When do you stop building for yourself & start building for the hobby?

[von Zipper]

I think the messed up part is that this thread has gone 8 pages in less than 24 hours and a very well built model that John Teresi worked on for months, posted finished pictures a week ago= for us to enjoy

Has only gone two pages ?

And before any one throws monkey poo at me for not posting on his finished thread,

my mind set is this-I have not been building much or posting,

I kind of think it's the guys putting it on the table who have paid the price of admission to comment on other peoples builds.

[chunkypeanutbutter]

Some people like to see the world burn.

I saw John's trike. Beautiful. Simply beautiful.

[highway]

So, you don't want the glory or fame. You just want to criticize those that have it. Classic. Post up one of your models and show everyone how it should be done. It's obvious that you think you can build better than the person or persons that you're criticizing. So, show us what you can do. Maybe you can teach us mediocre builders a few things. Maybe if you had the courage to throw some names out as to who you think is lazy and unprofessional, we might understand your position a little better.

Hmmmm,,,,,why should Jonathon have to call out anyone that he has these opinions about of their builds or prove to you or anyone else the quality of his builds!?!? It's his choice to post his work or not, just as I chose to post a couple of my works in progress earlier in this thread, not yours! Of course, looking at your content, 3,642 posts and I DIDN'T see any posts of your work, so I kinda see that as the pot calling the kettle black in my opinion.

[horsepower]

I think that if people were to just post pictures of their builds in a display type photo then we wouldn't have anyone picking up on details like the pitch of the teeth on a drive belt that's less than a half inch long anyway. If the pictures aren't such beautiful closeups that make a 1/24, or 1/25 scale model virtually appear to be a full size vehicle then no one could complain about it.

The only time any person should be held to a higher standard for their builds is if they are building commissioned builds to museum quality standards, even professional model builders for the movie industry throw in obviously out of place pieces and details because they felt like doing so and it was their build, and like I said earlier, unless it was placed under extreme scrutiny no one even noticed.

How many of you so called "details are so important to the public" builder's actually think a futuristic space craft capable of inter galactic travel would use the frame of a 1957 Chevrolet in its construction? Did anyone ever notice the Millennium Falcon actually had one on it before we were treated to a very close up photo of some of the details the builders put into it?

And how many people wrote a letter to George Lucas, or the model builders at Industrial Lights and Magic, to complain that they were expected to do better, and that piece totally ruined the entire image of the model and they should do better?

[Ace-Garageguy]

Of course, looking at your content, 3,642 posts and I DIDN'T see any posts of your work, so I kinda see that as the pot calling the kettle black in my opinion. (addressed to Plowboy0

I've seen a fair bit of Plowboy's work on the forum. He's not afraid to show it, and he didn't start this chitstorm, either. The guy who throws the first punch better be ready to back it up, IMHO.

[StevenGuthmiller]

I think sweeping generalizations about motivation are "generally" not correct.

I personally try to do the best work I can, if it's model cars, real cars, or cleaning the toilet. I LIKE to look at my own work and say to MYSELF..."good job!".

That's one reason I'm so stoked to see some of the truly outstanding work displayed here. It inspires me to do my own work better. If I spot a mistake in someone else's model, that's another learning opportunity (so I won't make the same one).

NOBODY has to have the same motivation to do ANYTHING, but the ones who try hardest, FOR WHATEVER REASON, will get some recognition at some point.

I'm not talking so much about the actual building work, as I am the "work" involved in getting recognition. If you're entering your projects in contests looking for "wins" in the form of ribbons & trophies, you're putting forth the effort it takes to gain fame. You're builds are not going to appear in magazines without "your" say so. If you choose to fly under the radar, you're chances of gaining much notoriety are slim. If you seek notoriety, it's much more likely to come. That's my main point. Steve

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Well before it recedes entirely in the rearview, I thought Russell Cook had a great response in post #125.

