"Speed Bump" diorama (lots of pics)

That is a great dio. Not only is it well built but the action is there as well. Great job.

wow. that is incredibly detailed. excellent work.


joe

Excellent work!!!! I know the "bitten off more than you can chew" feeling. I'm having it right now tih my mig-29...

Looks pretty good. Couple things though. The Bradley and figures are not correct for current ops in Iraq (OIF). Original M2 Bradley was replaced with M2A2 Bradleys during Operation Desert Storm (ODS), 1991. Markings on M2 Bradley are wong too, 2nd Armored division is no more, was stood down in 1993/94 time frame. Also, the figures are wearing the older PAGST flak vest, current vest (as of about 2002) is the Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) vest with loops all over it for securing ammo pouches and other items. The camo doesn't look right for modern 3-color camo either, too much and too bright on the green. The Abrams tank commander has incorrect camo as well, 6-tone Chocolate Chip Camo was phased out just after ODS as well. The Abrams looks good, but CIp panels don't look right, they should not be seen through, they are like siding on a house, solid.

The rest looks good. Street scene, ciilians, camel, buildings, and Mercedes look great. Good overall presentation, just not historically accurate. Good job overall, a few tweaks and it could be great.

Great dio, i love the detail also,great work
Pedro

Thanks everyone for the feedback!

HeavyArty, I had a feeling you'd be the one to notice my inaccuracies first :)

I knew the Bradley was the wrong version, but I really wanted to do the interior and couldn't afford two kits to do a kitbash. I had no idea that the 2nd Armored was no more. I didn't know that chocolate-chip cookie had been phased out until after I painted the tanker and glued him into place, so I left it...I figured with the other inconsistencies, the camo would be a small enough thing...

Now, the camo on the other soldiers was patterned after the current scheme, it's just poor paintwork, I suppose. :)

I also had no idea about the CIP panels. I installed them just the way they were molded--no idea they were supposed to be flat. Questions that should have been asked, I suppose :) My next dio, I've already made plans to do plenty more homework (I'll be honest, at the risk of being slaughtered by the armor guys, I started this project with absolutely no knowledge of modern AFVs and IFVs...)

Anyhow, thanks for the honest evaluation...and know that from now on you'll be my go-to guy for armor facts!

Beautiful work!

that is a really cool dio friend!!! well done!! and nice photography too!!

*cough*someone'srivotcounting*cough*

LOL, all joking aside great work on the Dio, good laugh at the situation.

Great looking diorama & a very interesting concept.

Regards, Rick

I love the giant turkey in the first picture. He looks so crunchy and golden brown.

I wish they were that big here in the States.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hatewall I love the giant turkey in the first picture. He looks so crunchy and golden brown. I wish they were that big here in the States.

Is that constructive criticism or random insanity?

Now that I look at it, that would be one killer drumstick...

Okay, seriously, thanks everyone for the comments, you're all too kind...
And thanks Hatewall for my laugh of the day...

Wow, You have done a fantastic job on this one. Great details!

A great doi, thanks for all the pics....

Very nice dio, great composition I love the shops -and the comment about the "turkey"

Hey, I dont know if you know it but Middle-east homes have 37 mini-blind folds not 32... HEhehehehe.(Bad skarpotchi, Bad!!!)

Great Dio....I really love the attention paid to the real life elements of the scene. And the wanted poster EXCELLENT, LOVE IT. Not to mention your camera skills. REALLY REALLY good stuff.

Thanks for the show.

Cool Dio! Just wish some companies would produce civilian cars for modern/wwii, alot more dio posibilities would come up! Great sense overall, I like the Bradleys, didn't have a clue 'bout the cammo schemes, blah blah blah looks fine to me! Well done!

Excellent work! I think the burned out Mercedes is the highlight. Extremely realistic!

Thanks for the praises, folks!

Skar, count again, I have the Middle-East Standard Regulation Issue Mini-Blind Handbook and it specifically calls for 32. Also, on page 24 of Squadron's "Middle-East Mini-Blinds In Action", you can count the slats on the blinds in the pic at the bottom of the page. So

Seriously, tho, got a good laugh out of that one...

And J-Hulk, you wouldn't believe the trouble I went through to find that car. I stumbled onto it after I had given up looking for it!

Some of you folks might remember me when I was a really new new newbie asking about 1/35 civilian autos...it was you guys (you guys!) who convinced me that 1/32 would be close enough in scale to be convincing.

Thanks again everybody!

QUOTE: Middle-East Standard Regulation Issue Mini-Blind Handbook

I got an even better laugh from that...Thanks.

I love the Middle East Mini Blinds In Action from Squadron! LOL Now I just thing we're all teasing HeavyArty here! haha Poor guy....
so a 1/32 civy car can almost be used?....and crap, I had an old Airfix kit years ago that I tossed...damn! LOL

I certainly didn't mean to tease HeavyArty...I was just shooting back at Skar! If it weren't for guys like HeavyArty, we'd have to go and buy BOOKS! Seriously, I'm glad to have the rivet-counters around, even though I've never been one of them (just too lazy) ...it's nice to have someone keeping things accurate...

