I thought I had finished up a pilot for a plane. (Full disclosure: I rarely paint pilots, or figures for that matter, because I like to have the cockpits open with easy views of the instrument panel and cockpit.) With Revell’s F6F-5, the canopy is one piece, and it’s closed - it doesn’t appear that there’s an option for an open canopy.
So, I paint up the pilot. It thought I was done, so snapped a couple of pictures of the pilot under the Ott light and with the camera flash. Yeesh. Was I in for a surprise when I looked at the pictures on the computer. You can see all the spots that I missed in the picture that I couldn’t see with the naked eye. Zoom and the lighting surely made a difference. Needless to say, you won’t see those pictures anytime soon.
However, I now have the pictures up on the monitor right in front of me and I’m touching the pilot up. I know my eyes are pretty good…I’m thinking the zoom and the optimum lighting are what helped.
You’re 100% correct. Digital photography (the only kind I’ve ever done) is both really helpful and brutally unforgiving when photographing those “finished” models. Missed or marred paint spots, errors in finishes, (previously) invisible wisps left over from cotton-swabs, and the usual dust and flecks all “jump right out” in closeup photos. Much better than the Mk. 1 eyeballs do, these days.
Though of course you could ask, if you can’t see anything wrong with naked eye, why isn’t that good enough? I venture you won’t use a camera to enjoy your finished models.
Digital photography is a cruel mistress, as anyone who photographed a model can attest. However humbling the experience, those pictures showing terrible workmanship are useful in improving one’s build quaity. A lot of guys fall in contests because they miss basic construction flaws that the camera can easily pick up. For those wanting to sharpen their skills, it helps to take photos of your model as you build, and check them frequently. (AND you can post them here so we can see what you are making! [:D]) I think posting “before” and “after” photos of a flaw and fix would be helpful and inspirational to others.
I thought my first large scale figure came out pretty good, until I took a close-up of his face. The small details looked like poo-poo! I also found a piece of lint that had got molded in with the figure’s clothing that I missed during clean-up. I touched up what I could then called it a day.
The main thing is to fix what you can, learn from mistakes, and move forward!
Boys you all have a good thread going here because I was just thinking of this very subject the other day after I snapped a photo of “the perfect accomplishment” on my Fw190. For me after I get through with something that was difficult to make it through I get this “hopeful inspection” when I look at the latest step or assembly. When I look at the picture of what I did I look at it through a “practical inspection”. Want to add a twist in it??? Put the pictures on your computer and show the people at work or anybody else that are interested in your project the pictures(being outsiders to the hobby they are still going to be blown away!). You’ll find yourself explaining why you didn’t do this or that and should have done this or that. I do! I pick up on that and take note of it and correct it quick! It works too. If you catch yourself expaining why the results of your build didn’t turn out how you would have rathered, then…
Ya don’t need the camera, just take a small mirror and look at the reflection of the model in it. You’ll be surprised at the things you missed and didn’t notice when looking directly at the model. ( Learned that from one of Shep Paine’s books back when I was into painting figures)
Too true. My problem is that, being pretty new to any kind of photography, I still tend to think of it as an “over and done with” type of thing. It still isn’t in my DNA to do a lot of in-progress shots.
Maybe the upcoming WW1 Aeroplane group build will help “imprint” the habit.
AND you can post your in-progress photos and share them with us! WW I aircraft builds are always amazing, as there are so many different materials and finishes, not to mention those wires running all over the place!
My friends taught me the five most important things in model photography:
Set camera to “macro.”
If your camera has it, set it to “aperture prioriry.”
Use the timer instead of directly pressing the shutter.
Use a tripod.
Have lots of light. (And make sure your camera is on auto-balance, or select the appropriate setting to match the lighting you use, i.e. fluorescent, incandescent, daylight, etc.)
And I have one more to add:
Don’t photograph your model on your grandmother’s paisley sofa. Plain backgrounds are always better!
HTH, and good luck! (The sofa thing sounds ludicrous, but I have seen a bunch of people do that!)
I am a bit of a free lance photographer and have some professional equipment. I’m almaost leary of photographing my models. Even some of my best work looks horrible when I move in for close-ups. It’s amazing what shows up. Things look “top shelf” when viewed with the naked eye, but when hi-res close-ups are taken, look out. Every teeny-tiny minute flaw is magnified x10. So, yes, if you are striving for perfection, zoom in, take some pics and then re-evaluate your progress. I’m almost afraid to post pics. My cameras point out everything all too well…
Thanks, Real G, for your suggestions. I really appreciate it.
For my first plunge into the digital photography world, I found a nicely-priced “reconditioned” camera in a catalog outlet, and I really lucked out–it’s a lot smarter than I am. Very gentle learning curve and everything worked more-or-less perfectly from the get-go, including a ridiculously easy-to-use macro function. It really helps take the terror out of learning to take pictures.
Now I’m working on the terror of what’s in the pictures. Granted, the eyesight’s not quite what it used to be, but it’s still daunting to see how many painting and construction defects and “invisible” glue threads, how much dust and lint, can show up in the most “obvious” places.
But, like anything else, it’s a tool. If it helps the work get better, it ain’t a bad thing.
Greg - So the next inevitable thing is an Optivisor. I use one almost continuously when building stuff nowadays. The old eyeballs aren’t what they were 20-30 years ago. Using the Optivisor, I inspect my work late at night, with all the lights off except for my desk lamp. The harsh, point source light combined with the dark surroundings cause things like bad seam lines to be easily seen. You would be suprised at how rough paint looks like under these conditions.
Hokey - Yes, I think my camera is a point and shoot (Canon Power Shot A650 IS), so it should apply to almost any camera. I’m not a shutterbug, so I don’t know how common certain features are between different models.
I have been told that a camera with a huge add-on macro lens admits more light into the shot, thus making it possible to get better depth of field, but my camera is not really designed to readily accept add-on lenses. I did get an appreciation of big-a$$ lenses when my boss took a photo of a Thunderbirds F-16 from the rooftop of our office building - you could see the fasteners on the underside of the aircraft!
A big telephoto lens is a lot different than a big macro lens. While the front elements on a macro may be big, the ones in the interior are probably not. The effective aperture is only as big as the lens closest to what is known as the entrance pupil, that defines the amount of light actually passing all the way through the lens. For a telephoto, the f/# is the number that defines the max light. Usually on a telephoto the bigger the front element the lower the f/# and bigger the aperture.
