keavdog

In my experience larger IPMS contests most entries are eliminated due to seams, mold lines, ejector pin marks etc.  IPMS starts with "was it built correctly" (perfectly).  Then on to the subject, scheme etc.  It's been a while since I put anything on the table but that's what I recall.  The old Tamiyacon contests in Alisa Viejo were super fun events and Mr Tamiya would pick what he liked.  Totally different judging so kinda depends on the event.

Good luck Tcoat - seeing what you've done I'd say you place at least.

 

Tcoat

 

 

cbaltrin

 

 

Real G

Awesome comments guys - thought provoking ideas are what it's all about!  Regarding older kits like Monogram's P-61 Black Widow, it did cross my mind to see if I could build it to the standards of the box art model.  The guys who built the box art kits for Monogram back in the 1970s were quite talented.

 

 

Real G, That Monogram P-61 will always have a special place in my heart. I had never heard of that plane before until I saw the Monogram box top. It was pure magic for me. All that interior detail. Radar. Turret. The overall odd design--not to mention the totally cool markings. Still panning on building one again-Times A Wastin....

Also,  as to the box art models -- I was justing thinking that would be a great GB for next year. Imagine yourself a box top builder for Monogram or some other company back in the day. you have to build the kit OOB and make look as good as you can with exactly what's in the box. Then you photograph it and make your own box top 

 

 

 

 

 

And you MUSt include the paints, glues, tools from the kit company in the picture. 

Ala Testers!

 

Oh, absolutely 

GreySnake

I was very disappointed when I purchased the 1/48 Tamiya P-51D and saw how barren the cockpit was. Would like to give the Monogram kit another go but I don't like the removable cowling and panel on the wing. 

Revell seems to have fixed the cowling issue--Get the big beautiful doll boxing. I fill and sand the Gun access panel.

cbaltrin

 

 

GreySnake

One kit I was very proud of was the Revell/Monogram 1/48 P-51D. I used a spray can of Testors chrome to paint it very heavily. There were many paint runs, fish eyes and maybe a finger print. None of that mattered to me I was just happy to have a shiny looking aircraft. 

 

 

 

 

Ahh yes, testors spray chrome, I remember the stuff well... Funny thing about the  Monogram P-51D, it took about 40 years for anyone to put something out with a better cockpit. I still prefered it over the Tamiya and Hasegawa 1/48 kits. If only Monogram had not made that that silly decision to go with the removable lower cowling.... Still a fun kit though...

 

 

 

 

I was very disappointed when I purchased the 1/48 Tamiya P-51D and saw how barren the cockpit was.

Would like to give the Monogram kit another go but I don't like the removable cowling and panel on the wing. 

   The Travel Air Mystery Ship and Caddy are UBER COOL, and with near masters skill can be built as the box art shows.......yea by me not so much. Still really cool kits.

cbaltrin

 

 

Real G

Awesome comments guys - thought provoking ideas are what it's all about!  Regarding older kits like Monogram's P-61 Black Widow, it did cross my mind to see if I could build it to the standards of the box art model.  The guys who built the box art kits for Monogram back in the 1970s were quite talented.

 

 

Real G, That Monogram P-61 will always have a special place in my heart. I had never heard of that plane before until I saw the Monogram box top. It was pure magic for me. All that interior detail. Radar. Turret. The overall odd design--not to mention the totally cool markings. Still panning on building one again-Times A Wastin....

Also,  as to the box art models -- I was justing thinking that would be a great GB for next year. Imagine yourself a box top builder for Monogram or some other company back in the day. you have to build the kit OOB and make look as good as you can with exactly what's in the box. Then you photograph it and make your own box top 

 

And you MUSt include the paints, glues, tools from the kit company in the picture. 

Ala Testers!

GreySnake

One kit I was very proud of was the Revell/Monogram 1/48 P-51D. I used a spray can of Testors chrome to paint it very heavily. There were many paint runs, fish eyes and maybe a finger print. None of that mattered to me I was just happy to have a shiny looking aircraft. 

