I Don't Like Studio Scale Replicas - or Plastruct

[Flintlock]

I've said something similar before. Maybe I stand alone on this, but the whole idea of "replica" is not what gets me enthused about this modeling subject. The thing that keeps me going is the "essence" of the ships. What I like about the X Wing, for example, is what makes the thing an X Wing. It doesn't matter if it's red 5, blue 2, or taupe 13... as long as it is an X wing, I like it just as much as any other, no matter what color its markings are and what it's weathering patterns.

Besides, a replica will never be 100% true to the original. Each builder has different tastes, skill levels, etc... If someone wants me to build something for them and wants it, say, "as a replica of Red 5," then I would do it for them. But when I build something for myself, I like to take creative license with that which is not crucial to the essence of the ship.

Is anyone else of the same opinion?



And what is with Plastruct? Sure, they've been around since before Star Wars, but their stuff is expensive, their website is woefully lacking and hard to navigate, and they have poor customer service. Why doesn't someone with the resources start a rival company, offer the same shapes at lower prices, and beat Plastruct out with an excellent website and customer service? Perhaps many of their structures are overpriced because they are the only game in town. What do the rest of you think?

 

[Nwerke]

Nah, I don't waste time not liking studio scale replicas.

Reggae. That's what I don't like. :lol

 

[moffeaton]

I think Plastruct is probably counting their blessings that they can stay profitable in an increasingly digital world. What are their main clientele - architects? Do they sell nearly as much stuff as they did in the 1970s? I'm guessing they don't update their systems because they don't have the time or resources to devote to that. I think we "hobby model builders" are probably a blip on their ever-decreasing radar. I remember when Chartpak started cutting back their dry transfers in the face of desktop publishing in the early 1990s, and the people who would use Chartpak for special orders and custom transfers were pretty much hung out to dry. Thank god Plastruct still caters to small orders.

As far as studio scale stuff, I am all about the "vibe" of the design. My Y-Wing isn't any one replica. I made a Y-Wing that I personally wanted to see, as it afforded me more creativity. But then again, I like to challenge myself for "historical accuracy" sometimes, so I'm going to make an X-Wing soon, and it's going to absolutely nail one of the originals, warts and all....

 

[ralphee]

Yeah reggae sucks, and pop, and i cant stand dance music lol, but studio replcas, hmm, i guess we all strive for the most accurate, but to be fair, itll never be fully on the money....but damn its fun chasing it!

Like J said, after the TESB ATST scratch (uber accurate),the X wing is one of my upcoming, and im going to do all i can, to make it as close to the Red variant im replicating, and i reckon ill be very close.

lee

 

[MonsieurTox]

I build my models the way I want and I dont care if they are not 100% screen accurate. What I like to do is more building the model like it was done (same materials, same sturctures etc) but I really dont care about the details.

Regarding Plastruct, they are a bit long to ship (well probably cuz I'm in Europe ) but the costs are very attractive for me. If I had to buy the stuff here, it would cost me at least twice the price of Plastruct (shipping included). And of course Plastruct has a lot of choice...

 

[Nwerke]

Plastruct do mainly sell to architectural model firms, I have been told. A *ton* of their stuff goes to models of oil and gas plants. Have a look at one of those things some time, literally every single part will be from the Plastruct catalogue. Deep pockets in the oil industry...

 

[Nwerke]

I'm a little conflicted on the accuracy question. A Falcon or Star Destroyer scratchbuild that uses non-screen kit parts, but nails the proportions well and the colours and style of greeblie-ing, gets my respect just fine. If it's what the effects pros would have done then so what? It's US who go super-anal on this stuff, not them.

If you'd taken the Executor back into the ILM shop in 1989 and asked them to restore all the kit parts that had come off, they wouldn't have been poring over old photos for the next two years; they'd have been gluing parts on in less time than it has taken me to write this.

OTOH, for a kit, that does demand more accuracy. How you *build* the kit is up to you, but the basics should be there and be correct.

 

[moffeaton]

If you'd taken the Executor back into the ILM shop in 1989 and asked them to restore all the kit parts that had come off, they wouldn't have been poring over old photos for the next two years; they'd have been gluing parts on in less time than it has taken me to write this.

ILM actually DID do that, rather recently. From what I was told, the Executor was accidentally DROPPED while being crated (or uncrated?) for one of the exhibits, and the thing shattered into a gabillion pieces. So LFL "hired" ILM to restore it. They did, for something approaching what the dang model cost to begin with (not surprising - it must have been a NIGHTMARE jigsaw puzzle).

Here's the part that makes you laugh - when I was at the archives, post restoration, I saw a ziplock baggie on a dusty shelf in the cargo staging area with a modest pile of painted plastic chips inside - grey-painted styrene scraps with glue blobs on them, for all intents and purposes. It was labeled something like "Executor leftover bits". Yeah - the poor Executor had "casualties" in the process of restoration. So it must have been like putting a car engine back together, and finding a couple of lug nuts leftover, lol! I showed the bag to the guy standing next to me, we both laughed and shook our heads in amazement, and back on the shelf it went (placed reverently).

 

[Flintlock]

Good replies. If someone sets out to build "THE MILLENNIUM FALCON," or "THE RED 5," then by all means, get it as close as possible. What I am personally not enthused about is actually building "THE RED 5." I would rather build an X Wing - that is, using the indefinite article, rather than the definite.

