Jump to content

1/32 Trumpeter P-38L Lightning- "Kicked Up A Notch"


Recommended Posts

Thanks Don. My honest answer is, "I know". :P/> By coincidence, we discussed this very thing in Janissary's post "Random thoughts from 2015 Nats" in the General Forum on Monday. Here is one of my responses, which should explain why I didn't leave a panel line on the wing.

To expand on this topic, I usually try to only include detail that I can see at scale. The seam on the wing collar I can still see from ~ 12 feet away at 1/1 scale, which is 4 1/2 inches at 1/32 scale, which is pretty darn close. I can't see the wing seam at 12 feet, but I can at maybe 3-4 feet, which is just over 1 inch at 1/32. Not even a contest judge looks at my model from 1 1/2" away, so I don't include it. The real reason is explained above. If I left a seam line at the front of the wing, there is an 80% chance it would be considered a flaw at a model contest!

Cheers,

Chuck

Hi Chuck. We met briefly in Nanton a few months ago. I'm also the guy who's bacon you saved by giving me a few extra F-16 engine bits some years ago. I think I've seen most of your models in person and I really enjoyed looking at them. You're a fantastic modeler and your attention to detail and the patience to go that deep are some of your biggest assets. I think you should build not for winning contests but for the the love of the craft. Scribe a nice sharp thin light seam on your leading edge and who cares what the judges think. Put a note on your entry card to explain or maybe the judge will know theres a seam and it will impress him. I don't think you should sacrifice your attention to detail for a contests sake.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beautiful job taking care of all of the rough little odds and ends that make Trumpeter kits take so long to put together. The light looks really nice, and that in spite of the magnification under which you show the pics here.

Marcel

Thanks for stopping by sir. I often take very close "Macro" pics, which is what I would like to see in other WIP threads (like yours), but they also expose many tiny flaws you wouldn't notice at say, 6" away. I often photograph a build step and when I see the pic on my computer, I notice flaws and errors that I eventually fix, which I think makes the model better. Other times, like with the landing light on this build, I see some tiny flaws in the pics above I just can't see with the naked eye, so I let them slide. If I can't see them without magnification, they don't exist! :rolleyes:

Hi Chuck. We met briefly in Nanton a few months ago. I'm also the guy who's bacon you saved by giving me a few extra F-16 engine bits some years ago. I think I've seen most of your models in person and I really enjoyed looking at them. You're a fantastic modeler and your attention to detail and the patience to go that deep are some of your biggest assets. I think you should build not for winning contests but for the the love of the craft. Scribe a nice sharp thin light seam on your leading edge and who cares what the judges think. Put a note on your entry card to explain or maybe the judge will know there's a seam and it will impress him. I don't think you should sacrifice your attention to detail for a contests sake.

Hi, yes of course I remember you, although your name escapes me right now. Kim maybe? Sorry if that's wrong, but I recall you were at the contest with a young lad I assumed was your son. Thanks for the comments- you are too kind.

You are right about building for yourself and not worrying about what contest judges might think, of course, but I've been burned a few times in the past and I now know what is OK and what might be fatal at a model contest. A seam line at the front of the wing, real or not, is a guaranteed deduction most of the time. I could make a big deal about documenting the seam to avoid this situation, but I'd rather not bother and let the model speak for itself without any propoganda. As I mentioned above, you cannot see this seam line at 10 feet away on the real deal, so I won't worry about making one that you can see at the equivalent 1/32 scale, which is only 3 3/4 inches. If I did, I better add about 10,000 more rivet marks, because this bird is just FULL of them everywhere!

Since I'm responding already, the status of this build is that it's on ice until the weather starts to deteriorate a bit. Our Canadian summers are way too short to spend indoors playing with little pieces of plastic, but it won't be long before the snow starts flying and I have nothing to do but model this project to conclusion!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck

I think your seam compromise is fine. I also run into the seam issue on some aircraft on the landing gear. On some of them there is a definite seam where the pieces were welded together. I know it is there and I see it in the pictures but I still remove it.

There is another perfect example in the armour side of things. The Germans during WWII had a 20mm anti-aircraft gun and carriage. Tamiya and many others have produced this kit. On the carriage there is a seam from the moulding which corresponds to a factory seam on the real thing. I have seen this on many models left on but in this case it is so prominent and I believe that many of the armour modellers who build that stuff know it exists. I don't think the aircraft modellers are in the same boat.

