Red 6 X-Wing pics [Finished]

StevenBills

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I did a quick build of a 1/72 Bandai X-Wing as Red 6, with a few artistic (read: lazy) liberties here and there. Not really any WIP pics, but here are some completed ones.

Base coat is AS-20. Red stripes were masked and painted with nine parts red and one part hull red. Yellow is a mix of deck tan and yellow. Weathered with pastels and Tamiya panel line paint for the droid strip to help the krazy detail in that area pop a bit.


IMG_9755.jpg

IMG_9754.jpg

IMG_9757.jpg

IMG_9750.jpg

IMG_9765.jpg

IMG_9752.jpg

To see more pics go here: https://flic.kr/s/aHsma6VfPN

Thanks for looking!

SB
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9744.jpg
    IMG_9744.jpg
    986.3 KB · Views: 340
I did a quick build of a 1/72 Bandai X-Wing as Red 6, with a few artistic (read: lazy) liberties here and there. Not really any WIP pics, but here are some completed ones.

Base coat is AS-20. Red stripes were masked and painted with nine parts red and one part hull red. Yellow is a mix of deck tan and yellow. Weathered with pastels and Tamiya panel line paint for the droid strip to help the krazy detail in that area pop a bit.


View attachment 769647

View attachment 769646

View attachment 769643

View attachment 769645

View attachment 769642

View attachment 769644

To see more pics go here: https://flic.kr/s/aHsma6VfPN

Thanks for looking!

SB
Very nice work! Especially at this small scale.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 
I concur with the statements posted above . Congratulations on a terrific build .

If I may , and apologies in advance if asking this here is inappropriate , but , is there a site or thread you could recommend for researching the colour schemes / patterns used for the various x-wings seen in the OT ? To be honest , I’ve tried taking screenshots , but they don’t turn out too well regarding details to work from .

Thanks , Ged
 
Thanks, @VFX Freak, but honestly it pales in comparison to your 1/72 FM Red 3. Now THAT'S a thing of beauty!

And thanks for the kind comments, all. Here's a photo of my faux photography studio in my basement:

faux studio.jpg

Just some black material clamped onto the back of some extra chairs, and then pulled so that there's a gradual curve up to the back. Then I add in two LED video lights with some diffusion on them, and that's pretty much it. Nothing special.

@gedmac66, one of the places that I go to for reference is Modeler's Miniatures & Magic website here: http://www.modelermagic.com/ Search for which bird you are looking for, and then peruse through until you find pics of the original. I'm sure others can chime in with other resources as well.

Again, thanks for looking!

SB
 
For those wondering about the photography and post processing, here's a little explanation.

I shoot with a full-frame Canon DSLR, using a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens that's stopped down to f/22 (to get a maximum amount of the model in focus), and then I set the shutter speed to around 2 to 2.5 seconds (depending on the shot) in order to compensate for how closed down the lens' aperture is. (Think of exposure like a balancing act: if you use one method [aperture] to make things dark, then to lighten the image back up to the proper exposure again you use either a longer shutter speed [letting more light hit the sensor], or ISO).

Then I bring the raw files into Photoshop, where I deepen the black background and paint out and dust specks as well as the stand and recenter the model for better composition (if necessary). The process is the same as the video below, except this video was for some of my brother's LEGO models that he's built:


So yeah, a bit of post-production fudging going on there, but nothing huge.

And theyrenotdolls, actual references for Red 6 are extremely scarce and closely guarded (annoyingly), so I just used this and this and this.

SB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's way nicer than my photography setup. Mine is literally a $1 white poster board curved into a cyclorama sat between my kitchen light and my dining room light. Works, though.

bGY8J62.jpg
 
Great job on Red 6. It inspires me to build this one myself - it's one of the few X wings I haven't done yet.

Nice photography too.

cheers,

K.
 
That's way nicer than my photography setup. Mine is literally a $1 white poster board curved into a cyclorama sat between my kitchen light and my dining room light. Works, though.

https://i.imgur.com/bGY8J62.jpg

Hey, whatever works! I really dig the white background. That's an excellent build, also.

And thanks, Keiko. Red 6 is certainly a unique paint job.

SB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For those wondering about the photography and post processing, here's a little explanation.

I shoot with a full-frame Canon DSLR, using a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens that's stopped down to f/22 (to get a maximum amount of the model in focus), and then I set the shutter speed to around 2 to 2.5 seconds (depending on the shot) in order to compensate for how closed down the lens' aperture is. (Think of exposure like a balancing act: if you use one method [aperture] to make things dark, then to lighten the image back up to the proper exposure again you use either a longer shutter speed [letting more light hit the sensor], or ISO).

Then I bring the raw files into Photoshop, where I deepen the black background and paint out and dust specks as well as the stand and recenter the model for better composition (if necessary). The process is the same as the video below, except this video was for some of my brother's LEGO models that he's built:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BugfUaD1yE&feature=youtu.be

So yeah, a bit of post-production fudging going on there, but nothing huge.

And @theyrenotdolls, actual references for Red 6 are extremely scarce and closely guarded (annoyingly), so I just used this and this and this.

SB

Getting the whole model in focus is something I often struggle with.

I have heard some "pros" use the image stacking technique where they take multiple images ( like may 2 to 4 or so) that have different focal points and then "stack" them using a a program that will basically combine the sharpest parts of all of them into one

I've got a Canon EOS DSLR. i'll have to try playing around with the manual settings. I typically just stick it on "macro" mode, or full auto without flash and stand farther back, then crop later. Macro mode tends to have a small depth of field. Standing back and cropping sometimes leads to fuzzy pics since it essentially gets dgitally zoomed in so much

Sometimes though it just won't work from certain angles to stay in focus for the whole depth of field
 
Getting the whole model in focus is something I often struggle with.

I have heard some "pros" use the image stacking technique where they take multiple images ( like may 2 to 4 or so) that have different focal points and then "stack" them using a a program that will basically combine the sharpest parts of all of them into one

I've got a Canon EOS DSLR. i'll have to try playing around with the manual settings. I typically just stick it on "macro" mode, or full auto without flash and stand farther back, then crop later. Macro mode tends to have a small depth of field. Standing back and cropping sometimes leads to fuzzy pics since it essentially gets dgitally zoomed in so much

Sometimes though it just won't work from certain angles to stay in focus for the whole depth of field

Yeah focus stacking images is a common technique in order to get the depth of field from front to back. It really makes you appreciate the old ways of shooting models on bluescreen like how ILM did it, because there certainly wasn't any focus stacking going on in the optical compositing days! They had to get the whole model in focus, meaning they stopped down to T/8-16, which means pumping out TONS of light in order to get the proper exposure. Cool stuff though.

SB
 
I've been away working and didn't see this until now. Thanks for the kind words! And that's a very nice photo setup for one that's easy to put away. And that's a very lovingly photographed roll of tape!
 
This thread is more than 6 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top