I don’t mind plastic kits, but I have become very discriminating. IT has to be exactly what I want, or have to be able to be made that way. And the detailing has to be such that I make it look the age and style of the layout. It’s funny how some of the older cheap kits fit that bill better than some of the newer more expensive ones.
But craftsman wood kits almost always seem to work–although, I wish sometimes they thought a little harder about writing the directions.
I know what you mean about plastic kits being unrewarding as far as build goes. Shake the box and voila! Tichy kits are a better experience especially the big hook crane.As they say plastic is 20% build and 80% paint. Sratching plastic is great and when one starts to cast your own details its really great. You can say look at my ORIGINAL work.
Interesting topic, and a part of the hobby that is very much alive. Here’s a few of my scratch-built wooden structures from balsa/basswood. Lots of fun!
Construction photos:
http://www.trains.com/TRC/CS/forums/860247/ShowPost.aspx
http://www.trains.com/TRC/CS/forums/903831/ShowPost.aspx
My web site:
http://home.mchsi.com/~ironmaster1960/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html
I have always like the Winans Camel (0-8-0) and I bashed one (HO scale) using a MDC old time 2-8-0 a few years ago as I doubt I could build one from scratch. Still needs decals. After taking a digital photo and looking at the photo on my computer, I realized the paint job was not very good. It has to be re-painted or at least touched up.
Rich
How do I upload a photo from my computer.
Upon reading your reply Chip, I realize that I was a bit blunt in my dismissal of plastic kits. While my preference is certainly wooden kits and scratch-building, the plastic kit does indeed have a place on my layout. Walthers in particular have released some kits that I have used, some of which are not yet built (Union Station for example). I think that the key to a successful plastic kit is in the painting and the care and attention made in preparing the kit for assembly. A willingness to deviate from the instructions to modify the kit to better meet ones needs is also important.
I agree. Painting is everything. Without the 6 weeks of painting I did on this model, it would be a very cheap-looking plastic church.
For those of you that are tired of this picture, sorry.
And as to whether or not MR is willing to cover scratchbuilding projects, my Tenmile Creek video PDF series I’m doing for them will have over a dozen installments on scenery elements from a bridge, tunnel portal, grade crossing, road, signs – all of which are scratchbuilt. Probably the most complex is the bridge, but it’s not that hard, and I show every one of these scratchbuilding projects step-by-step on video.
So no, I don’t see any indication that scratch building or scratch-bashing is dead. In fact, the move toward more prototype modeling means you probably can’t just use something off the shelf as is. [swg]
I agree with simon1966 in that I don’t derive any satisfaction in placing a prebuilt structure on a layout. Some plastic kits are OK but I prefer to scratch build. Surprisingly, I find craftsman-type kits with zillions of small parts and tedious assemblies (such as trucks) very frustrating. I actually find it much easier and relaxing to scratch build, especially with wood, than to assemble a craftsman kit. I really enjoy scratch building wooden structures and rolling stock but only if what I’m building isn’t available commercially. If it happens to be available commercially, why reinvent the wheel. One reason I find scratch building more enjoyable than assembling craftsmen kits is that I have control of the types of materials to use and the assembly procedure without having to rely on the incomprehensible and poorly written instructions common to most kits. By the way, I prefer RTR locomotives that I can take out of the box, set on the track, and run. I feel I can always modify and detail them later when I’m in the mood.
Even though I like craftsman kits, I think I’ve also found that scratch-building is more relaxing. I wonder if that’s perhaps because scratch-building isn’t as “confining” or “limiting” as a craftsman kit. I have more freedom to try things. Just a thought…
Tom
Yes, you hit the nail on the head when you said craftaman kits are "confining and “limiting.” Scratch building offers much more freedom in design and trying new things.