So bottom line do what makes you happy even if it means you fill the seam and minimize the stress :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chuck

I think your seam compromise is fine. I also run into the seam issue on some aircraft on the landing gear. On some of them there is a definite seam where the pieces were welded together. I know it is there and I see it in the pictures but I still remove it.

Hi Chris. Your example reminds me of my P-51D build. At the rear of the wing root and the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer, there are two seam lines that I thought were just molding marks as follows:

Wingcrease1.jpg

Wingcrease2.jpg

Not wanting any "flaws" I sanded them both off. Big mistake. It turns out they are weld marks that are very real and visible on the aircraft, even from 10 feet away. I should have known better on a high quality Tamiya kit, but if they were on this Trumpeter challenge, I might have sanded them off again!

Anyway, using masking tape, I made a new weld mark out of putty.....

Wingweld1.jpg

And after painting, the seam line looks a lot like a weld mark. BTW, the bottom of the D-Day stripes were chipped on purpose. ;)

Weathered1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

August 21/15

An Update - and a very important one at that!

I got in a few hours of modeling tonight, so this is where we stand on this project. The actual attachment of the two booms to the upper wing and central fuselage is not for the faint of heart, or so I thought. Other builds of this kit always have trouble with this step and there are many gaps to fill, but the most important issue I wanted to get out of the way is landing gear alignment. All 3 gear legs are cemented in, as per instructions, and there are no adjustments available after the fact. If the booms are crooked, so are the landing gear- a fatal model contest deduction!

I dry fit the booms to the wing to see how things lined up. If you get the upper portion of the booms to align with the wing, the main gear is almost perfectly straight, although you can’t really tell from this pic due to a few angles that are not dead on. The front gear is dead on- and it’s slightly crooked compared to the vertical red line!

Boomfit1.jpg

I agonized about this for a while, until I realized that I can still gain access to the inside of the nose where the leg is attached, since the nose cone and guns have yet to be installed. Whew! I really don’t see how this could be “user error”, since the front landing gear and gear well installation is fixed and there really is no play to the fit. In any case, a future fix is on the way.

Here’s another shot from above. With the lead weights I have in the two engines, all I need right now is 4 quarters to keep this bird from being a tail sitter. Those engine spindles are nice and centered now too, so prop alignment will be a breeze when I get to that stage.

Boomfit2.jpg

Gluing on the right boom to the wing, the fit isn’t too bad on the outside, although I’ll need to fill that gap at the front. I am not going to glue the left boom on until everything is fixed on the right side, for ease of handling. With the large size of the model and weights inside the booms, it would be too cumbersome to do so.

Boomfit3.jpg

The rear fits better, although I’ll still need to sand things down and re-scribe panel lines.

Boomfit4.jpg

The inside of the boom is a different story. There is a huge gap at the bottom of the wing, which is a common characteristic of this kit, especially if you fix and brace the correct wing dihedral as I did earlier with chop sticks. This also causes panel lines to be wildly offset, which will be a real pain to fix.

Boomfit5.jpg

Here is the Grand Canyon from below, which is NOT a panel line and it needs to be filled.

Boomfit6.jpg

The other inner side looks much better, although that small gap still needs some work. That little pin, as it turns out, is supposed to be a small vent, so I cut it off and will insert a new brass vent later.

Boomfit7.jpg

Normally I would just fill the big gap with CA glue and sand it smooth, but this is an area of wing flex and there is a high chance of it cracking. Instead, I inserted some ordinary 0.75 mm styrene pushing it as far back in the wing as it would go, then glued the rear of the strip with Tamiya Extra Thin Cement (TETC).

Boomfit8.jpg

After that dried for a few minutes, I flexed the strip downward to conform to the wing root curvature, then applied more TETC to hold it in place. I repeated this in 4 stages, then filled the rear of the wing root with 0.5 mm styrene to fill the remaining gap. With that all in place, I applied another liberal coat of TETC to the entire wing root, allowing capillary action to suck the glue into all the remaining gaps. This makes the styrene swell, creating a putty like mixture that will dry super strong- and won’t crack later. Here’s how it looks before sanding.

