'Threads'
|
'Threads' |
|
Two Discussions on the Use of Flashlights to Judge Models at Contests
source: Hyperscale
(thanks to Brett Green for permission)
(Bold Italics are added by the Webmaster to clarify the text or correct known errors. Some comments and their order of appearance in the original forum have been edited for clarity) In this particular thread, some off-topic material has also been removed.
Part 1:
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Anti-flashlight brigade and judging
Wed Dec 24
(Started from another Hyperscale thread) "19.
Deduct 5000 points if you ever used a penlight while judging."
With regards to this item in the Master Modeler thread my question is why is
everybody so vehemently opposed to this? As a follow up why aren't you using a
flashlight when you build your models?
Competition venues are often not "optimally" lit and being able to see
into things like cockpits where so many spend so much time "upgrading"
the kit alone should justify it. The other thing that a flashlight allows you to
do is judge how well seams have been filled. If you just skim the surface with
the light a seam becomes very obvious, if you flat spotted a round fuselage
while fixing the seam that shows up as well. If you would actually use this same
technique while working on the seams in the first place the errors wouldn't be
there to find consequently making your models 'better'. So instead of whining
about judges using the proper tools to do their job why don't you use the same
tools to better do your job in the first place?
Roy
Sutherland
Thu Dec 25
I build with two 100 watt...light bulbs
a mere 18" from my model desk. I don't expect
judges to try to see my work when the light is as poor as it is in most halls.
Could you build in that light?
I think not. Judging is hard enough without being handicapped by poor lighting.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Thu Dec 25
I have two 100 watt bulbs mounted in swing arm desk lamps at
either back corner of my work bench. I'll swing them to where ever I need them
with both typically being about 18" from what I'm working on. Even with
those I still use a flashlight to look for the seams and check my progress in
filling them.
Jim
Clark
Thu Dec 25
I don't get this anti light thing. Why is it wrong to bring a
light? Why is it sneaky? Everyone who has entered a contest has seen judges
using them. So why don't they do the same to check their work? People use
calculators to do math to "Get it right", so why not use a tool to
"Get it right"? Why go to the bother of filling and sanding the
seam to begin with if you not going to "Get it right”? It's like my mom
told me growing up, be the best you can be at your given profession, be it ditch
digging or a doctor.
And on another line of thought, aren’t seams a
"Basic" component of construction? I would think most entrants would
want their work judged fairly and not on the "It's looks good from 4 feet
away principle". What Jeff was talking about with in regards to
cockpits are that modelers spend big bucks on aftermarket cockpits form BB,
Cutting Edge, Aires, True Details, to name just a few. Then spend a lot of time
painting, shading, adding belts, and getting them to fit just to cram them in a
small area where you need a light to see anything. And then it's OK to use the
light because the modeler wants you to look in there to see all the effort he
has put in there. But wait!!! Hold on!!! Don’t' you dare use the dreaded light
on something as menial as a seam. Look, it's all about basics, and we judge
seams way before we look at cockpits, and I'll tell you something, we never get
that far to look at cockpits.
Everybody says "Oh, it's a hobby, just enjoy
it" and if it looked good from here, give it something. I would ask all of
you, how would you feel if your model that took you 8 months to build lost out
to a 1/48 Superfortress with every seam showing and frosted glass, silvered
decals, wheels that don't touch the ground, uneven or crooked parts and won just
because of the WOW factor?
Look, all judges aren’t perfect, in fact none are,
but when we are tasked with finding the best we as a team of three have to come
to a consensus of what’s presented to us. It’s often finding the best of the
worst and when you have models with a number of problems and you still have a
third place to give out it can get frustrating.
Yes we look for the mistakes, and the one with the
fewest wins, how would we judge if we looked for all the positives? We can find
positives in most things we judge too, so what’s the difference? I would
suggest that by finding positives it brings even more subjectiveness into the
process, i.e. "I like how he did this or that" Where as if we find
problems in basics and what wasn't done makes it A LOT easier than having
three guys standing there going "I like this and I like that" It's not
about LIKE, it's about execution of the subject and if that means bringing out
the light to see if something was done right, then why not??? Why bother to have
a contest at all if we are just going to stand around and be "Nice".
If you want something other than a contest, then have
an exposition and display, and drop the contest. But as you all can tell I get
real chapped when we "Judges" get ridiculed for using tools to make a
judgement. I, for one, would feel ripped as an entrant if someone got an award
just because something looked cool, or wowed the judges and a conscious
deliberate evaluation wasn’t done.
So Jeff, Congrats for having the 'nads' to bring it up
and speak your mind, as mom would say "If you’re going to do something,
do it right and not Half Assed!" Ok mom wouldn't but out the "A"
bomb.
Tom
Thu Dec 25
What a bunch of whiners. If building models is your hobby,
then build your models to suit yourself and ignore the critics, judges,
know-it-alls, and wannabe experts.
