DONE! » Prototype 01 Vincent [Futuristic] 1/20 Scale

[finescalerr]

You are yet another example of how school usually tries to destroy creativity, talent, and intelligent thinking. You had to leave it before you could blossom. -- Russ

[Frederic Testard]

It can be published in an industrial magazine and be beautiful for us modellers too. Have a look there

http://www.graphite-garage.com/illustration/ATELIERS/ateliers.html

and don't forget to go there too :

http://www.graphite-garage.com/illustration/ARCHIVES%20DIVERSES/archives2.html

Russ, school has helped me to go far beyond where I would be without it, and gave my brain many many opportunities to explore places it would never have visited otherwise. I'm a bit surprised someone as intelligent as you should have such a radical opinion over an institution that features so many different aspects.

[finescalerr]

I don't want to disrupt this thread, Frederic, so I'll merely say this: Your school system and the ones I suffered through may have differed in approach and quality. I include in that general condemnation my undergraduate education at UCLA and advanced studies at what was then the best graduate school in the USA: U.C. Berkeley. If anyone wants to compare notes, we could open a new thread on this subject in the Blue Room. -- Russ

[RoughboyModelworks]

It's definitely better than the dreaded and god-awful comic sans. Ugh.

Boy ain't that the truth... Ray there are many sites online where you can download free fonts. You might try Abstract Fonts or 1001 Fonts for starters. They're not always the best quality fonts but can work for many undemanding uses. I also have several thousand fonts in my archive, so let me know if there's something specific you're looking for and can't find, I may just have it.

We have surprisingly similar backgrounds Michael. Schooling was very similar except I majored in editorial cartooning, design and photography ultimately moving on to a photography-related career then editorial design. In the mid-90s I worked as a designer and web master for a poncy Arabian Horse magazine and established their first web site... god they were a bunch of self-absorbed snooty broads though I did have the opportunity to deal with Charlie Watts who is a gentleman "farmer" with an incredible horse ranch in the UK... who'd a thought.

Paul

[Frederic Testard]

I don't want to disrupt this thread, Frederic, so I'll merely say this: Your school system and the ones I suffered through may have differed in approach and quality. I include in that general condemnation my undergraduate education at UCLA and advanced studies at what was then the best graduate school in the USA: U.C. Berkeley. If anyone wants to compare notes, we could open a new thread on this subject in the Blue Room. -- Russ

But what could we say, Russ? The son of an uneducated (I haven't said un-intelligent) truck driver and his even less educated wife shows a good talent for mathematics and school allows him to become a university teacher. We were several in the group of students I belonged to to be in quite analog situations, so for us school means a lot. And that's what I still try to give to my own students, the desire to become better and go further.

[JohnP]

Tom's earlier comment about imagination is profound, because I think he is a pretty open minded guy from what he has posted. But I must agree in the sense that FitchenFoo's overall view is so inclusive. The story, the diorama scene, the beautiful machine- all blended wonderfully. I think it is useful to have a pulse behind the machine that is being modeled. I always felt guilty for not paying attention to things like diesel fan screens or hood door counts, but what does that really bring to a model? The machine was made by people for a reason the people dictate, and it should somehow reflect that feeling. This fantasy robot diorama is more realistic than many a model railroad model contest champion.

Am I making sense? 

John

[finescalerr]

Yes, John. That is why the model is satisfactory. -- Russ

[DaKra]

John, yeah makes sense to me.  Realism is more in the execution than the subject matter.   The idea of a scale model is to portray a full size thing made small, even if the thing never existed or isn't entirely accurate.  I can suspend disbelief if the general physical attributes are correct and ring the bell of instant recognition, dents, oil leaks and rust, etc.  But not if its been uber-highlighted to "AMT" standards, or trying too hard to be cute or whimsical a la Selios.   Then its just kitsch. Its the difference between painting, and paint-by-numbers.

Frederic, thanks for the link to the beautiful illustrations, I enjoyed seeing them.   

Have a look there

http://www.graphite-garage.com/illustration/ATELIERS/ateliers.html

and don't forget to go there too :

http://www.graphite-garage.com/illustration/ARCHIVES%20DIVERSES/archives2.html

[DaKra]

Ray--  found this on the link Paul provided

http://www.abstractfonts.com/search/vtcsundaykomixcaps 

[FichtenFoo]

Thanks again everyone!

I think part of making something look good is knowing what does not. I've seen WAY too many sci-fi "dioramas" where the modeler makes a flat tarmak or sandy base and throws on a few objects (usually oil drums or jerry cans) and a random maintenance figure and calls it a day. There's nothing dynamic about it and the result is something flat and boring. I try to make my works "vertically interesting" if that makes sense. Usually the main focus of my scenes isn't the largest or tallest item. Usually... Varying the height of groundwork is usually the start. Other objects help give a sense of scale as well as push the story and feeling of the scene forward. Having the focus (in my case, usually a robot) interact somehow with the scene helps with the realism. Stepping over rough terrain, holding onto a sign for support, etc..

