Northrop-Grumman B-2S - DEAD!!!!

[kerick]

I need to show this to my wife!

[zenrat]

I agree with the article, but only to a point.
Some modelling can worsen mental health.  Modellers can become obsessed with accuracy and detail and correctness.
Which is of course why the path of Whiffing is the ideal course to take.

[PR19_Kit]

Which is of course why the path of Whiffing is the ideal course to take.

Fred speaks great truth here of course.   

[The Rat]

I agree with the article, but only to a point.
Some modelling can worsen mental health.  Modellers can become obsessed with accuracy and detail and correctness.
Which is of course why the path of Whiffing is the ideal course to take.

Words of wisdom! 

[HarryPhishnuts]

I agree with the article, but only to a point.
Some modelling can worsen mental health.  Modellers can become obsessed with accuracy and detail and correctness.
Which is of course why the path of Whiffing is the ideal course to take.

I've often wondered if this was a hobby for folks with OCD. I actually like going down rabbit holes trying to understand the context of what I'm building especially for topics that have a history (real or imagined). However I am also guilty of getting mildly obsessed with things like ghost seams or minor mis-fitting, or historically accurate colors, to the point of wanting to throw the model across the room.

[kerick]

This is why I like the building phase so much.  Especially scratch building parts. It's like a jigsaw puzzle with no picture on the box and I'm making up the pieces as I go. A collection of problems to be solved. The level of detail is up to me.

[Rick Lowe]

This is why I like the building phase so much.  Especially scratch building parts. It's like a jigsaw puzzle with no picture on the box and I'm making up the pieces as I go. A collection of problems to be solved. The level of detail is up to me.

Yup, agree. Detailing up a cockpit from bits, rather than a resin drop-in, is more satisfying to me.
There again, if I can't be arsed bothered, a resin 'pit will do.   

[zenrat]

I agree with the article, but only to a point.
Some modelling can worsen mental health.  Modellers can become obsessed with accuracy and detail and correctness.
Which is of course why the path of Whiffing is the ideal course to take.

I've often wondered if this was a hobby for folks with OCD. I actually like going down rabbit holes trying to understand the context of what I'm building especially for topics that have a history (real or imagined). However I am also guilty of getting mildly obsessed with things like ghost seams or minor mis-fitting, or historically accurate colors, to the point of wanting to throw the model across the room.

You recognise these things in yourself, which is healthy.  It's those zealots who think that their path of righteous accuracy is the ONLY way to build, and that whiffers are heretics, that we should be worried about.

[PR19_Kit]

You recognise these things in yourself, which is healthy.  It's those zealots who think that their path of righteous accuracy is the ONLY way to build, and that whiffers are heretics, that we should be worried about.

Too right we should, and are..............!

I enjoy their various responses when they look at our SIG stand at shows. They range from a quick lift of the chin as they turn away and pass by so they don't get 'infected', to them coming to a rapid halt, staring angrily at one of our models that have caught their eye, and exclaiming something like 'Why did you have to ruin a perfectly good 'Superjetfighter' kit like that?'

And then if we try and explain our thought processes they just look askance and walk off, usually shaking their heads.

MAGIC stuff.     

[Rheged]

You recognise these things in yourself, which is healthy.  It's those zealots who think that their path of righteous accuracy is the ONLY way to build, and that whiffers are heretics, that we should be worried about.

Too right we should, and are..............!

I enjoy their various responses when they look at our SIG stand at shows. They range from a quick lift of the chin as they turn away and pass by so they don't get 'infected', to them coming to a rapid halt, staring angrily at one of our models that have caught their eye, and exclaiming something like 'Why did you have to ruin a perfectly good 'Superjetfighter' kit like that?'

And then if we try and explain our thought processes they just look askance and walk off, usually shaking their heads.

MAGIC stuff.     

Equally MAGIC  but much less common is when after your explanation you see the light dawn in  their eyes and they become a convert. 

[kerick]

I consider some of my whiffs be more art than a miniature reproduction of some real world machine. Someone here had a quote about, "none of these models are accurate, they're all 1:35 too small and made of plastic!" Fill in the scale of your choice. 
Someone who understands this can see the attraction, others, not so much.

[Weaver]

I consider some of my whiffs be more art than a miniature reproduction of some real world machine. Someone here had a quote about, "none of these models are accurate, they're all 1:35 too small and made of plastic!" Fill in the scale of your choice. 
Someone who understands this can see the attraction, others, not so much.

That's something I say, though I honestly can't remember if I invented it or copied in from someone else. The correct quote is "seventy-two times too small", of course...

It always amuses me when people treat it like a science, not an art, then in the next breath are talking about applying artistic techniques to models with as much attention to colour tone, shading and highlighting as if they were painting a still life in oils.

Unlike some people, I don't see any contradiction between being a 100% what-iffer and at the same time being interested in research, facts and accuracy. I very much enjoy going down rabbit holes of research, but it's always in support of a what-if, not as a substitute for it. So if, for instance, I want to know exactly what shade of green was used on a Spanish Civil War aircraft that was only ever photographed in black and white, it's not because I want to accurately recreate that aircraft, it's because I want to make a what-if in the same scheme as convincing as possible. If the research hits a dead end, I may end up making a compromise or guess, but at least it's an informed guess.

This isn't to criticize anyone else who has a different approach by the way. I tend to "switch codes" between credible and fantastical depending on the model, so I can appreciate all the different ways of what-iffing. I just personally like to be consistent within whatever frame of reference applies to the model at hand.

[Rick Lowe]

Equally MAGIC  but much less common is when after your explanation you see the light dawn in  their eyes and they become a convert. 

Or they at least can see where you're coming from, and are less inclined to burn you and your heretical arse model at the stake...