Model quality 'target'

[dansls1]

When you build a paper / card model - what are you looking to acheive? Are you looking to make an exact representation of the subject, a reasonable facsimile but don't care if somebody can tell it's paper by close evaluate, build the kit as close as possible to the designer's representation (however simple or complex that may be) or what?

The topic of edge coloring / painting always brings this thought into my head. Personally I've always pictured paper modelling to be a media in which you want to get a reasonable copy of the subject / kit - but seams and the like are to be expected. The models should look good from arms length - but if you look really close most people can tell the seams / etc. I'm just curious where everybody else falls in this regard.

[cgutzmer]

I voted arms length because the amount of time I actually get to model it would take me a year to do one model otherwise. My kids would bust a gasket if they took me that long :)
Chris

[Gharbad]

I generally built models just to assemble something cool. I wouldn't give much thought to the quality at all. Though, I was a kid then.

Now, I still build them just for fun, but try to make them as neat as possible. I use black marker on stuff that's obviously not white, but otherwise, I leave it alone.
Needless to say, most of my models have a lot of white patches. If they don't, it just means the model was very well designed.

I think I'm also affected by the kits I build. The majority of my models are older Maly Modelarz, and those aren't exactly amazing. Sometimes stuff is missing colours, or just doesn't fit.
Now that I bought some better GPM and Halinski stuff, I plan to spend a bit more effort on them, because I know it's possible to make it awesome.

Edit:
I guess that puts me at arm's length for most kits, and true to the kit for the good stuff.

[Clashster]

I like to build things. Not an expert on anything like what I build (favorites are armor and ships), and probably couldn't pick out the 7 TP I am currently building in a line up. I like the model to look good and clean, edges colored and looking at it makes you say that looks good! As to historical accuracy, not really hung up on it. Anyone I know who views my models in person wouldn't know anyway! So, I's say I follow the designers intent, right or wrong in accuracy.

[cjwalas]

I voted arm's length...maybe longer! I like building something that looks good (despite the glue blobs), but if I really want Halinski style detail, I'd move to another medium.
Chris

[rickstef]

as long as all the pieces have been used, i am happy

[Bluenoser]

I build for enjoyment. Most of the time I am not interested in super accuracy, detail or finish.
There is the odd occasion where I select a model from the pile and decide to go the full distance to do as much detail and good finish as I can manage.

[SCEtoAUX]

I did not color the edges when I first started making paper models. They just did not look right in some cases, so I started edging the models. It makes them look so much better. So I now edge them all, even the ones destined to be mangled by children, big and small. I just like getting into a routine, so when the time comes when it is needed, it won't be forgotten because a habit has been formed.

Building the kit as close as possible to the designer's representation seems like the way to go for me. Of course, it does not always turn out that way. Sometimes the models gets wadded up and circular filed part way through the build, other times my big clumsy fingers leave a few extra marks or bumps. :)

[John Griffin]

Fit and accuracy, and I like to find a kit that has a nice paint job. Mostly viewed from arm's length or closer (to see good surface artwork- weathering, rivets, etc). I've never even worried about edge coloring... if the kit fits tightly you usually can't see much of the edges anyway. I like to see parts represented well, with thicknesses on stuff like llanding gear doors, etc, but I don't even build all the tiny OTT stuff that seems to be creeping into kits more and more.

[Phil]

I strive for the best and accept what I get...I love every single paper model/toy I build. Not a single one was constructed the same as the subject but my mind's eye tells me it was. Of course, I have a fantastic imagination...I could see the " Sphinx" in a wad of paper on the floor!

I want perfection...haven't quite made it...will keep trying!

[Barry]

Target a perfect reproduction of the original ............. reality stand off scale is nearer.

[Ashrunner]

After I finish a model, I would prefer it be something only the Hubble Space Telescope could image. As for quality before I begin, as long as it looks like what it is suppose to be, with or without intense detail, I am happy.

[Texman]

Me, I am my own worst critic. So, if it looks good to me, it's good.

Ray

[MOS95B]

I voted "Arm's Length" which translates to "Best I can do". I'd love for them to be perfect, but who am I trying to kid??? ;)

[Jim Nunn]

I compete in the plastic categories at IPMS conventions both local and regional needless to say I push my skills to the limit. Perhaps I take this hobby too seriously but the fun for me is to improve the model by adding detail and correcting errors.

Jim Nunn

[dansls1]

I compete in the plastic categories at IPMS conventions both local and regional needless to say I push my skills to the limit. Perhaps I take this hobby too seriously but the fun for me is to improve the model by adding detail and correcting errors.

