Discussion The Cost of Kit vs Scratch Build: A Real Divide or Just Perspective?

[Bob Cleek]

As Roger, I don't have much interest in 3D printing and CAD, other than in passing, because archaic manual fabrication and drafting continue to serve my purposes well and, while perhaps erroneously, but nonetheless, I consider the plastic products of 3D casting archivally suspect. Then also, my definition of scratch ship modeling as art considers such duplication technology to be unsportsmanlike. I personally don't find a 17th Century man of war encrusted with gold painted plastic gingerbread appliques a particularly impressive example of the traditional fine art of ship modeling. I suppose it won't be until the passing of the last person alive who remembers a pre-digital world that digital art will have any chance of being fully respected, but I'm good with that. Call me an elitist snob, but don't confuse me with somebody who gives a damn what you think. Now get off my lawn!

 

[shipahoy]

He's Baack !

 

[Bob Cleek]

He's Baack !

There's always gotta be one in every crowd!

 

[Korsan]

My question is
To which category belongs a model builder who starts with a kit (even with a high priced ones) and the delivered accessories are actually massproduction and not specific for that ship (scale l,type etc) and has to produce them by himself to improve and to make the model as authentic as possible ?
(Actually for his own satisfaction and pleasure)

 

[Daniel20]

My question is
To which category belongs a model builder who starts with a kit (even with a high priced ones) and the delivered accessories are actually massproduction and not specific for that ship (scale l,type etc) and has to produce them by himself to improve and to make the model as authentic as possible ?
(Actually for his own satisfaction and pleasure)

I like the premise of your question; we are all modelers. Again, I have the utmost respect for all scratch builders however I wonder if one can truly be considered a scratch builder if that modeler uses someone else's plans to fashion their raw wood, plastic, metal etc. to build their projects. Now if you can design your own vessel weather by pencil and paper or CAD then take raw materials and go to work, well now you have a category that may just better describe a scratch build. For some reason this discussion tugs on my philosophical side.

 

[Dave Stevens (Lumberyard)]

I like the premise of your question; we are all modelers. Again, I have the utmost respect for all scratch builders however I wonder if one can truly be considered a scratch builder if that modeler uses someone else's plans to fashion their raw wood, plastic, metal etc. to build their projects. Now if you can design your own vessel weather by pencil and paper or CAD then take raw materials and go to work, well now you have a category that may just better describe a scratch build. For some reason this discussion tugs on my philosophical side.

maybe i can shed a little light on your philosophical side. To begin all modeling and model engineering have their own rules and definitions. Take model aviation as an example There is an article in the AMA mag. that defines a scratch build as one where the builder is also the original designer. If you build a model from someone else's plans, then the model is a "plans build" rather than a "scratch" build.

For years i was a judge for a model ship competition and the rules were set up by a committee for the museums. It is not possible to model a historic ship unless you're starting from the original set of plans. unlike the AMA where the builder is also the designer. All ship plans are basic information and usually do not have construction details. So a scratch builder is starting from a design concept and filling in all the missing information, that is scratch building. Now if a builder starts with a set of modeling plans done by someone else than that builder "scratch built the model from plans" All the finer details are filled in which removes the "creative artistic vision" BUT the actual model is still scratch built if every part was fabricated by the builder.

SCRATCH-BUILDING IS WHEN a full-scale set of drawings are scaled down to whatever size that you want. The structure is drawn, and then the parts are cut and assembled. When you build from someone else’s plans, you are plans-building. Someone else designed the model but you are scratch building the model itself. If you start with all of the parts cut out for you, you are kit-building. If you buy it and only assemble the main parts, that’s kit bashing. It’s that simple.
Scratch building is the pinnacle of scale modeling artistry, allowing modelers to create unique pieces from raw materials. This technique offers unparalleled creative freedom, enabling enthusiasts to bring their visions to life without the constraints of pre-made kits. Whether recreating historical artifacts or designing futuristic concepts, scratch building opens a world of possibilities for skilled modelers.

