How important is accuracy to you in a dio?

Basic modeling skills are always first. Next, the story is judged. If the dio is depicting an actual event, D-Day, for example, it needs to be more accurate than a generic scene, e.g., no Pershing or Maus in the scene. Consistency is next. Does the scene tell a consistent story, e.g., if there's combat in one corner, don't have other guys sitting or walking casually, or will the next step a figure take trip him over a wall? "Wow factor?" That doesn't come into play when I'm judging. I had a discussions with a top end, very well known scratchbuilder as well as a friend/regular co-judge at World Expo about a huge dio with a lot of "WOW factor". We all agreed it while there was a lot of individually excellent work present, the story was seriously lacking in internal consistency and none of us would have given it overall high marks as a dioram. I had felt he same when I first saw it last fall but was over ruled by the rest of the team I was on on the level of award it would get.

As most everyone else said ,have fun and enjoy.Depends on your personal goals though.One of my goals is to finally build a model or dio that has (in my eyes) no mistakes.I'm not there yet and probably will never be.I do strive to make them historically correct.The right vehicles and weapons in the correct time frame and location.One thing however that I do strive to do right is the composition of the dio.One thing that kills a dio for me and makes it unrealistic is bad composition.A soldier who is throwing a grenade on one side of the dio and a soldier relaxing not far from him is probably not realistic.For the most part if your dio's like mine due to space constraints are not that big everything in there needs to be reacting to the same moment in time.I don't know if I've explained this very well ,hope this helps .......Lonnie

I see where some of you guys are coming from. I know I will continue to make my dios as accurate as possible and not worry about the others.

QUOTE: Originally posted by stickjockey You mean my diorama concerning the T-72 in the lime-green and fluorescent purple camouflage that defended Hickam Field from the Germans during the Pearl Harbor bombing just won't cut it?

That is HILARIOUS! I love your sense of humor!

Accuracy = Credibility

When I was a kid, and competing in model contests, there was a dio of a German panzer column that was pro done. Fantastic piece. It didn't win. When I asked one of the judges what was up, he pointed out that the infantry was wearing pink piping and the tank crews were wearing white piping, (or vice versa, I don't do armor anymore). Completly wrong, and a little research, (just a little!), would have put the dio over the top, and it would have won the show.

Fast forward 25 years, I was competing in a contest 2 years ago and there was a dio of a 1/72 B-52 being serviced on the ramp. Great piece... for civilians, but, to a person that has been around B-52's for 15 years, I can GUARANTEE that bombs would not be loading during refueling. No matter what the situation. (he didn't grab 1st either). I was competing, so I didn't judge dio's.

When I judge dio's, accuracy is the 1st thing I look at. It gives the piece credibility, then I look at building, painting, ect..... The last thing I look for is how the scene is portrayed, ie: overall design and flow. If there are 30 different little stories going on everywhere, or if it's dull and flat, it probably won't get the high marks.

There are exeptions, (not for dull and flat), I am presently working on a dio with "Rommel's Rod" as the central piece. The skeleton's tattered uniforms will be very accurate, as well thier equipment, but of course, I'm using ALOT of artistic licsense on the vehicles that are in the scene. An example is the scatchbuilt 1/24 Cromwell tank that is half buried in the sand. When I built it, I used the "TLAR" method, (That Looks About Right). Accurate, no, comic bookish, yes.

Sorry about being so long winded

Accuracy = Credibility

Steve

Great topic!!!

I'am only going to say this, my diorama not yours.
Thats all.
ARTE ET MARTE
djw1

To me, accuracy is important, but also can't prevent you from having a great time building!! Research, is often a very fun, knowledge filling, and an enjoyable part of a build. If you get tired of finding out the right colors for the patches on your figures, maybe it's time to set down the books and pick up the brush.

Great discussion. I have never built a diorama, although I think it would be a great challenge to try. I think historical accuracy adds another dimension to modelling in general, not just dioramas. On the other hand, I think rivet-counters, as you call them, often think they have more complete knowledge than they really do. My limited knowledge suggests that while the broad facts may be fairly clearly established, the details are often highly disputable. Moreover, dealing with real-world conditions, especially in wartime, introduce huge amounts of variation. If one presents a diorama as a depiction of a particular time and place, I think it is important to get the broad facts straight. As has been pointed out, including equipment that simply was not in service at the time or place destroys the sense of verisimilitude, but minor "inaccuracies" don't bother me so long as the scene taken as a whole is plausible. Plausibility seems to me to be the key.

when i build dios, i like the accuracy. models and dios, especially when used in museums and the like, tend to be most peoples way of seeing whaat the past looked like. therefore, inaccuracies can mislead people. this may sound like im not giving a lot of credit to society.....which im not. from my experiences, i find that most people dont look into the history like we tend to, so they may just believe what they see. this is why i also have a problem with modern movies that skim off some accuracy to make a "cool" film.

on the other hand, sometimes i think you should just build something you like, maybe to try out new ideas and/or techniques, or just to relax. its that kind of building that really helps keep model building alive, people just going out and buying a couple kits and building them in a short tiem period, then doing it again. it keeps things going. but im going off on a tangent. to be direct: i prefer accuracy because im a perfectionist, a semi-rivet counter, and i like to be right.

To me, accuracy in a diorama is second only to whether it effectively tells a story that I'm interested in. You can compare it to a historical novel or movie. If you see something that you know is not right, it distracts you and pulls you out of the dream that you enter into when reading or viewing the movie. A really good diorama should do the same thing. It should pull you into the scene so you become involved with it. If you see something that is a bit off it will distract you a little. If you see something that is just plain off in left field it will throw you right out of the scene and your feet will move you on. Over the years I've probably seen a dozen dioramas that really drew me in and absorbed me (I have yet to build one that does that myself), but those few I will remember always. Diorama building at its best is the pinnacle of this hobby, it's like an Olympic decathalon in modeling, you may not have to have the very best in everything, but you need to do the best you can in every part of it. End of sermon... I'll go now. Chuck

QUOTE: Originally posted by Zouave146 To me, accuracy in a diorama is second only to whether it effectively tells a story that I'm interested in. You can compare it to a historical novel or movie. If you see something that you know is not right, it distracts you and pulls you out of the dream that you enter into when reading or viewing the movie.

Amen to that. Taking the movie idea, I just finished watching "Into the West." I was taken by this from the first scene to the last. WHat put me over the top in its accuracy was the Little Big Horn. Traditionally, cinematic Custers have the classic long hair for which he was known and wore in the earlier scenes, such as the attack at the Washita River. It has been repoerted that Custer cut his hair before his last campaign. This program got that right, with no fan fare, no exposition. He just shows up inthe scene wearing relatively short hair. He was also depicted wearing his blue fireman style shirt, having removed his buckskin jacket, according to the last cavalry witnesses that day. These detailsadded greatly to the credibillity of the rest of the show.

Likewise, attention to detail, historical accuracy, make the story you're trying to tell, and a dioram is nothing if it's not trying to tell a story. You can tell a historically precise story, recreating a photograph, or you can tell a representative story, with more artistic freedom, but you should strive to get the particualrs right. No Screaming Eagles in the pacific. No Abrams in Vietnam. You can throw all this to the wind if you're depicting a scene of alternate history, Luftwaffe 1946 or something taken from Harry Turtledove's "Guns of hte South."

how important is it??? i sometimes cant go to sleep thinking i left something or that the decals arent accurate for the dio im building...
how crazy am i with this?? this time im going to the actual site of where it happened and im gonna base it off that (WARSAW!!)