What Defines a Commercial Kit?

I just want to say people... Get A Life! It's just a sub-forum.

DaveG said:

...when someone flat out says "you belong at another site (DeAg's forums) not here" that can come off as snobbery and certainly isn't welcoming.

Click to expand...

I said that.
But I didn't say "site" - I said "forum". You're still on the same site. This is still the RPF.
I admit I could have been nicer about it, but I was drinking and I tend to be curt when I'm drinking.
Apologies if I offended anyone.

I have yet to build a studio scale model, but this forum has been a source of inspiration for me for 15 years now.
I poke my head in here often just to gawk in admiration at the stuff these guys are doing.
One day when I have more money than sense and I've gone completely off my rocker, I'm going to try my hand at a SS Millennium Falcon.
(The size of my lottery jackpot will determine it's scale)

The difference between "Studio Scale Modeling" and the DeAgo Falcon is this:

Studio Scale modeling is pouring over reference pictures, identifying parts, agonizing over measurements, drawing and redrawing blueprints, spending years collecting kits, and learning new techniques and processes.
It can cost several thousand dollars and take several years to build a studio-accurate scale model.
It takes passion, dedication, and probably a small touch of insanity.
I've seen it ruin marriages. I saw a guy frozen to death in his own garage with a tube of glue in one hand and a panzer deck in the other, because his wife left him and he didn't notice and no one paid the heating bill.

The DeAgo comes pre-formed, pre-painted, pre-packaged, fits nicely into a modest budget, and goes together with screws.
It's mass-manufactured for public consumption by a corporation with a commercial license.

I would recommend you watch this video clip, and if, once it's finished if you still don't understand the difference between the two forums then.. there's a good chance you'll never get it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sCReGjfZ_A

kbilly said:

I would recommend you watch this video clip, and if, once it's finished if you still don't understand the difference between the two forums then.. there's a good chance you'll never get it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sCReGjfZ_A

Click to expand...

I certainly get it, but considering this sub section was created to prevent clogging up the SERIOUS modellers pages, there seems to be a lot of interest from the old guard :-0

I've been meaning to start my own DeAgostini Falcon build thread, but wanted to be sure it went into the right forum! :cool

But now I'm thinking about grinding all of the surface panels smooth and then redoing the hull plating out of styrene sheet and using kit parts where possible. I wonder if then it would qualify as "Studio Scale" and I could return to posting with the grown ups?

:cool

I think the mods should just call this sub forum (Deagostini Builds). This way people won’t think they are belittled having a commercial kit. Woopty doo I say. I love the kit but it was plain to see it was clogging up the forum and who knows how many build threads of the same thing will appear. I think it’s great that there now all in the one place.

DaveG said:

But now I'm thinking about grinding all of the surface panels smooth and then redoing the hull plating out of styrene sheet and using kit parts where possible. I wonder if then it would qualify as "Studio Scale" and I could return to posting with the grown ups?

:cool

Click to expand...

Yeah show us !

Im sure the mods will move it once you're done !

Would be faster to scratch build it I bet.

DaveG said:

But now I'm thinking about grinding all of the surface panels smooth and then redoing the hull plating out of styrene sheet and using kit parts where possible. I wonder if then it would qualify as "Studio Scale" and I could return to posting with the grown ups?

:cool

Click to expand...

Yeah grinding the panels would be a nightmare...

I know a few people that are suggesting this, I'm not sure why!! It would make sense to scratch one with al that cash being thrown at something that will never be its peer

Once its painted it will look fine, its a great model but it aint going to get better with just kit parts, the plating is soft and the combo of this with Kit add ons would look wrong to the eye as much as not using them..... Use the deagastini to help you size and build a scratch version

Wow! I can't believe I was being taken seriously with that suggestion! Can't you folks tell sarcasm when you hear it? What a colossal waste of time and money that would be!

Some people do just that! Look at all the people who start with the oversized Hasbro Falcon and X-Wing and add details/tear it down/rebuild it.

Some times I think it serves as a confidence booster - you may not realize you can scratch build anything, but maybe if you start from something, ANYTHING, it will "work out" the way you want it to....

I have seen the Hasbro rebuilds, and that kinds of makes sense as they are cheap and in need of considerable work to be made to look decent. And, until the DeAg Falcon came along, a good way to get started on an almost stdio scale model. (There were a lot of sets of upgrade parts for the hasbro falcon being sold off on Ebay once the DeAg came out!)

