[}:)]I am going to say something that may not be popular, but I am growing absolutely sick of it. I am a research scientist and I know the importance of details and instructions. I belive it is inexcusable for some of the instructions that are supplied with certain kits and photo-etched sets. First off, if I buy a kit, I am dealing with parts that in many cases do not go together well. We all know the kits I am talking about. I do WWII planes and there is a host of them we talk about with the required remedies. But, more importantly, we deserve adequate instructions and diagrams to illustrate things. Don’t expect that we are all former pilots, mechanics, or have built hundreds of planes and read everything there is on the internet about color schemes, and placement of things, particularly in the cockpit. Just show us with good illustrations and provide us with some history. OK, you will say that is the fun of the hobby. Delve into it and learn for yourself. I say fine but I don’t have the time to have to research every darn kit I buy. I am getting tired of it. Put me in a postion where I can build every kit I buy and not have a stack of boxes that I start and get so frustrated, I just put them back on the shelf. Photo-etched stuff? Forget it, what a waste of time. I am currently building the Trumpeter Hornet and have the Toms photoetch set. Oh boy what a nightmare. I have already made a huge mistake that I do not know how I will correct. Why? Becasue there are no clear instructions. Now you can applaude a company like Tamiya. You pay top dollar but guess what? You are going to learn some history, you are going to have extremly well illustrated color schemes and you are going to 90% of the time be able to place parts AB and C where they are supposed to go. The bonus of course is in most cases, the Tamiya fits are superb. I will pay top dollar for their kits because they are enjoyable. I cringe now becasue I am also trying to finish an accurate avenger. Don’t get me wrong, gorgeous kit with great details. But the artists concept of illustration is incredible. “Oh yeah, glue parts A onto B and bend C so it wraps around D and then put the fuselage halves together” Right, don’t work that easy. Incredibly insane instructions. I am just fed up with these things and companies need to pay attention to our needs. If I were 12 again and doing some of these, forget it. Again, if I want to research, let that be a choice to increase my enjoyment, not a mandatory part of building your 28 dollar plane. I’m outta here, let the hair fly. [:(!]
Well said! Crappy or vague instructions, color schemes in Polish, and pricey kits. No wonder few youngsters are flocking to this hobby (one thing I DON’T see at hobby shops-kids.)
Valid points indeed, gentlemen.
While there are many levels at which people enjoy this hobby, the manufacturers should strive to make their products easy to use at every level, with comprehensive instructions and suggestions.
Some kits and aftermarket pieces are clearly not for the beginner or casual modeler, but I believe the manufacturer still has a responsibility to clearly describe the product as offered, as well as including intelligent instructions that clearly show what to do with the product.
Anyway, there’s my [2c]![:D]
How true. I cringe when I think about the number of mistakes I’ve made because the instructions weren’t very good.[:(]
One thing I’ve learned is to look for kit review on the Internet as soon as I buy a kit and put a print-out inside the kit box. Like my recently acquired Minneraumer-another fellow’s hard luck and work will be my cake-walk.
True, but… the kits that most newcomers will first come into contact with are those produced by Revell, Monogram, Tamiya, Hasegawa, Italeri, Airfix and even Trupeter… (and a few more), who do offer decent instruction sheets. Most of the kits with ‘simplistic’ instructions and all of the aftermarket PE sets, resin/metal conversion or full kits are made to cater a much smaller customer base, that of the ‘experienced’ modeler. Whether instructions are in French, English, Dutch, Martian or else, honestly, I very rarely look at them… My work is done according to data I find on the net, in books, in mags and the building sequence often vary very much from what is shown in the instructions. It will depends on the final scheme, on whether I build a diorama around the model or not, and a few other things.
Scratchbilt, I understand your point but I really think you are not the norm. You sound very experienced and knowledgeable. That is my point, not everyone is probably close to your abilities or desires. It needs to be more inclusive so everyomne can get out of it what they want to and how much they want to put into it. While I have a Ph.D. degree in the sciences, I do not need to do the research to get another one in WWII modeling. It is a hobby! But, your point is well taken. I respect that.
Well, I have a MFA in Illustration and an AA in drinking ;-). Even though the instructions can be arcane I still get a charge out of reading some of them (ie: “Watch out well for fire”) Ha!
nsclcctl,
You have a valid point. I often wonder to myself about those who do no wish to, have the time to or do not have the resources to do all the research needed for some builds.
Some instruction sheets, I have come across, have been mediocre to say the least. Even at an experienced level, some do get frustrating. This is the reason I spend the extra for Tamiya, Academy and so on. The add-ons available seem to cause most of the headaches (Photo-Etched and so on) I am currently working with an Aber set and I must say, it has one of the most detailed set of instructions I have ever seen.
It does make you wonder about those who want to try it for the first time and just get overwhelmed when the instructions aren’t as clear as they should or COULD be.
Anyway…Good Luck with your Hornet!
I believe it’s a manufacturer’s duty to clearly and comprehensively describe the nature of and the correct use of their products, in any field, not just the hobby industry.
Oops, I’m up to four cents now! [:D]
I agree totaly! I am working on a car right now that is the first one that I have done that has come close to sitting on a stump with the buisness end of my rifle pointed at it. The instructions are terrible, for instance it says to put the firewall on the front of the tub, but with no tabs or anything on the parts and nothing more than an arrow going from one part to the other, who knows. The decal sheet was also a nightmare, some one had the bright idea that instead of printing the instructions on the back of the page, they put a heavy duty plastic sticker instead that will not come off and can’t hardley be cut through or let water get through it. I can’t imagine a kid picking this up for a first time build, don’t think it would make it very far.
