer considered a model?

when your cat gets hold of it and it is smashed on the floor

or when you give a seven year old their 1st model and it becomes a mound of melted plastic

The main difficulty seems to be in the acknowledgement of gray areas - if I build a 1/72-scale USS Lexington (CV-2) and it takes me say 6 years to do it - to me it is still a model.  If it is accurately built, scaled, painted and everything else - it may be more - it may be considered by some to be a replica and possibly even a work of art - but it is still a model, too.  Obviously it can be more than one of these things at once - the same way an F-14 can be a fighter and a bomber.  Take off, drop some bombs, shoot down some MiGs, and land.  Fighter and bomber, all rolled into one.

I did the work, I built it (no matter what material I used), I painted it - all reliant on whatever knowledge and skills I possess.  Toys like the GI Joe vehicles are mass-produced by machinery - I wouldn't call them models.  Out of the factory they are identical.  Model kits rely on the individual builder to give them life and an identity of their own, no matter how beautiful or hideous it may end up being.  It is still my model.  Nobody else did it, and nobody else is able to do what I did.  It's not a competition - it's just the builder against themselves.  Seriously - do you build a model strictly to win a competition? Is that why you do it?  No - you build it because you want to see what you can make out of those parts that come out of the box - whether they be plastic, resin, wood...whatever.

There's a gray area where something like a diecast car - a replica, which is bought already finished, and involves no skill or knowledge on the part of the buyer, is on the low end, if you will.  then there are things beyond a replica like that, where some skill or knowledge might be required in order to complete it.  Still a replica, not a model?  Possibly - if you go to the toy store and buy a R/C tank that runs and is complete OOB...that is a replica.  If you have to build it, but afterwards it still does the same things as the OOB version - well, in between there is the gray area.  How much individual work is required in order to qualify it for model status?  It's an opinion thing, is what it boils down to.  But that doesn't mean there can't be debate.  Debate is fun. 

But personally, I think a model requires a little of everything - building, painting - representing how you personally feel about the subject.  It may not always end up looking the way you planned or dreamed it would - and that's part of the challenge.  Maybe that is what makes it a model - the possibility or risk of failure.

Some of the previous replies bring to light my third criteria for "a model".

IMHO a model (as defined in our hobby) must be a unique, one-time creation. What do I mean? The reason I don't consider Tonka trucks, scale railroad cars, or diecast products "models" is because I feel they are in fact replicas of the original. The person who actually sat down and cut, glued, and painted an original boxcar for an HO railroad set, is definitely a modeler and they created a model. However, all the factory stamped reproductions that came afterward are not models, in my book. There are many dictionary definitions which would not agree with my interpretation, but that's the way I feel.

jinithith2 wrote:

well I guess it stops being a model when you make the real thing. but then again, the term "real thing", can be interpretted many ways. like by "real" some ppl define it as "having all of the functions". well I can buy a kit of a desklamp and build it to function like one. a model does not have to be styrene whitemetal, brass, and resin. so I can buy an unassembled desklamp and make it and call it a model. I DUNNO!!!!

I would say the lamp in question is a kit, but not a model, in the same vein as unassembled furniture, a pre-fab house or a "kit car." 

well I guess it stops being a model when you make the real thing.

but then again, the term "real thing", can be interpretted many ways. like by "real" some ppl define it as "having all of the functions". well I can buy a kit of a desklamp and build it to function like one. a model does not have to be styrene whitemetal, brass, and resin. so I can buy an unassembled desklamp and make it and call it a model.

I DUNNO!!!!

1:1 can't be the deal breaker...there are scale model bugs that are much larger than life.

I guess it's no longer a model when it's the real thing. If it's some sort of 3 dimensional duplicate/representation of a real or fictional person or object, then it's a model, regardless if it's produced by a guy with a piece of wood and a carving knife oe a CAD-CAN robot, it's a model. I would consider flats more of a painting than a model. Even a toy tank that's supposed to look like an Abrams is a model, though maybe not a very good one.

i think when a guy spends 3-4 yrs of his life on one (model) like a 1/144 scale a/c carrier

i is no longer  a model it  is beyond a mere model  it may then qualify as a work of art

I am not trying to disqualify anything.  And I am not saying because something moves or has a light on it, it no longer qualifies as a model.  I was just wondering after this discussion that took place at my LHS what others would think about it.  This one guy was pretty serious when he said that if you build a large scale one-off that moves, it is now a replica.  I disagreed for the most part.  I think it would lean toward more of a replica than a model but it is still a model. 

Interesting take on the prepainted idea though.  Is a model that comes prepainted still a model?  Does a model have to be built, glued and painted, to be labeled a model?       

Let's see,

 If they really let themselves go, and overindulge in drugs, alcohol, and food binges, and start to look like a...

Oh wait...You mean a scale model.

Seriously, though...

I personally don't think that articulation or mechanization is a disqualifier. After all, I look at the model train hobby, that involves lights, motion, and even smoke or running water.

For that matter look at some of the animated dioramas that you see at the Museum of Natural History in NY, or even the props used in films. Were the original spaceships for the Star Wars and Star Trek movies, or the blasters and phasers models? I would say so. They can also be described as props, but I do confess I tend to see them as extremely well-scratchbuilt models 

I think where I would draw the line (Caveat: I am a die-hard scratchbuilder/basher) is that I think that a model requires a certain amount of actual effort and craft being put into the assembly and finishing.

For example, the 3 3/4 GI Joe toys from the 1980s and 90s required some basic assembly and application of decals, but I would not describe them as models, even though they were rather nice designs with a sometimes surprising amount of detail.

Just a few thoughts. Good topic! 

For me, the term "scale model" implies a certain static quality. Once you start including things like remote control, working engines, moving parts (excessive), or the like, the more accurate terms (IMHO) would become "functional replica" or "operational miniature" rather than a model.

Additionally, a scale model should require certain techniques and skills for assembly on the part of the "modeler". Is an R/C plane a model? Maybe. There are several questions to answer. Did the plane require painting or did it come pre-painted? Did assembly require "modeling techniques" like adhesives or was it simply a "bolt-together" kit?

Those are just a couple of my thoughts. There are obviously others, but I'll hold off until other members have chimed in...

When is a model no longer considered a model?

On Tuesdays, Thursdays and Holidays in odd numbered months. Duh....

my guess would be anything OTHER than 1/1 scale