If you are going to enter contests, realize this:
Once you enter a contest, you are competing against somebody else's not always
objective set of standards implemented by not always objective human beings. You
knew the score going in and to fall back on "it's only a hobby" when
you fail to bring home a pot, plaque, gong, or whatever awards are being handed
out at that particular venue, is basically a copout. In fact, it disguises the
fact that to the whiners the value of their models is measured by the number of
awards they can collect rather than the knowledge and skills they develop and
the models themselves.
Gil
Hodges (with another angle)
Judging obligations....
Thu Dec 25
There are some interesting and valid comments below, but I'd
like to comment on a couple of things not mentioned so far.
First of all, it's true penlights are needed sometimes if the venue isn't well
lit. But, there's another more important reason: judging integrity.
Judges (even though they volunteer) are obligated to do their best to pick the
best models over the lesser models. In order to be fair, they need to have the
tools available to do this. The higher the level of competition, the more
important this is. Sure, we could judge them all without a light, but what are
we missing?
There's a subtle difference in purpose that I'm trying to get at here. I don't
use a light to find flaws. I strongly believe in the "naked eye"
principle. I don't measure wingtips unless I suspect something from just looking
at them. There are judges who do go over every inch of the models with the
light. To me, that's a waste of batteries. BUT, I do want that light available
to CONFIRM what I think I see with the naked eye.
This also applies to the ability to pick a model up. I often use a dental mirror
in the effort to AVOID that, and only resort to picking up a model if necessary
and only when it's down to the final cut. Even then, it's done with the utmost
care. But, once again, the difference between a winner and an also-ran is often
on the bottom of a model. The models are 3 dimensional items, and need to be
judged in all 3 dimensions.
As judges, we are obligated to be fair, and to do our best to find the models
truly deserving of being awarded that day. If you limit our abilities to do the
judging to the best of our ability, then you're only hurting the modelers who
paid good money and time to travel to and participate in that contest.
Last of all, to those of you who echo "it's just a hobby"; I totally
agree; UNTIL YOU PUT THAT MODEL DOWN ON THE CONTEST TABLE! At that point you've
entered into an unwritten contract. That contract says that you'd like a chance
to win an award for your modeling efforts. In order to be able to do that, you
agree to subject your model to the scrutiny and criticism of a group of
strangers called judges. You should already know the criteria that they'll base
their decisions upon; if not, you need to judge a few times to learn those
things. If your model doesn't measure up to those criteria as well as the other
models, then you won't win. So, once you decide to COMPETE, it's not JUST A
HOBBY anymore.
Judging isn't a science, it's an art based on a firm set of modeling criteria.
We DO miss things on occasion. Asking us to do our job in dim light and without
the ability to see ALL of the model only hurts the contestants.
Roy
Sutherland
A truly classic line!!!!
Thu Dec 25
Gil,
That sums it all up. When you decide to compete, it's not just a hobby anymore.
That is the truth distilled into one sentence.
Jim
Clark
Thu Dec 25
You said it better than I did, especially the line "It's
a hobby until you put the model on the table"
Bill
Cammon
Penlights
Wed Dec 24
I'm definitely on the side of the anti-penlight brigade. I
think the point to remember here is that we are building MODELS...a depiction of
a specific thing at (usually) a specific point in time. I have seen entirely too
many "perfect" models that just didn't cut it on "sit" and
overall impression. I've also seen many antennae, static wires and mass balances
dislodged by the white-gloved Hordes.
I think the best-judged shows I have ever seen are annual MMSI shows here in the
This is not a war, it's a HOBBY...and we need to crank things back a bit lest we
lose too many promising builders.
I vote for NO PENLIGHT AND NO TOUCH! If it's really that good, it will still
collect the hardware.
Bill
Cammon
Absurdity Perhaps?
Thu Dec 25
The point here is that the line you refer to is currently
sliding down the slippery slope in the wrong direction. There are NO perfect
solutions, but that does not mean that we should be wedded to the status quo.
There should be a finite line and I think it should be about where I suggested.
So you don't agree...fine. That's what forums are for. I've been involved in
organized modeling since `57 or so and I do not enjoy watching my hobby being
taken over by erstwhile bean counters.
As an aside, we had a discussion at my club a while ago about a possible
regional and decided if it came about, it would have to be an invitational
because we decided to give awards based on excellence - that is, whatever
entries reached a very high standard of excellence would receive the top award
regardless of number or class.
There would, of course be lesser awards, similarly given. At the bottom would be
one for participation. This, in my opinion, would be a start
Roy
Sutherland
Thu Dec 25
The big problem with that is I have been to contests where
every model gets judged on its own merits and although it sounds like Nirvana,
it is rife with problems in the real world.
The bigger the contest, the more undoable this becomes. The problem is that it
takes a huge amount of time to scrutinize every single model.
In IPMS judging, you go over the category quickly the first time. You look for
screamingly obvious flaws. Bad misalignments, unfilled seams, rough clearcoats,
badly silvered decals. This typically eliminates 20 to 40 percent of the
entries. Then you do a second pass, and raise the bar on what makes the cut. It
doesn't take too long to whittle the field down to a group that gets the real
close inspection. We use teams of three (from different clubs if at all
possible) to prevent 'brother-in-lawing'.
