Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by niart17

  1. I'm liking it so far. Granted it takes a different approach but so far the story is being told pretty well. and like Kurt says, it's great that it's getting out to a new generation. I hope they get more in to the technical as well eventually but we'll see.



  2. You possibly could "rank" manufacturers as far as consistent quality vs not as many good kits as other makers. BUT that's not going to really help you make a choice for buying a good model. It would only be useful if you're interested in simply knowing who makes more consistent quality kits. But like many are saying, each kit is it's own thing. Some are good, some are great, and some just suck regardless of who made it. Also, I know it's not the genre's you're looking for but Bandai is pretty darn consistently good at making great kits.

  3. I haven't seen a lot about this on the news or anything lately but please keep Southwest Louisiana, and especially Lake Charles in your prayers. And if you feel moved to donate to any charities that are helping the area please do so. They are hurting really bad now after being hit with an incredibly destructive hurricane, Laura. Where I live in SE Texas we were extremely fortunate and it didn't do as much damage, just struggling with some power issues and some houses did receive bad damage. But Lake Charles looks like a war zone and it is likely a long road to recovery. It hurts to see the town I grew up in, with many sites that I am very familiar with, simply vanished.






  4. Awesome job. Your paint finish is superb. Just the right sheen.


    This is another one of those kits I've been waiting for for a long time. I wish they'd done an interior but I do understand the issue of trying to build accurate to a TV set vs a model that doesn't jive together. I've fortunately seen the restored Galileo at Houston Space Center a few times and I'll have to dig around but should have a lot of great pics of it for reference. May just have to be one of my next builds.

  5. 1 hour ago, Vidar_710 said:

    Scaling any of this to the Tamiya 1/100 kit a possibility?



    it's always been my intention to create parts for that kit as well, I just have to find the time and resources to be able to sit down and do it. I know that's a crappy answer and doesn't help you out at all. But I have to be honest and say I don't know WHEN it will get done, only that I do want to get it done. I have a Tamiya shuttle kit as well that I would love to create a stack for. I think that might could produce the best shuttle stack kit. Sorry I couldn't just say "yes!"



  6. Hi Dave, welcome to the forums. I currently am in the process of trying to move and haven't updated my Solidworks home license so I don't have access to this file at the moment. Hopefully once everything gets settled I can get back in to the swing of it.


    The area you're asking bout is also the area I'm struggling to find any good pics or drawings of. And also it being a very dark object, it's hard to make out much detail in the pics I do find. BTW, I appreciate the .pdf link, that will help when I get to the feed structure etc...


    Sorry I couldn't be more help at this time. 


  7. Interesting discussion. I think there is room for all here on this topic. True, the story of the Enterprise is just a fantasy, but the shooting of the series and archiving the history of it's facts and props etc....is very real. Each modeler approaches such a model in their own unique way. I do agree that telling someone something like "lighten up, it's only a fantasy" is not very helpful or nice just as much as someone telling another builder they "screwed up" because they used the wrong colors. Personally my approach changes from time to time. There are times when I'm wanting to make a replica of a prop and not the object it's representing, meaning I want it to be as accurate to the filming miniature as I possibly can regardless of what it looked like on film or TV. in that case, my ultimate (unobtainable?) goal would be to be able to hold up my model right next to the prop in the same room and not be able to tell them apart. Wish I had the skills and time to do that...practice practice practice...


    And then there are other times (maybe a majority?) that I want to go in to the fantasy and handle it like it's a very real space craft. And usually on those builds I try to go beyond what's "canon" and make up side stories, or look back before or after the story we know and make changes based on that new reality I created. To me that not only adds to the fun of building it, but it also helps me do something different from all the other builds. I wouldn't say that's hiding behind "it's only a fantasy" but I do agree there are those that will do that and it can be taken as an under handed compliment. My point? I have no idea. Funny, this is another subject that historically has caused some serious spats. I guess that says something to the incredible influence Star Trek has had on the world. I think that's Awesome!



  8. Beautiful job. Thanks for posting and for pointing out the things you feel could use improving. Kind of the point of this board I'd say. I don't ever recall ANYONE saying the kit is unbuildable but I guess some people read things differently. Outstanding work! the paint job is especially convincing! 

  9. Personally the only time I find it "neat" that the factory seal is still on it is if there is an obviously old price tag from a hobby shop or drug store with something like $1:50 or such price on it. But that's just a "hey cool, look how old this kit is and it survived in good shape" kind of thing. I don't think I'd actually pay more for that nostalgia. But I'm sure there are some collectors that would say otherwise. I would say it probably depends on the kit itself as far as rarity, collectible value, and if it's pretty obvious it's REALLY a factory seal and not a basement seal hiding missing items. Otherwise, I don't even care if it has a box. Sealed bags, instructions and MAYBE good decals. That's my concern mainly. 



  10. On 7/29/2020 at 10:49 AM, habu2 said:

    This reminds me of a thread here on ARC a couple of years ago.  As you have probably noticed there are rotating ads at the top of the forum page, those ads are based on your cookies and your browsing history stored on your device.   I remember a user who was complaining about adult/p*rn related ads on ARC and how it was inappropriate.  When it was pointed out those ads were targeted specifically at him (and why) he got vewwwy qwiet....  :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

    It was for research!!!! 😁

  11. 8 hours ago, Mstor said:


    Sorry if I caused any confusion. I was kinda comparing the files used to print 3D objects with software for the purpose of a discussion on how to control the use of said files and share them openly without giving up complete control over their use.


    In any case, it was all secondary to the OP's original question. Plus, confusion is a common state of mind for me these days and it tends to rub off :gr_eek2: :thumbsup:

    ahhhh gotcha now. Sorry about that, that was me being dense. Yes, we are living in the Land of Confusion! I'm practically a permanent resident there. 


