Pics of my first diorama...technically.

First, sweet diorama, Love it, put a smile on my face.

At first the hottie looked out of place but lots of people as late are going for the old school look starting with Gwen Stefani and other stars. I'd say that she's in modern times going to a party dressed old school. 

Well, I've said all I'm gonna say about it...  It's been a good discussion, and I know that I've certainly learned a few things about how others see the art of the diorama...

I look at builds from a competetive standpoint, and not just a build for the sheer enjoyment of the work, since they're two different worlds... That said, Overall, it's a good build and I'll give it a solid 7.5 outta 10, with a half-point penalty for the overhang and parallel guardrail... But, since it's a first-build, I'll spot one point, for a total score of 8.5... It's a fun piece, just enough whimsy, doesn't require a long explaination of the action, and an unusual subject to boot, and it encompasses not one, but two modeling genres, aviation and automotive...

Now gentlemen, please excuse me while I goose-step back to the Dio-Nazi Reichstag and get ready to invade a Polish diorama...

 

 

 

Hans von Hammer wrote:

So I keep stuff off-center and angled in order to make the "Snapshot" effect more noticeable, more random rather than a posed or planned effect...  Like when you take a photograph of something, you don't spend 20 minutes with the camera on a tripod and moving it around until everything's lined up in the viewfinder... You shoot from where you stand, just making sure that the stuff you want in the shot gets in it. And that's what a diorama is essentially, to me anyway, a 3-D photograph showing things doing what they do in their environment... It takes a conscious effort to appear random and candid, so I forego the "strings in the field", which is what the edges of the base are, IMHO...

For the record, in the photographic arts there is a style, called Formalism, in which everything is lined up and nice and neat and formal.  It's beauty relies on the aesthetic of clean lines and formal arrangments of color and content, but not so much the content itself.  It is not for everyone as it lacks the spontaneous element found in other photographic styles.

As for dios and the rules therein... like any art form, you lcan earn the rules, then you can master the rules and then eventually you can break the rules with a new paradigm.

Insofar as this dio is concerned- aside from the anachronistic dress of the woman, I think that it is a winner.

 

Just my unlearned opinions.

I LIKE your thinking...outside the box.  I'm gonna join you in doing a little more of that myself, thanks!

That's the problem... Part of the dio is OUTSIDE the "box"..

While it's indeed an art-form, some rules need to be followed as well as broken, although I consider them to be general guidelines rather than rules...  For me, things that are parallel to other things always look to me as if they are staged, following the "Dress right - Dress" military rule. It always reminds me of one of my former battalion commander's obsession with parking vehicles in an open field motor park in staright lines, using a length of commo-wire to form a straight line that the front wheels of every gun truck MUST park on top of in order to look pretty from the air when he flew over...   I'm not talking about a permanent or semi-permenant base either, I'm talking about a Tactical Assembly Area (TAA)field that the gun trucks and howitzers would be in for less than 24 hours, lol..

So I keep stuff off-center and angled in order to make the "Snapshot" effect more noticeable, more random rather than a posed or planned effect...  Like when you take a photograph of something, you don't spend 20 minutes with the camera on a tripod and moving it around until everything's lined up in the viewfinder... You shoot from where you stand, just making sure that the stuff you want in the shot gets in it. And that's what a diorama is essentially, to me anyway, a 3-D photograph showing things doing what they do in their environment... It takes a conscious effort to appear random and candid, so I forego the "strings in the field", which is what the edges of the base are, IMHO...

 

Thanks to EVERYONE who participated in this dialogue generated by my diorama.  That alone is the "greatest" review anyone could have ever gotten.  To have something that I created and displayed here cause such passionate, intelligent and worthwhile discussion just elates. 

It also encourages, to complete the next diorama.  It's in the works...wait for it, wait for it...

After all this, I may even consider myself "avant garde"!

mg.mikael wrote:

For you first dio it's simply amazing, Arthur! Gotta ask, what product(if any) did you use for the road surface?

Thanks for the compliment I'm glad you asked about the concrete surface.  I've seen so many others being befuddled by the challenge of duplicating concrete to scale.  Well, I just used a single layer of Woodland Scenics Plaster Cloth, smoothed over while wet and scored with a knife when dried and then painted with Polly S Acrylic "Concrete" paint.  It turned out so good, I amazed myself for a first timer.