Having lost track of the last build I did purely for myself - gotta say, without deadlines prodding me, I'd have probably gotten a lot less done over the past few years - my quickest response to the initial question would be you should NEVER stop building for yourself. But I'm gonna turn the question a little and ask it from another facet: is there ever a point where claiming to build for yourself becomes a cop-out, a facile retort to those who'd point out the knickers you left bare on that otherwise impeccably-dressed little emperor you fashioned?

And having taken the question there, I'm gonna stop it dead at purely rhetorical.

That's something only the individual modeler can answer truthfully for himself, if he even judges it worthy of consideration. And while you can see an edge in the work of those who do think it all the way through, I don't think there's a single right answer to suit everybody. This is why I'm very circumspect about commenting on another builder's work, except where I can offer honest praise. I know for sure there are areas I'd tweak in the monstrosity I just finished, had I world enough and time.

This conversation has been extremely illuminating for me in another way, bringing to the forefront something I've long simmered on a back burner. 'Cause something like this notion of "rivet-counting" driving people out of the hobby comes up again. And I wonder how that's anybody's problem besides those who take it on themselves to get "driven out", because I'm used to considering "rivet-counting" from one angle: that of a kit itself, which fails to live up to its very purpose unless it's at least not blatantly incorrect.

I see dreck like this waving red in the breeze -

and I want to lower my horns and tear into it, drag it to the tool shed and beat it down rationally beyond any hope of recovering from its already vegetative state. All the fear and hysteria motivating the very response to kit criticism, and now, apparently, propaganda, too? Make no mistake, there's a nice, putrid whiff of that vintage National Socialist alright, and it AIN'T COMING FROM KIT CRITICS -

except wait. Woops, lemme HOLD MY HORSES a second there... this wasn't about KIT criticism, was it?

Okay. Gotta concede that from the perspective of builders being discouraged by nit-picky feedback on their personal work, "rivet-counting" takes on a different significance; this meme, though, only really makes sense in the context of the AFV modeling from which it likely sprang, rather than that of us auto modelers - who, in characterizing an entirely incorrect chassis or a roofline 10% too low as a "rivet-counting" consideration, only imply a considerable faction of us couldn't find our asses with both hands, a GPS, and a homing pigeon.

Showing a finished piece is a double-edged proposition; those who see something that could be improved should be positive and tactful in pointing it out, and the presenter frankly shouldn't exhibit his model unless he's ready for that kind of feedback.

But "rivet-counting" someone's finished piece - even if it ain't really rivet-counting - is inevitably a far more personal proposition than "rivet-counting" a manufacturer's latest problem child, where more objective standards are involved...

and I just thought I'd point that out for the fair number of you who apparently fail to draw this distinction and wage holy jihad every time a legitimate problem is pointed out in the kits we do indeed pay for.

[Casey]

but also if you happen to be one of those builders that are a regular feature in a magazine, it should fall on THEM to take enough pride in their own work to make each build better than the last.

I understand your opinion, and I don't disagree with your desire to see someone improve the quality of their next piece of work. I think it's very important to always be willing to learn new or different things, but I also understand and have to accept others don't necessarily share my opinion, and that's my opinion is just that, an opinion. Nobody "must" nor "has to" do anything to one of their builds because I or anyone else is of the opinion that they should.

[Aaronw]

No I don't think a perfect model, unattainable by the way, should be every builders goal.

Maybe it isn't the fault of the builder as much as it is the publications and forums. There have been several builders who have been featured in the "One Great Model" spread that had glaring errors. Should those builds continue to be shown as the standard builders should strive for? Again I am NOT talking about minor errors like proper firing order. I'm talking improper fitting parts. Prototypically incorrect mechanicals, out of scale details, etc

This should have been the question of your OP, and it seems to have been lost in the noise.

No builder should feel an obligation to create a 100% model everytime. I'd like to think Gerald Wingrove could build a Revell Snap-tite and brush paint if that is what he felt like doing without being vilified for not creating another masterpiece.

However if a model magazine featured such a snap-tite (out side of the April 1st edition) instead of one of his amazing creations they should fully expect the justified wrath of the readers.

