Good Lord, that IS a gorgeous boxcover! Compliments to the chef!
Bear in mind I'm saying this as a consumer in happy anticipation of grabbing the first one of these he sees:
Yes, there can be serious distortion based on angle and lens, both in 1:1 and scale model shots. But as you bring the angles closer in comparative shots, the deviations just aren't going away.
These shots don't line up perfectly either, but they're closer. The flat arc of the model's side trim and the apparent push upwards all through the rear quarters may be an artifact of perspective height divergence between the two shots, so I'm not going to say anything conclusive on that just yet. Still, the view angles are close enough to show a few things beyond a doubt.
The rear overhang still looks a bit suspect in its expanse (did the missing length migrate just ahead of the front wheel arches?) and definitely a touch too vertical in the rake described by the taillight and bumper area, which not only rakes more but tapers outward top to bottom, relative to the rear quarter; just about every other 1:1 profile in this thread reinforces that. The backlight profile looks better from the new model shot, but as generally agreed here, it is blatant that the headlight nacelles are too far out on the model, lining up with the forward edge of the bumper where they're clearly well shy of that parameter on the 1:1.
Good news for that last is, it also looks to be one of the more bone-headed fixes imaginable, assuming the '56 nacelles are also separate - just file down the front of the fenders where they seat, probably a whopping 20 minutes of work even if you're super-cautious about it. There's a wee bit of taper from nacelle to fender there, but ultimately not enough to make a huge difference from the looks of it.
Edited by Chuck Kourouklis, 12 July 2013 - 06:18 PM.