And I'm pretty sure I can scratch build anything!

Ooh, ooh, as a recent hijacker, can have a go at this?

First off, the D.Falcon is actually pretty rad! Nuff said.

Second, I am not the almighty authority on SS model making, although I do understand it. Therefore, here is my humble opinion.

I look at this by applying the 90-10 rule (or something close to this). 90% as much effort and 10% modification still makes it SS to me.

Using similar materials and methods to build the main structure.....SS? Yes.

Using mostly same greeblies...SS? Yes.

The 10% modification comes from changing small details such as choosing to build a clean TIE wingstar instead of one riddled with air bubbles. Or maybe even installing a studio accurate cockpit in a Blue X, which was originally empty. Or how about using current technology such as CNC instead of wonky, hand-cut models....sure! These are just a few of examples from the endless combination of scenarios.

Overall, does the model (it's origin, construction, and detail) closelu capture the essence of the real thing? Then it is SS. The D.Falcon does not. It includes a full interior AND different cockpit then the 32"er. I also can't find one real greeblie. These things are the primary reasons that it is not SS.

I also believe that most SS garage kits should remain in SS and not here since a lot of research and time has been spent replicating the originals. The fact that the person assembling it didn't actually build it is an irrelevant point. It still REPLICATES the original model.

This isn't due to the "seriousness" of the builder. Hell, I have yet to finish my AMT Fed Tank because I require it to resemble the movie model as possible. Regardless of how close I feel it looks, I would never call it SS. Same with the ERTL Falcon. It's close in size with the 32"er. I've seen some fantastic re-builds on that kit. But, it's still not SS. However, are the builders really talented and SERIOUS builders? Hell yeah!

Seriousness is often mistaken for how anal retentive some of us are. The quest to replicate as close to 100% detail (e.g. replicating signatures on the model, replicating wonkiness, using actual kits produced in a specific era, etc) is a personal choice but should not make you a better SS model maker than the next guy; just a more deeply invested one.

Look at Lasse Henning. I know he has been featured here as SS building. I respectfully disagree. However, he's one of the best (and most serious) model makers on the planet and responsible for encouraging thousands of model makers (myself included) to scratch build. The fact that he doesn't devote himself to exact replication does not take anything away from his amazing skills.

The fact of the matter is, the D.Falcon is a kit much like a Bandai or Revell kit, just on a different level. Not sure why it has its own sub-forum, really. Does that mean all ERTL, Revell, etc., builds need to migrate from General to here? Much more confusing, IMO.

Now, if the hull is close in dimensions to the actual model, I'd kill to see someone shave off all the incorrect greeblies, replace them with actual ones, ditch the interior, and correct the cockpit. That, IMO would make it SS.

Cool builds nontheless and I recommend it over building the actual thing. Many a gray hair have resulted from my build! LOL!

Joe

joewhite said:

Or maybe even installing a studio accurate cockpit in a Blue X, which was originally empty. Or how about using current technology such as CNC instead of wonky, hand-cut models....sure! These are just a few of examples from the endless combination of scenarios.

Overall, does the model (it's origin, construction, and detail) closelu capture the essence of the real thing? Then it is SS. The D.Falcon does not. It includes a full interior AND different cockpit then the 32"er. I also can't find one real greeblie. These things are the primary reasons that it is not SS.

I also believe that most SS garage kits should remain in SS and not here since a lot of research and time has been spent replicating the originals. The fact that the person assembling it didn't actually build it is an irrelevant point. It still REPLICATES the original model.

Joe

Click to expand...

It doesn't work when someone brings up the interior. No one is going to argue that maybe there was an interior in the filming models, but other people have posted that they will do what I'm going to do--close that baby up and seal it tight. Not buying a single AM thing for the interior, not painting, etc. I'll put it in there just so I have a place to store it and it might support the structure. I can't imagine there is a way to leave it "openable" and not show in some way, so I'll glue it down, just like any other model part. As for the cockpit, that's a little like your mention of putting a cockpit into a Blue X. Finally, IF (and it's very big "if" that I don't know the answer to) what's left is a ship that is very, very, very close to the 32-inch filming model--or, dare I say it, exactly--then, it starts to sound like a SS kit "using current technology such as CNC instead of wonky, hand-cut models."