 

[RussF]

SCRATCH-BUILDING IS WHEN a full-scale set of drawings is scaled down to whatever size that you want.

For a true representation of scratch building, take a look at Peter Voogt's Balder

 

[Daniel20]

Well Dave I can certainly see where one would need a well-defined set of rules and definitions when hosting a model ship competition. I appreciate your effort to shed light on my philosophical musings.

 

[Steef66]

It's good that we have experts here who can describe things as they are. Whether you have certain skills or not, you choose the construction method that gives you the most pleasure. For some, it's a construction kit, and for others, it's a pile of wood. Skills or not, it doesn't matter. We do this because we want to build models and enjoy it in the way that suits us best. Whether you saw a table into small pieces and turn it into a ship or something similar, or whether you build a kit according to the instructions or add or change a lot of things, or you use a 3D printer or CNC, it doesn't matter. AS LONG AS YOU ENJOY IT AND HAVE FUN.

 

[Daniel20]

For a true representation of scratch building, take a look at Peter Voogt's Balder

I'm a huge fan of Peter's Balder.

 

[Korsan]

Scratch building is the pinnacle of scale modeling artistry, allowing modelers to create unique pieces from raw materials. This technique offers unparalleled creative freedom, enabling enthusiasts to bring their visions to life without the constraints of pre-made kits. Whether recreating historical artifacts or designing futuristic concepts, scratch building opens a world of possibilities for skilled modelers.
Imho the expression skilled modeler should not be reserved only for scratch builder.The Skill of a modeler cannot be judged whether he builds from scratch or kit or whatever.The final product decisive

 

[Roger Pellett]

My present project is the Great Lakes freighter Benjamin Noble. I consider it a scratch build for the following reasons.

Drawings: I am using the original builders drawings. Since this is a steel hulled vessel the drawings are much more detailed than say those for a 1700’s sailing warship.

Hull lines: These were lofted by me at the correct model scale using the table of offsets originally sent by the design office to the shipyard’s mould loft.

Details: like almost all ship model projects it is necessary to reconstruct some details. Where possible I am using an old catalog from the vessel’s builder, The American Shipbuilding Company. This is available here on SOS via a post by Dave Stevens. In most cases it is necessary to reverse engineer the photos to work out the geometry.

The Build: I make all everything myself except chain and cordage. Fittings are made from soldered brass. Where appropriate I do use some semi finished materials; mainly round, square, and rectangular brass tubing. I will also use some old brass belaying pins, beautifully machined to the models 1:96 scale 80+ years ago.

The downside- Snail like progress!
Roger

 

[Bob Cleek]

My question is
To which category belongs a model builder who starts with a kit (even with a high priced ones) and the delivered accessories are actually massproduction and not specific for that ship (scale l,type etc) and has to produce them by himself to improve and to make the model as authentic as possible ?
(Actually for his own satisfaction and pleasure)

Well, if the doing of it results in his own satisfaction and pleasure, I'd call him lucky and consider his time well spent. If, on the other hand, the criterion is the intrinsic value of the model itself, aside from the builder's own satisfaction and pleasure, I'd call him a victim of crass commercialization, if not outright fraudulent deceptive marketing. No doubt the model wasn't inexpensive and was loudly touted as "museum quality," etc., etc., when, in fact, it wasn't any of that. From a monetary value standpoint, a lot of work went into producing what was no doubt a better executed model than what was possible "out of the box," but the model will still have little or no market value because it is one of many produced from that kit. Some would call this "kit bashing," but, as that term is understood by my neighbors and friends who worked for George Lucas at Industrial Light and Magic back in the late seventies and early eighties building the Star Wars props, "kit bashing" means taking parts from many kits and using them to create a model entirely unrelated to the subjects of the source kits, such as the surface detail of the Death Star or the Millenium Falcon from hundreds of military armor plastic kits.

(Note the three turret-less tank decks on the table.)


Replacing defective parts, embellishing with additional detail, or correcting inaccuracies in poorly designed kit models isn't kit bashing. It's better known as "polishing a turd."