You are comparing two completely different things with a known modeler showing his work on a forum and a magazine publishing a model that is perhaps sub-par.

[johnbuzzed]

Yes, it does fall on on the (sometimes poor) choices of the editorial staff of what DOES make it in a magazine, but also if you happen to be one of those builders that are a regular feature in a magazine, it should fall on THEM to take enough pride in their own work to make each build better than the last. I've never had anything in any magazine, but that still doesn't stop my yearning to improve my skills. I guess, as usual, I'm in the minority here, but in those "developmental years" I looked up to builders in the magazine and know quite a few of the older "big names" from the 90s and 2000s personally and have seen their work firsthand, and have asked many questions to try and learn as much as I could from them. That said, some of the things I see from today's "big names" that should be teaching the new modelers today and featured in today's magazines wouldn't be worth the time to talk to, because some things like the examples I've stated earlier in this thread shows they don't share the same passion I do for the hobby and pride I take in my builds, and in my opinion just show new modelers learning that it's OK to not make something look correct and just use the "I build for myself" excuse.

"Build for myself" is not an excuse. That's the reason for building. Whether one builds for his or her shelves, or for contests, or for customer$/client$, we're still building for ourselves. Face it, we like to do it, otherwise, we wouldn't be doing it. For the great majority of us, it is not a mortgage-paying job with medical, dental, vision, etc., benefits. We build because we enjoy it. Each finished model brings a sense of accomplishment: "Look at what I can do." It's a basic human pride of creativity; some might consider pride to be a fault. But, that's life. Most of us here are humans, humans that make mistakes, forget things, screw up, etc. If you were to look carefully at any model, you would find what could be considered to be a mistake, problem, fault or omission. That's life. That's how we all build. I don't care if a builder swears that each of his or her builds will be better than the last ( I do it all the time, and I've been saying that for 54 years of building). Do you know why that happens? It's because we're human. If you can't deal with that fact, perhaps you should pursue another hobby.

In my years of being involved with the modeling community via clubs, contests, magazines, etc, I have yet to meet a modeler who considered him or her self to be a star or celebrity or luminary or what-have-you, and I know more than a few who could be considered to be up in the stratosphere as a builder, but I find nothing but humility. I've had contest-winning builds in magazines, on TV, on line; it's definitely a kick. I was inspired by those who were there before me and was happy to reach those self-set goals. I continue to attend contests and shows (but not as often as I used to) and I do find the "We'd like to photograph your model..." cards next to my stuff. It's still a kick to be acknowledged by one's peers. But, I'll always "build for myself", because in the long run, it makes me happy. Go figure.

Go back and read my previous post regarding this subject. Maybe then, you'll understand.

Edited November 14, 2014 by johnbuzzed

[bobthehobbyguy]

Nobody "must" nor "has to" do anything to one of their builds because I or anyone else is of the opinion that they should.

This is the best answer to the question asked in the title of this thread.

[highway]

"Build for myself" is not an excuse. That's the reason for building. Whether one builds for his or her shelves, or for contests, or for customer$/client$, we're still building for ourselves. Face it, we like to do it, otherwise, we wouldn't be doing it. For the great majority of us, it is not a mortgage-paying job with medical, dental, vision, etc., benefits. We build because we enjoy it. Each finished model brings a sense of accomplishment: "Look at what I can do." It's a basic human pride of creativity; some might consider pride to be a fault. But, that's life. Most of us here are humans, humans that make mistakes, forget things, screw up, etc. If you were to look carefully at any model, you would find what could be considered to be a mistake, problem, fault or omission. That's life. That's how we all build. I don't care if a builder swears that each of his or her builds will be better than the last ( I do it all the time, and I've been saying that for 54 years of building). Do you know why that happens? It's because we're human. If you can't deal with that fact, perhaps you should pursue another hobby.

