Modeling Genres

carsanab

simantics....unless there is a real..working/functional  example or a planned prototype using current technology.... its all fantasy...breaking it down to the simplest form...if not the categories are endless and thats not the point of the question.

GRL

That seems a bit like saying it's nothing more than "semantics" to put LOTR and Harlequin romances in different categories instead of the same category of "fiction."

It's possible to oversimplify as well as overthink these kinds of things.

Hans von Hammer

I recall one contest I attended where there were SO many entrants with them, the organizers had to create a category JUST for 1/48 Me109s...

My kind of contest.

Oh, and that's "Bf" 109's.

simantics....unless there is a real..working/functional  example or a planned prototype using current technology.... its all fantasy...breaking it down to the simplest form...if not the categories are endless and thats not the point of the question.

GRL

Not trying to add to any argument here, and no disrespect to Echo, just trying to clarify...

Smeagol has a point.  While it might not matter to most people who focus on something like military subjects, most folks who are into SF and would be likely to bring entries to a contest would be thrown off by the Enterprise from Star Trek or their X-Wing being put in a "Fantasy" category because that term is usually applied to something to do with a "swords and sorcery" setting.  This differentiation is so set that even books with their category shown on the spine use the "science fiction" and "fantasy" terms. 

As far as the list I suggested earlier, the vast majority of "fantasy" subjects I've seen are figures ( human, elf, or dragon, I'd think they'd all be considered "figures" ), and so  would normally expect to see them in a similar category at a show.

I recall one contest I attended where there were SO many entrants with them, the organizers had to create a category JUST for 1/48 Me109s...

You're making a simple question very complicated. Every catagory/genre can be broken down a million ways. Why bother??? The question was simple. ScorpioMikey had a simple (and best IMHO) answer. Everything fits!  Right NOW, sci-fi IS make believe....when items become reality, they'll fit into one of the other catagories (land/sea/air/space). 

K.I.S.S.

fermis

 

smeagol the vile:

 

Mythical means nothing except having to do with myths and legends, mostly related with things like the Greco-Roman lore

Fantasy has a massive connotations with sword and sorcery.  to go and say 'lets change the name of the category from Sci-fi, of which there are TONS and TONS of kits that are Sci-fi there are very few fantasy mythology kits in comparison, most of them being expensive resin kits.

 

Also, besides the scifi you have cut out scratch building.  While OUR thread doesn't have a lot of scratch builders (besides people like ChuckW) but there are a very large amount of them out there. 

While you might think 'oh, if he scratch builds a tank it can go into armor' but when its scratch build normally other things are taken into consideration, like the quality of the scratch build or the sculpt.

 

 

Smeags, you're over thinking.

Sci-fi, fantasy, mythical = make believe.

Ah Ha! now we come to the crux of the biscuit!  I say that because at one point submarines were science fiction, so were airplanes, so was space flight, so was robotics.

Fantasy and Mythology can not and will not ever be real science fiction on the other hand can very much become real.

That aside just outright changing the genre title is a stupid idea, lets change Aircraft to Jets and Armor to AFVs

smeagol the vile

Mythical means nothing except having to do with myths and legends, mostly related with things like the Greco-Roman lore

Fantasy has a massive connotations with sword and sorcery.  to go and say 'lets change the name of the category from Sci-fi, of which there are TONS and TONS of kits that are Sci-fi there are very few fantasy mythology kits in comparison, most of them being expensive resin kits.

 

Also, besides the scifi you have cut out scratch building.  While OUR thread doesn't have a lot of scratch builders (besides people like ChuckW) but there are a very large amount of them out there. 

While you might think 'oh, if he scratch builds a tank it can go into armor' but when its scratch build normally other things are taken into consideration, like the quality of the scratch build or the sculpt.

Smeags, you're over thinking.

Sci-fi, fantasy, mythical = make believe.

Mythical means nothing except having to do with myths and legends, mostly related with things like the Greco-Roman lore

Fantasy has a massive connotations with sword and sorcery.  to go and say 'lets change the name of the category from Sci-fi, of which there are TONS and TONS of kits that are Sci-fi there are very few fantasy mythology kits in comparison, most of them being expensive resin kits.

Also, besides the scifi you have cut out scratch building.  While OUR thread doesn't have a lot of scratch builders (besides people like ChuckW) but there are a very large amount of them out there. 

While you might think 'oh, if he scratch builds a tank it can go into armor' but when its scratch build normally other things are taken into consideration, like the quality of the scratch build or the sculpt.