 

ajlafleche wrote:

With respect to Hans...rules are meant to be broken. Your layout as it is does two things. First, the straight, parallel to the edge road suggests a very long strightaway as seen in the southwestern desert. The helo overhang can also work in making it clear there is a world beyond the edge of the base. The classic car is good, but see if you can find a more modern female figure. She looks like she just arrived from 1957 with the long dress and matching hat. Of course, you could add a thin guy in a suit in the corner, arms crossed, holding a cigarette, and retitle it, "For your consideration,..."

I LIKE your thinking...outside the box.  I'm gonna join you in doing a little more of that myself, thanks! 

I wish I couldv'e found better subjects for my diorama, but I started with the 1/48 police units and it is soooo hard to find civilian subjects in this scale, at least that is what I have found so far.  Any leads to more variety of subjects in 1/48 is always appreciated. Thanks again. Art.

the first is the only one that is parallel, the rest are on a ever so slight angle, if you look closley.

That being said, its not impossible for a parallel dio to win awards, everyone breaks the mold, its just that only the best actuially get noticed when they do it, IE if your builds arent top notch, there less likey to overlook the parallel base, imho.

smeagol the vile wrote:

Now, I dont know about the overhang, I never noticed it on dios before, but as far as the angle of the diorama... You have to understand that in a community such as ours, certain norms are set by your peers.  These norms might not necesserially be rules, but dios are based on them, one of them being that a dio should not have parallel lines along the edge of the base. If a dio has them it does not mean that its subpar in any way, but it doesnt follow the norms of our community, it happens in every field, you just have to adapt.

Dan Capuano, google him, out of New York, produces huige dioramas very regularly. Most of his scenes are set parallel to the base. He has taken multiple best of shows with these.

http://turkorama.kitmaker.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=2150

http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=2148

http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=2151

http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=719

 

Now, I dont know about the overhang, I never noticed it on dios before, but as far as the angle of the diorama...

You have to understand that in a community such as ours, certain norms are set by your peers.  These norms might not necesserially be rules, but dios are based on them, one of them being that a dio should not have parallel lines along the edge of the base.

If a dio has them it does not mean that its subpar in any way, but it doesnt follow the norms of our community, it happens in every field, you just have to adapt.

Look, just because it's a pet-peeve of mine doesn't mean that it's getting picked-on OR over-looked either (Truthfully, I rather resent that implication, my friend)... As I stated, it looks like poor planning on the modeler's part and THAT'S part of building a diorama...  Poor planning is just as much a gig as poor paint, figures, structures, you name it...  It's all part and parcel of attention to detail... Besides that, I've never gigged anyone on a detail that I myself haven't been gigged on... I've lost because of over-hang. parallel edges, no details inside a turret that has an open hatch, floating roadwheels, you name it, I done it... Or DIDN'T do it.. When I asked why I scored the way I did, I got answers, and  didn't repeat the mistake.  Rather, I found new ones to make, lol..

I've also judged and awarded accordingly dioramas WITH those "sins" simply because they were the best ones on the table, regardless of overhang or whatever... It was just that the point-loss wasn't enough to make it lose out to another one.. Other than that ONE thing, everything else was spectacular, or at least really, really GOOD, so it didn't matter... That doesn't mean that it would win at the NEXT one though... Does overhang count against you? Absolutely. Does it automatically make the diorama a losing one? Absolutely NOT... BUT... If you're tied neck & neck with another who DID add the two or three inches to the base needed to prevent it, it can cost you... Conversely, a guy that has the overhang can win if the other guys aren't up to the level of planning, layout, composition, story-line, accuracy (both kit/scratchbuilding and historical, if applicable), attention to detail, etc. that he is...  Unless theirs is in a fantasy/fiction category, you can't tell me that you'd overlook a T-72 being used in a Battle of the Bulge dio or a Fokker D VII attacking a Fortress in a B-17 shadow-box would ya? 'Course not.. It all boils down to planning and the "5-P Rule" applies: "Prior Planning Prevents Poor Performance"...

Pet Peeves are just a matter of opinon and everyone has opinions whether they're right or wrong. They have NO place at a contest where the rules are clearly stated.

