Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

johnnyboy

Pre shading and panel wash in 1/72

Recommended Posts

Gents, it's horses for courses, but do not be donkeys when t comes to dealing with each other's opinions and different views/approaches.

Additionally, please do not repeat photographs when you are quoting previous posts. It's annoying and wastes moderator time tidying up, any more and we will just delete your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May I add a comment ? Part of the work done with pre/post-shading and washes is not related to reproduce weathering but to make the completed model more "3-dimensional". This means that the modeller may apply things that don't exist in reality but have a certain effect on the final product. For example I sometime like to darken a bit the areas where the wing meets the fuselage on a low wing aircraft. At the same time, I usually keep other areas of the wing slightly lighter and the same for the top fuselage. In a real aircraft all these parts are (in theory) of the same exact colour, however on a model this technique simulates shadows and highlights that I would see when looking at that real aircrafts. The light will never create the same effects on a model, hence the use of artistic license to simulate this. I know I have introduced some non existing features, the end result is however more realistic to my eye. The same applies to many other techniques, on which I'm sure we'll never find an agreement...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar techniques to the one's you describe Giorgio have been used for many years by figure modellers. Not to do so would result in many of the finely detailed castings resulting in looking like toy soldiers.

My two 'pennorth is that a modeller should do what whatever he wishes using the skills he has, and clearly some people are more skilled than others. Trends and fashions come and go. In the end it's his model. Personally I go for the "less is more", but that's only my point of view, which I would not try to force on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was recently looking through some old Verlinden showcase books. They were inspirational for me back then but you look at them now and the models are very stylised and innacurate, an example is the Verlinden 'velcro stowage' as it became known, but I still like the models nonetheless.

Some see models as just ... models. Other see models as a form of art. I've always done modelling for me, if no-one else likes my models (but I do) then I'm fine with that. Choose the style that pleases you most and go with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the quest for perfect panel lines the trend for filling in the "trenches" on new tooled kits but sanding down and carefully re-engraving the raised lines on old tooled kits is rather funny. ICM's Ki-27 has beautifully fine, almost scale surface detail but brush painting quickly obliterates most of it. . .

The desk model school of modelling is perfectly valid. Nothing wrong with a model looking like a model if one just wishes to appreciate and enjoy the pure form of the airframe design, cleanly presented. Some completely unpainted plastic models can also look very nice. There are some superb looking solid wood or scratch-built models with a minimum of panel detail or weathering. These Japanese solid and scratch-built model clubs are worth exploring as there are some excellent RAF/US and civil subjects in the galleries and on the show tables:-

http://www42.tok2.com/home/avionroad/

http://a011w.broada.jp/3ten/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edgar:I said I would feel rude saying things like black never 'oozed' from below panel joints, implying that people who use strong black washes in panel lines must think that, and are ignorant.

Ignorant (from my dictionary) : Lacking knowledge; having no understanding or awareness.

As far as I'm concerned, admitting ignorance of a subject carries no disgrace (I am ignorant of German aircraft, calculus, the theory of relativity, nuclear physics, and many other subjects.)

I've spent many hours, finding out that, from Autumn 1942, Supermarine, Hawker & Bristol spent time on filling rivet holes and panel lines, sanding them smooth and then painting them, making the chances of there being black lines under the paint non-existent. If someone asks about pre-shading, I start with the premise that they might not know that fact, possibly pretentious, but it saves a lot of time; I do not say that they shouldn't weather on top of the finish, which is how I always preferred to do my own models.

I just thought that someone who is so interested in model realism might have tried to achieve what they like think is how a model should look like themselves, at some point, it doesn't have to have been a recent build. I also asked if maybe you have liked someone else's models

After several house moves, I have no models left.

We have some excellent work displayed on this site, and some people put almost as much effort into modelling as you do into research. I think we should spend more time celebrating what we think is great, than saying only what we think is wrong

"Wonderful finish" "Superb model" when the model has glaring errors does the modeller no favours, in fact it's downright insulting, and, if that means that I should not pass on information about the real item, which I feel might be beneficial to others, then I want no part of it.

I'm sorry that asking you to show anything you have enjoyed about other's builds seems to have caused you sadness- I was trying to refocus the thread into positivity; I am sorry it did not inspire that in you.

Not sadness, aggravation, since you fail to grasp that, to me, how others finish their models is irrelevant, but if "positivity" means asking for my approval for using techniques completely at variance with what really happened, forget it,

I'm old enough to remember how this pre-shading malarkey started; an American modeller first used (only) gloss varnish on panel lines, and a piece of cloth to buff over the paint, so that there was a beautifully subtle (and extremely faint) variation in tone and nothing more. We always went by the simple maxim, "if you see the weathering before the model, it's too heavy," but that now seems to have been discarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a few posters have already implied / stated, surely this hobby is about enjoying doing things to YOUR own standards. People will always aspire to a higher level in their favorite hobby and that's great.