The problem with judging each model to the same criteria (instead of against
each other) is that you will never find two judges that will apply the standards
the same way. One guy just loves everything and gives out too many Golds. The
next guy is a real stickler and gives out too few. The trouble is that a model
that is really beautiful might get a Gold from one judge (or team) while it
might get a Bronze from the other.
The truth is that 90 percent of the guys don't have any interest in reading up
on what the judges have to say about their masterpiece. I have seen many judging
cards left unread after all the models are gone. If they don't want to know, why
waste the time? Why not just have an evaluation table set up so that guys who
want to know can get a careful appraisal from experienced judges?
BTW, Judges are just modelers who take the time to judge. Are there some bad
ones out there? Yup. That's why YOU should get involved so that these bad seeds
will not be able to get away with it. I've seen some guys try to lobby for some
clearly inferior model, and they don't get away with it when the guys I know are
judging. Serious cases get reported, and a few have been asked to recuse
themselves from future judging.
As to everyone getting some kind of award or acknowledgement, are we not grown
ups? If everyone gets an award, doesn't that make the award meaningless?
Gold, Silver, Bronze judging sounds great, but it is a pain in the ass. I can't
and I won't spend the entire show judging models. They don't pay me enough... oh
wait, they don't pay AT ALL!
Jim
Kiker
Another viewpoint
Wed Dec 24
I do understand your point about seeing into the depths of a
cockpit - to a point. I'm just not sure how much I'd see in a real cockpit, even
with my head down in the thing, let alone looking at it from several feet away.
I helped judge a very well-built, beautifully finished model at a Regional show
a couple of years ago. Another judge used his penlight to look into the recesses
of the cowled radial engine. And with a "Ha!" of pure glee, he pointed
out to the rest of us a tiny bit of shine from a tiny bit of excess glue behind
one of the cylinders. Of course it could have been a bit of shiny oil streaking,
but hey, there was no margin for doubt that day.
Of course, part of the problem that day was that there were two great models,
each with at least one (very) minor flaw, but under IPMS-USA rules, there can be
only one winner.
So some guys with the penlights aren't just admiring the detail, they're
actively looking for tiny flaws- which are always there if you look long enough-
at times ignoring other bigger, obvious problems. That, I submit, is the
behavior that drives some of us wild. They sometimes spot the ants but miss the
elephants!
And as I often remind myself, most local shows are a crapshoot, no matter how
good a model is; it depends on what else shows up and who does the judging that
day.
Roy
Sutherland
Thu Dec 25
That's not the way IPMS judging was taught to me, and I have
been judging for many years now, even at the National level.
If a judge does find a flaw in the back of the engine (glue mark) deep inside a
cowling, it has always been considered to be a VERY minor flaw by all the judges
I've ever worked with. This guy sounds like he needs to be reigned in.
The truth about IPMS judging is that it is basics first. Detail is one of the
very last things that ever gets considered. If a guy builds a beautifully
detailed model with every panel open, yet the paint is poor and the decals
silvered, it will lose. Gotta walk before you can run. Would an Olympic Skater
that does flawless quadruple toe loops but can barely skate from jump to jump
win any awards? NO!!
This story is just another one of the rare, but unfortunate instances where some
judge ignores the rules and the other judges on the team acquiesce. The more
honest guys that get involved, the les this will happen. Some cops are
dishonest. Does this mean all police officers are bad? Of course not.
Get involved. Stay involved. I am proud to be an IPMS judge and I stand behind
my work.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Wed Dec 24
Actually my point had more to do with seams than the depths
of cockpits. The point being that, while everybody seems to whine about judges
using flashlights to find flaws with models (which is exactly what they're
supposed to be doing), they can be using the same tools to improve their models
in the first place. After all if the dreaded flashlight makes it easier for a
judge to see those tiny seams we're supposed to be dealing with doesn't it make
sense that we use that tool to make it easier to find them to deal with them?
Craig
Quatttlebaum
Where then do you draw a line at?
Thu Dec 25
You find flaws in little nooks and crannies with the
flashlight that would not be seen without it. Going by that assumption, then
models that cannot be seen inside should be disqualified because those normally
unseen areas can't be seen.
Spot a seam on the inside that's not finished with the light, chunk it. So just
where will the 'flashlight brigade' draw the line at? A flaw can be found on the
best built model if looked for long enough, or what is perceived as a flaw.
Put me on the side of 'no flashlights'.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Thu Dec 25
I should have made two posts instead of putting both
questions in the same post. The question about why people complain so much about
flashlights being used in judging was really mostly to lay the foundation for
the second question about why you don't use the flashlight when building the
model.
