Discussion in 'World War 2 Hobbies' started by Boba Nette, Aug 21, 2007.
This one is also amasing: http://www.modellbauforen.de/cgi-bin/ik ... =30;t=8738
That is some incredible workmanship!
amazing what people can do in that scale. I take this as an outstanding example of how it should be done!
Until now I believed that 1/72 was not to be taken serously - I stand corrected.
Now I'm going to have a little rant about scales. Specifically about 1/72 and the attitudes towards it.
Lone Wolf - this ain't aimed at you, your comment just gave me the opening I needed
Anybody who habitually works in larger scales, this is not aimed at you nor intended to belittle your awesome skills.
I'm also not trying to say I'm better than anybody. Nor am I trying to make any claim that I should have done better in any of the Group Builds. I honestly think that the winners were fully deserving of their laurels.
1/72 is a very tough scale to work in, if you want to get good results. In that respect, it is far more demanding that larger scales, which are (compartatively) easy to make well.
And yet it never seems to be taken seriously. Even modelling magazines... I bought a modelling magazine recently because it had an article on the Bison mobile pillbox. Looking through the magazine, out of 7 models built for review 6 were 1/35 or 1/48. The only 1/72 model built was the Bison, which was 'scratch-built' (inverted commas are there because it was built from expensive, wood-effect plasticard, hardly a scratchbuild, but that's a rant for another day... :wink: ). And after the guy built it (and built it well, I must say) he painted it... and then did nothing else. No weathering, no lowlights / highlights, nothing. So you have 6 large-scale 'I built it and then did xyz painting techniques on it and it looks fanstastic' and 1 small-scale 'I just built it' that looks ok. Hell, I could have done a better paint job on that model.
Can 1/72 models be made well - undeniably, yes. Go check those dioramas for proof.
They can even be made reasonably well without overly much competance needed - this is my 1/72 Cromwell. It's not stellar, but it is good. And it is 1/72.
So why is it so looked down on? Is it just because it it harder to do a good small scale kit? Again from the modelling magazine, one of the large-scale guys was complaining that the detailling on a figure was 'too small' for him. I've made entire vehicles that are smaller than that figure.
Or is it just that 1/72 is somehow seen as what amatures do, kids building 'pocket money' kits, and once you are good you can progress up to 'serious' modelling in larger scales?
The net result seems to be that 1/72 is not taklen seriously, so nobody really thinks that you can do it well, so nobody bothers, and it takes something like the dioramas in this topic to ,ake people sit up & take notice.
I'm sorry, but the whole thing really really frustrates me.
I have to agree entirely. I think there is a degree of snobbery towards 1/72 and 1/76. I think this is twofold, first and probably most importantly as Ricky's said they are regarded as kid's toys and poor quality kits - with some justification if you consider the Airfix Spitfire MkI/II kit which has been around probably almost as long as myself and Ricky combined, those prominent rivets, the huge gaps in the panelling... Urghh...
But if you compared the same model to the Tamiya kit of the same scale, it's clearly in a different ball park, not pocket money budget and much more detailed.
I would say having made kits of 1/72 and 1/48 planes that 1/72 is if anything harder to make a really good job of. Everything on a 1/48 plane is so much bigger that it's so much easier to paint and get looking good.
It is also possible though probably of lesser impact that 1/72nd is seen more as a sort of wargamer's scale (It was pretty popular for 20mm skirmish games) by "Serious" modellers, where the aim is more to get largish units of durable tabletop quality figures painted with concessions to accuracy quality made in the interests of survivability of the kit, or the fact that you may have a dozen or more to complete.