Agreed... But just because a particular shortcoming, mistake, or gig happens to also be a pet-peeve of mine doesn't mean I can't be impartial...  It, in fact, became a pet-peeve BECAUSE I made the same mistake in my own work and it cost me, so I make sure that I tell folks what I did wrong (on several occasions)...  Back when I was competing, I didn't have an internet forum to bounce around ideas, no club, nothin' to help me, no one to ask to find out these things that would help me become a better diorama-builder...  I just wanted to point out stuff that can help someone else from makin' my mistakes down the road... 

Now that that's all said, I'll summarize by saying that, although you don't have to to take my advice ( I never expect nor require anyone to do so anyway), it certainly can't hurt your build if you do...  

But if you ever lose because of overhang, parallel edges, or the like, I promise I will NOT say, "I told ya so.." 

 

But I will make the face...

 

 

Hans von Hammer wrote:

Try explaining that to a contest judge though... Although some folks like it, it's a pet-peeve of mine and some pretty good dioramas have lost points when I judged at contests for that.. You've got a point with the "world beyond the base", but it usually comes off being judged as poor planning rather than a deliberate attempt...  But, like I said, it's a pet-peeve of mine. As for the parallell edges, I think those takes a lot away from the "snapshot" effect of a diorama...

There is no place for "pet peeves" in judging.. The rules are clear and "opinion" isn't on them. I don't like modern armor but I voted one "best armor" at the last show I helpe judge because it was the best.. PERIOD.

As far as the "pet peeves" mentioned here I would agree that a few degrees of angle on the road would have made it a bit more visual but only just. It certainly has nothing to do with the quality of the build (Which is very nice btw).. As far as the overhang, again that's a matter of opinion and if you'll look beyond FSM you'll see some of the bes modelers in the world doing it all the time with no consequence at the judging table... To count off on someone at a contest because of overhang would be wrong and moronic.. Again, I personally don't let things overhang the base if at all possible but it's more for safety reasons like Renarts pointed out.. Too easy to snag on stuff..

Basically.. Pet Peeves are just a matter of opinon and everyone has opinions whether they're right or wrong. They have NO place at a contest where the rules are clearly stated.

would you advocate or find no problem with someone that didn't like Japanese Aircraft eliminating those aircraft from judging based solely upon a pet peeve?

Oh, I'd have a problem alright... But that's not the same thing as we're talking about here... It just happens that I have a pet peeve that also has a precedent in diorama construction... So there's no worry about me basing a decision solely on a pet peeve... But it would result in points being deducted, same as seam lines or ejector pin-marks... I'd also deduct for sloppy base edges and such...  You see, the groundwork in a diorama is evey bit as important as any kits on ground. Everything on a diorama effects everything else on it... On a display model, it's purely the model itself being judged and overhang and parallel edges aren't an issue... But I'm pretty sure that, given two dioramas that are too close to call in every aspect but one has an overhanging wingtip or such, the other guy that kept an extra inch or two of base material and skewed the runway five degrees off-center would take the ribbon... Conversely, a well-done diorama with all the models, structures, foliage, and "technical stuff" well done but has a half-dozen pop-eyed figures with straight outta the bottle "Flesh" on the face and open-handed grips on an 11-pound rifle will slide down a few notches too...

At any rate, I too agree that it most certainly does come down to personal choices... But I also advocate not picking up any bad habits as well... Also, I'm not one of the "go along to get along" type of judge when I judge at contests...

Hell, maybe I AM a "Dio-Nazi... Don't mean to be though... Like I said earlier, I'm just passionate about dioramas, since I feel they're at the top of the modeling food-chain, lol...

 

Although that kind of work is visually stunning, I don't count them as dioramas, and I doubt that, at a contest, any would be entered into the diorama category... They most likely would be entered into the "Figure" category... IMHO, they fall more in line with those that build display models and set 'em on a landscaped base with the gun tube hanging over "the Line"...  The main idea there is to show off the model itself, rather than tell a story using the models, figures, structures et al.. This's where we get into grey areas around here, I reckon... Stuff like trees and bushes that "break the plane" aren't that big a deal, but when the gun tube is hangin' three inches outside the border, or the track roadwheels are on the ground but the idler and drive sprocket are outside, it looks like a lack of attention to detail that's every bit as obvious (and unwanted) as panel lines and ejection-pin marks...