I think that the appeal of scratch building also extends to the end result. There is something very satisfying about having a unique end result that is not simply a re-work of someone else’s design. For me this is particularly relevant as I have been building very specific structures that family and friends know well. The reaction I get when they see the models is priceless and well worth the effort. In a purely narcissistic way it elevates what I am doing above simply playing-with-trains and somehow validates it. Maybe I am insecure or something? [(-D]
This is my beef as well with the craftsman kits. I spend much more time trying to figure out what the heck the model designer had in mind through cryptic instructions, pseudo-blueprints and microscopic pictures than I do building it. When I build myself, I know what I have in mind and I can make decisions accordingly.
With the Internet, it is actually a little easier to publish a scratchbuilding idea. I expect in the near future, publishing articles on the Internet will become more comon place. The readers of the Internet articles will be the final judge on what is good or not so good. Right now, figuring out to publish or find someone to help you build a web page is the biggest obstacle. I have a couple grandchildren in their teens who are developing web pages as a hobby. If I was more organized, I would have one of them publish things I have done in model railroading.
I belong to a shortwave experimenters group and I built (scratchbuilt) my own shortwave radio antenna preselector. Someone in the group offered to build me a web site or put my material in their personal web page with reference to me. I chose to let him put my project on his web pages. Anyone in the world can see and comment or build their own from my notes and photos. Even pencil sketched ideas work. As an example, here is a link:
http://www.geocities.com/amdxlog/rich1.html
This can be done by almost anyone with a strong enough desire. The magazines are good and run by people trying to make a living like anyone of us but times are changing and changing fast. I have five grandchildren who are in high school and taking some college level courses I never dreamed of
Rich,
Actually, building a web site really isn’t that hard nowadays. A number of Internet providers (Earthlink and Juno, for example) will automatically give you access to 10MB of FREE web space with your monthly subscription and have FREE web site building software available so that you can begin the process. The templates, although limiting, do give you a base to work from and you don’t have to know a bunch of HTML (code) in order to put a decent web site together. You just have to be willing to try.
Rich, take a look at my web site at the link below. It’s made via the Earthlink Trellix software templates. I did spend some time putting it together (tweaking, arranging, writing, etc) and I still have a lot to learn, but it’s a start. I like it for both posting pictures of my layout progress, as well as “how-to” tutorials for other modelers.
Tom
Tom,
Great point. My ISP gives me the 10 meg you spoke of and with their tools, it was pretty easy for me to design in just a few days. Fun and simple…the way I like it.
http://home.mchsi.com/~ironmaster1960/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html
Perry,
I think you need to include the recent antics of Rex on your web site somewhere. [:)]
Tom
Tom,
Great idea. Thanks. Its now here on the links section of my web page.
http://home.mchsi.com/~ironmaster1960/wsb/html/view.cgi-resources.html-.html
Well, suppose some of us take a camera into our workshops and start documenting our scratch-building projects? Do a bit of a write-up and submit it to MR for publication. If you get back a letter that says, “Nah, we don’t want it. It’s not the kind of thing we publish,” then you can say MR isn’t interested in scratchbuilding.
Either that, or take the easy way out and go buy a copy of RMC.
I guess some modellers would feel intimidated by really detailed scratch-building projects in the pages of MR, but just as many would be inspired to do it themselves. Personally, I think it’s one of the best aspects of the hobby. But, we still really need Ready-to-Run trains and Ready-to-Plop buildings just to get over that initial hump.
I’m still new enough this hobby to remember when it was intimidating to build a tree, or a cliff, or lay ballast, or use an air brush–the list of things that were intimidating was/still is longer than I care to admit.
I believe there are many who are still working through these stages. That is okay–no, that is the way it should be.
But look at photo fun and you see tons of people who started this hobby in the last couple-three years that can’t even think in terms of a plop and drop.
I used some Plop and drop Buildings on my layout which i am replacing with Scratch built
ones as time allows.
My over all plan was to be up and running through a scenic layout as quick as possible then go back and replace and redo as time permits