The motel sign and wall in this piece helps make up for what is basically a flat slab of a base. If the robot was the tallest item, the sense of scale would be off and I think the scene wouldn't look quite right. I toyed with the idea of adding a figure, someone frightened or trying to get out of the way, but it wouldn't have added anything to the scene and might had taken away from the overall feel.

Sometimes the main focus is the largest item, but you can add other interesting things to the scene to combat that large item being overwhelming. I did this with my Edmontosaurus and Briegel pieces. The Briegel is HUGE, but the figures give it a sense of scale and having it on a sloped base as if it's standing watch helps. Adding larger leaves and such (butterflies!) to the dino piece gives that a sense of scale. Having imagination definitely helps, but using a few graphic design theories can help just about anyone create something interesting. (Remember your CRAP! Contrast, Repetition, Alignment, and Proximity)

As for realism, I agree with JohnP. I've seen too many modelers spend months and years accurizing a model (real or sci-fi) only to paint it like a 3-year old. To me a poor finish negates any amount of work the modeler put into a piece. If the end result looks bad, who cares how accurate the door hinges, warp drives, or engine grilles are? I'd rather see an inaccurate model painted and weathered beautifully/realistically than an accurate piece painted poorly. Sadly there's far too much of the latter in the sci-fi world and most of those modelers are content with that. Kinda a pet peeve of mine. Now an accurate model painted to perfection is indeed a sight to behold!

I tend to be the type that just wants to make things look cool and hopefully real. That's what's fun for me. If it's accurate, then bonus, but I tend to not worry about that. I only add PE and such if it adds more interesting details to a kit rather than trying to make it more accurate. Even my Star Wars stuff is painted to look more "real" than what the original studio models depict. Those were made to look good on film, but seeing them in person is almost disappointing to me as they're beautifully built, but not weathered realistically enough for me. Seeing people try to exactly paint the studio model makes me laugh as the end results are usually meh IMO.

Okay... enough elitist ranting from me. LOL!

Paul: Seems that a lot of us have artistic professions. Nice! Yeah, horse people are the snottiest! I went to school with some entitled horse owning bitch. Ugh...

[danpickard]

Thats not a rant...thats a sincere and honest insight into why the work you produce actually works.  I find little thoughts such as this equally as inspiring as some of the images that appear on this forum.  Translating those thoughts into sensible words can be often difficult, but I think you have captured your thinking very well.

Thanks for sharing that Michael.

Dan

[Malachi Constant]

Thanks Micheal --

Enjoyed your comments and had some nice little side-trips following your links ... hope I can remember your "CRAP" motto ... but afraid the CRS might prevent it.   

Especially like the Briegel.  Think you were right not to incorporate figure(s) with the Vincent, but they worked great with the Briegel ... especially since they seem to simply accept and almost disregard his presence.

Cheers,
Dallas

[Ray Dunakin]

Thats not a rant...thats a sincere and honest insight into why the work you produce actually works.  I find little thoughts such as this equally as inspiring as some of the images that appear on this forum.  Translating those thoughts into sensible words can be often difficult, but I think you have captured your thinking very well.

Well said!

Michael, great work. BTW, the crotch-mounted gun turret on the Briegel is hilariously disturbing.

[DaKra]

... using a few graphic design theories can help just about anyone create something interesting. (Remember your CRAP! Contrast, Repetition, Alignment, and Proximity)

Would you elaborate a little on this?   

[FichtenFoo]

Thanks again guys!

Ray: Actually the Briegel is a Garage Kit produced by a friend of mine, Luca Z, in Italy. http://www.kallamity.com He does strange and fantastic mechanical designs.

... using a few graphic design theories can help just about anyone create something interesting. (Remember your CRAP! Contrast, Repetition, Alignment, and Proximity)

Would you elaborate a little on this?   

Heh... sadly I tend to lump all things into "graphic design" since that's what my training and profession is but I think it's probably better described in photographic composition terms. (along with CRAP) I was Googling for a site that could sum it up nicely and these rules seem to do the trick:

http://www.amateursnapper.com/photography/10-top-photography-composition-rules

See also "diagonal rule" here: http://www.colorpilot.com/comp_rules.html

Of course we're dealing with 3D objects viewable from multiple angles, but when I am designing something for a model scene I generally have a photo (or even cinematic sequence) in my head of what I'd like the scene to look like and go from there. (I tend to think more and more of how things would look in the final photos I take which helps... I can already see my finished fish sub photoshopped image) The real trick is to make it interesting from multiple angles. Mock up your layout based on your mental image, then spin it around and see where it could be improved from various angles. Not every angle is going to be awesome, but if you can get 2 or 3 you're in great shape.

If you're having trouble visualizing it, you can always do some rough sketches or even print out photos of your objects all in the same scale and shuffle those around or even use them as "paper dolls" to make and adjust a scene.

Hope that makes sense... sometimes I ramble.