Do you ever use poetic licence

[Ronnie]

I thought I'd ask if you ever complete a build knowing it's inaccurate in some way - I'm undecided as to whether to complete an aircraft with markings and serials which I know it never carried, and in fact applied to a totally different mark of the aircraft type. Trouble is, I really like the markings; so do I cheat, on the basis that most people wouldn't know the difference anyway, or stick to authenticity, which I've always done up to now?

I'm certain that if I do follow the dark path, someone out there will know when I post it as ready for inspection..........................

Ronnie

[Gajman]

I often use poetic license. Everything from markings through to shades of grey through to structural details. To me the primary reason I build a model is for my enjoyment. As long as I'm happy with it in the end then that's the main thing. Life is too short to try keep the rivet counters happy

[Bertie McBoatface]

As I see it, it's your game and your rules. If you are entering a model in an accuracy based competition you will be disadvantaged but if you are making it for yourself then simply do what pleases you.

I sometimes 'cheat', as you put it and add imagined detail to sparse cockpits etc. If a viewer notices then I congratulate him on his knowledge and don't judge myself guilty. I do mention the made up bits when I post on the web though. It seems fair to the viewer (p.s. I never use photos of other people's models as reference for this very reason! lol.)

Sometimes I indulge in flagrant what-iffery. Sometimes I attempt the highest level of accuracy that I can manage. It depends on the project and how I feel at the time. Whatever I do, I do it for ... me.

[hacker]

sometimes due to the limitations of the kit and space. I try to get accurate to a point but the aim is also to make it look right even when it is not. Slight of hand you might say

[Chris D]

As I see it, it's your model made for your enjoyment. Go for it.

And the riet counters weren't there 24 hours in every day, do what we did on the model ships, anyone who knew different and questioned the model, we asked them what date they were talking about, and then took a couple of days of.

Chris

[AnonymousFO98]

Not any more.

Have in the past when I first got back into the hobby and modelling was carefree and fun.

It might actually be a healthy thing to do as a two fingered wave to AMS

Like the other guys said she's your dollie so dress her as you please.

[FAAFAN]

My opinion is that ALL modeling is to an extent poetic license. For most of us, it is in how we weather or otherwise depict a subject, how we paint (as in shades and precise camo patterns) and to others it's a What If scheme. I constantly read rivet counters who decry someone's work, and I pretty much am over it. I once built an M-113 in NASA usage, silver paint abounding. At a model show, one of the armor "experts" perused it telling another "expert" that because the M-113 was made of aluminum, it could not rust, and I had depicted rust on the sides, running from the side skirt bolt holes. Even though I could SHOW these "experts" the photos of the rust stains running from the bolt holes (the bolt holes themselves being made of steel, apparently, or the actual steel bolts themselves having rusted at one time) on the real thing, they were unconvinced. That pretty much began my love affair with the "who gives a great care what others think about my model", and as long as I am satisfied with it, that's all that matters to me.

I am guilty of periodically wanting to do work as historically accurate as possible, but remember, for almost every example of perfection, there is an example of how it was done differently. Photos, eyewitness accounts and memories fade with time, so don't be too cautious. I have found myself agonized over using the right shade or weathering too much/not enough/if at all. It's a hobby and it's something you should have fun with. And it IS art, so use "artistic license".

I thought I'd ask if you ever complete a build knowing it's inaccurate in some way - I'm undecided as to whether to complete an aircraft with markings and serials which I know it never carried, and in fact applied to a totally different mark of the aircraft type. Trouble is, I really like the markings; so do I cheat, on the basis that most people wouldn't know the difference anyway, or stick to authenticity, which I've always done up to now?

I'm certain that if I do follow the dark path, someone out there will know when I post it as ready for inspection..........................

Ronnie

[Scratcher]

I think a bit of poetic licence is unavoidable. Take, for example, the panel scribing we indulge in. A 2 mm gap on the real thing, scaled down to 1/72, would be scribed to .03 mm. I can't work to that level of tolerance and it would require some very good paintwork to avoid obliterating such lines. Or look at the thickness of doors and open panels. Even if the real thing were a generous 10mm thick at the edges, we'd need panels 0.13mm thick.

