I am a member of a forum called papermodlers.com. As the name suggests it is where people who model in paper and cardstock gather. There is a thread .. has been going for a while now, on a 1:25 Big Boy build. The modeler has designed it and is .. in the thread .. in the middle of his 'Alpha Build' .. in other words .. he has designed it .. and now is building it. From what I understand the way these paper models works is that next .. he may ask for a Beta Build from experienced modelers. They would build the model and then look for any problems. Once everything is good .. then the model is offered for sale and build.
This .. just blows me away. Evidently, he has already constructed the tender in another thread. The link to the thread is
Here's a link to the Big Boy thread (http://www.papermodelers.com/forum/design-threads/5127-union-pacific-big-boy-4-8-8-4-1-25-scale-engine.html)
For those who may smirk at the VERY IDEA of modeling in paper/cardstock ... here's a few photos from the build (I think you have to register on the forum to see linked photos)
Building the driver
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi856.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab130%2FLCRRinHO%2FCardstock%2520Big%2520Boy%2FEngine-12.jpg&hash=d066ce00fa1b6584e86db461c60b521f86400c71)
Completed driver next to tender
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi856.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab130%2FLCRRinHO%2FCardstock%2520Big%2520Boy%2FEngine-17.jpg&hash=9b6504d32e77e513e53b48587f037632d1412bee)
.. and from his latest ...
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi856.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab130%2FLCRRinHO%2FCardstock%2520Big%2520Boy%2FEngine-219.jpg&hash=4b5fdf9022c19f7d0e02f6844f3649744db75653)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi856.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab130%2FLCRRinHO%2FCardstock%2520Big%2520Boy%2FEngine-227.jpg&hash=20e942909b822bed2e16117aabf3158bc23c185a)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi856.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab130%2FLCRRinHO%2FCardstock%2520Big%2520Boy%2FEngine-220.jpg&hash=7e6aa6712520dc095574c04637ebbe0d8bb933f2)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi856.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab130%2FLCRRinHO%2FCardstock%2520Big%2520Boy%2FEngine-228.jpg&hash=133c923f3708543d0e10193f631284267bbe45f2)
I posted a link to a Big Boy build a month or two ago: http://kartonbau.de/wbb2/thread.php?threadid=21015 (http://kartonbau.de/wbb2/thread.php?threadid=21015)
Could be the same basic kit or maybe not. It certainly is by a different and more meticulous modeler. It is most impressive and certainly worth a look.
Those bothering to investigate high end, sophisticated paper modeling inevitably are amazed with what they find because the models are every bit as good as the best of those made from other materials. If you still think paper modeling is for ham handed retards, you simply haven't looked at the right models.
Russ
I've actually been interested in cardstock modeling and have done lots of searching and lurking on the internet. The problem for me is it seems there isn't a lot how-to on advanced tecnhiques, at least not in english. One of the reasons I'm interested in card stock modeling is because I have problems with arthritis and tendonitis and I'd think that scratchbuilding from cardstock would be much less painful than scratching from brass or even plastic. The big question marks for me would be about strength and and the ability to create smooth compound curves.
David
Absolutly beautiful but I wonder how well it would hold up under use ;) :D.
Here is something I ran across a while back, maybe you guys are familiar with it but I wasn't. Is it art or modeling or both? Anyway take a look at this
http://www.popgive.com/2009/03/most-amazing-paper-sculptures.html
Later
Rick
I'm probably going to get some arguments here .. but I don't think you can separate art and modeling. Not the 'good stuff'. There was a reference a while back to the work of Troels Kirk .. and it wasn't entirely positive. I disagreed but didn't think it was worth the 'hassle' to say anything. In Troles' case, he is an artist that models. There is a synthesis .. a positive one in my opinion. I look at his work and I don't care if he has every thing exactly right, every rivet where it should be, bricks rounded or boards that don't look 'real enough' under a close look. His work inspires, energizes .. it's art .. and modeling.
A great model is always a work of art but a work of art isn't always a great model.
Within modeling, we find those who model every nuance as they found it in a photo, those who build only the minimum necessary to create an impression, and every shade in between. Depending on your personal preference, you might prefer an inaccurate, caricaturish, impressionistic work to something far more perfect and realistic or something straddling the two. Troels is a successful modeler regardless of the absolute perfection of his creations; his models are three dimensional renditions of his watercolor paintings.
To my eye, the most important aspect of modeling is what I call the "rule of consistency". If everything is perfect except rounded bricks, they are inconsistent and stand out negatively. Similarly, if Troels were to introduce a perfect photographically correct replica of, for instance, a house among his impressionistic paper creations, it would appear jarring and unpleasant. In that case, some might say the perfect model makes the others look bad and others might think the converse true. A matter of taste, sophistication, experience and, perhaps, confidence.
That's why no two people build identical models.
Russ
No arguments from me Ed. I have been following the big boy project from the beginning. It's inspiring as many of the very high end paper models are. Modeling is an art.
Thom
I disagree fundamentally. In so far as the contention that all modelling is art.
Perhaps the bulk of modelling on here IS art because it shows an ARTISTIC rendering of a subject involving a great deal of subjectivity, which one can call artistically creative, BUT, my model cars and boats, for instance, are NOT arty, they are works of craftsmanship and I wouldn't want them to be seen any other way.
My scenic models (which I have only ever done for myself, not a client) could well be described as artistic, but never wholly art. They are artistically created works of craftsmanship and that is as far as I would go.
Much "art" these days has not one jot of craftsmanship to it, yet is feted by the luvvies and darlings of that faddish pseudos' world. That is as good a reason as any could be for my attitude. It's a case of..."art? Don't lump me in with those crude piss-artists and con-artists, what an insult.
