First off I don’t intend to offend anyone who uses this technique. With that being said I just don’t get the whole preshading fad that so many use nowadays. I can understand if that’s just how you like it to look and I admit it gives it an artistic pop. Beyond that I find it very unrealistic. The real things didn’t have preshading around the panel lines so why i’m the world would you apply it on a scaled down version? The underbellies on some of these scale models is so overdone. To me giving the center of the panels a slightly lighter than base color to represent glare and sun fade looks so much better than seeing dark lines running along all the panels. That’s just my two cents.
This discussion (argument ?) has been around for a while. Many a person has posted about how panel lines are routinely overdone in models they see, which in real life would equate to a 1" gap between panels. Its really in the eye of the beholder. Navy birds get dirtier than land based aircraft, but then again, I’ve never worked on a carrier either, so what do I know. Everyone’s modelling styles are different, what looks overdone to someone might look just right to the person building it. I can always appreciate the extra work someone puts in to pre-shading, even if it is a trifle overdone.
I personally think it is often overdone. On painted finishes, even panel lines are pretty subdued- it is hard to see them at a distance. Plane needs to be very heavily weathered before they are visible.
Now, there are two kinds of panel lines- the darker lines in the seam between skin plates, and enhanced weathering due to dirt in seams leaking out and spreading when the surface is wet. The darkening of the seam shows up before the darkening of the whole area around the seams.
Seams on natural metal finishes are somewhat visible even when plane is pretty new. Two types of seams- one just the normal seam between two riveted panels. This seam is pretty narrow, and it takes awhile for dirt and organics to build up in them. Second are access plates, that are removable with some sort of fasteners. These pick up crud in the seams much more rapidly.
I’m firmly in the preshading camp. Subtle is the key. When you can still immediately see it under the paint, keep going a little longer. Indeed areas around the engine and such should be more noticeable, but that I reserve for post shading. Nobody has yet said my builds have looked unrealistic. Perhaps they’re just being nice…lol.
It can be overdone, but it also can be done well.
I agree with GM. And Lawdog is an example one who can do it well.
By no means am I criticizing anyone that does. To each their own. Overdone it’s just not my thing. True that done subtlety it can look good. I didn’t mean to come across as a hater and I still respect the time and effort put into it.
I will speak for myself, in no way did you come across as criticizing. I understand your point, and, respect your point of view. I do agree with GM though, I have seen some models that have been overdone. But, I wanted to point out that Lawdog is one modeler who, in my eyes, has perfected the technique. I use the technique from time to time, but, I try to make it very subtle.
Murph - Nah, I didn’t take your point as negative or criticical. If grossly overdone, panel shading can look unrealistic and just take away from the overall appearance. Done as Lawdog finishes his is quite the opposite, he does it in such a manner that I’m not really aware of shading while initially looking it over, but then my eyes pick up on it.
I’d guess that’s the intent, subtle use of shading means it’s there, but not a stand alone feature that instantly grabs your attention. On a well used but maintained military aircraft, after some time the appearance does get a slight mottled look due to staining from leaks and handling, but it’s not something that your vision immediately zones in on.
As stated, the areas around the engine bay, hydraulics and oil reservoirs are quite prone to have the staining/discloration, the belly of the fuselage and wing areas behind engines also get a bit buggered. That’s where I do a modest bit of shading.
But I remind myself, those that prefer heavy shading effects like it that way, it looks right to them. Model on everyone, build it to suit yourselves and we’ll all enjoy seeing our collective efforts.
Patrick
For sure overdone at times,but I guess its just artistic liscense like over rusting and over weathering.
If it’s done right, it does bring the realistic look of an aircraft. I’ve seen my fair share of pre shading done perfectly. I’ve seen a fair share of some overdone. It’s a matter of preference.
I’ve started black basing as shown on Doogs models. I’m not an expert yet but it looks pretty real. I did my recent V-22 Osprey with this technique and can see with refinement of technique you can get the model looking like the real thing. Youhave to go very very thin over the marble coat.
I will echo law dog’s comment. If it’s done VERY faint then it will add some tonal value And will look good. I have adopted marbling as my method to add tonal value and break up monotonous colors. Sometimes I use a combination of both techniques, 99% will be covered up anyway by the top coat.
This is my opinion and is not intended to degrade anyone’s efforts in modeling.
When I got back into modeling late last year, I was amazed at the methods that are now being used to finish models. Amazed yes, but also wondering with all the references out there for modelers to use in their projects, how can such efforts show realistic portrayals of actual aircraft. To some extent, you will see aircrafts with heavy weathering in the real world, but that is in conditions that prevent the maintenance of the exterior finish.
When a person modifies his or her project to reflect a planes upgrades with aftermarket kits, scratch building parts, cutting and pasting new parts to reflect the latest real life version, then finish the model with extreme weathering however beautiful that makes the model, it still tends to show it on the more artistic side.
My abilities are limited to say the least, but that’s okay. I build to suit myself, and that goes to what everyone is writing about. TO EACH THEIR OWN. What makes one modeler happy with how they complete their project, doesn’t sit well with another.
I won’t use preshading myself, because it doesn’t seem natural, and truth be known, it takes more time and effort to do for me. I enjoy looking at other people’s work and say to myself, “If only I had a tenth of their talent to do that.”
I believe moderation reflects the real aircraft as it is in any condition, well that is unless the plane has been regulated to the bone yard, then any and all extreme weathering is a okay. Years of neglect will do that to any object.
Extreme or in moderation, weathering reflects the individuals choice.
I think it’s overdone. I don’t mean emphasizing the actual panel line itself, and making it appear larger than it really should be. I mean shading along the panel lines. I look at some models, and then look at a photograph of the same subject, and the model just doesn’t look right. I agree with the guys who said that shading applied subtly can look good.
I also think that the look has become an expectation among many who judge contests, and so, that drives many to adopt the technique.
Yes it can be overdone but I think it makes a model look less toy like.
To my eye, it appears overdone in the majority of cases. Yes, some aircraft do eventually get that hardworn look while still operational. But most do not. It certainly is eye catching and adds visual interst to a model. But it is usually not “realistic”. I agree with the folks who say “less is more” on this technique, where a subtle application looks best. But the stuff you consistently see in magazines, on contest tables, or online in forums seldom show that restraint. It’s like when a woman wears too much make up out there. Bravo to those who can successfully pull it off. To the others, dial it back a few notches.
Hi, I’ve seen models which are heavily panel shaded which look very unnatural. I tried to look for a real picture of my subject and tried to replicate the effect but not to over do it. This is my wip Mig-29, tried to paint the underside with different shades of gray to give contrast, I have done the panel lines yet,
but look at the real aircraft…
(photo from Airliners)
If you are going to add shadows in the panels, try to keep it subtle and used a darker or lighter shades of your colour not just adding black as this create a very dark contrast.
A similar style has become very popular among figure painters, especially among the Europeans. More extreme contrasts of shadows and lights, and colors, especially flesh colors, that look washed-out when you see the figure in person. I’ve heard it referred to as the “Kabuki” style. Apparently, it looks good in photos, and many of the guys who made it popular paint figures for box art, or for photos that will be published. Just as over-done shading has become an expectation among judges, so has this style, especially among those judges who practice it. When I look at Shep Paine’s figures, I think they wouldn’t give him a certificate at some shows these days, because his colors typically were more life-like.
The same goes for armor builds as well. Between all the new color modulation fads and chipping, the builds look far more like range target hulks than operational AFVs and Softskins.