The Ship Model Forum

[quote="biggles2"]You needn't feel disappointed or betrayed by Jackson; when was the last time you saw a 100% factual, historical, and realistic war movie that wasn't a documentary? Even then, I've seen docu's that show training Pz l's from the mid thirties representing the German offensive during the Battle of the Bulge! :heh:[/quote]

I am just as offended by this as I am Jackson (more so in some ways).

Oddly, Asian foreign films (Japanese, Korean, and Chinese. . . And Indian to a much lesser extent) have a trend toward being more realistic in their depiction of History.

In Eastern Asia, it is due to a reactionary trend where their focus upon honor has been emphasized such that incorrectly depicting a Historical Scene involving the deaths of their countrymen is seen as a dishonorable slight to those who died (and their ancestors and descendants). This has not stopped all historical inaccuracy, but it has helped to put more of an emphasis upon it.

Surprisingly, Ben Affleck was motivated by this same thing when he made [i]Pearl Harbor[/i], but due to a failure on his part, inaccuracies crept in (such as the color of the aircraft in the Kid? Butai attacking Pearl Harbor, which occurred because of a misunderstanding of the Japanese terms for Green - the Movie Commentary mentions this), and typical Hollywood pressures force some changes.

There remains a bit of a difference, though, between a historical work, where we generally have little idea about some facts, and a world that has been wholly created, where the facts that are known about that world are not in question at all (those that are not known have considerable evidence to give us a clue as to the solution or interpretation, similar to how we might make inferences about History).

But... At least my putty situation is resolved.

MB

You needn't feel disappointed or betrayed by Jackson; when was the last time you saw a 100% factual, historical, and realistic war movie that wasn't a documentary? Even then, I've seen docu's that show training Pz l's from the mid thirties representing the German offensive during the Battle of the Bulge! :heh:

[quote="robertmelvin"]Matthew, give them a try. They work pretty well for me. Don't try to use the Bondo on large seams, save the Apoxie Sculpt for that. But, for seams like the upper/lower half of a waterline hull, Bondo has worked great for me.

Good luck and keep us posted on your progress.

Bob Melvin[/quote]

I am close to having some ships in a state I won't be totally embarrassed to post images of.

I have the IJN 1936-39 Fuso almost finished (with some modifications to the kit that opened up the parts for the lighthouse towers - I cut away the solid molded parts so that they are lattice construction, and I have replaced many of the secondary battery guns with brass barrels - not turned, just brass rods I cut to length and then filed smooth. I may replace all of the secondaries with brass, given their location and tendency to break), a late-1930's Agano (at least as best as I could manage), and a Hasegawa Kinugasa that I do not know what to think of (The build is clean enough, but the kit was very old, and not very good as far as accuracy).

If I can get a paint job on them anywhere near what I can do on a 28mm Saxon or Maurakian Byzantine Skutatoi, then I will post some pictures of them. I am wondering if I should rig them, since I have some rigging line from a German Company.

I plan to sell all three (cheaply), simply to buy newer versions of the Fuso and Kinugasa.

But learning how to deal with mold-lines and filling seams at this scale has been a learning experience. As has how to paint the kits.

I usually complete a model before I paint it, but I have learned that a lot of parts need to be painted prior to assembly to get a decent coverage of paint. I tend to do a lot of shading and highlighting, which itself helps to conceal areas that do not have complete paint coverage, but some areas are just too tight, while remaining too visible, to leave to completion to paint.

MB

Matthew, give them a try. They work pretty well for me. Don't try to use the Bondo on large seams, save the Apoxie Sculpt for that. But, for seams like the upper/lower half of a waterline hull, Bondo has worked great for me.

Good luck and keep us posted on your progress.

Bob Melvin

[quote="biggles2"]So what's wrong with Peter Jackson's " hideous...faux-Middle-Earth stuff"? It's fantasy - and maybe his concept of fantasy isn't identical with your concept of fantasy. Doesn't make his wrong, or your's right; just different. :wave_1:
I use Tamiya 2-part epoxy putty almost exclusively. It's soft and mixes well, easy to form, holds it's shape well without springing back, and begins to cure in about 1/2 hour, although you can still work it. It can be rolled very thin for making items of clothing for figures, etc., but has a tendency to droop under it's own weight when very thin. :wave_1:[/quote]

1) Without going into the depth os Jackson's wrongness, just because something is "Fantasy" does not mean that one can simply make anything one wishes up about a world whose author had a rigidly defined canon. Departing from that canon means that it is no longer really "Tolkien's work," nor is it about "Middle-earth" - it is about someplace [i]else[/i] that just happens to share a few noun-names.

It is as if you walked in a Cathedral, and saw four guys in black robes handing out unleavened slices of bread, and small sips of wine. Unless those four guys happened to be Catholic Priests (and attendants - Monks, Alter-boys, etc.) then what you have [b]isn't[/b] the Holy Eucharist during a Catholic Mass. It is only something with a passing similarity.