I realise nobody's having a go at me in particular and I think I made it clear that I'm impressed with the link but a few points -
1. The detail on larger models tends to be better.
2. The human eye and mind perceives in an unfair way - that is - in this context, some scales just look better when you're confronted by them directly (in front of your nose). Viewing photographs can be very deceptive - often deliberately so to achieve effect - many photos and videos I've seen of dioramas in particular are designed to achieve an illusion of 1/1 scale and often come very close to doing so (how many times has Tom Cruise been told he looks bigger in the movies). No argument from me regarding the skill involved in making a good 1/72 model but they're simply not as impressive to the average human eye (modelling junkies excepted) as is a larger scale model.
3. We are only talking about military vehicles and figures here really. It is not so much the scale of the model that impresses casual observers but the size - and it is not size as in the bigger the better - there are optimum sizes. For military vehicles and figures I think 1/35 is the optimum (although I've read that this scale only came about due to the size of an available electric motor). 1/6 to me looks less convincing and reminds me of action man dolls. However, no one would suggest that 1/72 was a small scale to model a battleship in - a rather smaller scale would be preferred for that thus producing a more agreeable size of model.
4. Modeller preference - if most of your mosels are in one scale you'll probably continue that - better for side by side poses and, obviously, essential for dioramas (within tollerances, of course).
5. Do what the hell you like !
6. Love the Cromwell - looks really big in the photo :wink: .
I can find no argument with any of your points (Except, detail on bigger models tends to be bigger, not necessarily better), however going back to your comment which initially sparked mine and Ricky's comments, none of these are any reason to not take any scale "Seriously". It all depends on what you're trying to show and personal considerations such as space.
May just be a case of slightly the wrong word, but as I said there is no scale I would have trouble taking "Seriously" (Well, except maybe 2mm wargames figures... Soldiers are little more than a dot and a tank will disappear if you sneeze too close to the table!).
But seriously, folks -
It's actually an impression that I've got from a lot of modellers on the net and doesn't really reflect my own opinions - nearly every model I made (some time ago now) was 1/72 (except the battleships of course). I'm not generally swayed by weight of opinion but may have let my guard down a little in this case. Actually - my own shelf space is very limited so when I get back into it I'll probably do 1/72 again.
PS. Is there any such thing as a magnifying case ?
OT, Did you ever follow the link to the 1/10 scale Yamato Che posted a while back? Now that is some serious modelling!
VERY interesting topic here. Ricky, thanks for standing up for those who build 1/72. I completely agree with your arguments.
Furthermore I'd like to add one little thing, and that is the following.
depending on the measures ofcourse, I think 1/72 is no pocketmoney modelling. To buy a kit is indeed a lot cheaper than the smaller scales 1/48 or 1/35, but considering the paint it's a whole different story. When I take a look at my paintstocking, and realize how many paints I use for any given 1/72 tank (which could be well over 10 or 12) I can hardly imagine that is a whole lot less than what is needed for smaller scale building. Those paints cost too, added to the cost of high-precision pencils makes 1/72 modelling something you have to put money aside for...
Lone Wolf - I know all those points - and they are very good ones. I just get irritated sometimes :wink:
The Cromwell model is roughly half the size in real life than it is on the screen (it is ~ 4 inches / 10cm long)
PP - Yeah, I made a little dorama of a LaGG-3 with the pilot, and I had to open & stir my pot of matt red paint in order to paint on the pilot's 'Hero of the Soviet Union' medal ribbon (a small line less than 1mm long). And that was all the matt scarlet I used. Similarly, the port/starboard formation lights took a tiny amount of gloss red/green paint. :x
Simon - nothing really to respond to, I just didn't want you to feel left out!
One point I forgot to make -
I think 1/72 is a great scale for aircraft.
that diorama is unreal, I bet it took about a year or more to build.
i work in 1/72 and i am just fine with it. first of all i don't have the space and and second i can't spend thirty and forty dollars on a kit.
on a second note has anyone seen the kits that dragon has been coming out with. i just got their Panther G early production w/zimmerit and it was a awesome build.
Dragon Models rock.I've built a few 1/72 kits myself.I love their 1/35 kits.The boxes are absolutely packed with good stuff.