Thanks for taking the time to respond. If the term "modeler," is somehow inappropriate, how would you suggest one describe a person who builds MODELS either for fun, as I would think the majority of participants in this web site do, or as a profession? Please let me know so that, in the future, I can avoid the risk of being perceived as being "condescending."
The condescending part is putting "modeler" in quotation marks. I'm surprised that as a native speaker you are not aware of the implication.
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate it. I did not mean to sound as being nit-picking. I am sure there are those who might want to do so about a model I am building or have built. But to install something on a model that was never on the original, in my very humble opinion is not being true to that original. Granted, one can choose to model a ship, airplane, etc, as it may have been built in one time period or another. The HMS VICTORY went through several different paint schemes. I chose to paint model as it was at the time if Nelson's command. Had I know now what I have learned about the ship and its history and construction, there are things I am sure I would have done differently. Some are content to build a model straight out of the box. That is fine. Its that person's choice. I, however prefer to do some research, see what others are doing and have done and then add as much accurate detail as may be feasible; that's my choice.
Well isn't the Victory is still in active service? These upgrades will be more accurate than a 32-pounder....
Being on an international website, one should not expect everyone to know the conventions of English dialog. It can be interpreted that putting a descriptive word in quotes implies sarcasm or criticism, but I try to give a person the benefit of the doubt. I can only imagine how ugly and clumsy my posts sound when translated to Russian, especially since google and other translaters have a big problem with Russian/English and English/Russian. How we convey meaning with text only on the web is also so very limited compared to actual speech, so we have to be careful sometimes when trying to discern the intent of others.
For the record, I use the term modeler to describe any who builds models, no matter from kits or scratch or even those found only in computers, no matter the methods used.
I agree Darius, however the author of the condescending remark seems to be American, so I think it is reasonable to assume that he is well aware that putting a descriptive word in quotes can be interpreted to imply sarcasm or criticism. Especially in the context of his post.
Not manning up to his remark now is just..silly imho. I'll leave it at that.
Anyway, he started an interesting topic,!
Now..I have some rigging to do (not my favorite part of our beautiful hobby..pfff)
Interesting topic for sure. I’m fairly new to the hobby and am currently working on two different ships. The Bluenose and the Buccaneer.
The Bluenose is an actual ship so I keep the build as accurate as possible. But I don’t actively research outside of this site and a couple of others. So if others have built it inaccurately, I might as well.
The Buccaneer is a mythical ship… it is a generic galleon. I still do the same research (reading and watching online build logs), but since it is not an actual ship, I can modify as much as I want.
I really like the different approaches of the two builds as I feel I get the best of both worlds. Holding myself accountable to be as accurate as possible plus I can be as creative as I want on the other. I also know that once these two are done, I’ll probably only be working on actual ships so I’ll have to exercise my creative side in other ways.
But this is the way I build my ships and really feel there is no wrong way. The key is to enjoy the journey.
The Bluenose is an actual ship so I keep the build as accurate as possible. But I don’t actively research outside of this site and a couple of others. So if others have built it inaccurately, I might as well.
The Buccaneer is a mythical ship… it is a generic galleon. I still do the same research (reading and watching online build logs), but since it is not an actual ship, I can modify as much as I want.
I really like the different approaches of the two builds as I feel I get the best of both worlds. Holding myself accountable to be as accurate as possible plus I can be as creative as I want on the other. I also know that once these two are done, I’ll probably only be working on actual ships so I’ll have to exercise my creative side in other ways.
But this is the way I build my ships and really feel there is no wrong way. The key is to enjoy the journey.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2020
- Messages
- 121
- Points
- 88
I think the origin of the post is being distorted.
It is fine if you wish, to follow a real ship as much as possible, but what is criticizable (always as help or advice) are the big "common" errors, such as out-of-scale parts, shiny brass cannons, doors for dwarves, deck boards of enormous width, visible nails with heads like pots...
And these criticisms are not usually made to ridicule anyone, they are polite observations with the aim of improving advice for beginners and no one should be bothered by this.