Craftsmanship, however is a mystery to the pseuds and all the more attractive because of it.
People throw the "art" thing around too easily, as they do superlatives where they aren't suitable.
Nobody ever mentions craftsmanship over this ethereal art thing. That, I feel, is a shame. My grandfather's cabinet making always enriches the lives and experience of those who see it, but he would have laughed in your face if you suggested it was art. It was craftsmanship and that is good enough for anyone who can appreciate it.
My other grandfather was a grainer and marbler. Damn, that just blew my assertion out of the water! What was he? A craftsman with materials, an artist in that he could create marble and wood grain right out of his head, so convincingly that you had trouble telling where the real finished and the faux began. But when he painted a house, back to the craftsmanship pure and simple. Then he'd really do your head in by sculpting and painting in plaster and oils, a sea scene bas relief on your bathroom wall!
Just because something is made in a way you might not consider "normal", doesn't mean it should automatically be considered art. Those paper Indians are art AND craftsmanship. There has to be a equal amount of each, figure modelling insists that is so, but my cars and boats (the shiny ones, I mean) are not in the least artistic. Artful maybe, I had problems to solve during their manufacture, but not art.
Let's make a difference where it matters, please. Not to do so, demeans the wonderful world of craftsmanship.
Martin
I think I know the difference between art and an object that has been crafted perfectly. True art will hit you like a baseball bat .. slam you against a wall .. and you are held in awe. I can look at a beautifully crafted object and admire the workmanship and craft that was put into it. Is it art? it depends .. on how it affects me. Every person is different .. everyone reacts differently to art/artists differently. Monet is worshiped by some .. leaves me .. *meh*. Does that mean that Monet's work isn't art .. simply because I don't react to it? Nope. At the same time I reject those that will hover around me waiving their little hands on limp wrists as they try to get me to worship with them. Me .. I'll admire, and consider art - that that appeals to me .. that amazes, gratifies, leaves me in wonder. Sometimes it is beautiful and detailed miniatures .. other-times . .heck .. it might be an On30 in balsa and cardstock. In any case it is that .. immediate reaction I will have .. and determine .. TO ME .. what is art .. and what is simply craftsmanship.
The Big Boy looks great so far. Is the card stock being laser cut? sorry if the question has already been posted. Joining this topic late. I know a laser cutter would cut card in seconds, even a lower powered one like my 60W laser.
cheers Ferd
I got interested in modeling with paper and card stock about 10 years ago after reading a book by Wayne Wesolowski ....can't remember the exact title but it was like "Paper Modeling from A to Z " or some such thing . I was impressed , not only by Wayne's work but generally what could be done with paper and cardstock .
Terry
BTW , the Big Boy is amazing .
I understand he's using a craft cutter kind of a printer with a blade.
Does it have to be craftsman VS artist? Craftsman, artisan, artist, scientist. All are related because they use creative observation and problem solving. the craftsman and the scientist both use an aesthetic. To my mind these labels are all equal. levels of ability vary. There are unscilled craftsman and artists.
Quote from: clevermod01 on November 01, 2010, 09:26:14 AM
I understand he's using a craft cutter kind of a printer with a blade.
Does it have to be craftsman VS artist? Craftsman, artisan, artist, scientist. All are related because they use creative observation and problem solving. the craftsman and the scientist both use an aesthetic. To my mind these labels are all equal. levels of ability vary. There are unscilled craftsman and artists.
I read that .. "... Craftsman, artisan, artist, scientist ..." and thought of Leonardo da Vinci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci) .. who WAS .. all of that! :)
Check out this Big Boy link (the third time I have posted it): http://kartonbau.de/wbb2/thread.php?threadid=21015 (http://kartonbau.de/wbb2/thread.php?threadid=21015) Just for fun, go to the last page and work your way forward. The craftsmanship is superb. The model is mostly laser cut. It is a test build. If you have Google Chrome, let it translate the German into your favorite language to get an idea of how the model is going together.
I have seen outstanding examples of vehicle (car, military, ship, train) models from cardstock. The top builders could win a contest against anyone using any other material. The structure modeling, by contrast, has been crude and disappointing.
Russ
Their conversation has shifted to whiskey. That means that they not only appreciate old machinery, but also old booze. ;D
And I second your comment, Russ: The structure builds on that website have been rather disappointing.
I've noticed with the high end of these paper models, the paper is a structural material only. It ends up painted, in traditional ways of model building. Which, I suspect, says a lot about the limitations of using a printed finish. :-\
Dave
That's the same model I original posted about .. (once I went back and fixed the link)
Noticed that in papermodelers .. there seems to be two camps. 1) the purists .. who use only paper .. broken down into 1a) .. except some wire .. 1b) wire and paint .. and 2) many of the East European modelers who simply consider paper as a tool .. and will use whatever .. wire, ACC, etc. to make a model. .. which I gravitate towards.
Ed, is it philosophical difference toward modeling or maybe a difference in how far the modeler wants to take the model? I have seen guys who buy a paper "kit" (prints in a book), cut out the parts, assemble them very carefully, and leave it at that. The result is a printed model and it looks unfinished.
The real hotshots take the same kit, add whatever detail it needs (usually from paper but also wire and wood), paint it, weather it, and the result is a stunningly realistic model indistinguishable from one made out of any other material.
Dave, you are right about the limitations of printed finishes. I just posted photos in the "Wall" thread showing the limit of what I've been able to do with a printer.
Russ
Holy moly! That paper Big Boy apparently has every single part that the real thing has!