If a model has provided you with hours of enjoyment and entertainment, does anyone really have the right to say the the way its has been completed is inherently "wrong". I don't think we do, to be frank.

At the end of the day, it's only a model and not a matter of life-and-death....

Chris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edgar: So there are no models on Britmodeller, or anywhere else, that you would like to praise?

I know that Typhoons were not undercoated in bright orange and blue, yet I preshaded with those colours. I would be very surprised if anyone using preshading with black on panel lines thought they were doing it to simulate black dirt under the paint coming up from between panels.

A modeller that I have copied, as I have been so impressed with his results and his creativity, as well as the time he has taken to share his knowledge is Jean-Luc Formery; one this the effect of coloured chipping beautiful to my eyes:

http://www.aeroscale.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=SquawkBox&file=index&req=viewtopic&topic_id=149030

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm another one who is quite happy to finish my models how I want and not be swayed by trends,but that is not to say I feel I can criticsise anyone who does model to trends or latest techniques to me that would be hypocritical! If I do get to post any of my builds on here,any comments I get would be treated as people's views and opinions constructive or otherwise I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over them. I am an average model maker at best,I probably won't ever enter a competition with one,I do it because I enjoy it,i dont ever want to get so obsessed with the finish on my kits it detracts from my enjoyment of actually doing them,but again i can't comment or criticise any one who does need the highest level of authenticity as has been said we are all different and shouldn't be lambasted for it. If I can sit back and look at what I have created and think that looks pretty damn good and is maybe an improvement on my last kit I'm happy!:-)

Edited by The Crusty one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never realised there was so much modeller snobbery on this site! Unfortunatley this thread has been a bit if an eye opener. People need to calm down and enjoy sticking there bits of plastic together, in what ever way they want to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that I'd like to add to this debate is that, whereas people who don't like to weather their models are always quick to criticise, point out what "they" see as wrong, you never see those that do like to weather their models, criticise peoples models for being to clean and not weathered etc.

Tim.

Edited to remove comment so as not to offend tetchy members.

Edited by tank152

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edgar: So there are no models on Britmodeller, or anywhere else, that you would like to praise?

Why this obsessive desire for me to praise the models of others, and why the implication that criticism wouldn't be welcome? My view of any model, as a modeller who was never any better than average (and who only won a class at the IPMS Nationals when there were only three entrants) means absolutely nothing. I am a retired factory worker, who now spends time as a researcher, and am not, nor have I ever been, a master model-maker.

Modellers build for their own enjoyment (with the odd exception, who builds to compete,) which, in a hobby, is as it should be, and they don't need a rank amateur sticking his oar in.

I have friends, on and off this website, who cheerfully send photos of their work, and ask for my honest comments, because they know they won't get sycophantic praise or a fearful lambasting, but an honest appraisal from what I know about the real thing, and the way it was really painted and looked after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why this obsessive desire for me to praise the models of others, and why the implication that criticism wouldn't be welcome?

Nothing was implied, your criticism would be very welcomed by all the posters in WIP and RFI; but I was wondering whether you ever thought to praise when you thought people had achieved the appearance you think a model should have, but I have my answer.

Modellers build for their own enjoyment (with the odd exception, who builds to compete,) which, in a hobby, is as it should be, and they don't need a rank amateur sticking his oar in.

There are over 17,300 threads started in RFI; suggesting that there are many people (just on this one site alone) would like some feedback, and don't just build for their own enjoyment.

I find it great to have the opportunity to give and receive feedback on the techniques used for painting and building. Mike has created a great, friendly place to exchange views, and the moderators do an excellent job of keeping things in order, all without adverts and other intrusions into the visitor experience. Giving feedback is fun and rewarding, and receiving it gives me incentives to keep posting build threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are over 17,300 threads started in RFI; suggesting that there are many people (just on this one site alone) would like some feedback, and don't just build for their own enjoyment.

I find it great to have the opportunity to give and receive feedback on the techniques used for painting and building. Mike has created a great, friendly place to exchange views, and the moderators do an excellent job of keeping things in order, all without adverts and other intrusions into the visitor experience. Giving feedback is fun and rewarding, and receiving it gives me incentives to keep posting build threads.

Those are very good points, myself always welcome feed back, good or bad. Why else would you want to post pics up of your models.

Tim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this topic with great interest. I am of the slight weathering no panel lines modellers, except where they are very obvious. The Airfix 1/72 Mustang of mine has all but the gunbay and main cowling panels filled, because that was what was done. One point regarding the Ju 88, what scheme is that supposed to represent? These were RLM 70/71 on top ex-works. 70 & 71 were both dark greens with almost no contrast. The model looks 02/ and something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is always going to be a hot topic and at the end of the day nobody is right and nobody is wrong - shades of grey at the end of the day.

I like to try to make my models look like photographs of the real thing, but its only my opinion and I'm happy with it. Some of my models look better than others - again in my opinion.