What you're complaining about here are some people who misuse a tool. Going to
those kinds of logical extremes we should ban photo-etched pieces from models
because people use flat photo-etch to simulate round wires. I think everybody
can agree that there will always be those who misuse the tools available to them
and that is a problem with their upbringing and education not with the tools
they're using. So staying away from the extremism a flashlight is a valuable
tool in judging, or simply just looking at a model. Even the "well
lit" venues don't really provide enough light to see the details in a dark
cockpit (especially things like the black-gray cockpits the Germans used, the
night blue the French used and the black that the
Anyway. As I said at the beginning these issues were really secondary to what
prompted me to ask the original questions. For the sake of discussion let’s
assume that the use of flashlights in judging isn't going anywhere. My real
question is that if you know they're being used for judging any model you might
want to enter in a contest why aren't you using that same tool to find the flaws
they're looking for before you put it on the table? Obviously the flashlight is
useful for finding some types of errors and being useful for that makes it just
as useful for finding the same errors at a time where you can do something about
it.
I guess what I was hoping to accomplish is to get people to see it as a
challenge to overcome and suggesting a way to overcome it instead of seeing it
as an unfair obstacle and whining about how unfair it is for those evil judges
to put in their way in the first place. If you want to just build models for the
"fun of it" then don't put them on the contest table. If you are going
to put them on a contest table don't get mad at the judges for trying to find
out what you did wrong. After all, the reason they're looking for flaws is that
there is more right with the models than wrong with them in the first place. If
"right" was the exception they'd be looking for what you got correct
and they'd probably still be using the same tools to do so.
Kent
Wed Dec 24
Jim you said you helped Judge. A team of three, I’m
guessing. So the others had to agree, correct? In that case what was the
problem?
Jim
Kiker
Re: Jim you said you helped Judge. A
team of three...
Thu Dec 25
Hi Kent,
That's right, a team of three. The third judge agreed with the penlight judge.
The problem? Penlight man had great fun finding that flaw. It wasn't a case of
"well, unfortunately, we need to find something wrong;" it was more
like "gotcha!" It was a terrific model, but both other judges felt
that they had to find some reason to eliminate one of those two models. Well, I
don't like that, but I do understand that those are the rules- one winner. But I
found no pleasure at all in eliminating that model; I wish I could show you a
picture of it.
I suppose this comes down to an issue that the penlight sometimes represents,
although the light itself is, as you say, just a tool. But I've been in the
midst of judging a couple of times and had non-judges (carrying lights for their
own amusement) ease up beside me for a moment and say things like "you
might want to shine a light 'this way' on that Mustang." They've already
been fault finding, and they want to make sure I find it too; but such behavior
constitutes a rules violation, and I resent having issues pointed out to me
before I've even looked at a piece. But some members of the penlight brigade
routinely behave like this in my experience.
It's not enough to see that a given model looks great from a foot away, or even
from six inches, or that the alignment is good, or that the paint is done
beautifully, or that the markings and decals are spot on with no silvering and
it's accurate to boot; no, occasionally you have to go farther to find the flaw
that eliminates a given model. If we were giving awards rather than 1st/2nd's,
those things would be enough. But sometimes as a judge you have to go farther. I
have done so because more than one model fit all the usual criteria. But the
fact that some people seem to really enjoy going to the nth degree purely to
find fault, that's where it crosses the line, in my view, from being necessarily
critical to engaging in tearing down someone's work just for fun.
You don't sound like one of these types here, so you likely won't understand the
objections I've raised. That's okay; we don't need to see eye to eye over this.
But I've seen a lot of boorish behavior by poorly-trained judges and by people
bent on making their buddy's models come out on top, to the point it has left a
bad taste in my mouth. And as it turns out, many of these bad apples carried
penlights with them. So no, I don't really like them because they are so often
misused.
Daryl
Huhtala
Dim bulbs!
Wed Dec 24
Not you guys, the venues! Many of the contest rooms I've been
in are actually designed for receptions and parties and are lit accordingly.
They don't want you to see that the veal is undercooked and the wife's 2nd
cousin is hitting on the neighbor's daughter. A guy could go blind trying to see
cockpit details in a room like that! I've used flashlights to see in cockpits
and I'm not a judge, I just want to see as much as I can.
RSC
Wed Dec 24
Guess we need to get the Air Force to mount Klieg lights on
their airbases then since that would be about the equivalent.
Kent
Sorry RSC, don’t understand your
response.
Wed Dec 24
Have you ever judged? The lighting in most halls sucks. Most
modelers build under the best lighting they can insure. Many use magnifiers to
build their creations. Then you are expected to judge in the equivalent of 40
watt lighting. All the work that people put into doing it right is lost because
the halls are poorly lit?
Simply the pen light gives the judges the ability to see what was done. Granted
if an individual modeler did sloppy work it may show flaws, but if a modeler did
great work the penlight allows it to be seen. Period.
RSC
Wed Dec 24
Yes I have, and in a well lighted facility I might add.
Even had the lighting been less, it would not have required a flashlight to
determine the winners. By walking around the tables and looking against the
lights, enough can be seen.
Jim
Mc
Thu
I don't agree with that. Some places, the lighting is good,
some it is not. It is unfathomable that if you go to a major show, that the
judges would not be prepared with pen lights. When you get up to regional level,
it starts to be evident that the difference between 1st and 2nd and 3rd will be
so minute as to demand that every detail, every seam, and every panel be
scrutinized. Look at the Nats. 200+ models in single engine prop, and you damn
sure will need a pen light.
