1/48 Fine Molds SnowSpeeder

Want to post a reply to this topic?
Login or register for an acount to join our online community today!

1/48 Fine Molds SnowSpeeder

  • Hi Guys

     FM just released 1/48 snowspeeder now and you can buy it at HLJ(http://www.hlj.com/product/FNMSW-10). I was looking at the pictures, but I think they might have messed up the scale, because the cockpit looks too big for the figures.

     If you look at the movie props, the only thing you can see from the speeder windows are pilots' heads, but in the new models you can see the whole body plus the arms. I remember snowspeeder is very small and cramped, and basically in the movies your shoulders hit the side panels and your head hits the roof.

     Do you think FM got the scale right? Or am I hallucinating.

     Novice

     For reference:

    http://www.starshipmodeler.com/starwars/ss_longb.jpg

    http://www.starshipmodeler.com/starwars/ss_bcoc.jpg

    http://www.starshipmodeler.com/starwars/jb_sspdr2.jpg

     

    Replies to this thread are ordered from "oldest to newest".   To reverse this order, click here.
    To learn about more about sorting options, visit our FAQ page.
  • I think the FM kit is based on the scale of the actors to the full-size props, not the appearance of the studio minis, which may have used slightly oversize pilots representations.

    http://i712.photobucket.com/albums/ww122/randysmodels/No%20After%20Market%20Build%20Group/Group%20Badge/GBbadge2.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y211/razordws/GB%20Badges/WMIIIGBsmall.jpg

  •  Kugai wrote:

    I think the FM kit is based on the scale of the actors to the full-size props, not the appearance of the studio minis, which may have used slightly oversize pilots representations.

    Looking at the "Side " view. The stduio model craft is not the same scale as the pilot. The studio model pilot seems to be too big. On the close-up view, you can see the pilot is being crushed by the console (in the movie, Luke just jump right in with eased).

    So I believed "FineMolds" rectify this. IMHO

  • hey guys

    I was just over on Krayt Clan forums (great place!) and someone posted this up, concening a Gaffi stick, well below that is a decent photo of a studio T47 showing that the maquettes used for the pilots were of the wrong scale, and basically crammed in there.

    http://www.originalprop.com/blog/2009/10/06/photography-from-1995s-art-of-star-wars-original-movie-prop-costume-model-exhibition/

     

     

    If you aren't having fun, you're doing it wrong! Build to please yourself and they will flame you every time!

  • I can't believe people are really debating scale on something that doesnt and never has ever existed in real life.....Since it is an imaginary craft....  any representation is just a rendition of the creators original description,...  I actually saw a knock down drag out arguement on a forum where 2 guys were fighting about a missing access panel on an x wing fighter,...... LOL   

    On the Bench : Ukrainian Flanker, Ju-87B Luftawaffe, Mi-24 (Trumpy scale)                                                                                   

     

  • Ti4019

    hey guys

    I was just over on Krayt Clan forums (great place!) and someone posted this up, concening a Gaffi stick, well below that is a decent photo of a studio T47 showing that the maquettes used for the pilots were of the wrong scale, and basically crammed in there.

    http://www.originalprop.com/blog/2009/10/06/photography-from-1995s-art-of-star-wars-original-movie-prop-costume-model-exhibition/

     

     

     

    Wow, I would have loved to see that display, mucho cool! 

     

    To the OP, if you really look to the heads of those pilots, and sort of scale out the rest of the body, based on that you would see the representations are WAY off, the legs wouldn't even fit. FineMolds does a pretty good job with coming off of original plans for the layout of the starships. Without doubt, to date, some of the best star wars models made.

    I like the look of the kit, might have to do one. Pretty tiny though!

    Photobucket

    On the Bench: Tamiya's 1/48 A-10a Thunderbolt 

    In the Hangar:  Hmmm???

     

  • kaiyudsai

    I can't believe people are really debating scale on something that doesnt and never has ever existed in real life.....Since it is an imaginary craft....  any representation is just a rendition of the creators original description,...  I actually saw a knock down drag out arguement on a forum where 2 guys were fighting about a missing access panel on an x wing fighter,...... LOL   

    If you see the studio props, the scale of the ship is rather odd. It's not deep enough for crew to sit. I loved the original MPC kit and once tried to add in scale crew figures. You basically have to cut the torso in half to get them to fit inside the cockpit.

