Texture: Another Attempt At Replicating Wood With Paper

[finescalerr]

It probably looks terrific from a slight distance away. I suffer from the problem of evaluating things under a lot of magnification. Once, when I complained to Marc about how my siding looked, he told me I should back off. So I'll back off from my earlier comment, too, because Dallas is right: It's strictly personal preference. -- Russ

[danpickard]

"This time, I'm going to roll with some of the craftsman kit trends to see what happens with my bottom line.   Subtle doesn't sell.  In HO scale, subtle is invisible to the majority of customers.   Also the instructions must include painting instructions that are simple to follow.  No more than three steps to achieve the effect, and no exotic tools or paints. "

Thats an interesting, but probably unfortunately very true, observation Dave.  It kind of emphasizes the way modellers interpret what they are looking at, and often build from memory and also replicate modelling styles of others, instead of looking at the real thing for inspiration.  How often have you heard the comment "I'd love to build a model like Chuck", but then the modeller makes no effort to change/improve their techniques (sorry to drag you into this Chuck, but you set the benchmark for many modellers around the world...thanks). 

For approaching this topic from a commercial perspective, the finish is probably quite appropriate, and if can be achieve with less than three colouring stages even better (less steps for a customer to stuff up, and then turn around and complain about, but if they want to apply their own finishing methods, they are on their own).  Important I guess to consider the general modeller who would purchase such a kit...where do they set their standards?  I'd think that this finish is still higher than the general expectation.  Would a finesale craftsman purchase one of these kits?  Maybe, but more likely not, because they perhaps have a greater interest in the challenge of scratchbuilding it.

You can't keep everybody happy, but if this is a business decision, rather than a personal project, you have to use your head and not your heart.

Cheers,
Dan

[michael mott]

This really is an interesting conversation. Drawing a line between reality and a perception and interpretation of reality ans also changing the scale of them to each other. your comment Russ about evaluating something under extreme magnification I think hits the nail on the head. this has implications for all sorts of other issues as well. We cannot scale nature, it is. We interpret natures effects as we design and build our models, it is part of the challenge and as we gain skills and knowledge we are able to make more and more convincing looking interpretations.

Once I had to build a model of a lumber yard that had been bulldozed by the city after an overnight fire caused by electrical wires striking the side of a sawdust hopper during an intense storm. The wires (city utility) were the subject of a multi million dollar lawsuit. Were they the cause or not.

I worked with forensic investigators to rebuild evidence that had been allegedly intentionally destroyed.

I replicated all the wires for the poles and transformers using an extremely fine model chain it couldn't have been more that a 1/64 in diameter it was blackened and hung in perfect catenary arches from pole to pole. Sitting upon the witness stand as an expert witness the city's lawyer commented that these wires were not very realistic because they were made of chain and wiggled easily if the model was bumped. I took a moment to think about that and responded.... if a big hand came down and whacked the side of the street all the wires outside would wiggle the same way. After the courtroom stopped laughing my point was accepted.

Obviously looking at the side of a building from ten, or twenty feet, or ten or twenty inches changes how we see the finish. I suspect that we are sometimes too critical of a texture or colour because we are looking at a tiny portion of the scene and not the whole picture. I would expect that it is even harder to replicate a really top notch representation of a building that has just been fixed up and renovated with a new coat of paint over old boards that have been repaired.

I have rambled on enough.

Michael   

[finescalerr]

In other words, every meticulous modeler has to draw the line somewhere because we cannot duplicate nature in miniature; we can only approximate it and, sometimes, only suggest it. The smaller the scale, the greater the compromise. That is where impressionism comes into play.

In my own HO modeling, I decided stained Strathmore Bristol looked more real than stained wood when modeling painted wood. I still think it does because wood grain and texture is grossly oversize in HO. But if you hold a strong magnifying glass up to stained Strathmore you immediately notice tiny speckles in the finish and slightly mottled coloration. That imperfection is almost unnoticeable from a foot away with the unaided eye. The reason is that paper fibers absorb color at different rates, a problem unique to the scale and the material.

Plastic would have other disadvantages.

Everything is compromise, technique, and preference.

The art of modeling involves choosing the best materials, finishes, and compromises FOR A GIVEN SCALE.

Yes, it is a fascinating subject and one we must address anew with each model.

Russ

[DaKra]

Rembrandt said  "pictures are not meant to be smellt."  In other words, he asks you to take a step back when viewing his paintings.  RR structure models meant as a backdrop for trains are not meant to be smellt.

Fine scale models however, beg a close up view.  The joy of beholding a really well made miniature is zooming in for a closer look, and not losing resolution, finding more details instead.  