Don
Flynn
Wed Dec 24
Beg to differ, even in a well lit room a flashlight can come
in handy for spotting decal silver or very small missed seams in odd places.
Don't take this as a flame, but when you say you've judged in a well lighted
facility how many times have you judged...if just the once then you've never had
to do it in a poorly lighted room when that little penlight can come in handy.
I like to use one on my work area, looking at the build as I would if I were
judging someone’s model at a show, cuz I figure that's how it will be judged.
The pen-light is a tool, same as others...used well it can make the difference
in a close contest. The facility that we use for the show here in
Kent
Wed Dec 24
You know Don the more I think about this the odder I find the
opposition to the pen light. Are modelers limited to the tools used to construct
a model? hell if I have a cad cam machine and good plans, I can let that
manufacture any part I want. No one would even bat an eyelash. But the minute I
want to use a tool to judge the model, people go ballistic. Sounds like fear of
scrutiny to me. And if that’s the case, don’t enter
Mike
Horrell
Wed Dec 24
I've only judged once, but I wish I'd had a light. It ain't
the tool, it's the attitude. (At least that's what I tell my wife).
I saw the "penlight brigade" (not necessarily judges) practically
doing handsprings of joy at the 2002 Nats when they could find something they
didn't like, and I saw some very famous modelers and judges using them in a very
professional manner at the 2003 Blue-Gray Challenge regional.
Some people are jerks, some people aren't. If I ever judge another show, I'll
sure as hell beg, borrow or steal a penlight so that I can really see some of
the neat stuff contest level modelers produce.
Kent
Wed Dec 24
Mike, a very good point on attitude. Perhaps there is a
reason that some folks hate to see the light. But, like you, I think it is
essential to do a fair job judging, at least in my case.
Don
Flynn
Wed Dec 24
Like Mike said, its all in who's using the penlight. I've
known my share of jerks who think its a light sabre or something to cut a
modeler down with...I avoid them and pray they don't volunteer for our show
here, then if they do they work with someone I trust if I'm calling the shots...
Don
Flynn
Wed Dec 24
I've always thought it’s the fact that a modeler can sweat
that model for all its worth, drop the kitchen sink in aftermarket into it and
still get beat by the 1 flaw that might not have been seen but for the penlight.
I just used mine to find a little problem on a 1/72 Emil that could have
snowballed if I had left it alone...5 minutes work and the model is back in the
hunt (excluding paint drying time)
Some people just get feed up not winning and want to blame the judge, I've been
beat many a time, doesn’t stop me from building, just makes me look at my own
stuff harder, and if I do that I build a better model, which is more satisfying
in the long run
Kent
Wed Dec 24
Don, I've been beat many a time, though I don’t enter any
more. It wasn’t Judging that drove me away, but the constant harping of the
real "losers" Ain’t no fun when all you hear is bitching about why
someone didn’t get the crummy plaque they thought they deserved.
Don
Flynn
Wed Dec 24
I know the type, I've learned to tune them out. Or if they
want to listen, tell them what they missed....had one guy tell me once about the
$200.00 worth of aftermarket he dropped in 1/48th Fw190D-9...then I showed him
the stabilizers pointing like a V-tail Beech..
Kent
Wed Dec 24
Love the comment on the stabilizers!! We had a guy in my old
club who was a very good builder, and would spend a fortune on every aftermarket
available for his builds. Unfortunately he never took the time top paint
properly, always looked very sloppy. But damn when he lost, first thing out of
his mouth was but I spent $XXX on it. Reminds of the old AKC story where I guy
was going on about how his dog couldn’t lose, because of the pedigree it had.
The judge merely looked at him and said, "I agree it's a fine pedigree. I
suggest that next time you leave the dog at home and just bring the
paperwork."
Don
Flynn
Wed Dec 24 23:13:19 2003
Yep, I think every club has one, checkbook modeler who overlooks
the basics and gets in trouble every time. That guy called me every name he
could think of, but next time I saw that bird the planes were straight so he got
a second from a different show so he learned the lesson, to bad others don't.
It did save me money, I've taken to OOTB builds the past few years, been
enjoying it more
Kent
Wed Dec 24
Randall, guess we have a difference of opinion on this. I have distinctly
seen where the penlight made a difference in our ability to see the results of
work that was otherwise hidden. Maybe your eyes are better than mine, but the
fact is using that light has let me see things, particularly in cockpit that I
couldn’t see without it. Glad you don’t need one
Hal
Flashlights
Wed Dec 24
I agree that Lights are necessary many times to see some of
the detail lovingly put into many cockpits. On the other hand, I consider lights
along seams sneaky and underhanded. From my point of view, if you can't see it
with the naked eye, it ain't there. We have no idea what circumstances the
entrant is working under. As for myself, I work at the kitchen table with a 100
watt bulb in the overhead fixture. Best regards, Hal
Kent
Wed Dec 24
Hal, you are one of the best builders I have ever known. But remember the
conditions a Wilkes-Barre Region II about 10 years ago? That Ramada had some of
the worst lighting I have ever judged in. Hell xenon lamps would have been
appropriate there!
