Author Topic: Gloss or Matt (or is it Matte?) (Read 2251 times)

Neville Legg · « **on:** July 11, 2011, 03:42:06 PM »

Many years ago, in one of your (U.S.) modelling publications, I saw a superbly crafted and quite scale Wildcat stunter, the finish was weathered and dull, as a Wildcat should be. Reading on, it seems the judges marked him down for the finish

. Are the judges conditioned purely for high gloss finishes, or can they not see the artistry involved in a scale finish? Is realism still part of the judging form? If I was building a semi-scale model I too would put realistic weathered finish on it, for my own satisfaction basically!

Cheers

Randy Powell · « **Reply #1 on:** July 11, 2011, 04:48:08 PM »

Not so much then, more so now.

Wynn Robins · « **Reply #2 on:** July 11, 2011, 06:11:41 PM »

pretty sure it needs to be shiney.....in the US anyways. a gloss warbird looks stupid tho.........

Ron Burn is the guy that had the F4F ......he does some amazing work

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #3 on:** July 11, 2011, 09:59:54 PM »

In the "Rules Forum", there's a post that's titled "Appearance points judging guidelines" by Randy Smith. The post is merely the publishing of a PAMPA document, not Randy's creation. It was drafted by all the PAMPA Officers and District Directors. It has the answers you seek, about matte/gloss.

You have to ask to be allowed to join that forum, and provide your name and AMA or SMAE number, etc. The permission will also allow you to read and post on the Judging Clinic Forum. You have to contact Sparky, tho I suspect Randy Smith or Bill Little can give you the permission. I am a moderator, but I can't do it.

I have a problem with this document, because it's a PAMPA document, instructing the NATS judges how to do AP judging. It's not in the rulebook, which means to me that they are not running the NATS (of all contests!) by the rulebook.

It doesn't allow judges to downgrade a model that's ugly, or upgrade one that's handsome. It doesn't allow judges to downgrade a model for having an ugly color combination, or reward one that has a good color combination. It doesn't allow judges to downgrade a model for having ugly graphics or reward one for having an artistic graphics design. Basically, it allows an ugly model with crappy colors and dopey graphics to get 20 points, and I have difficulty with that.

The rulebook simply says "appearance", and to me, that includes shapes, colors, graphics, smoothness, ink lines, cockpit details...the whole enchilada. Thankfully, the "Pilot's Choice" system of determining the Concours Champ seems to work just fine. Folks know a good looking plane when they see it, such as Bruce's Jester.

Gloss or matte should be as appropriate, by either PAMPA's document or the rulebook. The year that Ron Burns got hosed by the judges, I believe the AP judging was done by a team of R/C pylon racers. However, PW told me at the end of the B-17 project, that the gloss finish (B-17 #2) was because the matte finish (#1) was heavier.

Steve

Neville Legg · « **Reply #4 on:** July 14, 2011, 01:06:15 AM »

Does anyone have pictures of Mr Ron Burns models? I'd be very interested to see some.

Cheers

Neville Legg · « **Reply #5 on:** July 15, 2011, 11:06:19 AM »

Had a search, and came up with an identical thread as this one, from 2006! But sadly no pictures.

Cheers

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #6 on:** July 15, 2011, 01:32:19 PM »

Go to the SSW site - do a search for a thread "Evolution of Intelligent Design". The last attachment on the post willl be a picture of Ron's famous F4-F. I know there have been pics posted of his Zero and BT-13 "Vultee Vibrator" also but could not find them.

Neville Legg · « **Reply #7 on:** July 15, 2011, 03:01:45 PM »

Sorry Pete, what is the SSW site

I'm English, I'm sure I've seen it mentioned on here though?

Cheers

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #8 on:** July 15, 2011, 03:37:20 PM »

Sorry Neville, SSW aka "Stuka Stunt Works" is another control line forum. I mention it only because that is where I found a picture of the plane you were inquiring about.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #9 on:** July 15, 2011, 06:30:43 PM »

Quote from: Wynn Robins on July 11, 2011, 06:11:41 PM

pretty sure it needs to be shiney.....in the US anyways.

Not at all. The incident in question was an anomaly. There is absolutely no reason that an appropriate matte finish would be downgraded.

Brett

Mike Keville · « **Reply #10 on:** July 15, 2011, 07:29:47 PM »

A little late now, but IMHO, Ron Burn's F4F SHOULD have received maximum appearance points that year. Those who downgraded that entry haven't a clue!!!

Along with Ron's magnificent BT-13 and Mitsubishi Zero, his F4F Wildcat is just about the most realistic semi-scale Stunter ever seen. He his a true artist!!!

(Been wanting to say this for a long, long time.)

Mike Keville · « **Reply #11 on:** July 15, 2011, 07:43:44 PM »

Okay...log on to the Stuka Stunt forum and ask for Topic # 337050. You will then see what realistic, artistic finishes look like!

Neville Legg · « **Reply #12 on:** July 16, 2011, 11:23:30 AM »

Thanks for that, I didn't realise Mr Burns had fitted a scale Pratt & Whitney, or is it a Cyclone? Those models are a work of art, more scale than stunt, I'm in awe

Did they fly as well as they looked?

Cheers

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #13 on:** July 16, 2011, 03:55:57 PM »

Yes, they do, the F4-F at least which I have seen fly an expert level pattern in Ron's capable hands. Power wise, I believe there is a Merco .61 behind the scale P&W. 8)

Bill Little · « **Reply #14 on:** August 01, 2011, 01:26:50 PM »

Ron is a great guy, and is an absolutely great craftsman. He got 3 appearance points, back row all by himself, for the Wildcat at the NATS in question. I saw his piped Macchi in 1993 at the NATS, the pipe went OVER the wing........ And his models are very very close to scale. Between him and Al Rabe, the "Scale" stunters are very competitive!

Big Bear

Neville Legg · « **Reply #15 on:** August 01, 2011, 03:26:46 PM »

It's criminal that he only got 3 points! The judges must have been Philistines?

Cheers

john e. holliday · « **Reply #16 on:** August 02, 2011, 10:01:30 AM »

I think they are hung up on shiny finishes, the shinier th better. Also lots of stars, stripes and whatever else they can put on. Somewhere in this forum is sthe post for appearance guidelines, not rules, as every body has their own likes and dislikes.

Neville Legg · « **Reply #17 on:** August 02, 2011, 12:18:52 PM »

Maybe the judges for the static side of stunt, (big events only) should be people like the calibre of Dave Platt, he has flown almost all disciplines of aeromodelling since the '50's and is a true artist (if they are willing to do it?) Jack Sheeks would be a good candidate too? To me, aeromodelling has always been an art form, every modeller puts a bit of themselves into their work.

Cheers

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #18 on:** August 03, 2011, 06:31:42 PM »

Quote from: Steve Helmick on July 11, 2011, 09:59:54 PM

<snip>

The year that Ron Burns got hosed by the judges, I believe the AP judging was done by a team of R/C pylon racers. <snip> Steve

Neville Legg · « **Reply #19 on:** August 03, 2011, 11:53:35 PM »

I couldn't see Dave Platt or Jack Sheeks giving a score that low for a scale finish, besides what do pylon racers know? they assemble fibreglass models, that all look very similar, and can only turn in one direction!

Cheers