I would certainly hope that no one on BM would think of slinging mud about anyone else's approach because life is just too damned short and there's no point arguing about something which is so subjective. I'm just glad that we have a huge resource of knowledge on this site but what we do with information, once supplied, is very much up to the individual.

As has been said, panel lines are often invisible at scale distances but the effects of panel breaks are far more evident when it comes to dirt build up and, equally, weathering of the leading edges of everything - but this is down to photographic evidence. An artist would say that they paint what they see and thats all we can do. There is no such thing as a 100% authentic shade of a given paint, and even if we did, the effect of light and shade would vary that - and we can argue about that forever as well!

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok just a quick question why,if the panel lines on real aircraft were difficult to see or simply not there why do manufacturers insist on putting them on? I mean if they spend so much time trying to get an accurate shape, wing thickness etc seems a bit daft to ruin it with inaccurate lines all over it!:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok just a quick question why,if the panel lines on real aircraft were difficult to see or simply not there why do manufacturers insist on putting them on? I mean if they spend so much time trying to get an accurate shape, wing thickness etc seems a bit daft to ruin it with inaccurate lines all over it!:-)

Very good point.

I believe it comes down to kit manufacturers "giving" what us modellers want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok just a quick question why,if the panel lines on real aircraft were difficult to see or simply not there why do manufacturers insist on putting them on? I mean if they spend so much time trying to get an accurate shape, wing thickness etc seems a bit daft to ruin it with inaccurate lines all over it!:-)

Well, panel lines are there on many real aircrafts, they may be hard to see, they may have been filled on some occasions, but panel lines are definitely there because on a metal skinned aircraft individual panels are used. For this reason alone it's right that kit manufacturers add these lines.

It's a different story how these panel lines are reproduced on a kit and here it depends mainly on the technology available and what kind of price the company is williing to pay to have a representation that is as realistic as possible. Today it's possible to have very fine recessed lines but even overlapped panels have been reproduced convincingly in some kits. Should the modeller not like them, we can still choose from a range of fillers to eliminate any panel line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok just a quick question why,if the panel lines on real aircraft were difficult to see or simply not there why do manufacturers insist on putting them on? I mean if they spend so much time trying to get an accurate shape, wing thickness etc seems a bit daft to ruin it with inaccurate lines all over it!:-)

...which is one of the issues I have with the Airfix Canberra I am stalled on at the moment. I have spent time toning down the panel line effect, however I would probably have been better off filling everything and rescribing. I suppose kit manufacturers know their markets though and they provide what the majority look for?

Perhaps I own rose-tinted spectacles, but I am sure some Hasegawa/Otaki/etc kits from thirty years ago had beautifully refined panel lines and they have got less refined in some cases since then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I'll say about preshading is, and I've said it before, its like putting on dirty underwear with fresh clothes on top and getting dirty again. A lot of models are done really well but some overdone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I belive there is an element of artisitc licence in making a model. If kits were supplied with scale panel lines, they mostly wouldn't have any and would look toy like. We'd be all drawing them in and complaining that the new kit just released is poor!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm building one of the Hobbyboss Me262s at the moment. Virtually all the real thing had their panel lines filled with putty, so I spent a night filling all the ones Hobbyboss have kindly put in, now I've sprayed it I can honestly say it looks bland and I'm going to have to do some serious fading with oils etc to get some life into it, it just looks so wrong, even if that is how the real thing was done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm building one of the Hobbyboss Me262s at the moment. Virtually all the real thing had their panel lines filled with putty, so I spent a night filling all the ones Hobbyboss have kindly put in, now I've sprayed it I can honestly say it looks bland and I'm going to have to do some serious fading with oils etc to get some life into it, it just looks so wrong, even if that is how the real thing was done.

Bland compared to what? How it really looked or how you think a model should look? Don't over do it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...which is one of the issues I have with the Airfix Canberra I am stalled on at the moment. I have spent time toning down the panel line effect, however I would probably have been better off filling everything and rescribing. I suppose kit manufacturers know their markets though and they provide what the majority look for?

Perhaps I own rose-tinted spectacles, but I am sure some Hasegawa/Otaki/etc kits from thirty years ago had beautifully refined panel lines and they have got less refined in some cases since then.

Actually no, the panel lines on the Japanese kits have not become less refined, apart from a couple of kits that suffered from overly large ones.

The presence on some modern kits of excessively deep or wide panel lines has nothing to do with what the modellers want, it only depends on one thing: money !

There are companies capable of making moulds with very fine panel lines, their moulds are more expensive than those of other companies that don't have the same technological level. If model company X gets one of the "good" companies to make a mould for them, we can have beautiful panel lines. If the same company X gets one of the not so good companies to make the mould, we'll have panel lines not as refined. It's all down to what company X can afford.

The rumour that Airfix or Revell or any other company issue kits with wide panel lines to cater for the tastes of the modellers is a myth spread by someone on some forum. The harsh reality is simply that either:

- the company does not have the technology to make finer panel lines

- the company does not want to pay as much as would be needed to have finer panel lines.

No more, no less

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...