Museum quality models myth

Realizing that in the end, most models built in yesteryears (including bone models), or today, by the casual average modeler is a decorative or “folk art” representation of a ship that may or may not have existed, one must accept the fact that these models will at some point be judged whether the modeler wants it or not. Furthermore, in today’s environment most active forum member has his/her work judged: but, good or not-so-good marks are not really the point here.

A “museum quality” representation entails a certain level of craftsmanship from the modeler, a good portion of research and historical data and accuracy in the way the model is built and the respect for, or adherence to certain standards, conventions and predetermined rules. I am quite convinced that maritime knowledge is not a must, your hands and brain are far more important elements given the quality of the plans available these days.

These models should be regarded as upper level examples of quality in the realm of competitive model ship building: but few make it to the top echelons. It all begins with the modeler mindset, his or her abilities complemented by the source documentation used in order to build that scale model. Individual modelers can do the work from A to Z (research – design – building) although most will use documentation compiled by a third party (books, monographs, etc…).

Competitive model ship building is divided in categories / classes to ease the modelers’ “pain” and offer individuals a shot at some recognition within the community. The higher the class or level, the higher the standards are. It may serve to minimize elitism and democratize the activity by opening a wider range of presentation levels. This democratization may be annulled by some sort of envy and unfairness in the perception of what the top classification is.

The issue is that few modelers and resulting models have what it takes to qualify for the top appellation / designation: what ever the name of the designation is. This is compounded by the fact that many modelers who are not interested in following what could be called an “underground set of rules” or having their work judged and entered into such classification have a hard time adhering to standards and conventions, whether these standards are official or not, some modelers may think that those are unfair. The people / builders who accept to live by these written or unwritten rules are all too often labeled as elitists, snobs as they are a minority compared to the rest of the model ship building community: their models can be classified as the “cream of the cream”. All this while the average modeler often over-rates their own work while they aspire to better results with the next model.

Model ship building quality, like everything else, is defined by a set of standards that must be followed, and for most casual modelers, who dares judge and label or qualify my work? Unfortunately, judging your own models by your own standards usually falls short. Few modelers are gifted enough to really achieve their higher goals.

In most cases, models end up as heirlooms: and in some cases are passed on to reluctant sons and daughters. So for the majority of builders, the most important is to enjoy the time spent building the model and to adhere to our own expectation while aiming for our own “man-cave quality” standards.



A couple links that may be of interest to some:



G.
 
Gilles Korent said:
Model ship building quality, like everything else, is defined by a set of standards that must be followed, and for most casual modelers, who dares judge and label or qualify my work? Unfortunately, judging your own models by your own standards usually falls short. Few modelers are gifted enough to really achieve their higher goals.
Click to expand...
Who are the one\s who define those standards, and where those standards published so we can familiar with them?
 
Jimsky said:
Who are the one\s who define those standards, and where those standards published so we can familiar with them?
Click to expand...
Well I posted 2 links above as samples.
Enter a competition and you will be presented with the different classes and requirements.

I understand that this may be controversial given history and non-acceptance of classifications by most modelers, including some well-know names.
There is a sense of elitism within the community, but that is a self-prophecy: it is inevitable as long as there is such a gap in the level of quality and the vision of individual modelers.

The standards are defined by museums, dealers, collectors and to a certain extent modelers, etc... Everyone has an influence.
People get hang-up on literal designation, but whatever that designation is named it is a natural rating: call it what you will.
Common sense dictates the value of things and objects: from crappy to average to top of the line there is a "price" to be paid: respectively.
The more is produced, the less value. More people are able to produce average items. The high level craftsmanship has its price: be it money or better reputation.
It does not even relate to visual appeal or taste, it is purely technical.

Once you have defined what high level skill is you may see past the designation.
When you pipes bursts at home, do you call a crappy plumber or do you look for one with a good reputation?
When you go out to eat, do you look for a crappy restaurant?

All this surely does not mean that the average model cannot make it to a museum.
Should I build a model of the ship that brought the first settlers in the area I now call home, I am quite confident that my model would make it to the local museum display, because the model would be part of the local history. Should I try to present the same model to the National Maritime Museum, that model would not travel past my front door.

Every model ship is a model ship but You cannot deny that there are model ships and model ships, just as all museums are called a museum but there are museums and museums.
G.
 
