I found a Kenner Star Wars Snow Speeder from The Empire Strikes Back online fairly cheap. I saw that it had potential as a nice model. So I took it apart , rebuilt the cockpit and added some parts to it to busy it up , added seat harnesses and repainted. I then removed the landing gear which was in the “UP” position and scratchbuilt that in the “DOWN” position. And finally repainted the white weathered scheme with a polished aluminium metal finish, added some stencils from my spare decals and ink jet printed a few REBEL ALLIANCE decals to give it “STRAIGHT FROM THE FACTORY” look. My question is “Does this qualify as a model?”
A model is a miniature of somthing larger. To convey the likeness of the original without having to move the real thing or to provide a working idea of what changes can be made to the original.( Arcitects do this with miniature buildings.) As far as I’m concerned You can call yours a model ! You have improved its toylike features to resemble the real thing in a more realistic and accurate manner. ( Real thing being a reletive term.) Would love to see some pictures of it.
Like Timmy said, any scale representation of something larger is a model. By adding/fixing things to your liking, it becomes a customized model. The fun part is making it something that’s unique to your own personal vision. That’s why most of us in this forum do what we do.
But it’s not a model kit.
Actually a model can be larger than full scale as well. Very common these days in the world of industrial prototypes.
I think it’s a great subject- “accurizing” toys. I’ve done some, in fact am working on one now- the old Texaco North Dakota floor toy.
They present lots of challenges. Most are not designed to be taken apart, in fact usually are engineered to resist it. Also they tend to be made of dissimilar materials that are hard to paint, glue and machine.
Hasbro, Marx and others have made some fairly good looking howitzers in “Joe” or other big scales over the years. They can be had on eBay for pretty cheap. Talking to most redlegs though, they’ll be quick to tell you the thousand inaccuracies, but if one were not to take it too seriously…
Yes, indeed, a toy can become a model. I have refinished a crummy looking Star Wars Han Solo blaster to look like a real gun with various shades of metallizer and weathering. It’s a great model now, as far as I am concerned.
But it’s not a model kit.
Technically anything with more than two pieces could be called a “kit” .
possibly,but a star wars action figure,that someone buys and enhances,is not sold as a model kit,it is a toy or action figure.
This is very similar to modifying die cast models (sold already assembled). I have seen such models entered in contests and no one complained that I am aware of. Just refinishing might not be enough, but when they are extensively modified like the OP did, I think it qualifies.
Well…hmmm…maybe because you TOLD us it was a toy, it still looks like a toy to me. Too many bright colors, and the detail looks really soft.
I’d say it’s a “model” in the same way that a pre-fab is a “house”. You couldn’t really tell someone that you “built” you house–even if you fixed it up all nicely. Not really the same thing, in my opinion.
Hmmmmm… Ok I guess there are certain peramiters that should be set. A toy is designed to be played with. A model is for show only. But wait … the rc guys might take offence to that. Toys take a beating that a model could’nt handle so toys dont have a lot of detail that could be broken off or eaten. RC models usually dont have a lot of detail for the same reason… rough handling. Does that mean an RC boat is a toy? Also, if you buy an already built RC car ,boat or airplane Is it a model? is it considered a kit? Is a prefab house a kit and if so does that mean a house built from the ground up is considered "scratch built? A prefab house requires some assembly so some skill is involved . Same with model assembly. Taking a toy and altering details or making scale adjustments to it also takes some skill. True … some of us have more skill than others but in the end what you are left with is somthing that is “different than the others”. I stand by my previous post. A toy can be improved . I also understand that sometimes the alterations are so dramatic that little to nothing of the original toy is left.
When it comes right down to it… are’nt we all just working in miniature?
Just so I dont “ENRAGE” the RC guys… yes I have seen RC models that are detailed to infinity and still float or fly just fine.
Anyone for a “scale replica”? [8-|]
A very timely post.
I just converted an “Arthur Saves Christmas” S-1 Sleigh from a toy to a model display. Its was only $2.99 at TRU after Christmas.
I basicly filled in gaps with putty, sealed the cockpit, removed the wheels/filled the wells with putty, puttied over screw heads, and scraped/sanded off some manufacturers marks.
I also repainted the three figures that comes with it and removed the base that helped them stand up.
Not to bad.
On the die cast items I remember an entire forum devoted to making die cast look more realistic by repainting, modifying, weathering, etc. It was a car forum and I dont do cars so I didnt following it for very long.
I think its a question of semantics. How narrowly or broadly do you want to define a “model”. A model doesnt even have to be a physical thing. It could just be an explanation. i.e. a chemical reaction, gravity, light waves, etc.
As a collector of 12" action figures (GI Joe +) and Major Matt Mason, among other things, I have made a number of vehicles for both, but mostly MMM. Some are models of MMM prototype vehicles that either exist only in a few pics or drawings or some are scaled up from smaller '60s era space toys and vehicles that aren’t out of place with MMM stuff. Since they look like they are supposed to but aren’t generally functional but are made for my toyline collection, I refer to them as ‘model-toys’. I occasionally have detailed and painted toy vehicles to use with my aircraft models. I consider them toys that were detailed and painted but were accurate for being toys and good enough to go with my models.
I had a similar discussion with an art critic, “What is art” I asked - “If you say its art its art” was his reply. If you say its a model its a model and some of the guys on here produce art.
Phil
I will say this… A guy who takes a Han Solo action toy and paints the vest blue and then enters it in a contest is off his rocker. There should be some sort of dividing line between a touch of paint and a complete overhaul. And yea ok I give in… there not kits. But they were assembled from parts at the factory so dissasembly and reassembly may count… I think?
Well if you want to get all technical, than the dictionary defines “model” as a representation, generally in miniature, to show the construction or appearance of something.
It doesn’t say a model is necessarily a kit, the final sum of many parts. Just a representation in miniature. So a toy, technically, is a model in the barest sense of the term.
That’s playing devils advocate. However, I think it is generally understood at least to us that a model is something we’ve built from a kit.
If I were to post something like that, I would preface it by mentioning it is a toy as you have.
I do work with toys a lot and put them on bases. Less “modeling” and more diorama building in this case. Mostly giving the toy a wash, some dry brushing, maybe some new paint then putting on a detailed base - like this little Hoth scene I did recently.
I agree, they should not be entered into contests. Either way, most contests I’ve been in require you to name the kit you’ve assembled so it would be difficult for an entry to be accepted if it was a Hasbro or Mattel action figure or something.
Is it a toy because WE didn’t build it? Makes me ponder the following…a modeler builds a beautiful Tamiya P-47, then gives it to his buddy. Is his buddy now in possession of a toy or a model?