Est.1961

I have a little bit of the neanderthal in me.

I like.

Gamera

So if I go back to see dinosaurs and the time machine puts me in my ancestor instead of a shrew it would be a telephone sanitizer on Golgafringian Ark B???

Well, leaving aside relativity issues, and decidedly not being the brilliant, if late, Douglas Adams, I'd say it was possible.

Quantum probabliity (currently) holds that, if you found a way to create a time-space bubble, the interior of that bubble would tend to operate at your previous, 'native' time (the premise operates similarly to conservation of mass and energy).  So, the you of the "now" would still be you in the "then."  No regressing into protoplasm or dust or the like.

Now, sadly, current quantum theory posits that, if you went back in time, the "reality" you would experiece would not necessarily be the one in your own past.  It would be the one where the quatum states resolved to where the coin toss comes up that your trip was successful (and not any of the times the coin toss was "tails" instead).

Next tricky part is that on your return trip to your previous "present," it, too has to be the one where all the coin flips equal your success.  But, that might not (and probably wouldn't ) be the "present" you left to go to the past.

And, this stuff gets complicated, quick.  A quantum decision tree always has three branches, decision made, positive; decision made, negative; and no decision.

Quantum states will admit to any possible combination of reality, and they resolve only in observation.  So, in a given instant, there is a non-zero probability that you are a Llama.   When you look in the mirror and you are not a 120kg 2m tall quadraped, then, either a quantum dcision occured, or inertia mooted the decision, and you did not transmogrify.

Now, the probablities of being a Golgafringian are significantly higher than a bowl of petunias, but either are non-zero, especially with quantum probabilities.

Then, it gets really deep

Why does my head hurt now ?????

But wait,..... I will just go back in time to when my head didn't hurt... and then return to the present !

BAAAA .....   BAAAA .....

( uh-oh ...)

littletimmy

Why does my head hurt now ?????

But wait,..... I will just go back in time to when my head didn't hurt... and then return to the present !

BAAAA .....   BAAAA .....

( uh-oh ...)

 

Maybe we should just get a Delorean. Or maybe I should finish my LamboDelore. That will have time travel capability.

So, a sad tale for you. I tested the paint that I was so impatiently waiting for, and it was a total bust.  

I tried using AK interactive acrylic, 3rd generation. I did so because they had the color I was looking for, and the hobby store that had it was only across the lake from me. I had not tried that paint yet, and reviews seemed decent. How bad could it be?

Well, here is the kick in the pants. The hobby store had the paint, but they were out of stock on the thinner, and they made it sound like it would be weeks to wait on. Being impatient, I said ship the paint. Afterall, I was hearing the paint was cuttable using water. One yahoo even said lacquer was ok. Oh, and the promo for their paint touts it as airbrushable straight from the bottle.

Um, no. My paint was far too thick. So, I tried water. Horrid result. It was like oil and water. The paint separated and blotted. For grins, I tried IPA, X20, lacquer thinner, all bad. Lacquer was the worst. The paint congealed. I also found a complaint that the paint dries up in the bottle. Perhaps why mine came so thick.

Now, I  am back to square one. I have some AK Real Color Acrylic Lacquer that I could make work. I have a tan, and white. I could mix the shade I want. Two issues with that though.

1. I'd need to mix a large enough batch so that I have enough to paint the entire interior, when ready to. That could be a few months down the road yet. Will the paint keep? Forget trying to match a new batch later.

2. More importantly. Though in testing the paint sticks well when yanked on with tape, it does not do well when flexed. From my experience, the paint is very rigid and it literally flakes off when flexed. In those cases I did not prime first, didn't think I'd need to. But with that said, it's no guarantee it would change a darn thing. The structure of my interior is delicate, and there is gonna be flexing while handling. Hence my concern.

Btw. Tonights test was on spoons, not on my model. No concern there.

So, it's one of those one step forward, two steps back moments.

THE END

CapnMac82

Now, the probablities of being a Golgafringian are significantly higher than a bowl of petunias, but either are non-zero, especially with quantum probabilities. Then, it gets really deep

THAT is a hoot.

littletimmy

Why does my head hurt now ?????

But wait,..... I will just go back in time to when my head didn't hurt... and then return to the present !

BAAAA .....   BAAAA .....

( uh-oh ...)

 

 

 

It's worse than that Timmy, from what the Capn said you could find when you go back your head is aching more than when you left; I think, I dun know, what with cavemen stooges I'm getting a headache might leave time travelling for another time.

Edit.