I once had to get a classmate from poland to read a decal sheet to find out what stuff was. Seat beat in Polish and in English have never met.
Nsclcctl,
You see, a lot of the ‘garage’ companies do not have the time, resources to put into designing top of the range instructions and colour scheme pages. I wish they had, but they simply don’t. I do some work for such companies, designing patterns and such, and the fact that they are producing the kits (weird stuff, prototypes,…) that Tamiya and Co. will not dare even thinking about (because of commercial reasons) should be praised.
Having said this, I’ll admit that the standards are rising and that even garage companies are doing better at marketing and packaging their stuff nowadays than ever did before. I remember a time when Czech resin kits came in a plastic bag with not instructions, let alone even a picture of the model, just the name marked with marker pen on the bag… Nowadays those same people are giving us stuff properly boxed with extra PE bits and very good instructions (Special Hobby,…). So there is hope! Even in the ‘traditional’ manufacturers, Heller’s instructions have improved vastly in the same time span!
I aslo wanted to say that for me, doing the research is as fun as doing the model. I like learning about the history, the circumstances, the people…
Scratchbilt, you don’t get 5 stars next to your name by not knowin what your talking about. I agree. I just hope some of the companies read these posts. I love what lizardging said above. Do you think FSM can reprint that next month?
Wheh I buy a kit I want to be able to sit down and build it. I don’t want to be forced to use the internet to figure out how it goes together. Researching a kit should be for accuracy, different unit markings than provided, historical curiosity, etc. NOT for basic kit assembly. As an industrial mechanic i am used to detaild part drawings and such, I hate having to geuss.
I agree with all the points already made here…One of the companies I have a huge problem with is AMT…come on folks! Get with the program…I dont know who dreams up the color lists for the kits either but some can be downright hilarious. Im not happy with the company in general or thier kits…sure they have some dream kits that go together great! But that realisticly isnt the norm! So why do I continue to purchase thier kits? Well I havent seen Tamiya come out with a 1971 Plymouth Duster or some of the other American cars I like to build but you better believe if they ever do GOODBYE AMT!
I build Tamiya kits for some of my vehicles and AC and found them un-parraleled in my experience but I also havent built anything from other Manufacturers such as Trumpeter
I have to echo what you other builders have said. Just how many youngsters and grown ups have quit modeling because of bad fit and mediocre instructions? Do the modeling companies ’ test ’ their kits on a average or beginning builder? They could elicit comments from these new modelers about the instructions and the fit of the parts. The companies may give test shots to magazine editors and writers in order to garner free advertizing in the magazine for new kits. But a lot of these guys may have decades of modeling experience, how fair is that? Give 'em to a newbie. just my .02 worth.
I agree. My biggest problem is some of the color recommen-
dations . The name of the colors called for don’t match the actual colors
name or you have to mix several colors to get the correct color .
I enjoy my books and don’t mind doing research but some-
times it’s a royal pain especially when the paints are hard to get. Anybody have a Secret Paint Formula Decoder Ring with code book available?[:D]
Fuzzy
Goldenturtle, it’s a very interesting point you’re raising there… I wish all manufacturers would adopt a skill level’ system in the style of Revell’s or Airfix’s. Honestly, take any Skill Level 1 kit from Revell, and most newcomers will have no trouble completing the kit (Airfix is a bit different becausae of all those very old kits they still have in their catalogue, but still, it’s a helful guide).
Having run a Junior Model Club for over 5 years, I can tell you that a big problem in getting kids to stick to the hobby is the fact that parents and grand-parents love to give their kid(s) the biggest model they can find in the shop. Which is often well above the skill level of the average newcomer / beginner…
That’s why we ‘experienced’ modelers are better placed than others to 'pass on ’ our knowledge and love of the hobby. Kids do need, crave, attention, and it’s with our help that most kids /newcomers will manage to pass the ‘tests’ given to us by poor instruction sheets, confusing colour instructions, poor fit and the like.
As to the colour instructions, Fuzzy, do you remember the Matchbox kits…? Those were simply great, with the 2 or 3 different schemes shown full colour at the back of the box and in the instruction sheet, the colours refs given for several makes. Italeri and Frog did that too (Well, Frog did it first!). Not only were they very useful, but they were attractive and probably a good reason why I eventually made my way through 95% of Matchbox’s AFVs and Aircraft range…
This is very interesting and shows that many of us get different pleasures from making a kit. I recently finished a Tameo white metal Ferrari kit (43rd scale) that was an absolute nightmare. Now when this kit was produced about 15 years ago it was touted as being at the leading edge. The instructions were a major failure with vague arrows pointing in the general direction of where things were meant to go. However dry fitting was a necessity then and I can see why. Compared to a present day Tameo kit this was a dinasaur as todays’ Tameo kits have pages of detailed instructions, photos and often paint chips. So I suppose as was mentioned above some manufacturers have improved out of sight whilst others have remained in the dark ages. For me though one of the fun aspects of any model is the research into the particular race/rally I want to depict. However this is about decal placement, colour schemes not where the firewall goes, what the cross member is located on etc so in that respect I totally agree with your sentiments nsclcctl. I’d like to take this a little further as well and say that even well respected producers produce things incorrectly. I’ve just finished using a Studio 27 decal sheet and it had incorrectly sized decals, wrongly coloured decals and poor location diagrams. I would not have discovered this if I hadn’t found some reference material but in this case that material is not hard to find (Rallycourse had 2 superb photos). So some of the top of the line producers also have off days.