And it was here in these forums that someone convinced me (wish I could remember who so I could give them credit) that 1/32 was "close enough". To me the car looks fine in the scene, so I guess I have to admit they were right.

QUOTE: Poor guy....

Not me. You guys who are going along throwing models together in scenes that are out of context/time are the Poor Guys.


Seriosly, no offense taken. I am no rivet-counter, not by a long shot, but I do look for historical accuracy. I could care less if a vehicle is supposed to have 10 bolts and 3 washers down the side and there are only 8 bolts and no washers. Historical accuracy is something else. If you want to put vehicles out of time together and have them in the wrong era, fine. I will point it out to you every time. That is whht constructive criticism is. I could care less what you do with the criticism.

QUOTE: And it was here in these forums that someone convinced me (wish I could remember who so I could give them credit) that 1/32 was "close enough". To me the car looks fine in the scene, so I guess I have to admit they were right.

Yup, I was one of the people advocating the use of 1/32 scale civilian vehicles w/ 1/35 armor and figures. Check my galleries to see quite a few that I have used. Glad you took my advice.

Yep...in glancing through your galleries again, I distinctly remember it was your advice. Thanks :)

great dio and well photographed it really gave me a feeling of being there, it is interesting and different, great stuff.

I REALLY really should leave this alone BUT....

This is a hobby, and for some people it's more than that, and that's fine. In MOST cases if the modeler had fun building it then thats all that matters. And for the new builders out there build your scene and have fun, because it is not required that your model or dio be historically correct. The only thing that is required is that you enjoy it and share it and pass on what you learn.

Sorry, now I will go back into my hole, and build my models.

I agree with you 90% on this one, Skar. I have always felt like the fun was the thing, and I still do. I can see why a glaring error like including an IFV that had been phased out a dozen years earlier might bother some people (it even bothers me, and I eventually want to replace it). On the other hand, if you don't want to do research and you don't know the different, build it anyway, and for cryin' out loud, enjoy it!

What I think would be awesome would be if a band of us were able to get together (never happen) and do a real one-on-one group build, with everyone contributing their particular strengths. Historically accurate types could oversee the planning and choose the right vehicles for the scene...the best of the best builders, landscapers, figure painters and detail fiends could all apply their killer skills to one grand project.

Of course, since we're talking about involving people who are really really good, that would leave me out anyhow

Yep...have fun, that's the bottom line, whether it means laying on a generous helping of artistic license or being accurate to the last detail.

Just my

Oh of course the fun is the first and foremost part of the hobby...nothin wrong with ribbin' each other once in a while, god I get it from Bugsy everytime we go for coffee, so it's just part of the fun! LOL

QUOTE: This is a hobby, and for some people it's more than that, and that's fine. In MOST cases if the modeler had fun building it then thats all that matters. And for the new builders out there build your scene and have fun, because it is not required that your model or dio be historically correct. The only thing that is required is that you enjoy it and share it and pass on what you learn.

Then what does it matter if Heavy arty or anyone else makes these constructive criticisms? If it really is only about having fun then it shouldn't matter what anyone says should it? So long as you had a good time building it and obviously we do since there is a lot of posted pictures on this and other forums showing off the pride in our work. drucifer asked for comments, good and bad. No one has given a bad comment yet.

Heavyarty was only pointing out some errors in continuity. If it is a case of it being wrong then its wrong. Kind of hard to call it OIF if its using Desert Storm armor and equipment. History is history and in order to say something is from a particualr time in history then we should at least get it right. If we put it in terms that are more easily visualized it makes sense. i.e. I don't think I would put M3a1 Stuart tanks in a Korean War Dio, yet they were only 10 years apart in realtive history. Much like Korean era US marine uniforms and equipment in Vietnam.

Constructive criticism is just that. I agree with you skarpotchi that it sometimes goes overboard, and in some cases I'll help you get up on your soapbox, but we progress as artists or modelers because we take that criticism and do something with it other than make sophomoric comments (*cough*someone'srivotcounting*cough*) and improve upon our own work. Its what makes us better and improves the status quo. I'll rib with the best of them and I'm an incredible smart a** but in context and an onlooker may think that you guys are giving heavy a hard time. This will make the next guy or someone new hesitate to offer constructive criticism that may help all of us. Equipment and uniforms that are 10 years phased out isn't rivet couning. Having the correct manual for mini blinds.....thats rivet counting besides if they wee mini blinds that were originally looted from Kuwait then they could very well be the correct blinds as the US was a large importer of miniblinds to kuwait.Or they came in on an earlier arms shipment we made in the 80's when we were still allied to Iraq.

Rivet counters aren't so bad either. Its because of those rivet counters that there is a whole multi million dollar industry of aftermarket products, books, better kits, figures, updates to kits, etc. that we all enjoy. If not for this desire for accuracy and willingness to go tothis extent, we'd still have some pretty bad monogram, airfix and heller kits that could keep us busy in filler putty and styrene plastic for years to come.

QUOTE: Comments welcome! Even bad ones! :)

drucifer solicited comments and hopefully got what he wanted. Information, praise and constructive criticism. Not only do I applaud your diorama and builds drucifer, but I also applaud your willingness to accept criticism and help. Good job on all.