Jim Nunn

As long as you enjoy yourself, that's the important part regardless of skill level ;)

[ShaunGamer]

It depends on the model!
On my 1/72 tanks, I like to add the details, paint the edges etc. (at that scale it usually doesn't require a lot of extra work anyway!) Also a lot of errors that are visible to the digital camera are hidden to the naked eye.
However, most of my other models, I would just like to get a result that gives a good impression of the original subject matter. Fiddlers Green aircraft, seem to do this well.

Slightly OT: I also enjoy both the simple build threads and the complex super detailed build threads. Back when I first got into cardmodels, it was a little disappointing when scouring the net, to find plenty of Halsinki build threads (and other complicated models - battleships, etc.) but no build threads of simple kits to encourage the new modeller.

Because of this, it took me ages to feel confident enough to make a contribution on any of the sites. I needed to feel I had reached a certain "standard".
I should also state that I think this community has gone a long way to making this less of an issue. However, we could have more "simple" build threads that show how good a less complex model can be!

[Gharbad]

Slightly OT: I also enjoy both the simple build threads and the complex super detailed build threads. Back when I first got into cardmodels, it was a little disappointing when scouring the net, to find plenty of Halsinki build threads (and other complicated models - battleships, etc.) but no build threads of simple kits to encourage the new modeller.

Because of this, it took me ages to feel confident enough to make a contribution on any of the sites. I needed to feel I had reached a certain "standard".
I should also state that I think this community has gone a long way to making this less of an issue. However, we could have more "simple" build threads that show how good a less complex model can be!

Yeah this forum does that pretty well. I was sort of embarassed of my models, but I posted them anyway! I guess the fact that everybody seems like friends and that it's a relatively small place make it happen.
Before I said that I never saw cardmodels.net, but it turns out I did - it was in my favourites/bookmarks. I just never joined or posted, and left very quickly.

I intend to make a build thread of everything! This includes some easier models, though they're probably not super new beginner material.

[shrike]

I tried to do a build thread of an intermediate model back on the other forum, for exactly the same reason Shaun mentioned - to have something to inspire rather than intimidate a beginner. <sigh> didn't work out that way unfortunately. The model wasn't completely unbuildable, but it took some doing to make it presentable.

I might have to try that again if I can find a suitable kit.

[Scott K]

This gives me an excuse to show my latest simple build. While working on the F-105, I decided to take a quick break from it and build something I could finish quickly, FG's F-19 "Stealth Fighter". Well, maybe not 100% finished, but I frequently skip the landing gear on older FG stuff anyway. Not the best thing I've ever built, but I like it.

Scott K.

[GreMir]

I would like to build the kit exactly as designed, under the condition that the kit is designed well of course. I also preffer good artwok on the model than gadzilion parts in places that will be impossible to see anyway :rolleyes:

[Mark_1984]

I aim for a model that's perfect to the kit. However, I like a model to "look right."
A car should have a nice gloss finish, a working locomotive should not have a high gloss finish. Overall looks are more important to me than details. The lines should be right, but I'm not overly fussed if the details are wrong. I'll happily leave parts off if they don't look right.

[horologium]

I want it to look as good as my current skill level will allow. I don't worry too much about "perfect" I have to do that too much at work...

[The-EDSEL]

I am not skilled enough to try for prefect! And won't be anytime in the future!
As long as it looks like what it is suppose to be, I am happy.
But I have not built very many, & not yet a purchased one.
I am TOO scared to do so!.Though I will try with scanned copies of the ones I bought, that is, IF I can print one! I scanned them in at TOO high a resolution! 1200 DPI!!
I don't have USB 2.0, only 1.1! so that slows my Printer even more!
Maybe I will scan them again at 300 or so.

[Mark_1984]

Hi Dan,

1200 DPI is way too high - the file size will be massive, and will bring many PC's to their knees. Even 600 DPI is a bit big. You should find 300 DPI much more managable and the results should be perfectly acceptable.

[Vicar]

Perfect to kit is I guess my best answer, not that I ever attain it. I think a neat clean build is more important than accuracy. I've sometimes spent a lot of time trying to correct an 'inaccuracy' only to look at the model six months later and been unable to recollect what the problem was. If it looks good, it's right.

[Golden Bear]

I usually aim high but more often settle for "best with kit."


C.

[milenio3]

Well, it seems that most of us go for the "look good kit". Me too.

I like the fact that a paper model looks like a paper model, but I love the heavenly phrase "is that paper?".