 

Ahh yes, testors spray chrome, I remember the stuff well... Funny thing about the  Monogram P-51D, it took about 40 years for anyone to put something out with a better cockpit. I still prefered it over the Tamiya and Hasegawa 1/48 kits. If only Monogram had not made that that silly decision to go with the removable lower cowling.... Still a fun kit though...

Real G

Awesome comments guys - thought provoking ideas are what it's all about!  Regarding older kits like Monogram's P-61 Black Widow, it did cross my mind to see if I could build it to the standards of the box art model.  The guys who built the box art kits for Monogram back in the 1970s were quite talented.

Real G, That Monogram P-61 will always have a special place in my heart. I had never heard of that plane before until I saw the Monogram box top. It was pure magic for me. All that interior detail. Radar. Turret. The overall odd design--not to mention the totally cool markings. Still panning on building one again-Times A Wastin....

Also,  as to the box art models -- I was justing thinking that would be a great GB for next year. Imagine yourself a box top builder for Monogram or some other company back in the day. you have to build the kit OOB and make look as good as you can with exactly what's in the box. Then you photograph it and make your own box top 

I have been reading this, and may have commented back somewhere:

               Truth is I just finished a commission of Vessels for a friend. Not Perfect by any means. You work with what is supplied right? Outside observers have said WOW. Me, Meh! But the Meh was well taught. I have over the years been known to count rivets(More likely, hull plates and fasteners on ships). On certain types I was definiely enmeshed to a slavish attention to detail and realism.

              Somewhere along the way, Way back when, I  Did post a few photos. I asked myself, Self, WHY? Now in the scales I work now, I don't worry about oil canning and dents. It makes the little ships believable. Plus I paint them sloppier because I am going to cover them with weathering anyway. Plus a few wayward rust spots in the wrong place can be explained with a little figure, paint brush in hand, Doing his or her job on the ship.

             By doing this it is now a heckuva lot more fun, than it used to be. Thank goodness I found this reprieve in time. No More contests for me. The standards are to rigid for my old working fleet, which I planned, Built and Enjoyed every stinkin lousy minute of making mistakes, and then making them acceptable to my new found freedom. As has been said, I am back to what was summed up. It's MY model and I will enjoy building it the way I want, after all it is MINE!!!

One kit I was very proud of was the Revell/Monogram 1/48 P-51D. I used a spray can of Testors chrome to paint it very heavily. There were many paint runs, fish eyes and maybe a finger print. None of that mattered to me I was just happy to have a shiny looking aircraft. 

Tcoat - Good luck on your first contest foray!    It is good advice to closely observe the contestants' models for future inspiration.

Armornut - As Puss in Boots from Shrek II said "Our minds are becoming one..."  But yeah, the original Monogram P-61 box top model really impressed me back in the day.  And to be honest, those old box art build-ups still look good today.  I have a more recent Revell boxing of the same kit, but the build quality of the model on the box is best described as indifferent.

BTW, I just remembered something about the kit when I first bought it.  When I spray painted the parts gloss black and put them in the box lid to dry, my cat tried to lie down in the box!  So my P-61 had cat hair embedded in one of the upper wings!  

Mangoes Armornut?  I spent my summers eating way too many of them in my neighbor's tree house. The older kids living there would use their pocket knives to cut them in half, remove the seed, then score them and turn the skins inside-out.  Instant "hand grenade" treat!  Oh my gosh, my mom HATED it when I came home covered in mango juice.  That stuff got everywhere, stained clothing, and caused skin rash!

In my experience larger IPMS contests most entries are eliminated due to seams, mold lines, ejector pin marks etc.  IPMS starts with "was it built correctly" (perfectly).  Then on to the subject, scheme etc.  It's been a while since I put anything on the table but that's what I recall.  The old Tamiyacon contests in Alisa Viejo were super fun events and Mr Tamiya would pick what he liked.  Totally different judging so kinda depends on the event.

Good luck Tcoat - seeing what you've done I'd say you place at least.

