Merkava II

Soap box??  LOL I kinda like it up here, so I wont be comming down.  As for the tone of my writing, I didn't think it was nasty or meant to create issues.  I enjoy this forum, as much as possible.  I don't think I'm on a soap box as much as I don't think you are on one either!  It's a give and take forum, and I like it that way!  USMC you're entitled to your opinion, and that's cool, but I didn't mean it to sound mean or nasty.  I am however deeply connected to the IDF, and I do get over passionate about it, and perhaps it was spilling into what I wrote. 

Doog, I wasn't trying to start a fight, but I was doing what I'm entitled to do, share my opinion. 

As for calming down, I'm not heated at all...  No need to be!

As a side note, I do agree with you Doog, commenting on this guy's work is frivolous since it doesn't seem to do much anyway!

Calm down guys.  This comes up often; the debate whether we can or should give constructive criticism.  There are arguments on both sides and it never gets solved.  I think we should and I will continue to do so.  If you don't agree, don't give criticism.  Either way, we are not going to change the world.  Some people see this as simply a hobby and could care less if the models are accurate.  Others strive for museum quality replicas.  Neither way is right or wrong.  Some of us are just more passionate about which way we prefer.

 

Personally, as I have stated, it seems silly to me to be congratulating OR criticising "model maniac" on these posts, when he didn't even build them! IMHO, it's like congratulating someone for the kids that they're baby-sitting!

Totally agree with your sentiments there.  I'll still probably point out the errors of his high-quality "professional" builds though.

Guys--please! Will you both please tone it down? This post is starting to make my head hurt!

Jesse, I don't think it serves the discussion at all to resort to insults and "attitude"--James is a bit passionate about his argument, but nothing specifically defamatory was really directed at YOU personally;  plus, he has some very good points about the real intrinsic value of this site, whether you agree with it or not. I think the criticism and knowledge has made us ALL better modelers. 

James, I hope you don't feel the need to respond in kind to the previous post in the same tone. Haven't we been through this type of stuff enough here in recent memory?

You guys are BOTH valued members of this site, and it would be a shame to lose either one of you--voluntarily or INvoluntarily!

Personally, as I have stated, it seems silly to me to be congratulating OR criticising "model maniac" on these posts, when he didn't even build them! IMHO, it's like congratulating someone for the kids that they're baby-sitting!

 

James, why don't get down off of you soap-box and reread what I posted. 

CDNTanker25 wrote:

What if that same guy entered a competition?

Of course, if someone enters a competition their work should be judged.  That's the point.  This forum is not and should not be a competition. 

CDNTanker25 wrote:

Solicited or not, he posted this work here for inspection.

Who ever said posting pictures of  your model on this forum is for inspection?

CDNTanker25 wrote:

However by your post you seem quick to think it was horrible for someone to offer a suggestion!

Whatever.  Go back and reread the posts before you spout off at the mouth.

CDNTanker25 wrote:

If an error such as the Anti slip on a tank isn't added, it isn't a quality representation of the vehicle this guy paid for IMHO.

So you have the ability to determine the quality of something someone is willing to pay for.  Talk about an ego.

CDNTanker25 wrote:

All in all, being a yes man to someone isn't going to help!

Who said anything about a "yes" man.

CDNTanker25 wrote:

I got my butt whipped on these forums, and I believe I have improved in leaps and bounds because of the rivet counters!

Rivet counters need to get a life.  It's a hobby, man.

How's that for critizism of your post?

usmc1371 wrote:

HeavyArty wrote: I believe you are asking for feedback by posting pictures of it.  Ok, I'll agree with you on that point somewhat.  I guess this is what I'm trying to say: The builder should explain what they are trying to accomplish The critizism should be limited to that If a person doesn't ask for critizism, don't give any I feel that unsolicated critizism or inappropiate critizism will lead to modelers (especially young ones) from posting pictures.

Unfortunately people need to have their stuff criticised.  What you're saying is wrong a thousand times over.  What if that same guy entered a competition?  Hmmm?  You think they're going to be all strawberries and Ice cream about the model?  Even if you enter a a juniors category, you are opening yourself to the criticism of the judges.  Solicited or not, he posted this work here for inspection.  Infact, I don't think anyone really criticized him, only offered suggestions.  However by your post you seem quick to think it was horrible for someone to offer a suggestion!  The guy pays money for this guy to build, and well AI hasn't really produced anything above a Corgi, or Forces of Valour status IMHO, and I feel bad for Model Maniac, (even though his transactions are none of my business).  If an error such as the Anti slip on a tank isn't added, it isn't a quality representation of the vehicle this guy paid for IMHO.  All in all, being a yes man to someone isn't going to help!  I got my butt whipped on these forums, and I believe I have improved in leaps and bounds because of the rivet counters!  It shouldn't be that only criticize if the person asks, it should be DON"T post the pics if you can't handle the heat!