    I've always wondered why sci-fi modelers appear more hostile towards one another when arguing about colors or details. Any online spat normally ends up with lines drawn, half the modelers leaving which ever site the fight began on and the other half following the departing half to their new online home to continue to harass them until the losing side lays low and it all settles down.

    I guess it is more of a function of having no true "right" answer whereas with military modeling, someone somewhere will always pull up the proper photo or manual that proves right or wrong. With sci-fi, right may be right during one movie or episode and something else may be right according to some expanded universe book or the actual movie prop compared to the remake's CGI or what not.

  • OK, first off it IS possible to work out scales of sci-fi ships because within the context of the film/TV/comic/novel universe they exist in they still have to be flown/driven/operated by people.  Unless demonstrated otherwise, people are assumed to be the same size elsewhere in the galaxy as those of us here on Earth.  Since we can see the pilots in the snowspeeder (along with in an X-Wing, TIE Fighter or any other starfighter with cockpit windows) we can work out a scale for the vehicle from that.

    In cases where you can't directly see figures inside the ships - The Enterprise or a Star Destroyer, for example - scale can be determined by examining the size of the windows, hatches and other areas of the ship that people interact with.  Again, a boarding hatch has to be "so" big for a person to fit through it so once that dimension is known (within a certain margin for error) you can do the math to figure out the theoretical size of the ship and thereby determine the scale of the model.  This leads to a whole secondary debate - a common problem in sci-fi TV and film is that the set designers don't always communicate with the FX department, and vice versa, leading to interiors that are too big to fit inside the ship they're designed for.  It's usually close but has to be fudged a bit in some way.  Yes, the use of CG is starting to eliminate that because one department can finalize their design and send the file to the other department to continue their side of the job but the problem still happens from time to time.

    That being said, I will admit that there are plenty of designs that don't completely think the design through, however this is not always the designer's or FX shop's fault.  Film and TV are collaborative efforts dictated by time and money above all else.  Different people involved in those productions have different levels of regard for accuracy depending on their investment - both financial and emotional - in the production.  As such, sometimes shortcuts will be taken to get the job done on time and/or budget.  Other times it's a matter of someone in charge saying "I don't care - that's how I want it to look."

    Either way, those are not the sci-fi hobbyists' fault.  Our "job" is to re-create what we see - the same job as any other modeler who builds any other subject, which brings us to the color accuracy argument.

    Among sci-fi modelers, we freely admit that there is more than one way to paint a given ship, just as military vehicles have been known to have more than one design of camouflage or base paint color depending on their era and location of service.  The main issue with sci-fi ships comes down to one basic debate - "on screen" colors vs. "FX model" colors.  "On screen" color is how the vehicle looked in the finished production.  This can be and usually is affected by lighting, film processing anomalies and any number of video color balance settings both in the mastering of the DVD and the settings of your personal TV set.  "FX model" color is how the model itself was painted which may have been done with different tones and shades specifically chosen to compensate for the above mentioned lighting, processing and color balance issues.  Compounding both problems is that more often than not, several FX models were built in different sizes to accomplish different shots or multiple models of the same size were painted and detailed differently to represent this character's ship vs. that one's.  That's more an issue of sorting out and double-checking your reference material - I'm sure you military modelers face the same issue of finding correct reference to how a vehicle looked during a particular time in its operational life.  Different subject matter, same obstacle.

    While there are many ways to argue in favor of one color choice over the other, it ultimately comes down to what the builder prefers.  My personal logic has always been that it has to look "right" to my eye as I'm the one that's going to see it on my shelf every day.  I don't build to make someone else happy, I build because I enjoy it.  I don't live and die and center my life around how many awards I've won or not won over the years.

  • Rob Gronovius

     

    I've always wondered why sci-fi modelers appear more hostile towards one another when arguing about colors or details. Any online spat normally ends up with lines drawn, half the modelers leaving which ever site the fight began on and the other half following the departing half to their new online home to continue to harass them until the losing side lays low and it all settles down.