The modeler in the above post is perhaps best described as being, or about to become, a scratch builder who experienced an "epiphany" when, as a kit builder, he had an "ah-ha!" moment realizing that he could have just as easily built the rest of the whole damn model from scratch as well and bought himself a Byrnes table saw and disk and thickness sanders with the savings.

 

[Bob Cleek]

Imho the expression skilled modeler should not be reserved only for scratch builder.The Skill of a modeler cannot be judged whether he builds from scratch or kit or whatever. The final product decisive

Semantic distinctions are important to the overall estimation of a "modeler's" overall stature. Technical skill is a measure of craftsmanship, which is only one factor in the evaluation. A technically accomplished modeler can produce a technically outstanding model from a kit, but it does not necessarily follow that a technically accomplished modeler can produce a scratch-build model at all. The outstanding scratch-built model, depending upon the scope of the definition of "from scratch," will require competence in historical research, full-scale ship building knowledge, drafting and lofting, materials application, and related design, engineering and construction know-how.

To illustrate the point, consider the Model Shipways launch model kit, designed by a very technically accomplished modeler who also wrote an excellent instruction manual for this kit. I consider this kit to be one of the better kits on the market at present in terms of its technical features. That said, it exhibits one glaring error that should be immediately evident to any experienced sailor. I discussed it with the kit's designer who adamantly maintained that the kit he designed absolutely accurate because it was based on his personal examination of the contemporary prototype in the NMG collection. I agreed with him that the error is indeed present not only on the contemporary prototype in the NMG collection, but also in another similar contemporary model ship's launch in the NMG collection, which I can only explain by theorizing that these two models were perhaps restored at some point by the same ignorant restorationist who may have been a great technical modeler, but didn't know squat about boats. The error is not a matter of opinion. The boat categorically cannot be safely sailed in the configuration represented by the model. The designer and I resolved our "standoff" by agreeing that his model was an absolutely accurate replica of the prototype model in the NMG collection. Most assuredly, however, it is not an accurate representation of the full-size launch.

The picture below is from the Model Shipways advertising and the model depicted is built in exact conformity with the instructions. Can you identify the error? If you are an experienced sailor, you should have no problem. If you are not, regardless of how technically skilled you may be, you may have a hard time finding it.

The moral of this story is that technique is not the be all and end all of modeling skill, which is a very mixed bag of tricks, technique being only one of them. The more a modeler knows, the better their models will be.

 

[Bob Cleek]

I like the premise of your question; we are all modelers. Again, I have the utmost respect for all scratch builders however I wonder if one can truly be considered a scratch builder if that modeler uses someone else's plans to fashion their raw wood, plastic, metal etc. to build their projects. Now if you can design your own vessel weather by pencil and paper or CAD then take raw materials and go to work, well now you have a category that may just better describe a scratch build. For some reason this discussion tugs on my philosophical side.

The question you've raised has troubled me as well. I don't think there's a clear line of demarcation defining scratch building. It is, rather, a matter of degree. Similarly with kits, there are those which, like the solid hull blank, bundle of sticks, and hanks of string in the old "Yellow Box" Model Shipways kits, may as well have been "scratch builds" given the technical demands placed upon the builder, and now there's the modern kits with laser cut planking strakes and 3D printed gingerbread detail which demand little beyond the ability to follow directions, glue parts together, and apply finish coatings (yes... I exaggerate a bit sometimes...)

Wherever the concept of scratch building starts, I think, has to be somewhere that a model becomes a unique expression of the modeler's intention to create a work that creates a compelling representation of a vessel in a significant way that no one else has done before. This will generally require that the scratch builder has researched the authenticity of their model and engineered its construction and then built it without resort to prefabricated mass-produced parts. Some will fudge and claim an exemption for cannon, cordage, and blocks. Others will disallow such shortcuts.

