Panel line finishing

[dwh]

Gentlemen.

Pardon my ignorance, but would someone kindly explain why a vast majority of models are now being finished with panel line detail highly emphasised.

The idea seems contrary to what I was always taught, in that it should replicate a full size aircraft viewed at a distance, which being the case, panel lines are near impossible to see.

Please do not get me wrong and think I am having a dig at these excellent model makers and their models, but being old school I would appreciate being bought up to date with current methods and thinking.

Many Thanks

[AirfixAndy]

I think the words "each to their own" is very apt when it comes down to panel lines.

Some people , including myself , think it adds to the finished model...even if its technically "wrong" .

On the other hand are people who hate the die-cast /toy like look it gives.

In the end its up to the individual and nobody is right or wrong ......its YOUR kit , build it as YOU want.

Think of it like artists differing styles.

Well thats my 2p worth

Andy

[Mike]

I think Andy has said it all... Although you'll find some panel lines on some aircraft VERY prominent at times. It's all down to personal taste though. Weathered, over-weathered, pristine clean - you choose

My own take is moderation in all things

[Brian G]

I think Andy has said it all... Although you'll find some panel lines on some aircraft VERY prominent at times. It's all down to personal taste though. Weathered, over-weathered, pristine clean - you choose

My own take is moderation in all things

I think I would agree with you, the use of 'lines' can put an emphasis on a model but, it does go against my RAF Training where we would try and repair aircraft to the tolerances that would be in the Volume 6, 'Aircraft Repair and Reconditioning Manual', (IIRC), of something like 15 thousands of an inch between panels when you were doing a repair or replacement.

So, to my mind, you shouldn't have a model with huge lines - if you want to be realistic!

Cheers, Brian

[Old_TimB (Broken account)]

Brian, from my perspective it depends on scale, weathering and what the "panel" is. I agree that a Topic 6 repair should hardly be visible once painted. However, access panels oftem fit poorly, especially on older types and on curved surfaces - look at some Spitfire cowlings if you want to see some good examples. Grease, oil and exhaust will all locally accentuate panel lines. On the other extreme some USAF ac are cleaned between flights - I remember one Maint Officer having a fit because there was a boot print on an F-15 walkway! My preference is to mark up those panel lines that correspond to access panels or that move in flight, but to go very light on the others. If I can see the panel lines in a photo of the real thing, I will probably mark them in some way, even if they are almost inevitably over scale. As always, its a matter of personal taste, and using references.

Regards

Tim

[Julien]

Modelling fashion.

These things seem to come and go, if done well can enhance a model, of done badly looks bad.

Also down to personal preference as to whether you do it or not.

Julien

[sloegin57]

I agree with everything that has been said before me. It is up to personal choice and the old modelling saying, "It's your model" holds true.

I believe I am right in saying that with every model we build, we are experimenting, either with ideas we have read on sites like this or in the modelling magazines. My latest idea is to use very thin lines either printed on decal paper, sealed, measured and applied or use the slightly thicker ones around the decal sheets that Airfix put in their kits. I have also printed my own panels with the relevant maintenance instructions. It was an idea I had, played with on one model and which I, most probably, will discard. It is entirely up to you how you dress up your model.

Just have fun doing it

Attached 1 x Canberra PR7. Fun whilst I was doing it but in hindsight a bit overblown.:-

Dennis W Robinson

[Julien]

Just have fun doing it

Thats the main thing.

Dennis I like the Canberra, might be a bit over but effectively breaks up what could have been a monotone model.

Julien

[Jon Bryon]

I'm not sure it's a fad; it's been around for at least 20 years (going by Hasegawa catalogues) and shows no sign of disappearing, so I'd consider it a fairly well established style of finishing.

As others have said: personal choice. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and all that. Personally, I'm not interested in trying to replicate reality or fool the viewer into thinking my model might be the real thing. Just as it's trivial to distinguish a photograph of an aircraft from a painting, I don't mind that it's obvious my models are models, and nothing else.

Each to his own!

Jon

Edited for spelling

Edited August 7, 2011 by Jon Bryon

[Shaun]

I think weathering and panel line finishing adds to a model, I like the more realistic look it give a model when its done right.

Talking of real aircraft panels lines, check out the A-10's in this photo thread and then decide weather real aircraft show panel lines?