    There are people out there that are selling .stl files for single person use but I'm pretty sure the only protection against theft is the honor system. Malix3Design sells his beautiful files of some great figure models for a great price. He has you sign (check box) an agreement that you will not share the files, but I believe the only course of action he has if you do is to black list you from downloading any other files in the future. It's an interesting world and I'm sure someone at some point will figure out a way to make the files fully protected. But then of course someone will figure out a way to hack that and probably start a back and forth battle. 

  12. 32 minutes ago, Mstor said:


    Actually, it was the other way around, open source for the models (or parts or whatever you have designed).  Within the software development communities there have been a number of licensing models developed. Some allow unrestricted use, including commercial use, as long as the full source code is made available and all authors are cited.

    Most people that use open source software, either free or payed for, do not have the ability to design or even modify the software code. They are therefore content to simply get and use the software. If, on the other hand, I am an experienced software developer, the open source license allows me to use the code and incorporate it into any project I want to as long as I meet the requirements of the license (as noted above). Let's take Linux as an example. There are various completely free versions and then there are versions that you can buy. Those "for purchase" versions usually are just value-added versions that include support. This makes them attractive to businesses that can't afford to keep a Linux guru on staff. These "for purchase" versions must still adhere to the provisions of the GNU General Public License (the license model Linux uses), which means their source code must be made freely available without restriction. Means I could take there code base, make a few changes and then release it to the public for sale too. As long as I adhere to the GNU license. And, most importantly, these licenses are legally binding. If I develop code under, say. the GNU license, and someone uses my code but does make the source code available, the community enforces the license by imposing restrictions on the use of the code. If the violator does not comply with the GNU terms, redress may be sought in court for copyright violations under the terms of the GNU license.

    Now, I think this is what is needed in the 3D printing communities. They need to develop licenses under which they can release their code. Actually, you could release it under the GNU license. This gives you, essentially, a copyright on the code that you can enforce under the terms of the GNU license.

    If, on the other hand, you simply want to print parts and sell them, you need to copyright the code and not distribute it. If you want to share it, the adoption of some sort of licensing would be a good idea. This would give you certain rights that can be spelled out in the license.

    As John pointed out above, all this might not work well unless the community develops a universally accepted format for the files that is easily shared among users with different printers.

    Now, I am pretty much just thinking out loud here and I am sure I have missed a lot as my understanding of the output of design software is limited. So, take it for what its worth.


    ok, I guess I misunderstood/misunderstand. Still sounds like you're talking about open source programs and not files, but I'm not sure.  


    But anyway. To answer the original posts question my answer would be it depends. For the price of the printer and quality you're getting I'd say it's a worthwhile investment. That is ASSUMING you're ok with having to learn a lot of CAD and are ok with having another hobby of learning how to print. It's not quite to the "easy button" push and print stage yet. there is a lot of learning and living with failed prints to get consistent results. But if that's your kind of thing then YES, go for it. It's quite liberating knowing that you can create almost any part you'd like with the right amount of work and thought and you don't have to wait for a company to come out with something obscure just for your needs.

  13. On 7/14/2020 at 12:52 PM, Faust said:

    I can't see any reason to go the route they did...

    ummm...why have 2 people go really fast when you can have 4 go really slow>????   ok, that's not a good reason either. ohhhohhh I know....CHEVY!


    I actually remember seeing this kit on the shelf back when Kroger's used to have a model kit aisle. That's right kiddos, even grocery store chains had model aisles back in the good old days.



  14. 23 minutes ago, John Tapsell said:


    The difficulty with that approach is that the end file is a stand-alone item. In order to share it you need to save it in a format that is easily shared across a community with access to different CAD systems so a universally acceptable format such STL is needed. It's fundamentally no different from downloading a copy of a photo or a pdf. Once somebody else has that file, you lose the practical control of what they can do with it and you're back to trust and integrity.


    I know that sounds negative but I genuinely believe that sharing within a community is the right approach. However, the community needs to have checks and balances to ensure that freely shared files are not used commercially. The bigger the community you share with, the greater the risk of that happening.


    This thread is drifting off topic so my apologies for that, but I feel it's an important consideration not only if you're a designer wanting to protect your own Intellectual Property, but also the obligations placed on you if you are the end user of that shared print file.





    I think he was talking about open source for the 3D program to create the models, not necessarily open source models themselves, but I could be wrong. As far as Blender, I'm fairly certain it can save in .stl format, which currently is the most commonly used file to import into a slicing program. In fact, the slicing programs are the ones that are more important when it comes to being able to print. As long as it can import in a format you're comfortable modeling from, and can export to your particular printer, then you're good to go.

  15. 2 hours ago, Mstor said:


    Perhaps the development of something like the Open Source Software license is needed, where the developer is free to use the software for personal use or for profit as long as the source code is made readily available and the name of all previous developer(s) is preserved. This has been a successful business model for many. Users would be free to use and/or change the files and sell the results of their work as long as all previous developers is noted and the files, including all changes they made, are made available to anyone who wants them.


    There are some out there. Seems like Blender comes to mind as being open source. It has quite a learning curve if I recall though since a lot (most?) of it is speed key oriented and being opened source, there isn't or at least wasn't a lot of operating instructions. I'm sure by now the community has grown and it's much easier to get information. It's a very powerful program though if you can learn it. I've never really dug too far into it since I have access to Solidworks.




    Hope that helps.



  16. There is a Youtube channel put out by Andy's Hobby Shop and he's done a series of videos dealing with the history of some kit manufacturers. Not exactly just about molding and modeling techniques but somewhat relevant to this subject. It would be neat to see a full slide show of winning models from all the different years. And I agree a comprehensive study of techniques would be very welcome indeed.

  • Create New...