What this means is that scratch building would preclude the use of some plans, but not others. Original lines drawings would be permissible, of course, but what are sometimes called "modeling plans," drawn for the purpose of building a model, probably would not. One troublesome question now arising in some circles, is whether the use of practicums is really to be considered scratch building or not. There are some magnificent practicums available today, those of Antshcerl, Tosti, and Boudroit come to mind immediately, of course. These have been used by some incredibly technically accomplished modelers to arguably scratch build magnificent fully framed models. Many readers are familiar with Johann's long-running build log of his Le Creole. Notwithstanding Boudroit's detailed instructions (which I've never read because I can't afford them... still waiting for them to reach the remaindered table,) Johann extensively researches even the tiniest details of every aspect of his build, repeatedly studying the contemporary model in the museum as he goes along. I can't imagine that anybody would ever say he wasn't a scratch builder because he used Boudroit's book as a resource. But what of a technically skilled kit builder who builds a model from a practicum, only following the instructions without any of his own original research? Is his model really a unique expression of his own interpretation of the available data, or is all that the work of the practicum's author? Is technique alone the sole criterion of scratch building? I think not. Is there any difference between buying a kit of parts and material from someone else to build a particular model and buying someone else's instructions for building it?

How will we define scratch building when somebody finally creates a full data set of 3D parts printing and laser cutting files sufficient to assemble into a given model ship and starts selling flash drives containing them? Every part will be laser cut and 3D printed by the builder. Will he be a scratch builder then? What is a ship model kit, anyway?

I was interested to see in skimming the rules for the international association that oversees ship model competitions that entrants who submit models in the "scratch built" category are required to provide the judges with written copies of their research underlying their entered models and the amount of original research done to acceptable academic standards is a factor in judging the quality of those models. This would seem to indicate that those who take their modeling a lot more seriously that a lot of us in North America (they're competing for money and national prestige, and their teams are even sometimes subsidized by their governments,) equate scratch building with the builder's unique original creative expression.

Regardless of whether somebody buys a kit or not, everybody can say, "I built it myself." and everybody who builds a model is rightly called a "modeler." Some have said it's the technical quality of the finished model that should be the measure of a modeler, but I think that's only with any certainty relevant to the modeler's craftsmanship. To be a scratch-built model is a somewhat imprecise distinction itself. What really counts is not only the quality of the model, but its unique and accurate originality. It's not enough to build a well-executed model. To be really great, it has to be a well-executed model nobody else has ever built before. Myself, I keep returning to the criteria of fine art. Lots of the world's greatest artists have painted a "Madonna and Child," but each of the really great Madonna and Child paintings is original and unique in its own way. The world is full of sculptors who make marble statues of naked men. What is it that makes Michaelangelo's David so special? So is it also with ship models.

(And, no, unlike those marble statues, the size of a model ship's bowsprit doesn't matter. )

 

[Korsan]

Well, if the doing of it results in his own satisfaction and pleasure, I'd call him lucky and consider his time well spent. If, on the other hand, the criterion is the intrinsic value of the model itself, aside from the builder's own satisfaction and pleasure, I'd call him a victim of crass commercialization, if not outright fraudulent deceptive marketing. No doubt the model wasn't inexpensive and was loudly touted as "museum quality," etc., etc., when, in fact, it wasn't any of that. From a monetary value standpoint, a lot of work went into producing what was no doubt a better executed model than what was possible "out of the box," but the model will still have little or no market value because it is one of many produced from that kit. Some would call this "kit bashing," but, as that term is understood by my neighbors and friends who worked for George Lucas at Industrial Light and Magic back in the late seventies and early eighties building the Star Wars props, "kit bashing" means taking parts from many kits and using them to create a model entirely unrelated to the subjects of the source kits, such as the surface detail of the Death Star or the Millenium Falcon from hundreds of military armor plastic kits.

(Note the three turret-less tank decks on the table.)
View attachment 543249

Replacing defective parts, embellishing with additional detail, or correcting inaccuracies in poorly designed kit models isn't kit bashing. It's better known as "polishing a turd."

The modeler in the above post is perhaps best described as being, or about to become, a scratch builder who experienced an "epiphany" when, as a kit builder, he had an "ah-ha!" moment realizing that he could have just as easily built the rest of the whole damn model from scratch as well and bought himself a Byrnes table saw and disk and thickness sanders with the savings.