I have never seen in other naval modeling forums anything other than gratitude for the advice of those who know the novices.
For me, if a ship is well made, nice and contains no major errors, even if it is not historically faithful, it is perfectly logical and I would not hesitate to congratulate the artist.
It is fine if you wish, to follow a real ship as much as possible, but what is criticizable (always as help or advice) are the big "common" errors, such as out-of-scale parts, shiny brass cannons, doors for dwarves, deck boards of enormous width, visible nails with heads like pots...
And these criticisms are not usually made to ridicule anyone, they are polite observations with the aim of improving advice for beginners and no one should be bothered by this.
I have never seen in other naval modeling forums anything other than gratitude for the advice of those who know the novices.
For me, if a ship is well made, nice and contains no major errors, even if it is not historically faithful, it is perfectly logical and I would not hesitate to congratulate the artist.
Not the only post I made..... However, my original post was certainly not intended to light up the site, just ask question why someone would just slap something, a part, a rigging, a color, etc., that apparently never existed on the original just because a part came with the kit or because the item looked good on someone else's model. I will not apologize for using the term "modeler;" IMHO, it is a perfectly acceptable term to use to describe someone who builds MODELS on a kit, regardless of the model. Modern jet fighter aircraft often come with a myriad of weapons. If someone wants to put every bomb or missile on the "model" they are building, that it certainly their choice. Load 'em up. However, when I build a fighter plane, I prefer to equip that model with the weaponry and support equipment it was designed to carry. That is my choice. Same as with the ships I have built and the three I am currently building.
...so how would you name a person building from scratch, if a 'modeler' term only belongs to someone building from the kit? What is the term for what you are doing while currently building three ships?
What is acceptable for you, is not necessarily acceptable by others, That is perfectly fine, IMHO. I will not critique you for building your ships out of plywood, poplar, mahogany, or boxwood/Pearwood while actual ships were built out of oak and elm.
When I am not a modeler, I am known as a procrastinator. 
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2023
- Messages
- 61
- Points
- 88
"Not the only post I made...."
True. 6 pages and well over 100 posts later you revisit the cardboard bin lol. Omg man, build a model then post it here in all its microscopic correctness. I may see a deviation in it compared to the frozen in time 1:1, but I'd choose to credit you on skills and a clean build...maybe even some creativity.
True. 6 pages and well over 100 posts later you revisit the cardboard bin lol. Omg man, build a model then post it here in all its microscopic correctness. I may see a deviation in it compared to the frozen in time 1:1, but I'd choose to credit you on skills and a clean build...maybe even some creativity.
No "implication" implied or intended. Quotation marks are used to emphasize a word, a point, or as in the case of your reply, a term used by someone else. It seems, in your effort to criticize me and my choice of verbage, "native speaker" that I am, you answered my original question and have given readers of your comment license to point out to modelers the error(s) or their way(s). Thanks!!
When I was a young adolescent, there was a rock band called The Beatles. I will never forget these words in a song of theirs. "Life is very short, and there's no time. for fussing and fighting my friend!
As a result, I have always praised for the effort. Give it your best, and don't let anyone get you down.
Bill
As a result, I have always praised for the effort. Give it your best, and don't let anyone get you down.
Bill
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2024
- Messages
- 201
- Points
- 103
I don’t care what people call me. When I tell most people that I build ship models my interest is so unusual that they don’t know what to say. Recently, although a well known member of the Nautical Research Guild wrote that the Guild was started in 1948 by a bunch of Nerds who also built ship models. Now that’s insulting!
This “bunch of nerds” included Howard Chapelle. I would, therefore, add another category that fits between those building models just for fun and the professionals. I would call these people “serious amateurs.” These are the people that research and build historically accurate ship models often of unique subjects. While they may get a sense of accomplishment from building they don’t do it just for fun. They also have no expectation of financially benefiting from this activity. Instead, it’s a scholarly attempt to document the history of a particular engineering discipline- Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering. I consider myself to fit into this gtoup of serious amateurs.