Boomfit9.jpg

To fill that thin gap on the other side I used an old trick I used on my Mustang build, by filling the gap with ordinary thick plastic cement, in this case the Tamiya version in the orange bottle. This also makes the plastic swell, closing the gap slightly. Here I could have used CA glue to fill the gap and then rescribe the panel line, which DOES exist, but this method is so much easier IF you are not in a hurry.

Boomfit10.jpg

Now the hard part. If you use this method of using lots of plastic cement to fill gaps, don’t even think of sanding or re-scribing panel lines for at least a WEEK! The plastic is now a low grade version of liquid sprue, which takes a long time to dry before it’s hard enough. If you rush it, the plastic will tear and you’ll make a big mess. Trust me I know!

In the mean time, my next efforts will be directed towards the top of the boom, to smooth the fit and correct panel line and rivet detail while the bottom joints dry. Thanks for checking in!

Cheers,

Chuck

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

That crooked from landing gear was driving me crazy, so I went straight to surgery while the rest of the glue on the boom was drying. The front of the gear leg has two pins that fit into two holes, with a "D" shaped hole on the right and a circular hole on the left. The gear leg slanted left a bit before:

Boomfit1.jpg

The solution is to raise the left circular pin about a mm or so and thankfully I did not apply much glue to this area for fear of crazing the interior green of the gear well. By using a drill, I drilled a few holes above the pin, then opened it up a bit with a #11 knife. Drilling another small hole underneath the pin, I then raised the pin to the desired height. As you can see, it is a tight fit and I didn't have much room to work with, so the view from this side is a little crude. Fortunately, you can see nothing on the inside, even with a flashlight.

FrontGearFix3.jpg

Checking my work, things look a lot straighter now. I will cement the leg in after I attach the left (right in this pic) boom permanently, just in case there are any more adjustments necessary. For you guys building this kit, I suggest you don't use any glue on the front gear leg until this stage, just in case this is indeed a kit flaw, which I think is very likely.

FrontGearFix2.jpg

I'm calling this SAVE # 6!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks excellent.

How do you get such close & crisp photos without spending a heap of time mucking about with lights, camera settings etc....or maybe you do spend a heap of time mucking about with lights, camera setting etc?

Or maybe my camera's are rubbish ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

Your explanations as to why, what, and how to fit those issues is really well thoughtout, and should end with an overall perfect fit. What I'm trying to figure out is how your plan on straightening the front landing gear strut if it's glued into proper position without any wiggle room.

Joel

Edited by Joel_W
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck

Your work is spectacular. But without the camera skill you have, no one will be able to see it!

I want to know

• what type of lighting do you use?

• the camera set up - fstop, aperture & ISO

• the lens you use

in order to get pictures this sharp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys!

Chuck,

What I'm trying to figure out is how your plan on straightening the front landing gear strut if it's glued into proper position without any wiggle room.

Joel

Hi Joel,

The front gear leg is now free of glue and has lots of wiggle room. When I get the other boom attached permanently, I'll align the front gear leg as vertical as possible, then cement it in with CA glue to not only fix the position, but fill the oval like hole I've created with the drill bit. As I mentioned earlier, if others are building this kit, I recommend you use no glue on the front gear leg until this step. I was just lucky I used so little glue earlier, or I would never be able to move it now.

To answer a few questions about my photography, I wrote a "Model Photography For Dummies" thread in the Tools and Tips Forum a few years ago that should answer most if not all of them. Others chimed in, so you may find the thread useful here:

"Model Photography for Dummies"

My current set-up is either my Nikon D610 or D810 full frame DSLR, using a 60 mm Nikkor Micro (Macro) lens, mounted on a tri-pod. I keep the aperture as tight as possible to get maximum depth of field, which on this lens is either F36 or even F40, so my exposure times are long at 1 or 2 seconds at ISO 64-100- hence the tripod. I also use a timer so that there is no camera shake while I take the pic. I used to bracket 3 pics of one f stop under exposed, normal and 1 f stop over exposed, then pick the best one and delete the other two. What I'm using now is the "HDR" (High Dynamic Range) setting that takes two pics, which exposes the dark areas properly with one pic, then takes another pic exposing the lighter areas correctly, then the camera stitches the two pics together into one. This seems to work perfectly about 90% of the time, but even if it doesn't, post processing on my computer using ordinary Windows Live Photo Gallery (free on Windows 7+) corrects any exposure problems. Real photographers will insist on using RAW format so that you have total control over photo editing, but I just use Fine jpg format. With 36 mp on my D810, the jpg files are already HUGE at up to 30 mb each, so recording at RAW up to 50 mb each is overkill, especially when every pic is shrunk down to 1,600 pixels wide to fit most computer screens. Photobucket pic hosting, which I use, shrinks the pics down further to 1,024 pixels wide, so the final product has only about 5% of the information originally recorded. One really cool thing about using a full frame camera and sharp lens is that I can zoom into any small area of the photograph and still have a clear and sharp pic, which is effectively a digital zoom without the need for a real zoom lens.

