Weathering or Pristine

[tecdes]

Just wonder how many weather their models & how many leave them in the out of the factory mode.

Just started my 6th model & although I am sure I will have a go at weathering sometime I like to see, at least at the moment, the model as at the factory gate.

Seen some terrific weathered models & admire the way this has been accomplished. Very artistic. Seen elsewhere some I regret to say puts me off going down this route although I am always tempted to try the unknown. Think having only completed a few models it would be most disappointing to mess up the whole thing with a botched weathering attempt after putting in all the hours.

Laurie

 

[Sky Raider]

Know what you mean Laurie, my opinion and it is only my opinion is that a weathered model always looks better, gives it character as it was. Factory models as you put it always seem to me to look unreal. I would practice on an old or cheap model and give it a go, you will be suprised just how easy it is, a rule to remeber is ' little is more'. Best of luck no matter what you decide and remember, this is your hobby... do what you feel is best and enjoy what you are doing.

Cheers

Andy

 

[john]

I always make a mess of trying to weather my models then it usually ends up in a drawer, but sometimes I do something that I think I did a good job with but not often.

 

[Dave W]

I only started attempting to weather models earlier this year after joining this forum.So far all i have done is a bit of exhaust staining and a few panel washes .If you fancy having a go at a panel wash i would recommend trying 'Florymodels' washes.The great thing about this product is if you dont like the finish or feel you have put too much on ,you can wipe it off with a damp cloth.Just found some weathering videos by Phil Flory on You Tube which are really good and well worth a look if you fancy giving it a go.Theres also a video on there of some one showing you how to simulate paint chiping using salt of all things .Going to give that a go on my P61.

 

[tr1ckey66]

Hi Laurie

I tend to weather my models to suit the situation or diorama they are depicted in. If the subject is pristine then I think the model should reflect this, if the model subject is dirty, scratched, dented etc then I try to depict this as closely as possible. I don't think a model should be weathered with no reason, and I see quite a few models that look as though they're ready for the scrap yard rather than just have a little battlefield wear and tear, or (worse still) weathering is used in an attempt to hide a poorly assembled or painted model.

I think some of the best models and dioramas even show a mix of weathering (imagine a polished staff car next to a seasoned battle tank or troop transport) see the truck trailer and missile on the Home page as an example.

Then there's the simple matter of personal preference ,for instance, some prefer their aircraft very clean and quite a few armour modellers love their hardware really dirty and beaten up. In the end it's all down to your own personal taste.

Learning weathering techniques is really no different to learning any other modelling method and, as with everything, practice really does make for better results. I've had quite a few failed 'experiments' but I see it all as a learning curve and the only way to improve.

Weathering encompasses quite a number of techniques:-

Filters

Fading

Pin washes

Panel lines

Chipping/scratches

Dust

Dry dirt

Wet mud

Rusting

Smoke

Stains (fuel etc)

...and many more...

Mastering them all will take time and, to be honest, there's always something new to pick up or an interesting effect that happens by accident that can be used later. In short, I think you never stop learning.

I think the main thing is to enjoy it and try the technique(s) appropriate to your model. You might not succeed first time round but with practice I'm sure you'll get the hang of it (remember you will always continue to improve even when you think you've mastered a technique!)

My advice is; continue to enjoy your modelling and when you feel like trying a technique buy a cheaper model and give it a go. If it goes wrong don't throw it away you can always use it as a test bed for other techniques.

Have fun

Paul

 

[colin m]

My vote is weathered. Yes it can be overdone (something I am guilty of) but when you get it right, it can bring a model to life.

Colin M........

 

[stona]

I think the techniques are all mentioned above. I always try and use a reference,either of my subject or something similar. There is a danger that a completely unweathered model can look a bit toy like which is unrealistic. This doesn't mean you have to slap mud and oil all over it or paint it like a patch work quilt (something very popular on aircraft models in the last ten years or so). A little bit of subtle shading to modulate the paintwork and a little wear and tear often suffice.

If your car is on the driveway take a look at it. Most cars are painted in one colour but I bet it doesn't look like that!

Cheers

Steve

 

[AFC]

from my very short experience in weathering I found out that it really makes a difference. When I built the M151A2 (jeep) I used a bit of wash and "scratched" the jeep floor with some aluminium paint...some might tell it's horrendous but I just love it my point is that there is no need to use all or loads of techniques, but if you use 1 or 2 effects, the model immediatelly looks better! Again always keep the rule "little is more" in mind...but be no affraid of trying

just my opinion of course!

