The Ship Model Forum

@pascalemod Appreciate you being so understanding. I'm glad you still like them - for me, having worked on them for so long, it may be kind of too obvious what goes where and how the thing is built in the first place, 'cause I'm the one who did it. So things that may be obvious for me are not necessarily so for you all who look at them for the first time.

Obviously the Iowa's forward superstructure is better integrated because it was designed from the ground up as an integral part of brand new construction. As much as new superstructures can be bolted on older battleships pretty much however you like, those built as designed are generally more aesthetically pleasing than otherwise - perhaps with the exception of Renown


I would love to share with you all already what they are going to be, but this for now is a closely guarded secret for reasons you will understand once they are released. I don't want another Lord Clive II - Electric Bogaloo falling down on me twice in a year.
For now I will just say: one will be a battleship and one a battle cruiser. We are planning for release before Christmas, so hopefully at some point in November? But I have already said too much

_________________
We can have all of the resources in the world and still get it wrong. Not out of any incompetence, it's just because of how difficult it is sometimes to implement a physical feature without having seen it with your own two eyes. - the Chieftain

these 2 red circled areas do not look right as should be same as Tennessee class & West Virginia.

The only differences are that the pyramidal structure is conical in WeeVee and I've added 'arms' to the rangefinders. The rest is pretty much the same.
Call it 'artistic liberty for the sake of it'. I thought it would just look more interesting if it weren't an exact copy.

_________________
We can have all of the resources in the world and still get it wrong. Not out of any incompetence, it's just because of how difficult it is sometimes to implement a physical feature without having seen it with your own two eyes. - the Chieftain

I have a question for the sake of painting things being easier. Revell on Bismark has marked its waterline by a tiniest of raised lines. It was super easy to paint boot topping as a result. I never managed as good on normal ships without much more work.

Has there ever been a thought - if making full hull - to demarcate it slightly with a tiniest possible markings, raised line or something of the sort?

I dont mean you go make full hull plating like many do (which may ome out over scale) but may be there is a happy medium somewhere? What do you think about hull detail stuff?

_________________
- @Shipific on IG
my gallery

Our very first collab with 3D-Wild, released back in 2023, was the two Furutaka class cruisers. They had some hull paneling shown since it was such a prominent feature on Japanese cruisers, but it did not meet much approval, though we still decided to keep it. However we have never replicated the feature nor anything of the like on subsequent builds.

I have thought about a small boot topping line, I've tried it back in the day, but never seemed to strike a happy medium. It is something we can test, but my biggest doubt in implementing such a thing would be the inevitable complaints by those who don't need / don't want such a feature to show through. And I can't blame them entirely: while on plastic models it is easy to sand down and make it look like it was never there, with 3D printed resin it is a much harder task. Not to mention the chance of damaging other fine hull details.

But if somebody else would like to see such a feature implemented, we will do some testing

_________________
We can have all of the resources in the world and still get it wrong. Not out of any incompetence, it's just because of how difficult it is sometimes to implement a physical feature without having seen it with your own two eyes. - the Chieftain