Even if models are meant for backdrops, I think extreme close ups are useful.  Generally speaking, a technique that withstand close up scrutiny will look good at a distance. The inverse is less often true.   It also gives a better idea of what is happening physically on the model to produce the results you see at longer ranges.      

[JohnP]

Dave, regarding three simple steps to paint and weather a commercially offered kit- for my resin bridge kit I simply point people to a hobby shop for books and to this website. I do tell them a few things such as an order of painting that makes accessing beam insides easier, but I don't believe it is my responsibility to tell people how to do it. There is so much info available on the web and in print, and the styles vary so much. I would venture that all the customers that would buy a "craftsman" kit have had some exposure to at least the most popular weathering chemicals and powders.

And Dave- "This time, I'm going to roll with some of the craftsman kit trends to see what happens with my bottom line. Subtle doesn't sell."  Jeez Dave, please, noooo.    Do we need an intervention here???  At least find some good drugs so you enjoy your time designing architecturally impossible decrepit structures that defy the laws of gravity.

John

[danpickard]

"I don't believe it is my responsibility to tell people how to do it"
I agree with you there John, it really shouldn't be the responsibility of the designer to say how a kit should be painted, but believe me, the buyers certainly do follow up and ask for detailed SBS "how do I do it like on the box" instructions.  As you said, there is plenty of well documented info in both print and web based formats to refer too, but, the same questions are still asked.  Maybe its a degree of fear of stuffing up the kit they just invested their modelling dollars into?

Dan

[DaKra]

I figure minimal instructions are needed for familiar materials like resin, plastic and wood.   Where a material is less familiar, more instruction is needed.   Paper is not a commonly used material in this niche of the hobby, probably freaks people out.   

Also I've noticed craftsman kits are often flogged as lesson in model building.   That may or may not be so, but info on technique is perceived as value added.   Like I said, rolling with some trends here.   Some, not all.  I've left out the rooftop water tanks and external staircases.        

This is a real interesting discussion, but I think its getting off topic.    I'll start a new one later, when the model is ready for commercial release.   

Dave

PS @ John, hah """trust me""" 

[DaKra]

Came back to testing ideas, now that I have the Mig oils in hand.  This HO scale wall is 2" x 1.5" cardstock, paper battens glued on, wire brushed.  I painted thined out Mig Shadow brown over a mix of craft store acrylics. When dry, I painted a few knots.    



Chester, your tip was right on the money, there needs to be some more variation in tones, to make a good simulated wood, thanks for pointing it out.  What I really like about using the paper and acrylic + oil washes, is the super color control I just cant get with stains on basswood and plywood.    

Dave

[michael mott]

I like the way that looks, I am wondering if the knots might be a bit dark.

Michael

[finescalerr]

The color balance is off and that could have a very strong effect on the relative lights, darks, and overall coloration. Dave, was your camera was expecting to shoot in daylight but, instead, the photo was under incandescent bulbs? Regardless, we can't draw any real conclusions about the knots until we have a more accurate image.

Reading "between the lines", I suspect the technique works and may need only a minor tweak to be spot on.

Russ

[DaKra]

Russ, I don't know about the camera settings, new camera, haven't finished reading the manual yet.  For now, I just push the button and hope for the best.   

One thing I forgot to mention-- and this is one of the big advantages of using paint-- the battens are glued on with thick CA glue.  I glued this test piece up in a rush without any consideration about glue ooze.   If this had been stained wood, or printed paper, it would have been completely ruined by glue smears around every batten.   But because the paint covers everything, I was able to sand off the more offensive blobs and ignore the smears, and assembled this thing quickly and stress-free.

The colors are based on a calendar photo over my workbench.  It shows a 100 year old barn in Vermont, the wood weathered to a reddish brown, and the knots stand out as nearly black.    I think it was periodically treated with linseed oil or some traditional wood preservative.   

Dave

[DaKra]

Another test, slightly different method to simulate heavily weathered, bleached out untreated wood on cardstock.   This time I put on a heavy coat of grey and brown craft store paint, and dragged the wire brush through while it was still wet.  Diluted Mig shadow brown oil overpaint as before.   Very simple.  5 mins including blow drying the paint and cleaning the brushes.  Not sure I like the laser engraved knots, may go back and stain around them some.  



Photo is with my old camera this time, correct light setting.  Color is 98% correct on my monitor.  

Dave

[Chuck Doan]

Very promising Dave!

[finescalerr]

Actually, the laser knots look okay but stain around them might enhance their appearance. If this wall is just an experiment, try this, too: Lightly sand it to tone down the paint ridges left from the wire brush. The side lighting and macro image probably exaggerate them in the photo but, even so, a softer look might come closer still to wood. This ongoing attempt to perfect a technique is really interesting and should be of value when working with styrene, too. I hope a lot of others appreciate it. -- Russ