Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Aigore,

Nice to see your Viggen once again. Since you posted it as a reference to your points on weathering, I'll be the 1st to agree that it's an accumulation of various techniques to achieve the overall final effect. As Darren pointed out, you didn't do every panel line and rivet the same exact way or every one of them. Rather you were selective so that the total representation shows what I consider to be a very realistically looking and interesting model. That's one of the main things I've learned from you, and have been trying to incorporate in my weathering, but it's not easy changing an entire philosophy and approach. In other words, it's hard to teach a very old dog any new tricks.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aigore,

Nice to see your Viggen once again. Since you posted it as a reference to your points on weathering, I'll be the 1st to agree that it's an accumulation of various techniques to achieve the overall final effect. As Darren pointed out, you didn't do every panel line and rivet the same exact way or every one of them. Rather you were selective so that the total representation shows what I consider to be a very realistically looking and interesting model. That's one of the main things I've learned from you, and have been trying to incorporate in my weathering, but it's not easy changing an entire philosophy and approach. In other words, it's hard to teach a very old dog any new tricks.

Joel

You old? Naaaaaw, barely middle aged ;) Strong enough to pull the ears of a gundark :D

The point I was driving at is to have a more holistic view of weathering and techniques rather than just dissing one over the other, everything have their uses.

Wasn't pointing in any certain direction rather just at how debates about subjective views usually end in bruised egos and a locked thread.... and the subject as unresolved as when it started :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good observation, Aigore. Using a number of techniques in small amounts across the entire model can result in a very realistic look.

Nice looking 'Cat there, Brian. Seeing that makes me want to go to DQ. :whistle:/>

Dude..I literally died laughing at that last line..that poor waitress had it bad for you that night buddy...lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

080523-F-0000C-002.jpg

dehowie, that is one of my photographs that the AF appropriated. However it still has photo credit to it, so please follow the forum rules in regards to posting photographs:

Copyright on images thread in Research Corner

"only post pics you own the copyright to or that you have copyright permission to use. Posting photos here is the same as publishing photos in a book....so you must respect the copyrighted owners of the photos."

Thanks,

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

dehowie, that is one of my photographs that the AF appropriated. However it still has photo credit to it, so please follow the forum rules in regards to posting photographs:

Copyright on images thread in Research Corner

"only post pics you own the copyright to or that you have copyright permission to use. Posting photos here is the same as publishing photos in a book....so you must respect the copyrighted owners of the photos."

Thanks,

Jeff

I'm just curious - if the "AF appropriated" that picture, would it not then become freely available for use by the general public? Any issues on obtaining permission would be between you and the AF, no?

Just trying to get a better understanding on the rules of the road, since I have to admit that I haven't paid much attention to this before. I wouldn't take someone's personal pictures and use them in a book or another commercial venture, but I never thought to check and see if I needed permission to post them here on ARC.

Regards,

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

About weathering: I really am very cautious of dissing anyone about how much or how little they weather a model. Personally, I find a worn and weathered model more interesting than a clean one, but I have built models from aerobatic teams where getting them to look clean and glossy had its own challenges for me. I have seen some really dirty operational aircraft in my time. Also, I have seen aircraft with rather faded paint but that were spotlessly clean and perfectly maintained. All would require different techniques to represent properly in model form and it is very easy to get it wrong. A clean but slightly worn and faded aircraft is not the same as a dirty but brand new aircraft and is not the same as an aircraft that is both worn, weathered and dirty. I've once seen a recently polished natural metal jet where the polish and material that it took off accumulated in the panel lines exactly the way a very dark wash would have looked. That looked very different from the way the aircraft looked before it was polished when the natural metal was faded in all sorts of dull metallic shades, but the panel lines were clean and barely visible.

One thing that does impress me is when, whichever techniques were used, the model ends up looking like a dirty or weathered model of the real thing, rather than a dirty toy. That is what I aim for, and what I find incredibly difficult to pull off properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with most of the points above. Weathering is personal taste. Keep in mind that making a model represents a particular a/c at a particular point in time so two modellers can make the same bird and have two very differently weathered models. I personally like mine dirty so I try and find reference pics of the aircraft I'm building in a grimy state. If you're of the same ilk, you may want to join the upcoming Hellenic Air Force Group Build. It's gonna be weathering heaven y'all!!!

Check out this dirty mofo...

15394908782_6632e6b5b2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with most of the points above. Weathering is personal taste. Keep in mind that making a model represents a particular a/c at a particular point in time so two modellers can make the same bird and have two very differently weathered models. I personally like mine dirty so I try and find reference pics of the aircraft I'm building in a grimy state. If you're of the same ilk, you may want to join the upcoming Hellenic Air Force Group Build. It's gonna be weathering heaven y'all!!!

Check out this dirty mofo...

15394908782_6632e6b5b2.jpg

What's up with HAF? Why do they let their aircraft get so dirty? Is it a money issue? I'm honestly curious about it, because they have some of the rattiest looking aircraft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just curious - if the "AF appropriated" that picture, would it not then become freely available for use by the general public? Any issues on obtaining permission would be between you and the AF, no?

Just trying to get a better understanding on the rules of the road, since I have to admit that I haven't paid much attention to this before. I wouldn't take someone's personal pictures and use them in a book or another commercial venture, but I never thought to check and see if I needed permission to post them here on ARC.

