When looking at some picture in FSM. These guys who detail their airplanes to gills leave me confused.
I see that they like to have the exhaust blow back, and the deteriation of paint because of natural weathering. Thats fine.
But with the detailing of each panel, screw and rivet. Is that them just trying to show the detail of the panel, or they think that the weather causes the panel lines to stick out?
I know some do the weathering to make them realistic. But in my own opinion, I see the individual panel, rivet, and screw detail, making it look more like a model than a real airplane.
I personally leave them “clean” as if they just rolled out of the paint shop, or production line.
I’m not trying to cut these guys down, or yourself if you do this method. We build these models to meet our own likings, and imaginations.
I’m just curious if they’re doing this for the panel detailing or weathering effect?
Warfel…
just my…um…[2c] but,
i’d have to say it’s a little of both…and as you imply, the hobby is personal where “beauty” is in the eye of the beholder…
it’s what makes the hobby and these forums presentations so unique and fascinating…
for my personal satisfaction, i prefer to render each as an historical replica…in scale…of what actually served…
Warfel, I was looking at photos of Lancasters in a book the other day, including several views from above in daylight.
What struck me, was that the panel edges actually showed up as darker lines, which seems to support the panel line wash approach.
Karl
I tend to agree with Warfel. I don’t weather my models very much at all because I prefer them that way. Not necessarily spic and span and showroom-fresh, but clean and well maintained. I’ll wash the panel lines, add a little smoke here and there, and try to make the engines look right, but that’s about all. To each their own, and I’ve seen a lot of heavily-weathered models that looked great, it’s just not the way I like to see them.
On the other hand, the era and location need to be taken into consideration. For example, a Marine F4U from the Pacific during WWII would not look “Normal” without at least some mud splattered on it. However, a Navy F4U from the same time would never have mud on it because they were on carriers. Some salt spray maybe, but not mud.
I spent twenty six years working on and around fighter aircraft in the USAF. I would say 90% of the weathered models are too over done, especially the panel outlines. Some light shading is ok but most people go over board with it and it doesn’t look any thing like a real aircraft. Some say it is scale effect, but not in my openion. Just my[2c]
Weathering is a matter of personal choice & what one modeler loves another may dislike. I build mostly 1/48 WW2 vintage aircraft & prefer them to be fairly clean. Just prefer them to look that way on the shelf. If a model is in a diorama, then I think it should reflect the environmental effects & more heavy handed weathering may be appropriate. I have always considered my models to be three dimensional profiles, so I do enhance panel lines even though photographs usually don’t show the effect as much as the art work. You can argue against the so called scale effects, but to me a model with no enhancement begins to look more toy like. But I never critique builds that are perfectly clean, or heavily weathered, just because of my personal tastes.
Regards, Rick
Again - to rephrase what everyone is saying - it’s a matter of choice and wether or not you are trying to portray say an AVG P-40 a couple of months into the fray or a line unit ready to go.
Most importantly, do what you like and enjoy what you do - the rest dosen’t matter.