 

[Gern]

Hi Laurie. Weathering is very much a personal thing, but I think the guideline should be what you're actually modelling.

Here's a little poser for Steve (Stona) that might clarify (or confuse!) what we're trying to say. The picture you're using for your Hurri GB is of a 'plane in a museum that looks sparkling clean and shiny and factory fresh. So will you be adding any weathering effects to represent how it would have actually looked in service, or will you be copying the museum picture and leave your model all nice and shiny?

Personally, I'd say that either would be a 'correct' representation and I would go along with whatever version Steve decides to do, but I wonder what others think.

Gern

 

[yak face]

Hi laurie, i usually apply weathering to my models , as steve says its always useful to see an actual pic of the subject or something similar, so the weathering can be light or heavy. The usual rule is to apply a bit less than you think ,as its very easy to get carried away and overdo it. Obviously commercial aircraft or racers are done in the clean state,although a little defining of ailerons /elevators/rudder doesnt hurt. In the case of armour id say that it always looks more realistic to see a bit of muck,no matter how subtle or heavy. cheers tony

 

[Spyderman_uk]

It is a very good question, but I consider a model as unfinished if it hasn't been weathered to some degree.

As I see it, using a 1:1 car as an example, it comes out of the showroom polished and sparkling. Now scale it down to model size and the gloss looks too much. The model will reflect more than the real thing would because the finish isn't to scale.

You don't need to make the thing look old! You need to make it look realistic. The further you are away from an object the matt-er it looks. Remember the old comedy line "It's not smaller, it is further away", from Father Ted I believe.

Plus weathering helps to bring out details that would otherwise be hidden by a 'perfect finish'.

 

[stona]

Here's a little poser for Steve (Stona) that might clarify (or confuse!) what we're trying to say. The picture you're using for your Hurri GB is of a 'plane in a museum that looks sparkling clean and shiny and factory fresh. So will you be adding any weathering effects to represent how it would have actually looked in service, or will you be copying the museum picture and leave your model all nice and shiny?

Gern

Hi Gern,I gave this very conundrum some serious thought. Originally I was going to work from the "air show queen" photograph of the restored Hurricane and I would have finished it like that,very clean and very shiny. Since we don't now have to stick to an exact representation of the photograph we base our model on I'm leaning towards finishing the model as Bader's aircraft as it looked in September 1940. This wasn't a particularly dirty or worn machine but it does show signs of the hurly-burly of service life.

My start date has been postponed by more work commitments so I hereby reserve the right to change my mind!

Cheers

Steve

 

[Gern]

Hi Steve. I hadn't thought of the fact that a weathered version wouldn't represent the source photograph!

Another poser for you. If the 'Hangar Queen' in the museum is supposed to be an accurate representation of the real thing, why isn't that one weathered? After all, the chances of seeing a 'real' aircraft that clean in service would be pretty remote, so you could argue that the museum has a 1/1 scale model which isn't accurate - and if you copied it exactly, your version would also be wrong!

Laurie, I'm sorry to hijack your thread, but the whole question of weathering can be quite fascinating.

Gern

 

[tecdes]

You carry on Gern I am reading & taking in all that is said.

I like to see confrontational questions. Found that you really gain the facts.

Laurie

 

[Gern]

You carry on Gern I am reading & taking in all that is said. I like to see confrontational questions. Found that you really gain the facts.

Laurie

Well you know what they say: 'The only really stupid question is the one you don't ask!'

There's such a wealth of knowledge and talent here that we'd be daft not to use it. Learning about our hobby shouldn't stop at the bare facts of how to build kits.

Gern

 

[stona]

The Hurricane in the hangar and all other restored war birds are always kept immaculate. If I owned one mine would be too! They are after all museum pieces as well as air show queens (the ones that fly) and I don't expect them to represent an aircraft in service to the point of leaks,staining,chipping etc. If I'd made a model from the hangar picture I would have made it look as close to that aircraft,at that time,in that picture as I reasonably could.

I always say there is no right or wrong way to do these things. This is just my interpretation,I like to stay as true to my reference as I can.

It's an interesting point though. An aircraft on static display,whatever percentage is original,is essentially a 1:1 model of a known aircraft. Would we want to see such a thing weathered to match how the original looked at a particular time? I think it might be quite interesting for some brave curator to try it!

Cheers

Steve