A model with few details but accurate in shape and dimension maybe considereed a simple model.
A model with plenty of details but with details which are not accurate or with details not present in the real subject will make a model inaccurate.
A simple model can be improved by adding details. An inaccurate model can be improved by correcting the inaccuracies.
Just for fun, what’s your pick?
simple but accurate although I’m not picky about dimesions, who cares if it was infalted to 1:1 the wingspan would be 6 inches shorter. FCS
A simple model for me, thanks.
Simple for me. I can’t eyeball a wingspan that is off 6 scale inches in 1/72. They sit on a shelf and give the appearance of what they are supposed to be.
Simple for me too. IMO, It’s always more fun adding extra detail than it is correcting in-accuracys.
Give me an accurate model with all the correct antennas and air scoops in the right places. I’m not usually a fan of infinitely-detailed cockpits and compartments, because all that hard work usually just gets hidden anyways.
Based on the two choices, I would have to take the simple accurate model, but this is seldom my actual choice.
I prefer a relatively accurate model (whether simple or complex), with either a modest number or many accurate details, that I can then further detail depending on my mood. An accurate model with accurate details can be a simple model and this is always my first chioce.
I guess it depends on what is meant by simple and accurate. If something is too simple, it may be missing details that would make it more accurate!
Still, I would choose a kit of an interesting subject, with good fitting parts (not that I expect a perfect fit, but it shouldn’t be too bad), that is pretty accurate to one that is more accurate but much harder to put together.
Regards,
i pick whichever one has what I’m looking for in a model, whatever that may be depending on the build.
(but, to keep within the limits, i guess a simple accurate model is good. requires less work fixing, and I can concentrate on adding wuts not there, not figuring out what shudnt be there and adding what isnt)
I don’t buy em to correct them just to build them they way I want to build them.
It depends on the kit and what Im building it for.
For example, I’m building an A-10 with fiber optic lights, its not going to be accurate or even a representation of any particular aircraft, its more for skill improvment and personal fun.
However, next in-line is an f-16D its going to represent one of the Iowa National Guard planes they have in service right now. I even have an Am decal set for it.
That one is going to be donated to the Guard for display in the main office.
That one has to be accurate since those who see it will be those who fly it…
besides it might just get me a ride in the real thing.
I would go with the simple but generally accurate detail. I can either add parts from my spares box or buy a p/e or resin detail set. Some details I can improve myself.
I like the accurate and simple myself.
If I can have a base to go nuts superdetailing from or just a decent representation of the thing straight from the box in the same kit, so much the better.
Depends how I feel about the subject:
Sometimes I say. “Ohhh yeah! This one’s going to have it all!” and I go to town detailing.
Other times I say “It looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck. Its a duck.” and its OOB time.
I think a simple kit, that was accurate would be fine to me.
A simple but accurate model is my choice, I build because I love the planes and dont have room to store the real things.
As for me it would be both depending on the subject that I wanted to do.Uasally I just buy a kit with or without added goodies and start from there.Digger