   Just for kicks Tcoat, if you do place, quietly observe other competetors....guage their reactions, see if it co-orilates to the topic here. OR simply enjoy the contest. Best of luck my friend.

   RealG you are my brother from another mother 'cause the Monogram P-61 was one of the kits on my mind when I started this thread.....wierd....two!     Mangos...stop LOL

Real G

Awesome comments guys - thought provoking ideas are what it's all about!  Regarding older kits like Monogram's P-61 Black Widow, it did cross my mind to see if I could build it to the standards of the box art model.  The guys who built the box art kits for Monogram back in the 1970s were quite talented.

Regarding contest models, personally I feel they require a different mindset/approach compared to a "fun build".  Because frankly they are not fun, to me anyway.  We often ridicule the rivet counters, but in a contest, that's what you need to be to compete seriously.

But try not to take it too... serious.  Because at the end of the day, it's just a hobby, meant to provide enjoyment.  Of course, your mileage may differ considerably.

 

I have a bunch going into a contest for the first time ever on Sunday. I have little hope of wining anything but will be fun to see what they say.

Awesome comments guys - thought provoking ideas are what it's all about!  Regarding older kits like Monogram's P-61 Black Widow, it did cross my mind to see if I could build it to the standards of the box art model.  The guys who built the box art kits for Monogram back in the 1970s were quite talented.

Regarding contest models, personally I feel they require a different mindset/approach compared to a "fun build".  Because frankly they are not fun, to me anyway.  We often ridicule the rivet counters, but in a contest, that's what you need to be to compete seriously.

But try not to take it too... serious.  Because at the end of the day, it's just a hobby, meant to provide enjoyment.  Of course, your mileage may differ considerably.

cbaltrin

4) I don't enter my models in contests. Which is not to say I never would, it's just not why I build. I build for me and my enjoyment.  I did go to a contest recenlty however,  and brought my two little boys along since they like models. I actually went to see if I could buy some old kits for a good price, and I did, but I looked at the tables as well... Some judges were there and I overheard them commenting on some of the builds, nitpicking over some rediculous things. I muttered something under my breath and one of my boys asked me what was wrong. I told him "that guy can't see the forest because all the trees are in the way..." 

5) It's your model, you build it how you want -- when it's your model, it's your hobby.  

Remember, without modelers bringing models to the show, there would be no show with vendor tables and the ability to "see if I could buy some old kits for a good price."

Having judged kits before, and in one of the trickier categories*, So many of the models entered are so highly built that you have to nitpick to determine between 1st, 2nd and third.

Usually, the first place is easy to identify, and often second place is too, but who gets the last spot for a medal? You and I could judge the remaining half dozen contenders for third, and you pick one and I pick another. So we nitpick every little thing and the kit with fewer nitpicks gets third. All the rest of the kits that are probably better than anything I could do go home empty handed.

The other five guys that got nothing are also mumbling under their breath about the kits that won and the judges who chose another person's kit over their "masterpiece."

Next time you are at a show, stop, look at all kits entered in one category (pick one with about ten models), and try to determine for yourself which one gets 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Then ask your sons. The three of you will probaby only agree on one of the three kits. Welcome to the unappreciated world of model kit judging.

*I was often made a judge for the 1/72 scale armor category, but my expertise is modern US armor. In 1/35 scale, WW2 German armor is often its own category. But in 1/72 scale, all small scale armor is lumped together.

So I don't know that the Tiger has the wrong paint scheme and markings, the Panther should have had zimmerit, and the British tank has non-existant features. In 1/35 scale judging, these issues would automatically set those builds at a lower tier. But I'm going to judge them as if they are 100% correct.

If it was modern armor, I'd catch that the M1A2 in USMC markings is an inaccurate kit.

Then the other entrants complain that their kit might not have been built as well, but at least it was accurate.

cbaltrin

 

1) I have always enjoyed taking a kit that kicked my butt when I was a kid and kicking its butt now  . I mostly built Monogram kits when growing up. Stilll love building them and want to build them all by my adult standards. I by  no means want to build a perfect model (is there one?) with them--or any kit for that matter--but I do want to build an excellent model (model being the key word). 