I also have one of those collapsible "Photo Booths" where I place my models to take the pics. They have natural neutral lighting and a variety of colored backgrounds. I used the blue background for most of the pics so far, but with the wings attached to the booms, I've had to widen it so that it will fit inside, which reveals a lot of background that you would not normally see. For the pics above I went with a white background to balance the light a bit more, but when I take final pics of the finished model I create a totally different setup with poster paper and lighting that is too large and cumbersome to have set up full time.

Hope this helps!

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

Thanks for the explanation on how your straightening the front gear. Advance planning really is a life saver.

Photography is also my other hobby, although I rarely have had time the last few years to take any pictures. I'm still using my trusty old Nikon D90 with a AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm lens, as well as a 70-200mm Nikkor lens which I use with a set of extension tubes with for macro photography. I've got Photmatrix Pro for HDR work, so I'm familiar with the process. When you mentioned using it, all sorts of bells went off. Can't believe I never even thought of using it for model photography. There certainly are times that it would come in handy. Thanks for that tip.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, here's some demo pics to show you what an HDR (High Dynamic Range) setting can do.

In this first pic, I'm using spot metering on the darker area on the front fuselage within the red box. The fuselage is exposed properly, but the top of the wing and the silver box I'm using to protect the cockpit is over exposed.

HDR1.jpg

In this next pic, I'm using the brighter area on the silver box as my exposure area instead. Now the top of the wing looks OK, but the fuselage and other areas are underexposed.

HDR2.jpg

Now if I used the entire area as what the exposure meter should read instead of spot metering, I'd get a compromise of some areas too light, while other areas would be a bit too dark. Using HDR, and still using the area on top of the wing for my exposure area, the camera calculates the correct exposure for this lighter area and takes a pic, then it calculates what the exposure should be for darker areas and takes another pic- then it "stitches" the two pics together to get this, which is much better.

HDR3.jpg

Now you can still manipulate the overexposed and underexposed pics on the computer to make them better, but the HDR pic takes the hassle out of that and you still get a better result overall.

Now some examples of zooming in on the pic inself without using a zoom lens. With a full frame sensor, tight aperture (high f stop, F36 in this case) and good lens, here's a 50% zoom in shot.

Zoom1.jpg

50% more

Zoom2.jpg

50% more....

Zoom3.jpg

and 50% more....

Zoom4.jpg

Now another shot what we started with. Its amazing what a good camera can do!

HDR3.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

Going to be experimenting with HDR and see what I can come up with. My pictures certainly suffer from areas that are undexposed, as I prefer to use the Matrix metering for just the center of the frame.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck, nice save on those legs! And big thanks for the photography tip, will need to try that.

I often photograph a build step and when I see the pic on my computer, I notice flaws and errors that I eventually fix, which I think makes the model better. Other times, like with the landing light on this build, I see some tiny flaws in the pics above I just can't see with the naked eye, so I let them slide. If I can't see them without magnification, they don't exist!

Yep, that's pretty much how I roll :thumbsup:

Marcel

Link to post
Share on other sites

That crooked from landing gear was driving me crazy, so I went straight to surgery while the rest of the glue on the boom was drying. The front of the gear leg has two pins that fit into two holes, with a "D" shaped hole on the right and a circular hole on the left. The gear leg slanted left a bit before:

Boomfit1.jpg

The solution is to raise the left circular pin about a mm or so and thankfully I did not apply much glue to this area for fear of crazing the interior green of the gear well. By using a drill, I drilled a few holes above the pin, then opened it up a bit with a #11 knife. Drilling another small hole underneath the pin, I then raised the pin to the desired height. As you can see, it is a tight fit and I didn't have much room to work with, so the view from this side is a little crude. Fortunately, you can see nothing on the inside, even with a flashlight.

