Why only paper? Enlighten me.

[Dabeer]

I used to be a purist, and refuse to call things paper models if they included other materials. But I've grown to realize that things like plastic canopies and metal axles, and even laser cut detail parts, don't take anything away from a model being a paper model. Not sure about wood planking, though.

The thing that kills it for me is paint. Except for edge coloring, painting a model takes away everything that makes it a paper model. The skill in forming sheets to the desired shape, in getting clean cuts, clean folds, and clean gluing.

Then again, if your goal is realism, and not the challenge and pride of a "pure" paper model, then it's up to you as the builder to do whatever makes you happy, and to hell with my opinion

[airdave]

Originally Posted by Dabeer

The thing that kills it for me is paint. Except for edge coloring, painting a model takes away everything that makes it a paper model.

Is it all painting in general?
...since a predesigned and ink printed finish, is a "finish"
...basically the same thing as a "painted finish".

With respect, if I might assume to redefine your comment...
applying a single layer of paint or adding some details, markings, and minor painted effects
should be acceptable to most paper modellers.
Especially if dealing with a scratch built model or unprinted paper.
Similar to how painting is used and necessary in Plastic modelling.

Whats the difference if I built something using plain white paper,
then applied a wash of blue watercolour after it was built,
or used blue coloured paper before I started.

Its when you see paint laid on so thick and heavy
that it is thicker than the paper and card it covers,
or it is used to blend and hide all seams, texture and paper form...
and especially if primers and fillers are used under the paint...

this to me, is when the paint has taken over from the paper.
It becomes a "paint" model with "paper" elements.

Originally Posted by Dabeer

I used to be a purist, and refuse to call things paper models if they included other materials.

As Dabeer says, it boils to the basic definition of a "paper scale model".
Theres nothing wrong with using any material in any manner in a "scale model".

[Dabeer]

Originally Posted by airdave

Its when you see paint laid on so thick and heavy
that it is thicker than the paper and card it covers,
or it is used to blend and hide all seams, texture and paper form...
and especially if primers and fillers are used under the paint...

this to me, is when the paint has taken over from the paper.
It becomes a "paint" model with "paper" elements.

This. When paint is used to hide sanding or seams or to correct other sloppiness. The effect might be nice, and the finished product might be quite realistic, but to me it has ceased to be a "paper model".

Otherwise you're right, there really isn't a problem in applying color to the model in any way, printer or paintbrush.

[Paper Kosmonaut]

I can remember a thread of the late Zé Reis here in which a very elaborate super-detailed industrial excavator - was being built, in which every part originally had outlines. Zé painted it all over in the same colour to get rid of there black lines and colour the edges too. I remember the engine, a model in itself and it was covered in additional rivets and different parts, ending up being painted in several metallic colours to finish it. In this case, I think paint and even all the metallic tubing and wiring was absolutely a nice addition to the model, and I really consider this to be a paper model, although Zé never got to finish it...

[abhovi]

If I make a scratch paper model, I will have to paint it. And where I use filler, well rather that than 'the hungry horse syndrom'. I try to make models of which the viewer does not wonder what material was used. It' s about what you depict, not what material you use.

[ShadowCory]

I use paper as a medium because it is affordable, available, and I can realize much of what is in my mind with just the card stock. However, I don't consider my projects paper models per se. I do a lot of paint and finish work, but almost zero printed ink work. I design my own creations, yet I use techniques and get inspiration from many of the designs and kits that I see on this forum and on the web. I consider "pure" paper models to be printed beforehand, cut and assembled with only glue and maybe some edge coloring. Not saying that is inferior in any way. It still takes the effort and artistic skills to get it done. The designs are phenomenal. My models I would consider to be "mostly" paper with some small non paper aspects, such as a bit of plastic or a rubberband or the like. I have lately been using a little sanded filler to smooth out some of the more critical lines in the character's faces. Most of the other joined edges I don't mind to been seen. That's just my .05 cents worth of opinion

[herky]

Originally Posted by airdave

Is it all painting in general?
...since a predesigned and ink printed finish, is a "finish"
...basically the same thing as a "painted finish".

With respect, if I might assume to redefine your comment...
applying a single layer of paint or adding some details, markings, and minor painted effects
should be acceptable to most paper modellers.
Especially if dealing with a scratch built model or unprinted paper.
Similar to how painting is used and necessary in Plastic modelling.

Whats the difference if I built something using plain white paper,
then applied a wash of blue watercolour after it was built,
or used blue coloured paper before I started.

Its when you see paint laid on so thick and heavy
that it is thicker than the paper and card it covers,
or it is used to blend and hide all seams, texture and paper form...
and especially if primers and fillers are used under the paint...

this to me, is when the paint has taken over from the paper.
It becomes a "paint" model with "paper" elements.




As Dabeer says, it boils to the basic definition of a "paper scale model".
Theres nothing wrong with using any material in any manner in a "scale model".

no disagreement with that but the whole reason i prefer paper to plastic is they dont need painting

[douglasmarrel]

I build for fun since I am not an OCD rivet counter who obsesses and agonizes over the exact shade of zinc chromate in the engine nacelles of aircraft built in the Dallas plant v the Michigan plant

[Don Boose]

I'm probably slightly to the right of you in the direction of the rivet counter, but only slightly.

I enjoy paper modeling as a rewarding craft, but I also see models as a way to capture/represent history, so I often try to replicate (within the limits of the medium and my own capabilities) a particular object as it existed at a point in time. I value the research and knowledge of the obsessive rivet counters, and do not mind them pointing out to me that I have the wrong shade of color, the wrong number of rivets, and the wrong canopy shape on my models, so long as they do not denigrate my work on its own terms.

Oh, and the reason the tail wheel well of my P-51D-25-NT Mustang 44-84523 has the wrong shade of zinc chromate is because the aircraft was battle damaged and the lower tail section had to be replaced with one cannibalized from a Michigan-built aircraft. I will have to come up with some other reason for the glue splotches, misshapen spinner, and drooping port wing.

Keep on building for fun!

Don

[Rubenandres77]

As always in this forum, this discussion is a pleasure to read.
Quite interesting opinions and arguments.
And all in a most civilized way. Which is why many of us are still here in papermodelers.com
Learning from all of you is always nice!