Bakster: I've been using AK Interactive acrylic olive drab primer for US Second World War vehicles for some time and never had any problems with it. In fact I used some last night. I thin it with a smidgeon of windshield washer fluid (water with a little alcolhol added to keep it from freezing). 

I haven't used the actual paint yet, only the primer but still the issues you're having make me scratch my head. 

CapnMac82

 

 

Gamera

So if I go back to see dinosaurs and the time machine puts me in my ancestor instead of a shrew it would be a telephone sanitizer on Golgafringian Ark B???

 

 

Well, leaving aside relativity issues, and decidedly not being the brilliant, if late, Douglas Adams, I'd say it was possible.

Quantum probabliity (currently) holds that, if you found a way to create a time-space bubble, the interior of that bubble would tend to operate at your previous, 'native' time (the premise operates similarly to conservation of mass and energy).  So, the you of the "now" would still be you in the "then."  No regressing into protoplasm or dust or the like.

Now, sadly, current quantum theory posits that, if you went back in time, the "reality" you would experiece would not necessarily be the one in your own past.  It would be the one where the quatum states resolved to where the coin toss comes up that your trip was successful (and not any of the times the coin toss was "tails" instead).

Next tricky part is that on your return trip to your previous "present," it, too has to be the one where all the coin flips equal your success.  But, that might not (and probably wouldn't ) be the "present" you left to go to the past.

And, this stuff gets complicated, quick.  A quantum decision tree always has three branches, decision made, positive; decision made, negative; and no decision.

Quantum states will admit to any possible combination of reality, and they resolve only in observation.  So, in a given instant, there is a non-zero probability that you are a Llama.   When you look in the mirror and you are not a 120kg 2m tall quadraped, then, either a quantum dcision occured, or inertia mooted the decision, and you did not transmogrify.

Now, the probablities of being a Golgafringian are significantly higher than a bowl of petunias, but either are non-zero, especially with quantum probabilities.

Then, it gets really deep

 

Exactly!!! 

I've read a little on the subject but like 1961 it just gives me a headache. I like the idea that if I change the past it creates another timeline that spins off from the original. So if I should kill my own grandpa it just makes a new timeline without us and doesn't alter the one I came from. Or at least it makes my head hurt less. 

CapnMac82

 

 

Gamera

So if I go back to see dinosaurs and the time machine puts me in my ancestor instead of a shrew it would be a telephone sanitizer on Golgafringian Ark B???

 

 

Well, leaving aside relativity issues, and decidedly not being the brilliant, if late, Douglas Adams, I'd say it was possible.

Quantum probabliity (currently) holds that, if you found a way to create a time-space bubble, the interior of that bubble would tend to operate at your previous, 'native' time (the premise operates similarly to conservation of mass and energy).  So, the you of the "now" would still be you in the "then."  No regressing into protoplasm or dust or the like.

Now, sadly, current quantum theory posits that, if you went back in time, the "reality" you would experiece would not necessarily be the one in your own past.  It would be the one where the quatum states resolved to where the coin toss comes up that your trip was successful (and not any of the times the coin toss was "tails" instead).

Next tricky part is that on your return trip to your previous "present," it, too has to be the one where all the coin flips equal your success.  But, that might not (and probably wouldn't ) be the "present" you left to go to the past.

And, this stuff gets complicated, quick.  A quantum decision tree always has three branches, decision made, positive; decision made, negative; and no decision.

Quantum states will admit to any possible combination of reality, and they resolve only in observation.  So, in a given instant, there is a non-zero probability that you are a Llama.   When you look in the mirror and you are not a 120kg 2m tall quadraped, then, either a quantum dcision occured, or inertia mooted the decision, and you did not transmogrify.

Now, the probablities of being a Golgafringian are significantly higher than a bowl of petunias, but either are non-zero, especially with quantum probabilities.

Then, it gets really deep

 

But, but.....

Bakster and I only wanted to go back to a Steak and Ale for prime rib.  Just a quick trip. Then we'll come right back, ok?

Re the paint, always a bummer when after waiting for something to be delivered it turns out to be a disappointment.

I had a similar experience with Mission Models. I still think I did something wrong. Maybe you'll figure something out.

I'm with you on mixing colors. With very rare exception, I'm not a fan either.

Greg

But, but..... Bakster and I only wanted to go back to a Steak and Ale for prime rib.  Just a quick trip. Then we'll come right back, ok?

Yeah Buddy, I am with you. I think its doable. 

Gamera

the issues you're having make me scratch my head. 