 

[Korsan]

All the arguments about skill evels , pro’s- co’s for scratch or kit or (polishing a turd as Bob mentioned) are very deeply and nicely discussed without regarding the available working are conditions.
Can one be start with scratch-builder living in an appartment house on 100-150 sqmeters-area living together with his or her family without having no other possibilty than the balcony (if you have one and also weather dependent ).
That is my reason why i have to build kits instead scratch to avoid more tools-chaos,noise dust and occupying all the rooms except the sleeping room to realize my hobby (ı always admire the patience tolerance of my admiral) . I think i am not the only one in our community under such circumstances and thankful not to be forced to switch building miniature ships in the bottle
Happy Modeling for All the Members
Enjoy Your Hobby

 

[Korsan]

All the arguments about skill evels , pro’s- co’s for scratch or kit or (polishing a turd as Bob mentioned) are very deeply and nicely discussed without regarding the available working are conditions.
Can one be start with scratch-builder living in an appartment house on 100-150 sqmeters-area living together with his or her family without having no other possibilty than the balcony (if you have one and also weather dependent ).
That is my reason why i have to build kits instead scratch to avoid more tools-chaos,noise dust and occupying all the rooms except the sleeping room to realize my hobby (ı always admire the patience tolerance of my admiral) . I think i am not the only one in our community under such circumstances and thankful not to be forced to switch building miniature ships in the bottle
Happy Modeling for All the Members
Enjoy Your Hobby

My working area

 

[Bob Cleek]

Can one be start with scratch-builder living in an apartment house on 100-150 sqmeters-area living together with his or her family without having no other possibility than the balcony (if you have one and also weather dependent ).

One of the wonderful things about building ship models is that the answer to this question is most decidedly yes!

Some of the most prolific and accomplished master modelers of our times have worked in surprisingly small "workshops" that were paragons of compact efficiency. Gerald Wingrove, who built not only ship models, but was actually better known for scratch building metal models of classic automobiles, described his workshop in great detail in his worthwhile book, The Techniques of Ship Modeling. As I recall, it was a converted three-square meter gardening shed. Philip Reed describes his workshop in one of his books as being little more than a converted desk and credenza with a wall of shelves above it. Bernard Froelich also described his workshop in his classic treatise, The Art of Ship Modeling. It was situated against the wall of a room in his small apartment, and he mentions he has to go out on his balcony to get enough clear distance to operate his rope walk! Norman Ough, recognized by his peers as one of the greatest ship modelers of the 20th century, and a bit of an eccentric, lived in his workshop, a small, rented room, where he slept on a mattress under his workbench!

These master modelers all take the time in their books to share all the creative ways they save space. None required a battery of large stationary power tools, nor did they generate clouds of sawdust or enough noise to get their neighbors up in arms. The skilled use of properly sharpened hand tools generates little, if any sawdust. Even a scratch builder who can afford the luxury of Byrnes table saw needs no more space to use or store it than a typewriter would require. I would hazard to guess that the countertop appliances in most of today's kitchens take up far more countertop space than even the most generously equipped scratch builder could ever need for an enviable collection of mini-power tools. Modelers with large shops full of large stationary power tools are the exception, not the rule, and in most every instance, the space they dedicate to accommodate large workshops is required not by their ship modeling, but rather by other much larger scale work they've chosen to do.

Very few of us have the luxury of as large a workshop as we'd wish. (Just as our spouses never have as much clothes closet space as they'd wish! ) There is, however, no reason why anyone need limit their ship modeling to kit building on account of space requirements. If you have the space to build a model from a kit, you certainly have the space to build a model from scratch. In fact, scratch builders tend to need less space than kit builders because we don't have to store huge stashes of unbuilt kits we'll never have the time to build!

 

[Bob Cleek]

My working area

View attachment 543286

Thanks! Your picture is worth more than my thousand words. You've got plenty of room to scratch build. Just use the workshop and tools you have.