 

One kit that kicked my butt was the ICM 1/35 T-28 Bridgelayer not sure if I'm brave enough to attempt building one even now! 

I have to say I am enjoying this thread. Thanks to armornut for posting this!

I have a few more random thoughts  on the issue which might even conflict with one another, but, they are random thoughts...

1) I have always enjoyed taking a kit that kicked my butt when I was a kid and kicking its butt now  . I mostly built Monogram kits when growing up. Stilll love building them and want to build them all by my adult standards. I by  no means want to build a perfect model (is there one?) with them--or any kit for that matter--but I do want to build an excellent model (model being the key word). 

2) As I get older and realize how precious time is, I am always weighing the 'best technique' against the time it would take to accomplish -- which is not to say I don't still get carried away sometimes....  For example. I have no issue putting the wings/stablizers on last (last as in after painting and decaling)  if the fit is good enough. I dont mind that wing seam if it's not that noticeable. It can make the building and painting process much more fun/enjoyable/relaxing to build and paint sub-assemblies and assemble later.  Aside: I visited my local hobby shop a few years ago and they had a few big display cases with die cast aircraft in them. I always stop by and look at them and would buy a few if they were not so expensive. Then I asked myself, why do I look at these? Why would I buy one? They are die cast. They have big seams and deep wide panel lines? Answer: They are built and painted very well and look great for what they are.  

3) You cannot unlearn what you have learned, but you don't always have to use everything you have learned on your build.

4) I don't enter my models in contests. Which is not to say I never would, it's just not why I build. I build for me and my enjoyment.  I did go to a contest recenlty however,  and brought my two little boys along since they like models. I actually went to see if I could buy some old kits for a good price, and I did, but I looked at the tables as well... Some judges were there and I overheard them commenting on some of the builds, nitpicking over some rediculous things. I muttered something under my breath and one of my boys asked me what was wrong. I told him "that guy can't see the forest because all the trees are in the way..." 

5) It's your model, you build it how you want -- when it's your model, it's your hobby.  

  Tcoat and Keavdog are spot on to my OP, that said I guess it really does have many open opinions which thankfully have been discussed here.

   I call most of my builds " turds", most are hi quality kits where I have put hours of effort into only to have someone point out my " deficencies" It kinda takes the fun out of the hobby.

    There are many FANTASTIC modelers here, I have huge respect for them, I love to admire their efforts to take a lump of unbuildable plactic and make it an exact replica of whatever......but that ain't for me. When that person provides positive advise I don't mind, however when presented with " you should have this, that, or the other."...well I try to remember....." Why so seroius"

   I hope more folks join in on this thread, I really like the discussions we have had here. AND I hope it has helped someone realize that even their worst build can be something to be proud of.

Tcoat

 

keavdog

I thought armornuts original intent that it would be a turd by your standards today if you built it as your 10 year old self.  Not necessarily the kit itself - just the fingerprint, nylon brush painted gluebomb you had so much slapping together while eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich and watching gilligans island or better yet, the 3 stooges.

 

 

 

 

That was my interpretation. Not the quality of the kit itself nor even that it is badly built. Just simply that the finished product would not be up to the builder's "normal" modern standards. The worst kit ever made can be built to look good and the best can look like trash if not done well so kit quality is not the Turd factor.

It get more complicated if you consider that many have radically different standards as to what is "good".

I am happy to build out of the box and give a nice paint job but some need to ensure that each bolt, rivet, wire is represented in exactly the right place for the particular vehicle they are doing then throw a horrid paint job at it. Neither method is right or wrong but one group may well think the others is a turd. 

Right, I did not get anything from the OP regarding kit quality or good kit vs bad kit or old kit vs new kit...  

keavdog

I thought armornuts original intent that it would be a turd by your standards today if you built it as your 10 year old self.  Not necessarily the kit itself - just the fingerprint, nylon brush painted gluebomb you had so much slapping together while eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich and watching gilligans island or better yet, the 3 stooges.