I hope that when I judge I use the light as a positive tool. But quite simply, I
need the damn thing to see.
Hal
Kent
Thu Dec 25
You are right of course, re needing the things to see.
working my way through this thread it seems that maybe attitude of the penlight
bots may be more to fault, than the blasted things themselves. As said, if
someone puts down that he has put extra detail in the cockpit, I'll need the
light to see it. My primary objection is the use of them to detect flaws that
are not visible to the naked eye. That's like those who have to ensure that the
entire interior is painted, not just that which can be easily seen, or if a
builder has opened up a vent or inlet that was closed on the kit, then they want
to see inside detail thru a 1/32nd gap that was created. Of course if such
detail was actually built, the light would be necessary for it to be seen. To
me, this is all so much bull hockey.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Wed Dec 24 21:10:33 2003
Can't have it both ways if "I agree that Lights are necessary many
times to see some of the detail lovingly put into many cockpits" then they
are also "necessary" for checking seams. If on the other hand they are
"sneaky and underhanded" then they are "sneaky and
underhanded" for looking into cockpits as well.
It's not terribly difficult or expensive to keep a penlight on your workbench
and the simple fact is that if you use it when you're fixing the seams you'll
probably end up with much better seams than if you don't. It's not hard, doesn't
take more than a couple seconds to check your progress and improves the quality
of your work so why not do it?
Dave
Sherrill
I'm with you 100%
Wed Dec 24
There's no shame in using a penlight to judge. In
fact I think you would be short-sighted (no pun intended) not to use one. I
can't build a model without optimal lighting and vision so why judge without the
same. When judging I want to be able to see what the modeler has done,
especially in the cockpit and for that I need a penlight and my 1.25+
eyeglasses. You can't always see cockpit detail under poorly lit or even well
lit conditions without some help. To me, it's the least I can do for the modeler
who has put a lot of time and effort into every phase of model building. Sorry,
but it should be 5,000 points if you did bother to use a penlight. I think Jaymo
has an axe to grind with a judge who used a penlight.
Part 2:
Jeffery
S. Harrison
"Hidden" seams
Thu Dec 25
One point that came up a couple times in my
flashlight thread was the objection to people using flashlights to find seams in
areas that would normally be 'hidden' from sight because it would be buried so
deep inside the fuselage or where ever. For the most part I have to agree with
that but (I'm sure you knew that was coming) there is a counterpoint to
that. If you're going to enter a model in a contest
you really should take precautions to hide even interior seams if they might be
visible through the cockpit or any other 'opening' to the interior. I'm not
saying that you should get in there and fill and sand the seam like you would
for the exterior because that's a) unrealistic to expect and b) often
impossible. You can however do some simple things to minimize its visibility.
You can put in a bulkhead to hide the area completely, you can paint the
interior that is in theory 'not visible' flat black or better yet a much darker
shade of the interior color, you can lay some sheet plastic over the area where
the seam will be when you assemble the fuselage halves or even add some
additional details (fictional or otherwise) to distract the viewer from the
seams -- whatever the area should have a flat not glossy finish (flat can hide a
multitude of sins). If you're going to open a hatch you better detail the area
and go to even greater pains to hide any internal seams or don't open the hatch
since opening that hatch is inviting people to look inside (whether you admit it
or not you know that's true).
In the past it used to be that with jet models you
could look in the tail pipe and look out the intake so the modeling magazines
suggested that you at least add a wall in the fuselage to prevent that. It was
no big deal, was common and had a simple, if not a terribly accurate fix. As you
know our hobby is one of illusion. Most of these things don't have to be dealt
with at all and the ones that do can be dealt with by relatively simple steps
and just a little care (if you think about them ahead of time).
Roy
Sutherland
Fri Dec 26
This whole flashlight thing is being
blown way out of proportion.
IPMS/USA judging deals with basics first. Seams, alignment (the number one
killer), paint, decals, canopies, etc. all get dealt with way before anyone gets
to really scrutinizing the models.
Guys unfamiliar to IPMS judging must be imagining a troop of nasty looking
judges scowling through Optivisors with police grade flashlights looking like a
scene from some Sci-Fi/Horror movie. Not the case at all.
Most judges don't even HAVE flashlights and use them only sparingly, unless the
lighting is truly terrible, which it too often is.
The only time the judging teams I have been on have ever gotten to the point
where we are sticking flashlights where the sun don't shine to see hard to see
details is when it is down to a tie breaker between first and second place. It
usually only happens in the most hotly contested categories, typically 1/48th
single engine prop and such when there is a good turn out.
Being that this is a CONTEST and understanding that the judges (unpaid) JOB is
to determine first, second, and third place (even though we greatly appreciate
and admire the work that it takes), tough decisions have to be made. Sometimes
it comes down to splitting hairs. That is rare. If you want to win tough
categories, be prepared to do the work it takes.