Regards,

John

In other words John, the AF stole my photo. PM inbound with more details.

Cheers,

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with most of the points above. Weathering is personal taste. Keep in mind that making a model represents a particular a/c at a particular point in time so two modellers can make the same bird and have two very differently weathered models. I personally like mine dirty so I try and find reference pics of the aircraft I'm building in a grimy state. If you're of the same ilk, you may want to join the upcoming Hellenic Air Force Group Build. It's gonna be weathering heaven y'all!!!

Check out this dirty mofo...

15394908782_6632e6b5b2.jpg

One area that is usually overlooked is the bottom of the aircraft. Check out pics of US white-bellied F-4's during the Vietnam war. They were absolutely filthy, to the point that aft of the main landing gear, there was often more black grunge than white paint. It's rare to see many models that accurately address this.

Edited by 11bee
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some very good points on this thread. The F-18 pictured above is indeed very dirty, but it still doesn't have every panel line and rivet evenly dirty. There are two things that I shake my head at sometimes. The first is when an extraordinarily built model goes off the deep end with weathering. Like Rex said, they take the time to correct any inaccuracies on the airframe, and then finish it with a completely unrealistic finish. We have a gentleman in our contest area that builds the most flawless models, and then he has inky black panel lines with paint chips, no matter what the subject matter is. The second is when a company like Trumpeter gets ripped for having rivets all over the model, but then a modeler will use a ponce wheel to do the same thing, and those same modelers that ripped Trumpeter (or any other company, really) are falling all over themselves about how good all those rivets look. :rolleyes:/>/>

I couldn't agree more. And people wonder why I don't run a wash over the entire models I build. Not every panel is seeping with dirt or grime. As much as I strive for a realistic finish, I do believe some artistic license should be taken.

Where I lack in weathering skills comes with gull grey over white finishes..I swear I have the worst time with weathering them..TPS..I have to admit I'm pretty good at those (not to toot my own horn), but anything gull grey over white..I'm like..nah..I'll find a low vis version..lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't agree more. And people wonder why I don't run a wash over the entire models I build. Not every panel is seeping with dirt or grime. As much as I strive for a realistic finish, I do believe some artistic license should be taken.

Where I lack in weathering skills comes with gull grey over white finishes..I swear I have the worst time with weathering them..TPS..I have to admit I'm pretty good at those (not to toot my own horn), but anything gull grey over white..I'm like..nah..I'll find a low vis version..lol

I'm the same as you. I'm getting closer on the Gull Gray schemes, though. Try painting the base colors, then misting on a light coat of Tamiya Smoke. Go back with the original colors and a fine tipped airbrush and do some overspraying. I'm just about done with an A-7 that I used this technique on. I'll post pictures when I'm done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's up with HAF? Why do they let their aircraft get so dirty? Is it a money issue? I'm honestly curious about it, because they have some of the rattiest looking aircraft.

Darren,

Check out this thread where I posed the same question. I think Scott's post (#17) sums it up the best...combo of the harsh Med sun, sea air and hard usage.

<Link>

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're of the same ilk, you may want to join the upcoming Hellenic Air Force Group Build. It's gonna be weathering heaven y'all!!!

When HAF A-7s were announced for last years RIAT I thought "Great, they will be like a one stop shop of weathering inspiration." Guess if I was disappointed finding out they were so freshly painted I almost could smell the paint.

hafsluf1.jpg

hafsluf2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can tell that all of those pics have heavy computer editing that has boosted the contrast. Here's an example I took of a heavily weathered QF-4E...

Nellis17%202.jpg

Crank the contrast a bit, and it looks a lot like those Viper pics above, which have exaggerated wear and tear....

Nellis17.jpg

I also agree that the weathering in this article is way overdone- at least 50% overdone.

You can actually tell your original image is under contrasted as the shadow area under the wing is barely a shadow.

A correctly processed image would be about a third of the way to your over contrasty image example from your under contrast original.

I do know a little about editing when your talking about contrasty images etc.

www.vortexaviationphotography.com

You are correct that the last F-16 image is overly contrasty but the rest of the images are quite well edited and stating they all are is totally incorrect.

Also agree that natural weathering is far more random and less like pre shading in some areas than what many modellers do. The only exception being USN birds with heavy panel edge painting due maintenance.

Maybe a Greek or other bird would of been a better choice but still there are plenty of F-16's to go around in dirty schemes and more subtle shading combined with surface weathering ie fading would of looked better.

However guys saying dirty F-16's don't exist are simply incorrect..

93-0687.jpg?m=1371931250

f-16c_greek_over_skopelos.jpg

Edited by dehowie
Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am overwhelmed by the amount of weathering solutions that are available currently - by one brand! I just use water color sludge wash :unsure: I guess a tutorial such as this might help people like me to grasp what is used where and to what effect. And what products to buy ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am overwhelmed by the amount of weathering solutions that are available currently - by one brand! I just use water color sludge wash :unsure:/> I guess a tutorial such as this might help people like me to grasp what is used where and to what effect. And what products to buy ;)/>

Thadeus,

Excellent idea. I'm all for a tutorial to help when it comes to weathering. It's the one area of modeling that is more subjective then objective.

Joel

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...

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...