    I guess it is more of a function of having no true "right" answer whereas with military modeling, someone somewhere will always pull up the proper photo or manual that proves right or wrong. With sci-fi, right may be right during one movie or episode and something else may be right according to some expanded universe book or the actual movie prop compared to the remake's CGI or what not.

    Oh, yeah, because military modelers NEVER argue about tiny details, right?  Confused

  • Ziz

     

     

    Oh, yeah, because military modelers NEVER argue about tiny details, right?  Confused

    Anyone can take arguments about details to far on any subject.

    As far as the "it's not real, so why argue at all" goes, I don't see any reason to get in a huge argument about details on any model.  Whether it's a "real" subject or not, most such arguments seem more like some kind of Freudian issues are behind it rather than anything really relevant to kitbuilding.

    http://i712.photobucket.com/albums/ww122/randysmodels/No%20After%20Market%20Build%20Group/Group%20Badge/GBbadge2.jpghttp://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y211/razordws/GB%20Badges/WMIIIGBsmall.jpg

  • No, military modelers always agrue about details, but there is usually definitive evidence to prove or disprove but even then, there are still agruments after the fact.

    I just notice that sci-fi modelers are more apt to hound one another following the other to different sci-fi modeling site to continue the fight just in a new venue.

    Whenever a new group of sci-fi modelers pop up here or other sites that have a sci-fi community, a day or so later another group appears and a fight resumes. Most of us wonder what just happened. It's like the online version of a drive-by shooting or high speed chase that appears and disappears in the blink of an eye.

  • Rob Gronovius

    No, military modelers always agrue about details, but there is usually definitive evidence to prove or disprove but even then, there are still agruments after the fact.

    I just notice that sci-fi modelers are more apt to hound one another following the other to different sci-fi modeling site to continue the fight just in a new venue.

    Whenever a new group of sci-fi modelers pop up here or other sites that have a sci-fi community, a day or so later another group appears and a fight resumes. Most of us wonder what just happened. It's like the online version of a drive-by shooting or high speed chase that appears and disappears in the blink of an eye.

    You're using the minority to define the majority.  You're obviously closed-minded to sci-fi modeling, and by extension everyone involved with it, so no amount of proof I or anyone else could provide to the contrary is going to change your mind.

  • Been building sci-fi models for over 40 years. It's been my first and longest love. I grew up watching shows like Land of the Giants and Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea and building the model kits when they were current kits as well as current TV shows. I was still a young teenager when the first Star Wars models were issued by MPC. They were hard to get and I had to have them all.

    I've built all of the current Clone Wars kits with my 7 yr old son just as I built the Phantom Menace kits with his older brother when he was 7 and Next Generation kits with his older brother when he was 7 and a slew of Gundam kits for another son (I have four sons who are currently 7, 15, 22 and 26).

    So, I've just noticed that many sci-fi modelers are more tech savvy lot and a smaller close knit group. So when a spat occurs, it goes on for days. Someone who stopped here long enough the last time one came whizzing by this site mentioned that they are "epic" . It is the vast minority of sci-fi modelers who cause the problems, but that minority tends to make the most noise and get noticed.

    I know it is an unscientific observation that I've noticed on this site during the last decade, but you are making my point. It was one of the reasons I stopped being a forum member on sci-fi only or sci-fi genre specific (i.e. Star Trek, Star Wars) modeling sites.

  • Speaking as a Star Wars obsessive nutter since I can remember, fans have been well served with toys and models of the snowspeeder that have consistently good.

    The vintage toy was one of the best in the range with electronics, functioning parts and in scale with the 3 3/4 figures of the time. Next came the MPC speeder, still a great model even today, I have one mint in box and another in line for a build.  I have built both of the Revell easy kits and I have to say that they are quite good for basic snap kits, offering possibilities for customisation and improvements in build and paint applications. The Master Replica speeder is just about the hight of detail, a superb job. And now comes the the two Finemolds kits..the quality of which are just outstanding and I for one will be glad to build and display both. A long time ago I realised that we will never be able to attain true accuracy in any kit building, all we can do it get close enough so as we as builders are happy with out efforts....at least that is my theory anyway   

  • just a quick heads up, if you have purchased the FM kit then fine its a beauty, well worth the money, if not try the Revell prepainted snap kit, it measures out almost the same size and for the price, about1/3 theh cost it is a great alternative.

    Terry.