I'm a young modeler (well 17) and like other things in life if i do something wrong i don't really want to do it again.  Yeah you should put things "nicely" and not shove it down their throats but HeavyArty and all the other human libraries of knowledge don't do that.  AI a "proffesional" builder has done the same typical errors time and time again and time and time again HeavyArty and others say what's wrong with it in a polite manner instead of tearing the build to shreads like they probably could. 

Carry on Gino and all other human libraries!

Like anything else, there is a right and wrong way to go about giving criticism. A little diplomacy is in order. 

And remember at all times that although everyone has an opinion, don't forget to consider and weigh the source of that criticism.

the doog wrote:

And we don't even know if these guys are subscribers to FSM--isn't that one of the requirements for access to this site?

Not to the forum. Much of the other content is restricted, but as long as you have a forum account, you can post.

HeavyArty wrote:

That works great when the model was actually built by the guy submitting it.  When it is a "professionally" built model being submitted by a collector, that has no relevance.  He has no goal but to collect another model and no idea about the actual build.

I have to chime in here and say that I don't see the point of posting models that you buy just to collect; that you have NO IDEA what was used, how it was constructed, what you used to finish it, what weathering techniques were used, etc, etc, etc!

I mean, I realize that there may be some dubious value in just looking at the model itself, but I have never seen anything but the most cursory response from this mysterious "art instructor".  And recently now this guy's brother has been having his models posted. Where does it end? And we don't even know if these guys are subscribers to FSM--isn't that one of the requirements for access to this site?

Not trying to be inhospitable here, but IMHO, I'd MUCH rather see and comment on a model that the poster themselves built, or posted for someone already on the site and just having issues with their computer. I mean, I can see built-up models on any number of sites on any given day...

HeavyArty wrote:

Rob Gronovius wrote: Remember where you are. This is the FSM Armor Forum, no criticism allowed.   I know, I know.  But I will fight the insanity every chance I can.

That's akin to trying to swim laps in a wading pool.

if i didnt know any better, id think that those were frag nades hanging off the back of the turret

HeavyArty wrote:

I disagree about not giving criticism if not asked for or only addressing what he explained in the description.

Ok.  Agree to disagree?

What Gino just said, especially in the op's case since he is posting "profesionally built" models, but across the board when you post something on-line. The onus should be on the poster to indicate that only positive responses are welcome. Sounds pretty lame, doesn't it?

The people who've helped me improve haven't been the ones who've told me how good my stuff is, but the ones who told me where and how I could do better.

I agree that the builder should give some type of explanation to his build.  I disagree about not giving criticism if not asked for or only addressing what he explained in the description. 

 

Like I said above, criticism is necessary to see your mistakes and improve on your next build.  You also have to learn how to take criticism and not be offended because someone see something you don't.  Many of the young modelers here have done that and become better because of it.  Others have not, so be it.  Sometimes life is hard; another good lesson to learn early.

HeavyArty wrote:

I believe you are asking for feedback by posting pictures of it.

Ok, I'll agree with you on that point somewhat.  I guess this is what I'm trying to say:

• The builder should explain what they are trying to accomplish
• The critizism should be limited to that
• If a person doesn't ask for critizism, don't give any

I feel that unsolicated critizism or inappropiate critizism will lead to modelers (especially young ones) from posting pictures.

But shouldn't someone ask for feedback on their model before people jump all over it?

I believe you are asking for feedback by posting pictures of it.  You are posting it for others to see and comment on.  One has to be prepared for both praise and constructive criticism.  If this thread was full of "Hey, it looks great!!" replies, would there even be a discussion about criticism here at all?

I'm not saying there should be no criticism.  But shouldn't someone ask for feedback on their model before people jump all over it?  It seems like some people are just waiting like vultures to devour a new build that's been posted. 

Rob Gronovius wrote:

Remember where you are. This is the FSM Armor Forum, no criticism allowed.

 

I know, I know. 

But I will fight the insanity every chance I can.

Remember where you are. This is the FSM Armor Forum, no criticism allowed.

Personally, I just do not comment on someone's kit if I do not like it. I guess it is the old grandmother rule "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."

I do see the benefit of pointing out errors though. If it receives only accolades and some novice thinks that the kit/technique is perfect, he may try to replicate the build, errors and all.

That works great when the model was actually built by the guy submitting it.  When it is a "professionally" built model being submitted by a collector, that has no relevance.  He has no goal but to collect another model and no idea about the actual build. 

I also disagree somewhat.  When you post a model, you are looking for some type of feedback.  If all you receive is the obligatorty, "Hey, that looks great," no one learns anything about improving their skills.  If you are given constructive criticism, you can see your mistakes and learn how to fix them, therefore improving your skills and becoming a better modeler.  If you intended to leave something off or build it in a non-standard way, you should explain it first or be prepared to explain it when questioned on the build.