Roger
This “bunch of nerds” included Howard Chapelle. I would, therefore, add another category that fits between those building models just for fun and the professionals. I would call these people “serious amateurs.” These are the people that research and build historically accurate ship models often of unique subjects. While they may get a sense of accomplishment from building they don’t do it just for fun. They also have no expectation of financially benefiting from this activity. Instead, it’s a scholarly attempt to document the history of a particular engineering discipline- Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering. I consider myself to fit into this gtoup of serious amateurs.
Roger
In this forum, we don't classify members by skills, knowledge, and quality of their scale models. We don't have a desire to do this. Why should we?
For most of us it is just a hobby, I mean, we build scale models in our free time, while still employed by a full-time job. Some of us don't know the nautical terminology and describe parts of the ships by the word 'thing' but that doesn't mean they cannot glue those parts according to the instruction manual. They are inspired by the future result but can be frustrated if something goes wrong. We are here to help, should they ask for one, and many of us will do this in no time! Actually, I suspect there will be more than one suggestion, from many members. Our skilled members are eager to help novice scale modelers. We share our knowledge and learn from each other. This is what our forum is all about!
You can call me a skillet, I don't mind, but...please don't put me on top of the stove to make scrambled eggs
For most of us it is just a hobby, I mean, we build scale models in our free time, while still employed by a full-time job. Some of us don't know the nautical terminology and describe parts of the ships by the word 'thing' but that doesn't mean they cannot glue those parts according to the instruction manual. They are inspired by the future result but can be frustrated if something goes wrong. We are here to help, should they ask for one, and many of us will do this in no time! Actually, I suspect there will be more than one suggestion, from many members. Our skilled members are eager to help novice scale modelers. We share our knowledge and learn from each other. This is what our forum is all about!
You can call me a skillet, I don't mind, but...please don't put me on top of the stove to make scrambled eggs
I am new to wood ship modeling, but not to “modeling” In the past sixty years I have built, painted, glued, cut, modified, flew, floated and sunk hundreds of models. I have left off parts, added parts and completed kits with handmade parts or parts from the scrap bin, and not one has been criticized as historically inaccurate or that a particular shade of paint was used where I used it.
This is a hobby and If you find researching the model prior to and during the build “enhances” your enjoyment that is great for you, hopefully your skill level allows you to accurately reproduce what you researched.
Maybe you do not consider yourself a “hobbyists” But I do. And it all started with a kit of a German V1 “buzzbomb” Even today regardless of my experience I am not one to criticize. Even if I find an obvious“mistake” from award winning builder or my 7 year old neighbor who finished her first model without reading anything more the instruction sheet.
Continued success and much enjoyment on your current and future builds.
A couple of supercharged Big blocks poking thru the deck for those “dead calm” days, and maybe since it is a ship. A rudder from a B-52 and PT 109 decals
Well said, Jim!In this forum, we don't classify members by skills, knowledge, and quality of their scale models. We don't have a desire to do this. Why should we?
For most of us it is just a hobby, I mean, we build scale models in our free time, while still employed by a full-time job. Some of us don't know the nautical terminology and describe parts of the ships by the word 'thing' but that doesn't mean they cannot glue those parts according to the instruction manual. They are inspired by the future result but can be frustrated if something goes wrong. We are here to help, should they ask for one, and many of us will do this in no time! Actually, I suspect there will be more than one suggestion, from many members. Our skilled members are eager to help novice scale modelers. We share our knowledge and learn from each other. This is what our forum is all about!
You can call me a skillet, I don't mind, but...please don't put me on top of the stove to make scrambled eggs
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,127
- Points
- 383
I got round it by building obscure or semi-obscure merchant ships that are well off the beaten track of model shipbuilding.
As I build from plans, they are generally accurate, but I am not a perfectionist, so I just build to the plan I have, that is generally the builder's plans "as built!"
As I build from plans, they are generally accurate, but I am not a perfectionist, so I just build to the plan I have, that is generally the builder's plans "as built!"