The problem comes when people fall in love with their models. It's like some
people feel about their pets or kids. They don't want to hear anything bad about
them. Then why do they enter them in contests? I don't get it.
There is no such thing as a flawless model. I've never built one and I've never
judged one. We are all aware of the flaws our models have, we just hope that the
judges don't find them!
I've said it before. If you hate IPMS judges and want to get even with them,
here's what to do. Take an extra hour during your build to make sure all your
alignments are on the money. Remove all parting lines. Fill and sand all the
seams and restore lost panel lines. Take extra time to make sure your finish and
decals all go on smoothly. Cleanly mask and paint all canopy frames so no light
shows through them. Make sure paint separations between wheels and tires are
cleanly done. You'd be amazed how often one or more of these is overlooked.
You will make the judges crazy. It will make their lives hell. We will be
sweating the process for hours, wishing we had not volunteered for this job! :-)
Craig
Quattlebaum
Fri Dec 26
Yes it is
On the whole, I believe a light should only be allowed in instances in a
tie-breaker situation where the difference really comes down to nits.
Ralph
Nardone
Bingo!
Fri Dec 26
Then again, there is another solution for those
that don't like having their model probed more than the
Don't compete. Period. That way, you'll never have to deal with an "anal
retentive" judge who "doesn't know anything about models"
sticking a flashlight up the tailpipe of the model or looking at the underside
with a mirror (or, horror of horrors, actually picking the model up and
inverting it).
Bottom line, you know what a contest judge's job is, you know the rules of the
contest before you ever fill out the entry form. You don't like the rules, you
have the option of not playing the game....
As Roy said, you wanna compete to win? Make sure every aspect of your model is
absolutely perfect and you stand a good chance of winning. If you don't wanna go
to those pains, well....
David
Thu Dec 25
You make good points the Jeff and since I don't take all the precautions
required to build contest winning models I won't ever make it as an IPMS contest
modeler. Too much of an effort for my enjoyment. For one it means getting the
best model of the subject i.e. Hasegawa or Tamiya etc, latest resin sets, latest
photo-etch, latest decals, latest doo-dad and use all the tricks of the trade to
remove seams, like using tube inserts for interior seams, seam scrapers, and
special tools and so on.
That's why I won't enter contests anymore. I'll display my lousy 'cute' 1/72
kits but I won't enter. Just tired of it.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Thu Dec 25
Despite what it sounds like, most of these precautions are hardly required
and most are easy to accomplish taking little in the way of extra time (again,
assuming that you think about it ahead of time). Others paint a dire picture of
judges using flashlights to find the most obscure, deeply hidden flaws and this
just isn't true. Most judges (in my experience anyway) don't even use
flashlights at all and those that do actually use them
"intelligently", for the most part only breaking them out to pick
between very close contenders -- in that case all this BS I'm talking about on
the interior does become a factor :-). About the only thing I normally do is
paint my interior the interior color (of course it helps that the interior color
of most of my subjects is light black) and don't worry about it. I like going to
contests but have yet to actually build a model for a contest. If I know I'll be
able to make it to a competition I bring whatever happens to be on had, stick it
on the table and then go have a good time. If I win, great (I've even done that
on occasion but never assume that I will--if I was worried about winning I
wouldn't build 1/48 Messerschmitts :-) ), if not it doesn't matter because I
still had a good time, got to talk to people with a common interest and got to
spend my money and see a lot of excellent models. Anyway in contests with most
judges most of the time the decision is made long before these extremist
possibilities come into play.
Wayne
Funderburk
Flashlights..
Thu Dec 25
My 2 credits worth.....I carry a penlight to
contest. I am 50+ years old. The light in MOST halls is terrible at best. I use
it to see. I also have judged, I use it when I judge. However, I don't use it
like Yoda said about one judge and the engine cowling. When I walk up to a
model. I look at it from a distance. 1) Does it "look" right? i.e.,
sit correct. Seen some really nice models that didn't sit correct. One wing low,
etc. Look of main parts, i.e. no "V" tails. LG correctly aligned. If
it pasts that far then a Quick look with the light to look at exterior seams,
paint and decals. That quick look about 10-15 seconds depending on the size of
the model. Then a quick look in the cockpit and engines. This is to get an
impression of the amount of detail and any jump at you major flaws. At that
point I will score it 1-10 and move on. After, my first run thru I will go back
to the top choices depending on the size of the category. Then I will do another
quick run thru again. To refresh what I saw. And depending on this I might toss
one or two out or not. Then I start getting more detailed till winners are
determined. I have judged with Yoda, I find him to be nothing but a fair and
honest judge. And as far as MOST people go. If you talk to them and show them
their problems in a professional way they will respond in kind.
Keith
Thu Dec 25
I think the flashlight thing a bit anal and only should be a last resort if
comparing to models of the same type and/or manufacture. Every different type
aircraft model is unique and manufacturers place seams and e-pin marks in
different areas. I mean one could be judging and comparing a 1/32 F-15E (with
all its seams and e-pin marks in the intake and exhausts) to a 1/32 Corsair and
because some judge uses a penlight to peer down the intake of the Strike Eagle
and see faint parting lines or look inside a closed gear well for e-pin marks
will deduct points.
