SPA Modeler

And some folks just grew pretty much tired of bringing forward constructive criticism...

Every then and now, I find myself looking at a model which positively "qualifies" for bringing forward constructive criticism: What attracted my attention or caught my eye? Why did it attract my attention? Which options/info/references can I offer to do better/differently, and how can I encourage the addressee to sail uncharted waters, to be more adventurous or to accept failure as an essential step in his personal evolution as a scale modeller, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera... But then, and more and more frequently, I eventually end up mumbling "Leave it!" to myself. Too many discussions, too many instances where folks had mistaken constructive criticism for nitpicking or rivet-counting, the usual bandwagon-jumpers, total lack of feedback from the recipient, sometimes even the "institutionalised" renunciation of critique (e.g. ARC's The Display Case versus Critique Corner).

WHAT!? You didn't bother to straighten the pitot and replace the rudder?!?! Terrible.. just terrible. How's that for criticism?

I know what I'm capable and not capable of doing as far as weathering, using the right color, etc... It all boils down to the individual and what makes him happy with the end result. I could care less what anyone says of my finished model as long as I'm happy with the end result. If I'm not, I can always get another and try again.

JimD wrote:(...)

I love your cat and want to get wild with it...

Another fine example of a "civilized" discussion without going nuts or getting personal. I want to thank everybody for your comments and the way you posted them!

I really can see a point or more in Jim´s words, but also in some other contributions. In my opinion there possibly won´t exist the perfect "solution" or statement on this topic. Don´t forget we all are individuals, with individual feelings, experiences, history, and whatever.

Thanks for some interesting thoughts here.

Thomas_M wrote:Another fine example of a "civilized" discussion without going nuts or getting personal. I want to thank everybody for your comments and the way you posted them!

I really can see a point or more in Jim´s words, but also in some other contributions. In my opinion there possibly won´t exist the perfect "solution" or statement on this topic. Don´t forget we all are individuals, with individual feelings, experiences, history, and whatever.

Thanks for some interesting thoughts here.

Whew. Time for a dork to weigh in. First, I'd be tickled to death if my stuff looked like Jim's Wildcat. Seriously, I would. I don't get much comment on my stuff when I post it and I'm sure it is because of the "if you can't say something nice....." rule. I'd welcome feedback (Breakfast of champions, you know) and tips on things to try. However, my skill set at the moment only allows me to go so far. My hands and eyes further limit things. But, I have noticed that there are some small things I do much better now than when I started back in the hobby. I'm better at gluing up the model. I'm better at filling and sanding (thank you B-2), etc.

Much of what I've learned is from you - our merry band of modelers. Pros, all of you. At the level you guys work, constructive feedback is critical to getting to that next level. At my level, ehhhh, maybe. For me, simple feedback for now. I don't know how one would assess the skill level of individual modelers, short of the number on the Revell box, but as you become more expert of a builder - making models of aircraft, not just assembling them, feedback ought to be shaped by that.

Oh well. Great discussion and all that stuff!

BlackSheep214 wrote:WHAT!? You didn't bother to straighten the pitot and replace the rudder?!?! Terrible.. just terrible. How's that for criticism?

I know what I'm capable and not capable of doing as far as weathering, using the right color, etc... It all boils down to the individual and what makes him happy with the end result. I could care less what anyone says of my finished model as long as I'm happy with the end result. If I'm not, I can always get another and try again.

You know, I'm just pulling your chain, Jim. LOL!

JimD wrote:
If you don't want, seek, and crave critique it must come down to either thinking you're above it because you're work is so great, or you're indifferent and have no desire to grow

or it could be that you just enjoy posting up pictures of models and sharing in the hobby with others?

Two areas that I can critique on, but often do not are these: historical accuracy, and vehicle stowage. Those are two areas I really get into when I do research a project. Just because an item comes with a kit, does not make it accurate or proper. The Revell F-4G kit is a prime example- the ordnance is improper for the kit decals- bigtime. Aircraft load outs are a big deal for me. bomb & missile types, ECM pods, configurations, etc. are one of my OCD areas. I will used Jim's F-4D of OY 463 as an example- a beautiful build all the way around- but the load out was historically wrong for that bird in those markings. I put in my 2 cents about the load out weapons during his WIP thread and he can take or leave it as he pleased. After the kit is completed and he shares it with us, should I go then and say how he got that part all wrong? be the guy who jumps in the pond and scares the fish while everybody else is looking in the pond and saying how nice the fish are in the pond?
I know many folks here don't build armor, but for me vehicle stowage is a BIG thing. Proper types of equipment and placed where it really would be, not interfering with vehicle operations like vision blocks, turret traverse, etc. No US ALICE packs on a IDF tank, or British haversacks on a Russian T-34.I do realize that stuff gets captured and used by the other side, but some things I have seen go beyond reason or true plausibility...
Are these areas rivet counting? to me no. But to somebody else, perhaps...