All except for the one with the kids would go into Fantasy/Mythical for one reason alone... THEY ARE FANTASY AND OR MYTHICAL!

The kids one I would put under Land because well it could be a real ride and its on LAND.

I don't see what is so confusing about this.

Kugai

Smeagol, on your post about the wide range of SF subjects, I definitely understand your point.

Though I haven't participated in any contests, the main point I see that causes some of the issues of judges having "NO IDEA"  what to do with those models would seem to be what I've heard of  regarding accuracy.

If the number of posts in the SF part of this forum is any indicator of interest among modelers in general, I'd guess that there are few judges out there who really know enough about SF subjects to judge on "accuracy" of a SF kit.  A model of the Space Battleship Yamato may have the added weathering touches and customized details to make it look as realistic as the 1:350 IJN Yamato next to it, but I doubt the Space version would even be considered for comparison to the "real" ship because of the fictional nature of the subject.

That "accuracy" issue is why I had SF in a different category in my suggestion.  Even though you'd likely still have a problem with judges unfamiliar with the genre going by technique over what us fanboys could nitpick over regarding in-canon accuracy, at least that would leave some kind of standard most experienced modelers could understand.

Probably the least debatable area to mix "real" and SF subjects would be figures.  If it were up to me, I'd leave the mecha you mentioned in the general SF category ( again, because the weathering and detaining techniques used on a Perfect Grade Gundam would have more in common with how you'd weather the Millenium Falcon than how you'd add depth and texture to most figures ) and leave characters in a figure category.  The main problem I can see there is when you would have something like WWII soldier in uniform next to some of the anime character figures.

Well put. 

The idea to put 'Fantasy' or 'Mythical' instead of Scifi just confuses me beyond belief.  Unless you going into some seriously expensive after market kits you will not find much in the way of fantasy or Mythical.  Only thing that would fit into it is war gaming. 

Ok, so lets say you break up Scifi into multiple categories I want YOU as the thread creator, tell tell me where you would put these certain kits in your 5 category new system.

Smeagol, on your post about the wide range of SF subjects, I definitely understand your point.

Though I haven't participated in any contests, the main point I see that causes some of the issues of judges having "NO IDEA"  what to do with those models would seem to be what I've heard of  regarding accuracy.

If the number of posts in the SF part of this forum is any indicator of interest among modelers in general, I'd guess that there are few judges out there who really know enough about SF subjects to judge on "accuracy" of a SF kit.  A model of the Space Battleship Yamato may have the added weathering touches and customized details to make it look as realistic as the 1:350 IJN Yamato next to it, but I doubt the Space version would even be considered for comparison to the "real" ship because of the fictional nature of the subject.

That "accuracy" issue is why I had SF in a different category in my suggestion.  Even though you'd likely still have a problem with judges unfamiliar with the genre going by technique over what us fanboys could nitpick over regarding in-canon accuracy, at least that would leave some kind of standard most experienced modelers could understand.

Probably the least debatable area to mix "real" and SF subjects would be figures.  If it were up to me, I'd leave the mecha you mentioned in the general SF category ( again, because the weathering and detaining techniques used on a Perfect Grade Gundam would have more in common with how you'd weather the Millenium Falcon than how you'd add depth and texture to most figures ) and leave characters in a figure category.  The main problem I can see there is when you would have something like WWII soldier in uniform next to some of the anime character figures.

smeagol the vile

Well Echo, I thank you for not reading and completely ignoring my thought out and long post about the genre I mainly build, I really appreciate you took no time in looking at it when I spent the time to type it.

Well Echo, I thank you for not reading and completely ignoring my thought out and long post about the genre I mainly build, I really appreciate you took no time in looking at it when I spent the time to type it.

What do you mean why?  For the same reason people climb mountains?

What does it matter?  It matters to someone who would like to see Five categories.   HAHA... just messing with ya.

I am doing some writing on scale modeling and that question popped into my head.  I tried to condense the genres into five categories because of a logo, unrelated to models, that I was working on at the time had a five point star.  Had it been a 6 or a 7, I guess I would have gone with that number.

Anyway, as hard-headed as I am, that question stuck and when I could not do it, I posted the question here.  And, I got my answer; I like Scorpionmikey's Land, Air, Sea, Space, & Mythical.  

Anyone who does not like it.... can take it up with Mikey.  LOL  

Scorpiomikey

Land, Air, Sea, Space, Mythical.