I do my best, but I have limits....

[AnonymousFO98]

I think there is a difference twixt poetic licence that Ronnie describes, and technical licence which is necessitated by the limitations of materials/abilities/scale or whatever.

For example I painted up Revell's 1/72 Spitfire MkV in pink and called it a Pr whatever t was.

The next build was Airfix's 1/72 Mossie FVI/NFII/? kit built as a pathfinder iirc

Neither had a great deal of modifications to convert to the type the markings depicted.

Don't disagree though Scratcher, am sure all of my scratch building is overscale

But I do what I can as well

[Vulcanicity]

When scratchbuilding details, I am frequently confined by what is physically possible/how much of my life I can afford to spend on the job in hand. With my current Sea Hawk, I added cabling to the undercarriage bays, but there was no way I could ever imitate every single pipe, cable or wire in 1:72nd , all routed correctly and plugged into scratchbuilt connectors/control boxes etc. I do not have enough patience, steady enough hands or even enough plain skill to do this; it would end up looking worse than a simpler job, as the whole bay would be drowned in CA glue. Instead I just used stripped eleccrical wire to imitate bundles of cable going in approximately the right directions, and it looks fine to my eyes: a representation of the business and "feel" of the undercarriage bay without being perfect in every regard, and as such is much crisper and more believable under a coat of paint than a botched attempt at the "perfect" job would be.

I am also often confined by what I can find by researching. I do not buy reference books because I cannot afford to spend money on both books and kits, so if I can't find what I want via Internet searching or the kindness of people on forums, I guess, using as much knowledge as I can muster. This was very much the case with my 1:72nd Fairey Seafox a couple of years ago; stuck with no cockpit references at all, I just used all my knowledge of the aircraft's construction, British cockpit layouts of the period and British standard equipment to come up with something that looked plausible. Beneath a thick Matchbox canopy or behind a small cockpit aperture, it hardly matters!

I am definitely a perfectionist up to a point, but I try and keep a degree of perspective. It is, after all, just a hobby!

[CockneyCol]

I'm probably going to echo everyone else, depending on the subject and what its for..... i'll try to be as accurate as I can if it's for public consumption or of a specific aircraft for a reason, otherwise the kits and my limitations have to factor in. I find a complete break from reality is a relief too, so a little what-iffery is always welcome (at the moment I have an RAF F-104G Starfighter on the bench...because I can!).

Ultimately it's your ball so you can play what ever game you want with it, the only thing i'd say is if you are going to show it make it obvious you already know that the markings are wrong for the type etc otherwise you'll be really sick by the end of the day as rivet counters can be draining on the spirit!

Cheers

Col'

[Bertie McBoatface]

(at the moment I have an RAF F-104G Starfighter on the bench...because I can!).

I'd like to see that when it's done. I'll post my RAF F-5 to go with it. (Well, it could have happened!)

[Ronnie]

Thanks for your views, they make interesting reading; so I think I'll be safe modelling a single seater with a two seat serial............................. I can always say the painters made a mistake

[Scratcher]

Thanks for your views, they make interesting reading; so I think I'll be safe modelling a single seater with a two seat serial............................. I can always say the painters made a mistake

Painters do make mistakes. A turd coloured Nimrod springs to mind.

Actually, the painters weren't at fault. They questioned the error but they were told to do what they were told.

Edited June 12, 2011 by Scratcher

[Murdo]

Accuracy?

Whassat then?

[macgregor]

Accuracy?

Whassat then?

I think its type of watch........

Mac

[Learstang]

I thought I'd ask if you ever complete a build knowing it's inaccurate in some way - I'm undecided as to whether to complete an aircraft with markings and serials which I know it never carried, and in fact applied to a totally different mark of the aircraft type. Trouble is, I really like the markings; so do I cheat, on the basis that most people wouldn't know the difference anyway, or stick to authenticity, which I've always done up to now?

I'm certain that if I do follow the dark path, someone out there will know when I post it as ready for inspection..........................

