Over Weathering

[PeterL]

Originally Posted by Barker

I know what I like, but that does not mean it's a universal preference. And vice versa.

What he said.

Any discussion on this subject is bound to turn up Francois Verlinden eventually. First time I saw his work was the 1973 Model Engineer Show at the Wembley Exhibition Centre. To me his models looked more like cake decorations. Over worked and over coloured with too much going on in the dioramas. Some strange what, where, when and how situations were in evidence. IMO it was very much a case of The Emporer's new clothes but for years afterwards his was the standard everyone aspired to. Thankfuly the fashion these days is to tone it down a bit. No bad thing in my book.

[Barker]

Originally Posted by PeterL

e.g. these two men should never be let near a photo editing program and loosed in public.


Do judges grade Photoshop efforts?
I think we have a new category.



"We're not worthy!"

[Tim West]

Right, clean or factory fresh models are not out of the question either. I just feel that most planes did not stay clean for very long.

I can imagine that the first time someone fired up a Dr1 for example, that it was all instantly covered in oil and gunk. It seems unlikely that aircrews would have kept these machines spotless for very long.......imho

Not being a scale modeler myself, I can not speak to the topic of contest and what not but when it comes to my form of modeling it seems that people expect a dirty look. So much so, that in most cases it is over done to give the effect that people expect, even if it is out of scale. It is most of time exaggerated to give the effect when viewed from a distance.

In another forum we had a similar discussion on the effects of perceived realism and it went both ways. Some liked it and found it critical to their presentation, while others found it to be a shallow attempt at realism. It seems that its more what you like rather than what is real.....just like here and the topic of weathering.

It's all a personal preference. Both clean and dirty models can be historically accurate. Its all in the delivery of the technique that makes it or breaks it.

[PeterL]

It must be understood that there are practical as well as aesthetic reasons for keeping an aircraft at least reasonably clean. This was an era when five or ten knots was a major advantage or disadvantage. Dirty aeroplanes are slower than clean aeroplanes. If it were my ar$e depending on it I'd be out there with the erks, chamois leather in hand, giving it some serious elbow.

[Tim West]

Originally Posted by PeterL

It must be understood that there are practical as well as aesthetic reasons for keeping an aircraft at least reasonably clean. This was an era when five or ten knots was a major advantage or disadvantage. Dirty aeroplanes are slower than clean aeroplanes. If it were my ar$e depending on it I'd be out there with the erks, chamois leather in hand, giving it some serious elbow.

Keep in mind I am not a pilot and the following is only based on what I have heard. So take it with a lot of salt

I am not sure this is much of a problem, especially for WWI planes. Not to long ago I had a conversation with a commercial pilot about the SR71 and why would such a sleek a/c have rivets and other attachment hardware sticking above the skin surface. What he told me was that at speed a/c get a small air bubble just above the surface that in affect causes the air to travel just above the skins surface and such attachment hardware.

Ok, I can buy that. Really if it was a drag problem, then I am sure, by WWII, that a/c manufactures would have come up with a different means of putting together planes.

In the end all I can say is that the photos of WWI a/c indicate that they were not the cleanest of machines.

[John Masters]

The fields were muddy or dusty; oil, grease, exhaust, ammo flash; dirty hands; and not a lot of fresh soapy water to really get down and use those elbows all add up to a thin film of grime over most things, IMHO. Just my 2 stotinki...
John

["Junior"]

I personally think a lot of the problem of "over weathering" come from guys who have started out modelling WWII subjects (very well in many cases) and eventually get an interest for some WWI subjects. Subsequently they bring the same approach to weathering from their WWII pieces to WWI models.

Hence loads and bloody loads of oil stains, chips, exahust stains and so on. The thing they forget is that a frontline WWII fighter stayed operational far, far longer generally than a WWI aircraft.

Looks great an a Mk Vb Spit not on a SE5a.

[John Masters]

I agree Junior...also tanks and jeeps are not canvas and wood biplanes.

John

[NeilE]

Originally Posted by JDCMasters

The fields were muddy or dusty; oil, grease, exhaust, ammo flash; dirty hands; and not a lot of fresh soapy water to really get down and use those elbows all add up to a thin film of grime over most things, IMHO. Just my 2 stotinki...
John

John;

And those same fields contained nice seargants with ideas that 'men' left unworked inclined to evil and therefore cleaning (amongst other menial tasks) was gainful employment. They also contained many officers representing (at least for the British and probably the German) a social class used to servants whose place was naturally to keep things clean for them - anything less was an affront. They were also part of an army with traditions of routine around presentation of equipment and sanctions if standards dropped below certain levels.

About the only time you hear of these standards being dropped for the British is during the German offensives of 1918.

Also for a lot of the war, airfields were static fixtures and facillities were not that primitive as a result.

I agree with Peter, keeping aircraft clean was a means of maintaining performance in these aircraft as well as a standard maintainance task - cleaning is a damm fine way of checking for developing flaws in an aircraft - and it was done after every flight - circumstances permitting.

This doesn't mean of course there weren't dirty old aircraft out there at all. But whether they were the norm? I'm not so sure they were......

Regards

Neil

[John Masters]

Very true. Idle hands would have been the German's advantage as well. Spit and polish, and all that, what! The class idea is a facet I hadn't considered, but certainly valid. Pride in one's mount, etc...also The King's Property, perhaps. I think I have a somewhat romantic idea of the rag-tag outpost of rough-and-ready pilots and their machines. It's all those old movies with Errol, David, Basil, and all. Then there is that other romantic idea--Jean Harlow!

Keeping it clean,
John D.C. Masters