Sounds good to me, although I might change the last one to Fantasy.

Echo139er

I would like to condense ALL modeling Genres down to only five MAIN categories. I think its possible.  

But, because there are so many I am having difficulty doing so. Help me narrow it down to five.

Why? This is topic a country music song waiting to happen. Five or fifty, what does it later?

Trying to water down Sci-fi into armor and aircraft would cause so many problems you have no idea.

'Sci-Fi' is already such a MASSIVE term.  There are many many genres in there.  Gundam kits along are there own genre and have their own international competitions for just that specific type of kit. 

Sci-fi can cover anything from a giant spaceship to a dude in a suit of powered armor.  You could take Scifi and find more then ample examples to go into EVERY category.

for example...

you could have a post apoclyptic car build like a road warrior build put into scifi, hover bikes kits are out there that are sci-fi and automotive

you could put a kit like that Resin KV-1/2 Spider tank, or some of the Warhammer miniature vehicles into Armor

you could put MA.k Hovercraft, Xwing, or the Enterprise into aircraft

You could put a Ma.k Suit of power armor or a Gundam kit into Figures for that matter

Ships, that one is easy, what about a Space Battleship Yamato kit from the anime of the same name.  The genre is already really condensed within itself, to force it to be broken into subcategories and thrown into OTHER categories is a bad idea, especially when it comes to contests.  I know judges have NO IDEA what there doing with a lot of sci-fi subjects.  I could not imagine a figure judge juding a gundam kit...

"Soft-skin armor" is an oxymoron, lol..  Probably should be labeled as "Tactical Wheeled Vehicles" if they wanna get accurate..

Hans von Hammer

Are jeeps, Kubelwagens, 2 1/2 ton trucks, and other soft-skin wheeled militay vehicles armor or automotive?  They're military, but they have no armor...

Aren't they classified (for contests anyway) as "soft-skin armor"?

Are jeeps, Kubelwagens, 2 1/2 ton trucks, and other soft-skin wheeled militay vehicles armor or automotive?  They're military, but they have no armor...

Be sure there is a misc. category.

This brings up a gripe- contest categories. We show up and find lots of categories like single engine allied biplane or WW2 multi-engine.  Some of us like to build civil aircraft.  No category fits!  I have seen civil aircraft shoved into misc. category because there were no appropriate aircraft categories.

Sounds like "Spill the wine" Bondo

Blondes

Brunettes

Redheads

Skinny

Curvaceous (my favorite)

I would have to go with these 7:

Aircraft

Auto

Armor

Figures

Ships

Scifi

Real Space

The problem with putting scifi with most of the other categories is that that dont really exist. Planes, tanks, and Automoblies (with a few exceptions) are real.

I can see Real Space more in Ships than Aircraft. When spacecraft are doing what they were designed for they are more like submarines than airplanes.

The problem I see with five is that, in my mind, I'd want to divide it into categories based not just on subject, but also techniques used.  For example, armor and airplanes would be put in different categories by most people, but the weathering techniques tend to be the same unless you're adding mud or something else that's built up as part of the weathering on the armor subject.  

Even if similar materials are used, the techniques for those kinds of subjects are pretty different from what you'd use with figures.  There's a difference in skills used to make a wash on an airplane convincingly make panel lines stand out and how you use a wash to add shading to the face or clothes of a human figure, or the use of putty to smooth out panel lines versus the sculpting skills needed to fix a seam on a figure.

The best division of categories I can figure, to as few as possible, would be:

1) Aerospace ( including planes and helicopters, civilian and military, and rockets )

2) Armor 

3) Civilian land vehicles ( cars and bikes, separate because of usually being glossy instead of drab and weathered like military vehicles )

4) Ships ( While construction and painting/weathering techniques are similar to other military subjects, the techniques to work in the very different scale and knowing how to weather convincingly make a difference )

5) Sci-Fi

6) Figures

I see dioramas as a per-category "extra", and added step by subject more than a separate category, that adds a more artistic touch.

So there's my attempt, down to 6.  Not quite down to the 5 you wanted, but the best I do for the factors I could think of.

Wabashwheels

 Maybe add an "Odds and Ends" category.  (weekdays only)

Done that already...  except its 24/7

Mikey, yeah that would do it alright.  I thought about those a while back but I was missing Mythical.  I like it.

Land, Air, Sea, Space, Mythical.

No can do...  Maybe add an "Odds and Ends" category.  (weekdays only)