Overall though, I think it's better to just add the two or three inches needed during the mock-up phase of planning.  You can always shorten a base, or turn a road then, as opposed to after the fact, when you've just finished adding the name plate, lol...  So, to quote St. Shepard of Monogram from the Gospel according to Paine "Never Put Anything Parallel To The Edge Of The Base".

Just to further emphasize, from How to Build Dioramas:

You want to maintain an illusion of spontaneity to give the impression the groundwork extends beyound the confines of the base.  If any element in your diorama is parallel to the edge, it convinces the viewer that the scene was constructed to fit the confines of the base, rather than the base made to fit around the scene.

This's where my main point comes into play.. Convincing the viewer..  Of course, if you never plan on showing your work to anyone, or just to a very limited few, this doesn't matter nearly as much as it would when your work is being viewed by dozens, maybe hundreds of people at a show or contest... 

 

Hans von Hammer wrote:

Try explaining that to a contest judge though... Although some folks like it, it's a pet-peeve of mine and some pretty good dioramas have lost points when I judged at contests for that.. You've got a point with the "world beyond the base", but it usually comes off being judged as poor planning rather than a deliberate attempt...  But, like I said, it's a pet-peeve of mine. As for the parallell edges, I think those takes a lot away from the "snapshot" effect of a diorama...

Hans, I am a firm believer of to each his own, but for the sake of discussion, under that same line of thinking, would you advocate or find no problem with someone that didn't like Japanese Aircraft eliminating those aircraft from judging based solely upon a pet peeve? Regardless of the technical ability of the builder? I would like to think that judges can look beyond pet peeves at works and judge based upon the criteria set forth by the contest organizers. After all, deducting points because of personal bias is really no different than an elimination (if its close) and is only a matter of semantics. IPMS has no criteria that addresses that issue nor do any of the figure shows I've been too. And I'm with Al on this issue as well, I've seen several dioramas, vignettes and figure/model displays, that have taken top honors that have "colored outside the lines" by adding either a overhang or some sort of visual continuation that may utilize not only air or space over and or around the base but in some cases that "spilled" down the side of the base and almost onto the exhibit table.

While I agree with you that there is more visual interest in skewing angles and or setting things slightly off line or to use odd numbers of figures or to weight presentations to a side to create visual interest or create some sort of conflict/tension etc. to the scene, there are many instances that a "on line and linear" display works just as well.

Now personaly I try to shy away from overhangs but solely based upon the contest tables getting crowded and the potential for damage by careless co-exhibitors or onlookers "scooting" bases around to get a better look and not seeing the overhang or bumping their pieces into mine. A base as a frame for the piece also makes a nice safety when carrying pieces to and from shows.

And yet by clicking here, you can see what Marion and Alan Ball, acredited as Grand masters at MFCA last month, do with their figures/vignettes/small dios and bases, breaking both rules regularly.

Well, y'all can go ahead with the overhangs and parallel edges & scenery, but I can safely say that I've never seen any Master Modelers that do that... Verlinden, Paine, Letterman, Zaloga all recommend against it... Me personally, I figure if you want overhang, you build displays, not dioramas... 

It's not THAT big a deal when you're building for yourself I guess, but when you compete, little things like that can keep a Good Diorama from being a Great one and a Great one from being the winner... The grondwork on the base is just as much of a model as the kits are, and you wouldn't overhang your groundwork would ya? Or say, telegraph wires, buildings, rails, etc... All that stuff is a model too...

Don't mean to come off as Dio-Nazi though.. I just love the "Art of the Diorama",lol...

I really like it, I think you did a great job on the road, as far as it goes, I dont think the overhand or the parallel base really matter for this build, it fits like was said earlier.

All in all, you can look at all the posts, I'd say its a success eh'

Hans von Hammer wrote:

ajlafleche wrote: With respect to Hans...rules are meant to be broken. Your layout as it is does two things. First, the straight, parallel to the edge road suggests a very long strightaway as seen in the southwestern desert. The helo overhang can also work in making it clear there is a world beyond the edge of the base. Try explaining that to a contest judge though... Although some folks like it, it's a pet-peeve of mine and some pretty good dioramas have lost points when I judged at contests for that..