FrontGearFix3.jpg

Checking my work, things look a lot straighter now. I will cement the leg in after I attach the left (right in this pic) boom permanently, just in case there are any more adjustments necessary. For you guys building this kit, I suggest you don't use any glue on the front gear leg until this stage, just in case this is indeed a kit flaw, which I think is very likely.

FrontGearFix2.jpg

I'm calling this SAVE # 6!

Hey chuck540z3, Lookin' great sir! I can tell that you are using 4 Canadian quarters for your weight up front. The Canadian quarters don't have the copper color along the edges like the U.S. quarters do. I just thought that I'd throw that in the fray. Again, your P-38 looks great. I wish that I had some "moxie" in me to build some WWII airplanes. I love to watch AND hear the old WWII airplanes when they fly at airshows or wherever. They are just like today's jets. After being around them long enough, you can tell what airplane goes by just by the sound of the engine. Just like your P-38, it's a beautiful thing when you hear a certain airplane fly by and can tell what it is just by the whine of the motor.(i.e., a P-51 Mustang flying by)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck,

Going to be experimenting with HDR and see what I can come up with. My pictures certainly suffer from areas that are undexposed, as I prefer to use the Matrix metering for just the center of the frame.

Joel

Look into Adobe Cloud. $10 a month for Photoshop and Lightroom. Though LR is most you'll ever need for what you're doing. HDR is unnecessary, and the "HDR" settings in cameras are poor mimics...it's a lot of wasted processing time to do it properly, and it's really not appropriate for model photographs. You just need some basic curve controls to get what you're after honestly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys!

Look into Adobe Cloud. $10 a month for Photoshop and Lightroom. Though LR is most you'll ever need for what you're doing. HDR is unnecessary, and the "HDR" settings in cameras are poor mimics...it's a lot of wasted processing time to do it properly, and it's really not appropriate for model photographs. You just need some basic curve controls to get what you're after honestly.

I disagree. If you're willing to pay $10/mth ($120/yr) for photo editing software, you must be really into photography and none of my tips are meaningful to you. My tips are for the "average Joe" who knows a bit about cameras and how they work, but doesn't necessary want to buy a lot of expensive equipment (or software) in order to take pics of their models. I don't know why you claim that HDR settings in cameras are "poor mimics" and "waste processing time". My examples above- and quite frankly most of the photos before them- prove that the HDR setting works very well, without any photo-editing. The results speak for themselves and using a timed exposure of 1-2 seconds for most of my pics, the extra processing time is maybe another 3 seconds. Big deal, I've got all day.

If you want basic curve controls they can be found free with Windows Live Photo Gallery, loaded with Windows 7+. When you're taking a 36 mp pic, 7,360 pixels wide and then shrinking it down to 1,024 pixels to fit Photobucket and ARC defaults, I think Photoshop and Lightroom are overkill unless photography is a major hobby.

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Look into Adobe Cloud. $10 a month for Photoshop and Lightroom. Though LR is most you'll ever need for what you're doing. HDR is unnecessary, and the "HDR" settings in cameras are poor mimics...it's a lot of wasted processing time to do it properly, and it's really not appropriate for model photographs. You just need some basic curve controls to get what you're after honestly.

Jinmmydel,

Being a long time Nikon man since I got into Digital photography, my choice of a editing program is Nikon's Capture NX-2. It works extremely well with my Nikon D90, and is enough of an editing program for me.

For HDR work I've got both the built in program and the full blown Phtomatix Pro 4.14 version. I've used it extensively to help control very contrasty scenes, even in bird photography. Chuck's method does work. Most of the time I use one of the functions to work various under and over exposed areas due to my rather poor lighting setup.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the photo's and info. Your photography and modeling skills are obviously top notch. I'll stand by my assertion that the HDR setting (or the Canon, Sony, etc. equivalent) is beneficial for the average photographer.

Edited by chuck540z3
Link to post
Share on other sites

:jaw-dropping:/> They are great. I didn't say your photos were bad. I hope your ego is satiated. I could stroke mine with a link to my business page or a pic of the $3000 check for a wedding last weekend, but I don't need to get in a pissing contest. :)/> I should have known better to post anything here anyway.

Edited by jinmmydel
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...