 

I thought armornuts original intent that it would be a turd by your standards today if you built it as your 10 year old self.  Not necessarily the kit itself - just the fingerprint, nylon brush painted gluebomb you had so much slapping together while eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich and watching gilligans island or better yet, the 3 stooges.

Gamera

Thanks! Guess I was a little confused, I assumed 'turd' meant a really poor quality kit. Greysnake said his staff car was really bad but I've built the 251 halftrack Joe did and found it though old still a pretty good kit.  

I think the definition is really quite wide and often depends on your point of view. Many older kits are turds because they were rough and crude, lacking any real details, just indescernable lumps here and there. Model kits were toys built by boys and played with in the sandbox.

Some kits are turds because they barely resemble the actual prototype. Something like Lindberg's T-80 Soviet tank is a very poor kit that is almost a cartoon of a Cold War modern Soviet MBT. It fails on multiple levels.

Tamiya makes some very well engineered kits, they are "box shakers" that go together easily. But as noted, they take some detail shortcuts and many have been bypassed by the more accurate Uber-kits by Meng, Takom, AFV Club, etc. Their M2/3 Bradley series is an easy build, but they glossed over so many details that the kit is very incomplete.

I'd consider the Tamiya JS-3 a turd from an accuracy standpoint as there is a lot wrong with it. But from a building standpoint it's a typical excellent late 1990's Tamiya kit that will go together with little to no problems.

Thanks! Guess I was a little confused, I assumed 'turd' meant a really poor quality kit. Greysnake said his staff car was really bad but I've built the 251 halftrack Joe did and found it though old still a pretty good kit. 

The IS-3 is a decent kit, not great nor terrible. So far what I've done with it I think is about average, not my best but not my worst. I wouldn't put her in this build in any case since I'm about 75% done. 

    Great question Gamera, my intent was for us modelers stricken with numerous forms of AMS, OCD, or any other mania that has afflicted us as we aged. The goal was to convey the fun we had when we had limited access to special tools, paint, or reference materials. This does not exclude anybody as some had fathers, mothers, uncles, etc that helped. This exercise is also NOT MEANT TO CRITISIZE exceptional modelers.

    No one is obligated to join, heck I never thought it would morph into this...glad it did, and I understand that you have other obligations.

    I think to answer your question about your " turd".....is it your very best work? Does it bring you joy working on it? I enjoyed seeing what you put out. If you answer yes to these questions then YOU are the only one who can claim it as a " turd".

That looks good Greysnake- kudos sir! 

Armournut: What would you define as a 'turd build' here? Seems like some of them are decent kits, just older with less detail and poorer fit. 

I don't want to join anymore GBs right now but I'm working on this Tamiya 1/35th IS-3. Pretty good kit but Tamiya was still leaving the sponsons open, you could look right though the kit. I blanked them off with sheet plastic. And I'm going to replace the tracks with white metal ones. Again, I don't want to enter but would this qualify as a 'turd'? 

As it should CTD, as it should

While I've truged through some pretty awful kits, I haven't really done a 'turd', but have built a couple of kits to just 'put something together', and not worry about details, paint, smooth seams, etc.  Getting tired of how many projects I had on the bench, only having time to put a dab of paint here, or sand this joint there, but getting nothing done, I thought it would be a good idea to actually finish something.  Don't worry about the extra details, paint, etc., just assemble a kit, like in the 'old days' but trying to make it the best OOB build I could.  I grabbed an old AMT 57 T-bird kit for that.  I had a couple in the stash I got from a dollar store, so figured I could 'sacrifice' one for the cause.

It was actually a pretty nice kit.  Considering it's age, it had a nice amount of detail and went together pretty well.  It sits proudly on my display shelf in it's own display box.  I look at that plain, unpainted kit and just smile from time-to-time.

It really was a joy to do.