A-10's at Lakeheath, check out photo's 9+10.

Shaun.

[487 Squadron]

As everyone has said, each to their own - everyone should finish their model as it pleases them. There are various ways to do it, but I prefer to avoid black / high contrast, but rather use a darker shade of the base colour to accentuate panels here and there, and to create a more subtle effect. The other thing you mght want to try is Tamiya's weathering master 'makeup' - it gives a nice effect when used sparingly. I've used both techniques on this build:

[Nigel Bunker]

We do hobbies for fun, so just do it whichever way you want.

[Julien]

I think weathering and panel line finishing adds to a model, I like the more realistic look it give a model when its done right.

Talking of real aircraft panels lines, check out the A-10's in this photo thread and then decide weather real aircraft show panel lines?

A-10's at Lakeheath, check out photo's 9+10.

Shaun.

Also Shaun on that thread are F-15E's and no sign of panel lines. A lot depends on the finish and where they operate. What might be right for one airframe is not right for another.

Julien

[Shaun]

Also Shaun on that thread are F-15E's and no sign of panel lines. A lot depends on the finish and where they operate. What might be right for one airframe is not right for another.

Julien

I know horses for courses, but that A-10 is a good example of how dirty lines can get on certain airframes.

Shaun.

Edited August 7, 2011 by Shaun

[Tailspin Turtle]

[Julien]

Nice pic, look at those wings.

Julien

[JagRigger]

That must be a very early A4 - the rudder isn't 'ribbed'

Personally, I think too many modellers do go OTT with weathering and panel lines, but hey - your choice. It's like the soft/hard cammo line argument.

Edited August 7, 2011 by JagRigger

[Mike]

It's like any argument. You'll get folks entrenched in one camp or the other and unwilling to move, and some folk that share their views to a certain extent but keep quiet, and then you have the folks that either can't make up their minds, or see positive points in both arguments. it's the ones that try to force their opinons on the rest that should probably chill out a bit though.

[Brian G]

To try and give some detail to this subject:

There is a different standard of Maintenance of the aircraft we have seen pictured here.

In the RAF, jets are, (were), generally 'washed' every 28 days - as part of a Maintenance Procedure, so they would never be allowed to get into such a state. But a clean aircraft, pictured at the start of a 28 day cycle, could be quite dirty by the end of the 28 days.

This cleaning is called an 'Anti-Deterioration' wash or clean, where the whole aircraft is physically cleaned and a lubrication of essential points, as laid down in the Maintenance Manual, is carried out.

This means that, if the RAF have to go 'Into Action', you know where you are with regards to the apparent condition of an aircraft.

When I left the RAF, I went to work on the Maintenance of A10's at Kemble.

You would not believe the state of those In-Service aircraft!

Cheers, Brian

[spike7451]

To try and give some detail to this subject:

There is a different standard of Maintenance of the aircraft we have seen pictured here.

In the RAF, jets are, (were), generally 'washed' every 28 days - as part of a Maintenance Procedure, so they would never be allowed to get into such a state. But a clean aircraft, pictured at the start of a 28 day cycle, could be quite dirty by the end of the 28 days.

This cleaning is called an 'Anti-Deterioration' wash or clean, where the whole aircraft is physically cleaned and a lubrication of essential points, as laid down in the Maintenance Manual, is carried out.

This means that, if the RAF have to go 'Into Action', you know where you are with regards to the apparent condition of an aircraft.

When I left the RAF, I went to work on the Maintenance of A10's at Kemble.

You would not believe the state of those In-Service aircraft!

Cheers, Brian

The Nimrods at Kinloss went thru a giant 'jet-wash' after every sortie to remove corrosive sea salt residue.The one at Kinloss was next to the MT section.

[Tailspin Turtle]

Nice pic, look at those wings

Julien

The inboard access panels on the wing are especially visible because of the engine oil coming out the discharge port above the wing. However, some of the fuselage panel lines are also just visible.

It is, as supposed, an A4D-1: plain (and grey) rudder, no inflight refueling probe, and if you look very closely, vortex generators just above the wing at mid fuselage and a different vortex generator pattern on the wings (see My Website). Note also that the slats are in, probably due to a combination of wind over deck and acceleration forward and that it has 150-gallon drop tanks (see My Website)