When it comes to kit parts, I absolutely agree that it should be as close as possible, and that variant parts should be taken into account too. Just that it should not necessarily be as close as possible to any particular model. That's what I mean by the "essence" of the model. On the other hand, if you take all different kit parts, like Bill George did with his Y Wing, then that destroys the essence of the Y Wing. Or, rather, it creates 2 essences: The Original Y Wing and the Bill George Y Wing. My particular favorite is the Original Y Wing, and therefore I would strive to preserve that essence, but not necessarily try to recreate any one of the particular ANH Y Wings.

As far as Plastruct goes - if a competent company targeted hobby builders, as well as the architectural firms, perhaps they could "underhand" the market and win much of the market over. But when it comes to the website, there really is no excuse. We are in a different age now. My roommate designs websites for companies - they could hire someone like him to do it.

I just think that the technology exists where someone could offer the same shapes as Plastruct at a significantly lower price. Hobby stuff is way over-priced to begin with.

Thanks for the comments, fellas! Keep them coming.

 

[Nwerke]

ARRGH, JASON, AAARRRGHHH! As if what happened to the Cygnus wasn't bad enough, now my OTHER favourite ship is ruined, LOL!

I kinda knew something had happened. The whole mass of detail under the fantail is pulling away from the hull plates above, there are thousands of missing parts, brass stripping is bent, the list goes on. I had been putting it down to age and wear and tear, though, not something as violent as that. Horrible. Do you have any idea when this might have happened? Will have to be more careful with my reference photos than I thought.

 

[Treadwell]

Isn't Evergreen a competitor of Plastruct?

 

[Flintlock]

Isn't Evergreen a competitor of Plastruct?

Not quite. Evergreen sells more sheet styrene, but Plastruct has a lot more structural shapes and larger sized tubes. They also have hemispheres and flat dishes, which are useful to our kind of people, but Evergreen does not. Not to mention, Evergreen is way over-priced as well. Why do you think people go to local plastics suppliers to get 4'x8' sheets? Surely this stuff can be produced pretty cheaply...

 

[faustus100]

I like both ideas.I think that when it comes to ships where there are many different ones-(ie: x wing,y wing etc) artistic license is great!It makes perfect sense that there would be variants in the group.There are people who have the talent to turn those out.
However-I believe that when there is ONE model of a subject you should try to get it as close as possible.Thats not to say that there arent great models out there that arent"studio accurate".
I dont find Plastruct prices to be that unreasonable.And for SS builders its great to find some of the same stuff still around from the old days.

Oh-I hate Raggae also:rolleyes

 

[nightrider]

I know people enjoy seeing these exhibits, but there's a part of me that would just rather know these iconic pieces of art are sitting safely in one location and as protected as they can be. They should create a museum of their own, and if people would like to see the props then they can take a vacation.:lol Carting and shipping this stuff all over the place is taking it's toll on these things and I wonder what they'll look like in another 30 years time.

 

[nightrider]

Oh, to get back on topic, I agree Flintlock. With many of the ships I prefer seeing a little personal inspiration put into them vs. trying to replicate every detail and mark. My one exception would probably be the Falcon. I love the studio paintjob on that ship so much that I would want that replicated as closely as possible to the original.

When I do my X-wing and BR the basic markings and panels will be the same, but I'm not going to try and match weathering exactly to a particular filming model, just the overall look is what's important to me.

 

[eagle1]

I agree that our studio-scale replicas should be as close to the originals as possible in essence but having said that now and again some artistic licence comes into play. I feel that the majority of builders here strive for the utmost for accuracy and it shows in the building and finishing of the end product. My TieBomber is nearing completion but have yet to find the one kit I need to finish it but I will scratch that part and probably live with the knowledge that the part wasn't original, not that any one could tell the difference anyway!.
Regarding Plastruct I have found them awesome to deal with online with swift orders and availability of products. The hobby shops here in New Zealand only carry a modest amount of stock unlike Evergreen which has a huge stand where I live.
As for Allied Electronics, Don't get me started, Araahhhh!!.
Stu

 

[Howard]

And what is with Plastruct?...and they have poor customer service. What do the rest of you think?

What experience did you have with their customer service?

I was looking for a particular part, telephoned them, very helpful lady - she scanned in a couple of pages from the trade catalogue and emailed them to me, and there was the part. She even called me back on the phone!

 

[8 perf]

"Studio Scale" is the easy part, "Studio Accurate' is another story all together. Personally, i build for my own likes and dislikes while remaining true to the 'flavor' of the original design.
As for plastruct and Evergreen, both. Just remember, Plastic parts are all made from petroleum by-products. As goes the gas, so goes the plastic.

 

[vaderdarth]

I like adding my own twists to these larger models. I find that by haphazardly gluing bits together and then gluing those to the model, not only does it take less time, it looks better than trying to make a certain area look a certain way in alot of cases. I've been building the RC SD kit and the coolest thing I've discovered is that the same old parts you keep gluing on, if you glue a few of those together and flip them around, you get tons of new and interesting looking details. Keeps the boredom to a minimum.

I'd be willing to wager that not one single ANH or ESB or ROTJ prop looked the same at the beginning of the production AND and the end of the production......much less today!!! I'll bet things got knocked off and replaced and positioned wrong the entire time they were filming. I'll bet not one single ILM made model looks the same today as it did on set.

Dave

 

[nightrider]

I think your right Dave, and I'm sure many will look much different still after being dropped, knocked, and generally abused over the coming years.:unsure