Me as well. All I can say is it performed so badly it was unusable for airbrushing. Maybe if I had their thinner things would be different. Don't know. For now, though, anything that behaves in such a fickle manor gets put on my do not use list. One thing for sure. There are some pissed off people that bought large sets of this paint when it came out. Even unopened paint is drying out over time. Sigh.

Greg

Re the paint, always a bummer when after waiting for something to be delivered it turns out to be a disappointment.

I had a similar experience with Mission Models. I still think I did something wrong. Maybe you'll figure something out.

I'm with you on mixing colors. With very rare exception, I'm not a fan either.

 

Yup. But ya know, I always look for the silver lining because there usually is one. More than once it's happened where a setback has set me on a new course that ended up being better, and if I had stayed on the previous track--it is discovered that a disaster was waiting. No joke. 

After I wrote about the setback last night I went and checked my stock of paints, which isn't all that big. I found some Vallejo that I bought for another project and amazingly, I have a bottle called aged white that is very close to the color I want. I just need to tweak it a little, and I happen to have a bottle of desert sand that should get me there. I will do some testing on that tonight.

Bakster

 

 

Greg

Re the paint, always a bummer when after waiting for something to be delivered it turns out to be a disappointment.

I had a similar experience with Mission Models. I still think I did something wrong. Maybe you'll figure something out.

I'm with you on mixing colors. With very rare exception, I'm not a fan either.

 

 

 

 

Yup. But ya know, I always look for the silver lining because there usually is one. More than once it's happened where a setback has set me on a new course that ended up being better, and if I had stayed on the previous track--it is discovered that a disaster was waiting. No joke. 

After I wrote about the setback last night I went and checked my stock of paints, which isn't all that big. I found some Vallejo that I bought for another project and amazingly, I have a bottle called aged white that is very close to the color I want. I just need to tweak it a little, and I happen to have a bottle of desert sand that should get me there. I will do some testing on that tonight.

I have been having success with Vallejo again lately. Also, I'm beginning to learn about lighter coats and it is actually working in many cases. And the Vallejo, to my amazement, is actually drying (as opposed to the rubbery feel forever thing folks talk about, including me).

There's a lot to be said for using what we have. Including not going broke from trying every new paint I read about!

The Vallejo Model Colour is wonderful for hand brushing. I don't think I've ever used paint that worked better for it. But I've never had much luck spraying it. 

Their Model Air I love, it airbrushes like a dream. 

And yeah I hate mixing my own paint. If I ever run out and have to mix more I can never get the exact shade again no matter how careful I measure it out. 

Greg

And the Vallejo, to my amazement, is actually drying (as opposed to the rubbery feel forever thing folks talk about, including me).

I changed over to Vallejo, noticed it would rub even after been left for a good while. The two models I'm working on now I'm happy to say haven't shown that problem even after handling. I've been spraying on in short soft bursts and it dries nicely, I've got to practice more with the airbrush. 

Greg

And the Vallejo, to my amazement, is actually drying (as opposed to the rubbery feel forever thing folks talk about, including me).

Good to hear. Hey --remember my orange squid on the Seaview build? I used Vallejo Model Air on that and it seemed to work fine. Fingers will be crossed. Oh--and I even have their thinner this time.

Greg

There's a lot to be said for using what we have. Including not going broke from trying every new paint I read about!

True. And with stores closed, you can't see the color in person. I hate picking a color on line because you never know what you are gonna get.

Est.1961

 

 

Greg

And the Vallejo, to my amazement, is actually drying (as opposed to the rubbery feel forever thing folks talk about, including me).

 

 

I changed over to Vallejo, noticed it would rub even after been left for a good while. The two models I'm working on now I'm happy to say haven't shown that problem even after handling. I've been spraying on in short soft bursts and it dries nicely, I've got to practice more with the airbrush. 

 

Gamera

Their Model Air I love, it airbrushes like a dream. 

Gamera

And yeah I hate mixing my own paint. If I ever run out and have to mix more I can never get the exact shade again no matter how careful I measure it out. 

BINGO.

Gamera

Their Model Air I love, it airbrushes like a dream.

It does.

Gamera

The Vallejo Model Colour is wonderful for hand brushing. I don't think I've ever used paint that worked better for it. But I've never had much luck spraying it.

Long story short, it sprayed well. I added a little bit more Vallejo Retarder on the second color (Brass). It sprayed beautifully and never had a bit of dry tip. Was a long spray session. I was afraid the extra retarder would hinder drying, it didn't.

We had no way to adhere the stenciles, so we knew the overspray would happen. I got smart on the second layer and used black stynylrez to prime instead of the grey I used for the purple. Duh.