 I think if you are judging a dio, its important to see what works and what doesn't on a compositional level. (that is quite apart from technical stuff like filling seams and ejector pin holes etc) In this case the parallel road to the dio edge does work, in my opinion. There are plenty of times where it looks wrong, but sometimes it's undeniably right (another time I think it works is Manny's courtyard scene). The important thing is to look and assess whether it is the right thing to do in that instance.  In the end it comes down to personal taste (and if its its a personal peeve, there is no getting around it!).

plastickjunkie wrote:

They had some lady in Palm Beach a while back call 911 cause Mcdonald's was out of fries!

Yeah, and that lady called THREE times!!! (Though I thought they were out of McNuggets, but hey, why sweat the details, right?)

Nice little dio you got there.  I'm split between Hans and Al on this one - I don't mind the overhang for just the reason that Al said, but the parallel base bugs me, but just a tiny bit!!

I do think the figure is a little out of date for the scene...  If it is Cali, maybe an 18-ish blond in a pair of white short shorts and a bikini top....  OH MANNY, I think we need you.....

This scene may have been produced by the young woman's call to 911 regarding her car  being on fire and smoking out of control!!!!   Only to find out when the troops get there that it was actually overheated!  The 911 service get some really weird calls. They had some lady in Palm Beach a while back call 911 cause Mcdonald's was out of fries! I do agree that the lady's clothing looks vintage but maybe she was going to a fund raising event in that fancy looking car? It is certainly very original and different.

As one who has judged every type of model for over 25 years I'd be talking to myself. My bigger judging problem, as suggested previously, would be the look of the woman (very 50's)  in realtion to the chopper and motorcycle cop (contemporary).

ajlafleche wrote:

With respect to Hans...rules are meant to be broken. Your layout as it is does two things. First, the straight, parallel to the edge road suggests a very long strightaway as seen in the southwestern desert. The helo overhang can also work in making it clear there is a world beyond the edge of the base.

Try explaining that to a contest judge though... Although some folks like it, it's a pet-peeve of mine and some pretty good dioramas have lost points when I judged at contests for that..

You've got a point with the "world beyond the base", but it usually comes off being judged as poor planning rather than a deliberate attempt...  But, like I said, it's a pet-peeve of mine. As for the parallell edges, I think those takes a lot away from the "snapshot" effect of a diorama...  

I love it! Very cleaver- especially with the title. It did make me laugh, so I’d say you did excellently in getting the point across, which is usually the hardest thing to get right.

Another rule/non-rule/personal preference: the name plate is actually on your groundwork- not that it’s a bad thing, and now that I think about it- it does a good job of taking up empty space. It just kind of kills the scene’s sense of realism, unless a large billboard broke apart and landed in the center lane that just so happened to have your title. Just my 2 cents, I really do enjoy it, and I know you wanted the light mood of the subject to ease in the crit. So all that being said- this is an awesome piece! I really like how the dog looks like it’s barking at the chopper, it’s very realistic and it appears that all aspects are interacting with each other.

For you first dio it's simply amazing, Arthur! Gotta ask, what product(if any) did you use for the road surface?

With respect to Hans...rules are meant to be broken. Your layout as it is does two things. First, the straight, parallel to the edge road suggests a very long strightaway as seen in the southwestern desert. The helo overhang can also work in making it clear there is a world beyond the edge of the base.

The classic car is good, but see if you can find a more modern female figure. She looks like she just arrived from 1957 with the long dress and matching hat. Of course, you could add a thin guy in a suit in the corner, arms crossed, holding a cigarette, and retitle it, "For your consideration,..."

Hans, I can't believe I didn't realize those things myself.  I've been looking at dioramas from around the world via the net for the past year and only when you mentioned it did it hit me about the overhanging and the angle of the base. 

In this case, your words were worth a thousand pictures.  Thanks.

Clever little scene and funny one at that... Overall, an excellent job with just a couple flaws that I'll point out...

One is my own personal pet peeve, the dreaded overhanging model... The helicopter's tailboom pokes out too far.. For future reference, always lay out your base with completed or semi-completed models i order to make sure the entire scene fits on the base.

Two, the road is parallel to the base edge, another faux-paux.. The models are good, they were placed well, but the road needed to be at an angle as well... Even as little as 10 degrees...

Just FYI though... Again, Great job...