Ronnie

Ronnie, the answer is simple - it's your model, your quid, do it as you wish. I try to be accurate, but then I realise that for starters my model suffers from a major inaccuracy - it's only 1/72nd the size of the real article! Seriously though, as an aficionado of Soviet WWII subjects, I often have to use poetic licence. I've just now finished the HB IL-2, with the engine compartment opened, and try as mightily as I could, I know it's not completely accurate and it can't be - the pictures just aren't available. I suppose that's unavoidable licence whereas you're talking about deliberate licence. However, if it bears a large warning label - WARNING - THIS IS NOT ACCURATE!, I should think that should take care of it. Remember, modelling is supposed to be fun. So follow the dark path and have fun doing it!

Regards,

Learstang

[Murdo]

To be honest, I build what I want. If it is accurate enough for my liking then I'm happy.

Someone might nark about it but generally I find that most modellers are actually very complimentary and encouraging and ALWAYS happy to pontificate about how to improve it...

[Louise]

Great question! It shouldn't matter should it?

Who are you doing it for or who do you give a crap about what they might have to say about it? It's a hobby, funny that the simple question really does put one in a difficult position. I think as humans, whatever we do we try and do "right", so our 6000 year thought process kicks in to try stop us doing something knowingly wrong. I try to do what you have suggested and it really hurts....... but in time you'll get over it because there's the next model build on the horizon which you will of course build to spec and prototype.... isn't there?

I've wanted to do a Spitfire as one of those "formation bomber planes", you know in overall yellow with red spots everywhere. It WILL HAPPEN someday once I've run out of the aftermarket decals that I've got spilling out of the decal chest to make yet another "actual prototype Spitfire" in boring green/grey/blue.

May peace be with you my son, let the light on the table direct you on your path of enlightenment.

[ssculptor]

Big deal. If you are an obsessive fine scale modeler the incorrect color or markings or a rivet missing out of a line of a thousand will drive you screaming to the rubber room.

But if you are a modeler building a model for the fun and enjoyment and sometimes pleasure what difference does it make? I like to make up my own color schemes. Heck, I like to change the plane in some way for the fun of it. I am planning a float F-86 biplane Saberjet. Do you think I care what some other guy says one way or another about it.?

This is MY hobby for my enjoyment, pleasure and fun. If someone does not like what I make he can stuff his head up where the sun don't shine.

I do not build models to win IPMS contests. I do not build models to please or impress others. I build for my fun.

But you have to decide who rules, your compulsion to be 100% accurate or your intention to create or alter something for your personal pleasure.

Stephen

[AnonymousFO98]

So where do you get this Poetic Licence and how much does it cost?

Can you get it from the Post Office?

[Gerard]

When I build, I'm not too fussy about serial numbers. One possible exception is USAF where the FY year is the 1st 2 digits, and I might try to get more accurate, at least within a few years. I'm not going to spend £ to get decals just to a do a handful of serial numbers, regardless of country / AF.

I also wouldn't care about cockpit detailing, or wheelbays, or superdetailing engines. Decals are great for cockpits, to me. I'd make a bad job of that sort of super-fine detail painting, so the results would be worse than using decals.

I'm much more careful about choosing the right weapons for a plane. Saying that, I still see some new combination that I've not seen before every few weeks on some plane.

As to "that never happened", well, I've seen pictures that I would otherwise have thought were fake, but turned out to be real, after some more research. "Impossible" colour schemes / weapons did happen. During war, the official manual may not always be the final word.

Regards,

Gerard

[thx6667]

I think every time you see a model, esepcially dioramas, with lots of panels open while armed is pure poetic (or artistic) license but hey, we do what we want not what others think we should.

Its telling sometimes how many of these flawed kits that need über accurizing (sic) rarely ever make it into the public domain, while the sometimes-criticised "artistic" ones do. Could one draw the conclusion that some are having more fun with their hobby than others?

[AnonymousAA72]

So where do you get this Poetic Licence and how much does it cost?

Can you get it from the Post Office?

POETIC(?) Licence...about half as much as ARTISTIC(!!) licence...and yes , I sometimes apply the latter , but never the former...

[Enzo the Magnificent]

So where do you get this Poetic Licence and how much does it cost?

Can you get it from the Post Office?

Yes. That's where I got mine. Mind you, it has the word DOG crossed out and POETIC written in in crayon...