Just got my new issue of FSM today. The guy that has disassembled a 1/16 Heng Long Tiger and then given it a few tweaks and reassembled it. I really liked the paint job, but I was surprised to see it in the Gallery. Its not a model kit, its a bought, assembled, painted RC vehicle. What do you all think ? Surely FSM get enough contributions without stuff like this ? Again, I dont want to fry the guy that submitted it, I think it looks good.
It is, many a modeler has taken something that is already “complete” only to disassemble it and make inprovements. Model railroads do it with rolling stock all the time, just depends on where you find your inspiration and motivation.
I don’t consider it “modeling” per se. and to be honest, I didn’t notice the captioning until now! [:-^][:I]
But I agree with you 100%! If you look at all the great modeling here on these forums alone, I would think that there would be more honest integrity in publishing one of our boys’ “ground-up” creations than an R/C “make-over”?
The tank itself looks nicely finished with what the guy did with the weathering, and the photgoraph itself is superb, but if you look at the actual labor involved, and what he claims to have done–lengthening the barrel and merely rotating the cupola and pistol ports–well, that’s not modeling, that’s rearranging the furniture!
Not to hijack the thread… but how did someone in Australia (great country BTW) get their copy of FSM before I did? I’m ONE STATE over from Kalmbach.
I did see it while browsing the new FSM at Border’s Saturday night. It’s a…different type, I guess. I am in agreement with ‘le doog’ though. Much more could be shown from some of the builds on these forums…I suppose that FSM tries to keep it balanced by throwing in off subjects (and building styles) from time to time.
I’d say it’s no different than someone who builds a model from scratch (raw materials such as wood) thinking that someone who merely assembles a plastic or resin kit isn’t a real modeler.
The only way I could see this as a problem would be at a contest, not sure how they would catagorize this.
Personally I’d say if he took the effort to unassemble, improve, and reassemble it, it qualifies as modeling. There are many different levels of modeling, to me it’s all just a creative outlet.
My brother in law puts diecast cars together with a screwdriver and calls it modelling.
I call it lame.
i agree with doog it aint modeling its modafiying a pre assemble toy.
Adding epoxy glue to the firewall in your ARF RC plane…a Modeler is born. (not)
well MAYBE technically the only TRUE modelers are scratch builders
the rest of us who use kits are assemblers
OH GOOD GOD! That just jarred loose a memory.
Who was that guy who used to post here (still does?) Who had a website and basically claimed that anyone who didn’t scratch build every single thing wasn’t a true modeler but merely a “kit assembler”
Big Smitty.
Mine arrives via New Zealand. (New Zealand postmark) so maybe they are firing them over the Pacific in a giant catapault or something…[:-^]
David Merriman, started this concept on the old RMS USENET newsgroup. Anyone who built kits were just kit assemblers. Only true modelers built from scratch.
I would think that if you disassembled the model and made some major change to the model, i.e. added an interior, engine, detailed it out, then it would be modeling.
I agree with Rob. I’ve seen pics of some very nice looking models that started out as pre-assembled model, then were totally disassembled, reworked, reassembled and repainted. What’s the difference between that and assembling a kit from a box?
Kit building is model building. Scratchbuilding is model making[2c]
~Dave
Ah, you dodged the original question…[swg]