|
|
Forums - News / General |
For General modelling or hobby-related topics that are not covered by any other specific forum. Please keep to topics concerning the hobby. |
| Topics | 2850 |
| Messages | 20576 |
|
|
| Subject: | Re: If it looks like a "duck" ? |  |
| Date: | May 3, 2008 | |
| From: | Scott Fraser | |
There are two extremes of the human (modelling) condition. The first is the "I just want to build a tank" crowd, and it doesn't really matter if there are too many roadwheels or the turret is in the wrong place. If it looks like a Russian tank, everything is right with the world.
The other extreme is, of course, the unsatisfiable prefectionist who will rail against a manufacturer because they put an SAE thread on the bolts he's counting instead of a metric ISO thread. There's no hope for him. Modelling is about compromises. No manufacturer will ever produce the perfect 1/35 scale model — they must live within the limitations of production techniques and technology. It just ain't possible to mould sheet metal fenders that are scale thickness. It's not even possible to produce them in photoetch. Fenders that were REALLY 35 times thinner than the prototype would crumple if you even looked at them hard. People who demand the impossible deserve to be ignored.
That said, my own philosophy in modelling is to make THIS model better than my last one. To do so, I am willing to spend sometimes stupid amounts of money and time to get the best results possible.
I expect manufacturers to be on more or less the same page — if Tamiya wants to release a PzKpfw 38(t), it must be better than DML or Tristar's models for them to get my business. If it isn't, I hope to find a critical review telling me that, and why, so I can make an informed judgement as to whether to buy it or not (thank you Terry!).
If Tamiya trumps DML and Tristar, they get my dollars. If they don't, they won't. If they fail often enough, they will go broke. That's economic Darwinism of a sort — not survival of the fittest, but survival of the best.
The so-called "rivet-counters" who CORRECTLY point out the relative strengths and weaknesses of a given kit are doing me, and my colleagues, a great service, and I thank them. Others may not care, and I do not fault them if this information is simply not important to them.
I am annoyed, though, when they dismiss the efforts of people who conscientiously try to inform consumers like me for whom this information IS important. I get even more annoyed at people who peek into a box and slap out a review saying "this is a very nice model that looks like a duck", even though they've never seen a duck in their life, know nothing about them, and can't be bothered to actually build the kit before rendering their verdict. Those people, in my humble opinion, should stick with LEGO.
And that's just my opinion.
Cheers
Scott Fraser
Calgary |
| |
|
|
 | If it looks like a "duck" ? - Brian J Tears - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . What year car do you drive? - Kip Rudge - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . . . . ??? Think you are missing Brian's point, Kip - Kurt Laughlin - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: ??? Think you are missing Brian's point, Kip - Kip Rudge - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: ??? Think you are missing Brian's point, Kip - Brian Bocchino - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . Re: If it looks like a "duck" ? - David Manning - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . 1978 Pz IV's vs the real thing - Robert Gregory - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . Re: If it looks like a "duck" ? - steve campbell - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . Two Responses - Rob Ervin - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . Re: If it looks like a "duck" ? - Juan Contreras - May 2, 2008 |
| . . . Re: If it looks like a "duck" ? - Christopher C. Tew - May 3, 2008 |
| . . . Re: If it looks like a "duck" ? - Scott Fraser - May 3, 2008 |
| . . . This really is simple... - Kip Rudge - May 3, 2008 |
|
|