Last edited:
Gilles Korent said:
Well I posted 2 links above as samples.
Enter a competition and you will be presented with the different classes and requirements.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with absolutely no argument that if your model built to participate in competitions it must qualify and obey the rules by the completion. The problem, however, that those rules differ from the different competition organizations.
Gilles Korent said:
The standards are defined by museums, dealers, collectors and to a certain extent modelers, etc... Everyone has an influence.
Click to expand...
The standards, or better say requirements, may be defined by all mentioned above, but...it is doesn't necessarily define the quality or better say grade of the model, For example; a private collector asked to build a model from a kit to his collection. He has his own requirements and one of them is he wants more guns installed. BTW this is a true example... What kind of standard it is? The model built very accurately but looks ugly, IMHO
Gilles Korent said:
Every model ship is a model ship but You cannot deny that there are model ships and model ships, just as all museums are called a museum but there are museums and museums.
Click to expand...
It is obvious and foolish to deny, but the term 'Museum quality' doesn't mean anything and absolutely useless to define the quality\grade of the built model.
 
Jimsky said:
It is obvious and foolish to deny, but the term 'Museum quality' doesn't mean anything and absolutely useless to define the quality\grade of the built model.
Click to expand...

I guess it is true if most say so...
Well, I may be a fool in thinking and saying this, but the rating is rendered useless because modelers make it so by denying its meaning. The second reason is that the rating has been misused by anybody and everybody. The value of the designation is diminished to the point it no longer has any meaning.
The fact remains that a "museum quality" built model is a model built a certain way, from serious research document, with high level of skill, etc... with the added bonus that it may has some historical value when the model and documents are put together.

It surely does not mean that average models cannot end up in a museum exhibit.
The argument is as much about who gets to decide on the meaning of the term.
We can change to only one open class (from kit to fully scratched built) model ship rating A, AA, AAA: the more letters, the better the quality or rating. But then again, who is to decide... and would it be fair.
"I spent so much time working on my model, I think it looks so great because my friends say so, I believe it should have an AAA+ designation and it should be in a museum. Why is it only rated as an A: who is the nerd to decide, how dare you?"

G.
 
Last edited:
Gilles Korent said:
I guess it is true if most say so...
Well, I may be a fool in thinking and saying this, but the rating is rendered useless because modelers make it so by denying its meaning. The second reason is that the rating has been misused by anybody and everybody. The value of the designation is diminished to the point it no longer has any meaning.
The fact remains that a "museum quality" built model is a model built a certain way, from serious research document, with high level of skill, etc... with the added bonus that it may has some historical value when the model and documents are put together.

It surely does not mean that average models cannot end up in a museum exhibit.
The argument is as much about who gets to decide on the meaning of the term.
We can change to only one open class (from kit to fully scratched built) model ship rating A, AA, AAA: the more letters, the better the quality or rating. But then again, who is to decide... and would it be fair.
"I spent so much time working on my model, I think it looks so great because my friends say so, I believe it should have an AAA+ designation and it should be in a museum. Why is it only rated as an A: who is the nerd to decide, how dare you?"

G.
Click to expand...
Gilles, thanks for sharing. I did not even know that there was a rating scale for ship building competitions. It probably won't impact my personal work that much since I just build to have an outlet for my meager talents. But now I can better appreciate some of the finer aspects of the works of more skilled enthusiasts. Again, thanks.
 
This is all good to know.,while I am nowhere near ready to try entering a competition, its good to understand there are standards (or requirements). It'll make me pay closer attention.
 
Gilles Korent said:
"I spent so much time working on my model, I think it looks so great because my friends say so, I believe it should have an AAA+ designation and it should be in a museum. Why is it only rated as an A: who is the nerd to decide, how dare you?"
Click to expand...
Gillies, my friend (sorry to be too familiar) Why at any cost your built models have to be graded, unless, again, it is built for competitions?
 
museum quality is actually a real thing the problem is we are trying to establish what it is. That can not be done because it is a generic term with many definitions depending on who, why and where. In general "museum quality" is something of historical significance, something of a high level of workmanship, something rare.

there are thousands and thousands of ford mustangs cars price range depends on condition of the car, restored or not say price from 5 to 30 thousand. but the prototype is worth 1.2 million because there is only one. Just like model ship kits they are mass produced so the rarity value is very low. That one off one of a kind built to historical accuracy scratch built just might be a piece that catches the attention of a collector or museum.

i would venture to say most of the models we build will be passed down from family member to family member, sold in garage or rummage sales, lost or destroyed over time. If your model should make it into a museum collection it becomes "protected" there are people who are making sure it is preserved for future generations. There has to be something special about the model in order for people to make the effort to protect it or want to own it.

