greebling issues and philosophy?

[goblingilmartin]

I'm working on the greebles for a project, I have more than I can possibly choose from and still be within good taste. Gundam bits, warhammer bits, some star wars bits, etc. But I'm running into a couple of roadblocks, some physical, some mental.

Is there a "philosophy" to greebling? a logic I can keep in my head to avoid the final product becoming a garbage-y mess? I've put quite a few bucks towards this project and I don't want to ruin it with my own overzealousness.

My physical hurdle is that the body piece I'm working with has curved sides (A model van), but most of the pieces I'm using have flat bases. is there an efficient way to make them flush with the surface of the piece? beyond carving things down, possibly some kind of filler material that I can put underneath, and then shape or cut?

Thanks in advance for any input I receive, I'm really eager to get started with this project.

 

[Rogviler]

I don't know about a set rule, but you can never go wrong with thinking of each piece you put on as if it were a real component that does a specific job. If you think of its function then any wires or plumbing will look natural.

I don't think random ever looks good, even though a lot of greeblies appear random.

As for shaping the bottom of a flat piece to match a curve, I usually put a piece of sandpaper over the curved area and carefully sand the bit down until it lays flush all around. Barring that, you can get it close and then backfill with putty once it's glued in place.

-Rog

 

[Clerval]

Random:

You have to have areas of visual rest, you can't change the overall form of the shape it's being applied to, areas can get busy quickly so work with small groups. If the bits are really breaking the silhouette of the main form, back up and see if it's adding interest and not altering the shape, tack pieces into place at first, then live with it a few days. Larger pieces that flow back into your shape imply intent, smaller pieces, more light catchers and shadow casters, can give you complexity, but are random and you have to decide on the aesthetic early and keep it consistent front to rear. Many a greeblie have died under a chisel. Start with this: on a surface, it's design; cut into/under a surface, it's function. If you put something on that shouldn't be there, take it off. Same is true of the opposite. If your model isn't physically large, under-do it at first, it's too easy to kill scale. Look at old locomotive, marine engineering, aircraft graveyards, etc...

 

[mash3d]

Keep in mind greebles are meant to add detail and break up bare patches of the model.
Also think about the scale of the greebles vs the scale of the model.
Look at the details on the Millennium Falcon vs the scale of details on a Star Destroyer.
The size of the details vs the size of the model will help give a sense of scale.

As far as shaping the parts get a contour gauge. Get one of the metal ones you can get in a hardware store.
Use it to the outline of the shape you are trying to match. Now either find a similar shape, piece of PVC pipe etc.
Or make one out of wood. Then glue a piece of sandpaper to it.
Now you can sand down the part to roughly fit and fill in the rest with gap filling superglue or filler.

 

[Jedi Dade]

The way I do it - Its got to look like its got a purpose... IF it looks like some sort of pump - then there should be pipes involved If it looks like a motor there should be a purpose for a motor in that part of the model - at least in your head.

If it starts to look like a Borg cube - you've gone too far

Jedi Dade

 

[Teddz]

:lol

 

[Richard Baker]

I start by looking at what each part of the ship/vehicle/device does then try to find detail greebly which look like the function. One caveat is that the parts should not be recognizable to their source- Once you see the tank bodies on the Millennium Falcon or the engine deck of the TOS Galactica you can never unsee them. Railroad Engine parts are great for that- most are unfamiliar. I also use heavier pars on the underside of the build to give it a more industrial feel and the heavier shadowing.

Nothing ruins the look of a model that having it appear the builder covered it in glue and then rolled it around the parts stash. Less is more.

 

[TazMan2000]

It appears that you're doing so, but apply parts that are not readily identifiable. If you use tank parts, try and avoid using the wheels too much, unless you dress them up with parts that can obscure their nature. Solid brass wire can be used to make more of an authentic look. Paraphrasing Rogviler, but you have to make it look like it belongs there. If a "real-world" space ship was constructed, most of the greebles would be engineered under the skin. With use and upgrades, panels could go missing, revealing the components underneath, or in-field upgrades needed to get done in order to upgrade the system and piping and components would be bolted to the top. With ships that fly through atmosphere, more than likely these greebles would not be on the surface in order maintain aerodynamics, however, there are numerous exceptions, like the ESB Snowspeeder and, of course, the MIllennium Falcon.