Gamera

And yeah I hate mixing my own paint. If I ever run out and have to mix more I can never get the exact shade again no matter how careful I measure it out.

Yes, that, plus I'm a hoarder so if I do mix a batch I will mix extra in case it's needed down the line for the project. I'll either end up not have mixed enough or not use it at all.

Est.1961

I changed over to Vallejo, noticed it would rub even after been left for a good while. The two models I'm working on now I'm happy to say haven't shown that problem even after handling

You are priming first, right?

After cleaning and drying well, primed with Vallejo primer. Will admit to painting enamels straight on in the........ #%@ need a time machine for that. 

Est.1961

After cleaning and drying well, primed with Vallejo primer. Will admit to painting enamels straight on in the........ #%@ need a time machine for that.

Good.

Glad to hear the Vallejo primer is working for you. It consitantly dries to a beautiful finish, and the detail retention is excellent, that's for sure.

That's cool Greg. Nice work!

Ok, I did some testing with the Vallejo paint. Here is the good and the bad of the test:

1. I was able to get the color I was looking for by using an extremely small amount of desert sand mixed with the aged white. I couldn't tell the difference between the AK color and with what I mixed. It was a real stroke of luck that I had those paints, especially the aged white. This is an example of what I was talking about earlier. I purchased the aged white for another project but I didn't use it. I didn't like the color that I thought it would bring me. At the time, it was a waste of money and I figured it would never get used. But guess what? It was the silver lining for me on this project.

2. I used Vallejo thinner in conjunction with the paint. The paint sprayed out of the brush like it was silk. It was incredible and it layed down nice and wet.

3. After a few hours I checked on it, and it had that rubbery tact that Greg mentioned. THAT... may be a problem. I will check on it tomorrow but I suspect it won't change much and here is why...

The thinner had bubbles in it, like a soap. That is indicative of a paint retarder, or flow enhancer, or both. And that would explain why it sprayed like silk, and that would explain why it has that tackyness to it. I have experienced this before when I used Winsor and Newton's retarder/flow enhancer, and the tackyness resulted from using too much of it. A person needs to be very careful how much is used. 

So, I went to the web, and sure enough, Vallejo has a paint retarder/flow enhancer built into their thinner. With not using this thinner before, I am now learning, I used it wrong. I thought I was using a thinner as the name suggests. That is misleading. Yeah, you can use it to mildly thin the paint but, not to the levels we might do with straight thinner, and the latter is what I did. I used way too much of it. That's why I think the paint will take forever to cure, if it cures at all. Along with that, I don't expect a very strong bond. I think the paint is compromised now.

That said, I need to do another test. This time, far less thinner and then see what happens. I wish I could remember what thinner I used on the squid I mentioned earlier. It wasn't Vallejos thinner because I didn't have it at the time. I am pretty sure I used Tamiyas X20A, and it worked fine with no tackiness. If needed, I will try that too.

And now for some really good/bad news. The good news is that the Stooges showed up in my mailbox today. They look really good! And now for the bad news... I can't use them.

Yup! I can't use them because they are too big. Somewhere along the line I messed up in my calculations and with how big I thought they'd be. So, no more stooges. It's too bad but maybe there is a silver lining coming. 

And Greg, I also ordered and received the orange cap Tamiya cement. I look forward to seeing how I can utilize this stuff.

PS: Those same stooge figures were once available in I think it was 1/96 scale. I couldn't  find them available anymore. That is what I needed, and unfortunately, not being able to get them is why I hoped to compromise with the one I got.

Bakster

The thinner had bubbles in it, like a soap. That is indicative of a paint retarder, or flow enhancer, or both. And that would explain why it sprayed like silk, and that would explain why it has that tackyness to it. I have experienced this before when I used Winsor and Newton's retarder/flow enhancer, and the tackyness resulted from using too much of it. A person needs to be very careful how much is used. 

Thanks Steve, 

That's very interesting, when I first started using Vallejo colours in my AB I was in a right mess. Bought some Vallejo Air bottles, now the more I use them the better it appears as it goes on. I use the originals for brushing shall use this information to try them out again what with having more of them. 

Too bad about the stooges, but do let me know if you like the orange cap Tamiya cement.

Glad the Vallejo worked out. What product number is the thinner? I've noticed their flow improver (retarder) bubbles. The straight thinner does not, and I'd never heard about the airbrush thinner containing retarder/flow improver.

I inquire about product number because if there is a new product with both thinner and flow improver, I'd like to know.