Words have meanings that tend toward a most common usage, and departure from those definitions needs to be accompanied by a substantial explanation as to what the new words mean, and why the traditional definition isn't used. Jackson egregiously altered the canon of Middle-earth, and the meaning of the terms Tolkien created to describe his sub-creation. What Jackson created ceased to be related to Middle-earth with the release of the First of his so-called "Hobbit" movies.

I take Middle-earth [i]very seriously[/i]. It contains a depth and complexity which are not apparent until you understand Tolkien's beliefs and intentions behind his later work on it (post-Hobbit, which was not originally a part of the Middle-earth Canon, and had to be retconned by Tolkien into that Canon).

But... back to putty:

2) I did not even know Tamiya made a 2-part resin putty. I have plenty of other 2-part resin putties (Milliput, traditional Green Epoxy-Putty, Procreate, and two others whose names I cannot even recall - they are water-soluble, like Milliput).

Speaking of Milliput, I do not know why I did not even think of making a paste out of it. You can add water just after mixing it, to create a paste, which you then use dental tools to apply (at least for miniature work).

It is kind of like Auto-Body work at that point, though, because you can't just let it sit until it cures completely.

You have about three steps that are intermediate to its curing.

a) As soon as it hardens enough to no longer be a paste, you push the putty into a rough shape of the area to be filled (the first of the clean-up).
b) When it has hardened enough to hold an edge, then you trim off the excess, just near the edges of the part being created. Not flush, but as close as possible (Milliput will shrink just slightly when it cures).
c) When it is at its warmest when it is curing, it will still be springy to the touch, but will be possible to smooth slightly with a razor and sandpaper to get as flush as possible.

Then, after it has cured completely, you do the finishing sanding.

I will check out Tamiya's epoxy-putty, to see how it stands up next to Milliput and Procreate.

[quote="robertmelvin"]I use a product called Apoxie Sculpt. Works great. Its a two part product as you might expect that you mix together 50/50 and kneed together to mix. Has about the consistency of Play Dough. Moisten your hands a little bit and it won't stick to you. Makes an excellent filler and can be rolled out into long, slender rolls that are great for seams between deck and hull, etc.. Keep it sealed up and it seems to last well on the shelf. You should be able to get it either from FreeTime or Sprue Bros.

Hope this helps, it the best I've found. Oh, and also, Bondo auto body filler, the stuff the comes in a tube, not the stuff that comes in the cans and is like an epoxie compound, works well to. I use it for hull joints and that type of application.

Bob Melvin[/quote]

Ah! I have both of those. I did not even stop to think about using them on a model.

Stupid me...

MB

I use a product called Apoxie Sculpt. Works great. Its a two part product as you might expect that you mix together 50/50 and kneed together to mix. Has about the consistency of Play Dough. Moisten your hands a little bit and it won't stick to you. Makes an excellent filler and can be rolled out into long, slender rolls that are great for seams between deck and hull, etc.. Keep it sealed up and it seems to last well on the shelf. You should be able to get it either from FreeTime or Sprue Bros.

Hope this helps, it the best I've found. Oh, and also, Bondo auto body filler, the stuff the comes in a tube, not the stuff that comes in the cans and is like an epoxie compound, works well to. I use it for hull joints and that type of application.

Bob Melvin

So what's wrong with Peter Jackson's " hideous...faux-Middle-Earth stuff"? It's fantasy - and maybe his concept of fantasy isn't identical with your concept of fantasy. Doesn't make his wrong, or your's right; just different. :wave_1:
I use Tamiya 2-part epoxy putty almost exclusively. It's soft and mixes well, easy to form, holds it's shape well without springing back, and begins to cure in about 1/2 hour, although you can still work it. It can be rolled very thin for making items of clothing for figures, etc., but has a tendency to droop under it's own weight when very thin. :wave_1:

I have been using Testor's Contour Putty, simply because I have a ton of it for doing bases on 28mm/30mm Historical and Fantasy figures for armies (Saxons, Goths, Byzantines, Vikings; [i]Middle-earth[/i] stuff - but [b]not[/b] that hideous Peter Jackson faux-Middle-earth stuff).

But I have noticed that on plastic models it tends to be a little chalky, and crumbly. It works really well, but it seems to be [i]too soft[/i].

I have tried [i]Squadron Green[/i], but I have a problem with the fact that it shrinks a lot, and it tends to melt the styrene over which it has been applied (and it is a nightmare to apply).

I have discovered that Tamiya makes a putty, but have not tried it.

[u]Does anyone have any recommendations or tips for using the putty?[/u]

I have thought about using CA to flood the Testor's putty after my initial roughing in of the shape (and then hoping that the CA makes it tougher, and thus more easy to get precise control over finishing it - and smoothing it).

I only have four ships (All Japanese, so far, and two of them older Hasegawa ships that I am going to sell really cheaply when they are finished. I built them strictly for the practice when I discovered they were not what I wanted) that have gotten past the stage of putty and finishing work, and into Primer.

And I have discovered that the Putty work is inconsistent. The Testor's stuff just isn't working for most applications (it works for filling larger gaps, but that is about it).

So... Help, please?

MB