No, I think what you see (and everyone else sees) is what you get. I think the
flashlight judging should not be tolerated, unless in case of a tie-breaker
Just my $0.02
Keith
Thu Dec 25
I think the flashlight thing a bit anal and only should be a last resort if
comparing to models of the same type and/or manufacture. Every different type
aircraft model is unique and manufacturers place seams and e-pin marks in
different areas. I mean one could be judging and comparing a 1/32 F-15E (with
all its seams and e-pin marks in the intake and exhausts) to a 1/32 Corsair and
because some judge uses a penlight to peer down the intake of the Strike Eagle
and see faint parting lines or look inside a closed gear well for e-pin marks
will deduct points.
No, I think what you see (and everyone else sees) is what you get. I think the
flashlight judging should not be tolerated, unless in case of a tie-breaker
Just my $0.02
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Thu Dec 25
Did you actually read what I wrote??? The only reference to flashlights in
this post was to reference the post where the issue came up. But since you
brought it up flashlights as a judging tool aren't going anywhere. That being
the case you might as well use them in construction as well (which was the point
of, and the point missed by most of the respondents, of the previous thread).
The other factor is that the quality level of models (especially when you get to
the National level) has gotten to the point that these difficult to see (not
impossible to see) areas are becoming more and more important, at least in
competitions (you can dismiss that if you wish but it doesn't change it). If it
isn't important then why do model companies give us these nice interiors? If
you're not entering a competition then do what you want and have a good time but
if you do want to compete and you lose because you ignored this
"unimportant" details then don't whine about how unfair the world is.
Keith
Who's whining?
Fri Dec 26 00:52:46 2003
I just said I think it’s anal! Even at the
National level, just because it's inevitable doesn't mean I will agree with it.
There are too many factors to consider and again, like I said, it should only be
used when the competition is so close that the difference would be something
like 'flashlight' highlighted seams.
I'll repeat.............this is MY opinion.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Fri Dec 26
OK, maybe I was a 'little' sarcastic and I knew it would happen but I make a
post suggesting a couple methods to help improve a model for competition by
helping to hide internal seams and the very first reply to it was "I think
the flashlight thing a bit anal......." But it does emphasize my point
about how vehemently people seem to oppose this whole flashlight thing :)
The whole point of the earlier thread was simply that since flashlights aren't
going away we as modelers should be using them also to make their job of hiding
things like seams easier. The point of this post was to mention a couple of
fairly easy techniques that would help to conceal 'flaws' that are going to
become more and more important as time goes on. These ideas don't take very long
and go a long way towards thwarting that dreaded modeler with his light sabre.
This is a trend that's been going on since plastic models were invented. With
each new generation of kits we're getting more and more detail both inside and
out so there's no reason to think it'll stop now. Since that's a given (at least
in my world) then these seams on the inside of the model are going to continue
to become more important. Fortunately (or unfortunately as the case may be) most
of them are relatively easy to deal with. Of course that means the more people
deal with them to ward off everybody with their lights, the more it's going to
be accepted that they have to be dealt with...
Finally, the thing most people seem to be complaining about isn't the fact that
flashlights are being used. It's the attitude of SOME of those using them. This
need to "tear down" the efforts of other modelers isn't a fault of the
flashlight. It's a fault with the upbringing and education of the person doing
the tearing down. Railing against the use of flashlights won't fix that problem,
these people do the same thing whether they have flashlight or not.
Clare
"Hidden" seams
Sat Dec 27
Jeff,
I tend to agree with you on your basic concept. The first decision point,
however, is just how far the builder wants to go. Unless we are working on a
commission, we really build models for ourselves. In that case, if we don't
worry about an interior fuselage seam that may be seen by looking straight down
into the cockpit, so be it. What I think you were trying to point out is that if
a modeler really wants to build the "perfect" model that will blow
away the competition, then he or she should also consider these types of things.
A good comment, sorry that some people took it wrong.
Jeffery
S. Harrison
Sat Dec 27
Exactly. Which is why I put the part about if you're going to compete in
bold, red letters. Since once you decide to enter a competition you're really
not just building for yourself anymore, at least if you're competing
'seriously'. Me, personally I enter competitions because I want to go to the
event and figure I might as well put something on the table so I bring whatever
is handy so I do build for myself but ...
And since the trend has been, for the 37 years I've been building models, to add
more and more detail both inside and out it's only a matter of time before the
standard is that these "frivolous" will become important.
Craig
Quattlebaum
Thu Dec 25
I agree with ya Anony. Unless it comes down to the wire, and there is no
other way to make a decision, peering down into normally hidden areas with a
flashlight shouldn't happen.
And the fact that it's entered into a contest shouldn't matter or not. Some
areas that might be seen with a flashlight may also be impossible to reach into
with sometime of tool to work over good enough to satisfy a flashlight toter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
