If you add a person to a photograph, or a painting for that matter, the eye goes right to that person, or persons. Even if they're not central to the composition. It's just human nature and curiosity. Let's say you're painting a landscape and you even "suggest" an inhabitant in the scene with a dab or two of a skin tone. Guaranteed, the eye will go right to that skin tone - the "person." I think this was alluded to earlier on in this post by the photographer. I have to agree with Harry, though: driver-less cars in the era that this guy works in seems kind of weird. PB.
Indeed, most people regard cars as appliances these days. The styling mantra of the car companies today: "Do Not Offend." Thus all the cars from the different manufacturers look identical. I think the cup-holders were more for the Gen-Xers. The millenials are looking for built-in technology and computing, self-parking, self-driving, etc.; which is now what the car companies are marketing. PB.
I'm with Harry on this one. Since I started building (at age 5) I don't think I've ever had a kit I couldn't bring to a reasonable conclusion(including the Orange Crate, Revell Microbus(s), Revell '57 Nomad, etc.). When I would open a box, however, and discover that I had just bought (talked my mother into buying) a real dog of a kit it would be immediately relegated to the parts box. Funnily enough, though, I recently completed the AMT new-tool '57 BelAir and that kit actually gave me an un-expected run for the money. Absolutely nothing fit right on that car without a lot of trimming, grinding, sanding, etc. Geesh! I recently bought a Revell '57 Nomad, BTW, just so I could have that beautiful box art up on my shelves again. I may pick up the MCW Nomad body and combine it with one of the recent Revell '57s for a proper build of the Hollingsworth car.
I keep a supply of a full palette of Sharpies on hand for these instances. As careful as I try to be, I often polish through high spots. However, they're usually very small, narrow areas such as the top of a tail fin (never the whole length of the fin - I usually catch myself...), hood and fender creases, etc. I find that if I very carefully run a Sharpie that's close to the color I've applied over the affected area, that usually does the trick. This works best with solid primary colors and neutrals, but I've had success with metallic, complimentary and analogous colors as well. Lighter colors (whites, yellows, beiges) can be tricky. I try to be as accurate as possible and to perform the touch-up with just one shot. If I have to hit it again, I make sure the first application has dried thoroughly. When successful you'd be hard-pressed to detect the repair. It doesn't work for every situation, though, and I've done my share of "dry-brush" touch-ups and re-sprays. PB.
I polish with abrasive pads and sticks, starting with 2400 grit (if warranted), or 3200-3600 grit (usually), and work through 4,000, 6,000, 8,000 grits, and then finish with a 12000 grit. I then hit the whole body with Novus #2, which will bring the paint to a shine and at the same time reveal fine sanding scratches. I then use a FINE automotive compound to remove the fine sanding scratches, working the compound against the grain of the scratches, and then wipe and rinse the residue off with water. Then, after another application of Novus #2, I finish off with carnauba wax. The "Treatment" was the best model car wax I ever used, but my jar perished in a fire 7 years ago and when I tried to purchase a new jar I saw that they had switched the product over to some sort of polishing system, which is not what I needed. I have my own polishing system. Keep in mind that enamels need more cure time (some more than others) than lacquers and acrylics, and I always clear coat over metallic paint jobs before attempting to polish them out.
I pulled out the '48 convertible kit that I started 5 years ago and am in the process of completing it. If Revell made the chrome trim on this coupe kit a bit deeper, and more sharply defined, than the trim on the convertible kit (and the woody) I welcome the modification. It might be off "a little" scale-wise (just as all trim is on a scale model compared to a 1/1), but if you've ever foiled the trim on a first edition Revell '48 you'd know what I'm talking about. This is a welcome addition to a line of really good kits. I'm looking forward to its release, if that happens.
What it is it about the consumption of lacquer thinner and 2x4s that appeals to pregnant women? Pickles with ice cream and that kind of stuff is one thing, but paint thinner and wood is a new one on me...
When the AMC Eagles came on the market I didn't care for them. Then I rented a 4WD wagon and was impressed. Sure, typical Rambler rough plastic build quality (it was a Hornet, after all), but it felt stiffer, lighter, and less rattle-prone than the big-3 offerings of the day. And, with that 4.0-liter six it went pretty good. I remember that these cars (the 4WDs in the U.S. northeast) had an enthusiastic following; their competition was the first-gen Subaru 4WD wagons, and the AMCs had them beat by a mile when it came to ground clearance, performance and utility. By the early '80s it was common to see Eagle 4WD wagons with lift-kits, off road wheels / tires, lighting, etc. I think I'd buy one today if it were possible. Oh, wait a minute, I do own one - in the guise of my 1998 Jeep Cherokee. Funny to think that I actually drive a "Rambler." PB.
Let's see. My dad bought my mom's cars ('50s-'60s-'70s) from a Pontiac/Cadillac dealer right in town, and his Chevies from a Chevrolet-only dealer the next town over. The Chevy dealer still exists under a different name, but the Pontiac/Cadillac dealer is long gone. During the late '50s - early '60s (as far back as my memory goes) we also had a Willys Jeep/Studebaker dealer and a Chrysler/Plymouth (and Simca) dealer in town. The family who owned the Jeep/Studebaker dealership went on to sell AMC/Jeep/Renault and then they bought the Chrysler dealership around the time Chrysler acquired Jeep and AMC, so they are still selling Jeeps. An interesting side note: When you could still buy Willys and Ramblers from the aforementioned dealer, that dealer was leasing out an old, standalone dealership/service bay that they no longer used to a young man named Bob Sharp who was importing Japanese cars that no one in my town had ever heard of. What was cool about this guy was that he raced one of his Datsun's and kept it parked at his tiny little dealership for all of us kids to see.
I've been using Micro-Scale Liquid Tape (I think that's what it's called). As long as the part is completely flush to the surface you're affixing it to, it seems to work fine as long as your model doesn't endure too much manhandling. I apply the stuff right to the PE part and let it "dry," position it, and then burnish it down. If something looks a little bit "off" on a second look, you may reposition the part. I just bought some Pacer Formula 560, which I've never tried, but from what I've read it sounds like it may be similar to Liquid Tape although a bit more aggressive adhesively.
I use 3-M spray-mount (spray adhesive). Just a fine light coat to get the desired texture, let it dry, then paint. I like Marcos's approach, too, although I've never tried it; very convincing and it cuts out a step.