A little rant here:

Sometimes I get really annoyed at nick-pickers.  Why do people nick-pick a model before even asking what the modelers goal was in producing the model.  Modeling can be very subjective depending on what the modeler is trying to accomplish.  I'm not talking about construction mistakes like a gun barrel glued on backwards or the wrong tracks on a tank.  I'm talking about the "your missing this" and "your missing that" comments.  I build plenty of models OOB that I know have inaccuracies and are missing things.  Sometimes my intent is to just build a nice looking model and not to replicate the real thing in 1:35 scale.  Other times I try to correct as many inaccuracies as possible.  So how about before critizing someone's elses work, why not try to understand what the modeler was trying to accomplish.   On the same token, maybe when people submit their work, they should explain what they were trying to accomplish.  So basically, I think critizism should be based on what a person was trying to accomplish, not what you think they should of done or you would of done.

Many thanks for your kind comments and compliments, especially from Jose and Panther 44.

Fair enough--ye have been warned!

Actually, Doog, never had a problem in any length of time using baking soda.  Only time I did was it being an attractant for dust and the like, it yellowed over time, when I used it for snow.  No issues on baking soda for me, too bad you had an instance with it.

CDNTanker25 wrote:

Jose, the Anti slip is rather easy to recreate if you have the patience.  There are many methods to do it.  Mind include Mr. Surfacer 1000 and baking soda.  Stiple the mixture on after masking, and you're all set.  The anti slip is rather irregular, so it's fine to make it not uniform.  Here's a pic of my Merkava III Baz that I did recently. Maniac:  I'm not trying to hijack your thread my friend.  Just want to prove a point!

I know I've said this before, but PLEASE people, DO NOT use baking soda for ANYTHING in modelling applications where you are mixing it with lacquers, paint, etc...it is FAR too chemically reactive!!! I used to use it for texturizing rust, ya know; mix it with enamel rust paint to give it "grain"--and had a nightmare of ruin happen several years later where the paint reacted with it and made it look like yellow-brown oily ooze sweating out of every surface where I used it. It completely ruined half of my collection! Leave it on the shelf for the Misses!!   

BTW, that's a seriously gorgeous BAZ, CDNtanker!

 

Hi Model Maniac,

  Despite the "short comings" pointed out, I still think it is a very good looking job. I'm admitting my own inadequacies as a builder, but I'm still trying to get to that level.

 To me this build will help me to aspire to better finishes on my own builds.

 I've seen several builds by Art Instructor and always enjoy his work. The builds may not be perfect, but that doesn't mean (to me) they're not good.

 I look forward to seeing more of his work.

 I give him .

                                                                                                       Joe

                                                                                               Joe

Jose, the Anti slip is rather easy to recreate if you have the patience.  There are many methods to do it.  Mind include Mr. Surfacer 1000 and baking soda.  Stiple the mixture on after masking, and you're all set.  The anti slip is rather irregular, so it's fine to make it not uniform.  Here's a pic of my Merkava III Baz that I did recently.

Maniac:  I'm not trying to hijack your thread my friend.  Just want to prove a point!

Yes, you're right... Maybe they are pre-production Merkava tanks like the "Mahatz", depicted in the Academy Merkava III kit, but in your reference you didn't have the book I have, I told all that before because I have the book... I also have the Osprey book, but I can't find it right now, I also want to make the non-slip surface, but I don't know how tho do that particular surface (I was thinking about spreading white glue, then fine sand), and as the "Mahatz" depicted in my book doesn't has it, I'll leave it until when I get a Merkava IV. Most regards.

 

José

Jose, don't know where you got your references from, but mine, seem to be a little more legit.  I am going by, A) IDF tankers whom I know personally B) IDF Mechanics who work on these tanks personally. C) IDF military vehicles by Mouse House publications.  D) Osprey's Merkava MBT. and Last but not least, Tankograd's Merkava: A history of Israel's main battle tank.  Anyway, now that I have shared which references I go by, I can safely say that you haven't seen any Merkava other than a Merkava Mk. 1 INITIAL PRODUCTION without Anti slip. Heck, only a small amount of initial production Mk. I's had no ball and chains.  Regardless of if you care for it or not, it is on EVERY MBT used by the IDF.  If someone is trying to replicate a vehicle, they should do it right.  If you don't like the look of it, don't build it!  I know you have built a couple of Merks in your day, but it seems you lack a solid amount or research to say you have seen Merkava I, II, III without antislip unless it was the pre production vehicle used for testing, which only had a lack on antislip for a few propaganda pictures!  As for you book, it is good, but you do need to take a better look at your Merks in the pictures.  As for Mahatz, it was never used in military conflicts and was used only for show!  It sits at Latrun Museum in Israel and that's that.  Academy's Merkava kits leave little to be desired, especially their Mk. III which has the incorrect suspension and road wheels for the vehicles, and can only be correctly used to model Mahatz, which again never saw combat!  This Merkava model presented by AI seems to be portraying a Merkava that is the standard for a combat vehicle and should have Anti slip on it.