There is a right way and wrong way to do it. Google models from the movie Starcrash. This would be an example of how NOT to do it. Greeblying is more of an art, and not a science. I've seen some common components used that look surprisingly convincing, and some not so common pieces used that make the model look worse, because the pieces were not properly placed. You have to have a good imagination as well. Some of the greebles you place may look odd and out of place when on top of a different color of plastic, but when covered in paint, will almost blend in to the shape of the model.

Take your time. Try out the positioning of pieces several times. Depending on the model, I find that placing greebles can be a more time consuming process than building the original model.

TazMan2000

 

[Richard Baker]

'Starcrash' is an epic example- they built foam core models and gave them to a bunch of school children along with tables of model kits. A lo tof the times they just glued the whole sprue on, parts still on the tree.

 

[pave spectre]

'Starcrash' is an epic example- they built foam core models and gave them to a bunch of school children along with tables of model kits. A lo tof the times they just glued the whole sprue on, parts still on the tree.

Holy crap it looks like you are right!


That is both hilarious and sad.

 

[rbeach84]

How to make a model look "real":

Fool the eye by creating a visual complexity using paint, multi-layered 3D details, intricate designs and/or shadow-casting textures.

Weathering, detailing, lighting effects, etc. all aim for the same result: imply the reflectance of a full sized surface. Inclusion of discerned scaled objects (such as figures) aids the illusion.

Why did the Borg Cube ship look so good (in spite of the simplistic shape) and the 'Starcrash' ships look, eh, not so much when both used essentially a bunch of 'sprue' details? The main difference would be the aforementioned concept of 'functional arrangement'. Obviously, the experience of the model shops (and the associated budgets) had a bearing on the results, but you get the idea. Choosing an underlying 'theme' will help guide any detailing efforts by establishing some kind of standard framework for the seeming chaos.

Regards, Robert

 

[mung]

I wrote up a guide to kit part detailing on my blogsite a few years ago.

http://rcscifi.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/model-kit-part-detailing-guide.html

It distills the lessons I learned in studying the masters of the craft into some basic guidelines.

1. CONNECT - The parts should appear to connect to each other, either with pipes, ducts or more abstractedly as a flow of parts. Basically they need to look like they do something, whether it be electrical, hydraulic or mechanical.
2. RECESS - Wherever possible chunky detail always looks the best when below the surface or recessed. It can be in a trench or a hole or where a panel has been removed. The other possibility is to build up around an area so it appears recessed. Avoid just gluing big lumpy detail parts on top of the surface. Flat details such as panels, piping and ducting are OK .
3. CLUMPING - Probably the most important rule. Detail should not be evenly spaced across the surface, it should clump together, much like trees clump together in a landscape.There should be a contrasting range of areas of very little detail and spots of intense detail. The clumps of detail may then connect together using pipes or ducts.The heights ofthe chunky detail should also be clumped like a grove of trees, taller in the centre and smaller as the clump radiates out, with some random variation.
4. RANDOM - This is more of a re-inforcement of the Clumping rule, in that if you are going after a random distribution of detail, make sure that the spacing between each section is also random. One of the mistakes you can make is to randomly place detail in terms of location across the surface, but each location is about the same distance away from each other. Some areas of detail should be close to each other and some should be a long way apart, this is again the clumping rule. Also randomise the shapes, mix round with rectangular etc.
5. THICKNESS - Where possible vary the thickness of panels, ducts, channels etc.
6. ASYMMETRY - This is up to you, sometimes symmetry is appropriate, but asymmetry can look cool. It really depends on the subject.
7. SCALE - The scale of the detail should match the scale of the subject. As a general suggestion, smaller scaled model kits 1/350 and above down to 1/72 suit small scale surfaces. Larger scale subjects require larger scaled lumps, 1/35 up to 1/12 scale kit parts. This is not a hard and fast rule it is just that too much fine detail on a 1/12 scale model starts to look odd as does 1/12 scale parts on a 1/500 scale model. I'm talking about surface detail here, larger scale model parts can become the actual structure of a small scale model quite happily which then get a layer of fine surface detail. Large and small here refers to the scale not to the size of the model. You can make a 1/1000 scale spaceship model 3 metres long if you want.
8. MULTIPLES - When buying model kits it is often advantageous to have repeats of the same detail. Sometimes a kit may have multiples of the same part in it but if you can,for a really large model, get more than one of the same kit. The other option is to make a master detail section and mold and cast multiples of the panel. It is possible however that for the hobbyist, the cost of the molding and casting materials exceeds that of a multiple kit purchase.

Hope that helps,

mung.

 

[bwayne64]

And the most important rule, there must be at least one Sealab Iii part on it, or it doesn't count,