Model ship building is like ice sculpture it is art done for the sake of art. someone spent time creating this and within a day or two it melts away . Those terms like builders choice, built it your way, there is no right or wrong are terms to define this as a hobby nothing more than to bring a sense of personal accomplishment, Then there are those who do built for competition, built with the idea in mind to add to the collective art of model ship building, build to historical accuracy, build to impress the academic circles and museums, build to the excellence of museum quality.

DSCN5226.JPG
 
Jimsky said:
Gillies, my friend (sorry to be too familiar) Why at any cost your built models have to be graded, unless, again, it is built for competitions?
Click to expand...
Hi Jim,
That is exactly the point, it does not have to be until you decide to sell it through a reputable dealer who may grade your model , or when you enter a competition.
And I do not even think that museum used the term themselves, but they may have specifications for models to be accepted: I would suspect that each institution have their own specs although most may be similar.
Furthermore, it is very similar for competitions, your model is not actually graded; each class has very specific requirements and if your model meets those requirements then it competes against other models in the same classification.
Again, the term is way overused by the wrong people.
G
 
Last edited:
Gilles Korent said:
I guess it is true if most say so...
Well, I may be a fool in thinking and saying this, but the rating is rendered useless because modelers make it so by denying its meaning. The second reason is that the rating has been misused by anybody and everybody. The value of the designation is diminished to the point it no longer has any meaning.
The fact remains that a "museum quality" built model is a model built a certain way, from serious research document, with high level of skill, etc... with the added bonus that it may has some historical value when the model and documents are put together.

It surely does not mean that average models cannot end up in a museum exhibit.
The argument is as much about who gets to decide on the meaning of the term.
We can change to only one open class (from kit to fully scratched built) model ship rating A, AA, AAA: the more letters, the better the quality or rating. But then again, who is to decide... and would it be fair.
"I spent so much time working on my model, I think it looks so great because my friends say so, I believe it should have an AAA+ designation and it should be in a museum. Why is it only rated as an A: who is the nerd to decide, how dare you?"

G.
Click to expand...
All right, you can see that. I miss the point when museums place orders with model builders, when a model is ordered from a certain time and a certain version. Museum quality? Happened continuously, for example to equip an exhibition with a certain topic. I miss the inclusion of other perspectives, for example Europe with great model makers like Mondfeld, Holz, Zimmermann. Some of the differences are striking, even if they always lead to the same goal.
 
This is one of the 'Hot Topic' threads where I find myself agreeing with most comments. This is most likely because the subject matter is not defined, and can vary from country to country and museum to museum.
Some museums will have clear guidelines on what merits a model ship's position in their museum. Other's will display model ships because they were found inside a tomb of an important leader.
 
Dave Stevens (Lumberyard) said:
The "Art" of great craftsmanship
Click to expand...
All art is subjective because it relies upon the opinions of its viewers. That said, whether art is good or bad isn't just about subjective views. Popular opinion can be swayed by the fame of the artist, the amount of exposure a piece of art has, and the impact of societal norms at the time.
 
Jimsky said:
All art is subjective because it relies upon the opinions of its viewers. That said, whether art is good or bad isn't just about subjective views. Popular opinion can be swayed by the fame of the artist, the amount of exposure a piece of art has, and the impact of societal norms at the time.
Click to expand...
Quite a lot of art being sold for outrageously huge amount of money gives me a strong desire to act like the little boy in H.C Andersen's tale "The Emperor's New Clothes"

Museum quality? Well, if you are a talented artist and you study enough years at the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts and then you spend - thousands of hours? - creating a piece of art like below, you can have it displayed at a museum:
1615406322884.png
 
PoulD said:
Museum quality? Well, if you are a talented artist and you study enough years at the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts and then you spend - thousands of hours? - creating a piece of art like below, you can have it displayed at a museum:
Click to expand...
Nah...I think this one better, Just in case you didn't get it, it is called 'Dansing Angel'

1615407891131.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top