Have any of you guys ever taken an FSM article about a specific kit and followed the whole procedure? Take the article from the December 2004 issue where Gil Hodges takes the old Monogram T-28 and slaps a ton of detail on it. Have you ever taken an article like that and said, “I’m going to grab the same kit, same aftermarket stuff and go step by step through this article?”
Thought about it, planned to do, never did it though. I think it would kinda be like painting a copy of a Picaso (or whoever). Sure you painted it, but it’s not original. I know you can only be so “original” with any kit, but personal style can make it a “one-of-a-kind”.
I don’t feel this would be a bad idea however. It would make for good practice and learning new techniques. All in all, I wouldn’t hold it against anyone. There is something to be said for someone who can replicate . for .
Nope.
I like originality.
That’s be like getting sloppy seconds, LOL!
I would never follow one to the letter, pick up a trick or two maybe, but I’m with Doog…ORIGINALITY! To hell with sloppy seconds!!![(-D]
I definitely see your point about originality (and in general I wouldn’t copy one point by point either) but there are a couple of models that I want to do and I’d have to work hard to avoid copying the articles where I first saw them. For example, the first FSM I ever bought had a Pat Hawkey article about an F-106 that held a world speed record and had a lot of day glo orange markings. I want to do that bird, but to do so I’d have to basicallly copy Hawkey…so that’s what I’ll do when the time comes. Same thing with the MiG flown by Chuck Yeager that Matt Usher did.
But yeah, in general, it’s “hey, that’s a cool idea” but not the whole shebang. I used some of Hawkey’s corrections from the F-106 article to backdate my F-106 for the USAF Anniversary group build, but I didn’t bother with some of the others and used the kit decals.
I’ve never replicated an FSM build to the letter, but I usually get bits and pieces from an article.
~Dave
yea, i just started subscribing to FSM and i have already picked up a few tips and tricks. I love it.
Hey watch the sloppy seconds comments… a guy in the NHL’s career has gone very sour since he uttered the same words!!
I’ve never gone word for word from an article. Mostly because I’m not that skilled. The best article that I’ve been able to replicate somewhat is the article in FSM a couple years ago about painting figures. I think it’s May of 06. Check it out, really really good for 1/48th scale figures.
Nah… I pick up an idea or two, or new technique, like some of Doog’s weathering tips and tricks from his Hetzer and derelect Nomad (specifically the seats in the Nomad, I used the tricks for the ripped fabric on a duece & a half-Thanks Doog[;)] ) but never do a build based on the kit what’s in the article… Wouldn’t work for me very often even if I was so inclined due to the kits generaly chosen (I don’t go near new kits very often. I prefer to haunt Ebay and pick up the 20 and 30 year-old kits with 20-30 year-old prices, lol)… I prefer my work to be my own by & large.
Hopefully though, I can get published with some articles I’m working on that deal with building and detailing the “Classic” (read-old) kits without buying any after-market parts. Old School stuff, y’ know…
Regarding the T-28 article, I haven’t seen it, but I’m working the Monogram TBF in the Aircraft forum and doing a scratchbuild-detail job on it, so it’s a similar work, I’d imagine… I love doing the old kits that way, making an attempt at the proverbial “Silk Purse out of the Sow’s Ear”…
Never have. Sometimes I’ll try out a new procedure or technique from an article, but have never copied someone elses work.
Jim
I haven’t done so, no, but I am sure that I’d find something that I’d like to build in the exact same matter. So far, I usually find details that I’d change (different paint job, other weapons loadout, stuff like this), but I have more than once bought a kit and the detail sets, because I wanted to recreate something I liked to see.
As a matter of fact, I don’t see what all this big fuzz about “originality” is about in this discussion. What’s original? I mean, YOU built it. YOU painted it. If YOU like the way the model in an article looks like, what’s the problem with building the same model. Are you only going to build models that haven’t been featured in magazines? Only going to use detail kits that haven’t been used? “Oh shucks, I really wanted to do build this F4 Phantom II, but the exact kit with the exact detail kits that I wanted to use, have already been covered in FSM! And they painted it in the scheme that I liked most! Awwww…” - sounds pretty lame to me. 
And what’s so bad about copying a Picasso? If you really like Picasso and if you actually have the skills to copy one… what’s so darn bad about it? I’d paint it and be gosh darn proud of having done that.
Hmm, maybe my last kit was at least something like you asked in your post: I got a Saturn V in 1:96. Looked around and found several articles on building it with Realspace and Newware add-ons (apparently the only stuff you can get for the kit). So I bought it and built it, using the articles I found online. I pretty much copied them, but now I have an awesome kit and I am very proud of what I built, even though someone else told me stuff I needed to know.
All it took to break me of any inkling to attempt that was chukw’s Helldiver tutorial in the Aircraft forum. The man is insane and I’m not going to follow him down that path. For any who might have missed this tour-de-force: /forums/935048/ShowPost.aspx
Me trying to copy those articles whould be like turning cake into crap i could do it only i don’t feel like making myself feel bad.