If you can't find any greeblies, either you haven't looked or we have a different understanding of the word greeblie. What comes to mind is the details under the engine exhaust, for instance. I haven't seen how the upper engine deck will be, but I hope it's full of separate (what I think of as) greeblies because that area really needs that feel.

If garage kits count as SS because of all the research and time spent to replicate the originals, well, again, we're back to the DeAgo kit, which has indeed required a lot of research and time.

None of this is meant to argue that the D. Falcon is in fact SS. But the arguments tend to be full of fallacies and holes and inconsistencies. What I have come to understand about SS is that it is about a model that is the same as the filming model with all or nearly all details matching. This is why a certain 1/24th scale resin Y-wing being sold is not SS--too much, or total, creative license with the details. Seems like a more cut and clear case. My understanding is that the D.Falcon doesn't have this same issue. It has all kinds of details molded on that would be separate greeblies on something build from scratch. But even the available SS kits (those still accepted as such, I guess) have greeblies that were originally separate parts molded together as one. I don't think too many people think that the D.Falcon is a simpler way to get to something on the same level as one of the ships build from scratch, but there is definitely a movement to make that expressly clear.

Dedalus5550 said:

It doesn't work when someone brings up the interior. No one is going to argue that maybe there was an interior in the filming models, but other people have posted that they will do what I'm going to do--close that baby up and seal it tight. Not buying a single AM thing for the interior, not painting, etc. I'll put it in there just so I have a place to store it and it might support the structure. I can't imagine there is a way to leave it "openable" and not show in some way, so I'll glue it down, just like any other model part. As for the cockpit, that's a little like your mention of putting a cockpit into a Blue X. Finally, IF (and it's very big "if" that I don't know the answer to) what's left is a ship that is very, very, very close to the 32-inch filming model--or, dare I say it, exactly--then, it starts to sound like a SS kit "using current technology such as CNC instead of wonky, hand-cut models."

If you can't find any greeblies, either you haven't looked or we have a different understanding of the word greeblie. What comes to mind is the details under the engine exhaust, for instance. I haven't seen how the upper engine deck will be, but I hope it's full of separate (what I think of as) greeblies because that area really needs that feel.

If garage kits count as SS because of all the research and time spent to replicate the originals, well, again, we're back to the DeAgo kit, which has indeed required a lot of research and time.

None of this is meant to argue that the D. Falcon is in fact SS. But the arguments tend to be full of fallacies and holes and inconsistencies. What I have come to understand about SS is that it is about a model that is the same as the filming model with all or nearly all details matching. This is why a certain 1/24th scale resin Y-wing being sold is not SS--too much, or total, creative license with the details. Seems like a more cut and clear case. My understanding is that the D.Falcon doesn't have this same issue. It has all kinds of details molded on that would be separate greeblies on something build from scratch. But even the available SS kits (those still accepted as such, I guess) have greeblies that were originally separate parts molded together as one. I don't think too many people think that the D.Falcon is a simpler way to get to something on the same level as one of the ships build from scratch, but there is definitely a movement to make that expressly clear.

Click to expand...

I think you have made a very valid and succinct statement there and I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Personally I am glad that the Deagostini Falcon threads were moved, so that now builders can post their builds without the threads being hijacked.
My main gripe now is that the rules of what is considered "Studio Scale" have not been updated. By the very definition of these rules, the Deago Falcon still qualifies as Studio Scale.

craig g said:

I think you have made a very valid and succinct statement there and I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Personally I am glad that the Deagostini Falcon threads were moved, so that now builders can post their builds without the threads being hijacked.
My main gripe now is that the rules of what is considered "Studio Scale" have not been updated. By the very definition of these rules, the Deago Falcon still qualifies as Studio Scale.

Click to expand...

Well, yeah, there is that definition.
" By that we mean models that match the size and scale of minatures created during filming. Also on topic would be kitbashing, scratchbuilding, discovering original parts and and other tips in relation to the replication of studio scale models."

But now that I think of it, the easy defense is that this is a "subforum" of SS. Maybe SS needs two distinct forums for "People who roll up their sleeves" and "People who just don't have as much time/energy/money."

Dedalus5550 said:

Maybe SS needs two distinct forums for "People who roll up their sleeves" and "People who just don't have as much time/energy/money."

Click to expand...

Not worth it

It would seem some of us completely missed the fact that this forum was created as a sub-forum of the Studio Scale Models Forum...