In my years of being involved with the modeling community via clubs, contests, magazines, etc, I have yet to meet a modeler who considered him or her self to be a star or celebrity or luminary or what-have-you, and I know more than a few who could be considered to be up in the stratosphere as a builder, but I find nothing but humility. I've had contest-winning builds in magazines, on TV, on line; it's definitely a kick. I was inspired by those who were there before me and was happy to reach those self-set goals. I continue to attend contests and shows (but not as often as I used to) and I do find the "We'd like to photograph your model..." cards next to my stuff. It's still a kick to be acknowledged by one's peers. But, I'll always "build for myself", because in the long run, it makes me happy. Go figure.

Go back and read my previous post regarding this subject. Maybe then, you'll understand.

I don't have to, you seem to be the one not understanding. I've seen on forums countless times, even when someone genuinely tries to offer genuine help, builders of all levels, not just the ones that have been building for years but beginners as well, using the "I build for myself" excuse when offered suggestions on how to improve their skills. If one is happy with the level of work they produce, so be it, but don't play the "I build for myself" card.

[J Morrison]

No builder should feel an obligation to create a 100% model everytime.

I never said that. What I'm saying is the level of detail should be consistent through out the entire model. I hope this clarifies things a bit. If a builders goes 100% on a model why got thru all that work only to stop 50 feet short of the finish line & drop the level of quality. I wasn't going to cite a specific example but since it has been brought up by several others in this thread I will. Read carefully what I write please & thank you.

First off, can John Teresi build better than I? Right now, most definitely. Will I ever get to his level? No idea, but that does NOT discount me from being able to have an opinion on his builds. His trike is built very well overall. It's obvious he put a lot of effort into the build and it should be acknowledged and I do. Much better than I could do tackling the same subject. That said the belt/pulley mismatch baffles me. Why put all that effort into that build only to have that aspect look like he handed it off to another builder or just blindly grabbed a belt from the shelf and threw it on there to get the project done? Before anyone says why don't you ask the builders, I did ask John and got no response.

This will be my only planned citing of a specific build or builder. Please do not turn this into a personal attack against myself or John. Thank you.

[Cool Hand]

The belt/pulley mismatch you are referring to, is on the Novak Sidewinder build.

[unclescott58]

We're missing the important point here. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? In other words, I can't believe this has gone on for nine pages. And what is point?

Scott

[Aaronw]

I never said that. What I'm saying is the level of detail should be consistent through out the entire model.

But you are still placing a requirement on a specific modeler (whomever that is) that they are not allowed to ever under any circumstance cut corners, even when building a model for themselves, granted possibly being seen in public. I equate a statement like that to suggesting that a MLB pitcher can't go out and play baseball with some kids in the park because he isn't putting his all into striking them out and OMG he is ruining baseball.

You place these into a commercial situation and I can see your point, but even then it isn't really the builders fault as the editor who allowed subpar work into the magazine. Given a high enough stature that the magazine should have expected better, I can understand some blame going to the builder as well.

[southpier]

..... I neither read nor subscribe to any magazines.....

you're trying to slip one by the goalie, aren't you?

[Aaronw]

We're missing the important point here. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? In other words, I can't believe this has gone on for nine pages. And what is point?

Scott

Actually I think it is a fair point but misdirected.

[blunc]

Never says "accurate scale," however

my revell fairlane sunliner kit has "accurately scaled" proudly printed on the front of the box.

[Harry P.]

I can't believe this has gone on for nine pages. And what is point?

Scott

If a member sees value in this conversation and has something to add to the give and take, that's the point.

If a member sees this topic as pointless, why would said member be reading the thread and posting on it?

Seems kind of odd for someone to take the time to post a comment on a thread to tell us how he doesn't see the point of the thread. Seems to me that if a member stumbles across a topic that he finds to be worthless or uninteresting or pointless, said member would just move on to another topic that he does find to be worth his time.

[blunc]

^^^^^ amen to that! ^^^^^^

I blame it on faceborg, where everyone MUST comment on what you had for breakfast.

[Ace-Garageguy]

If a member sees this topic as pointless, why would said member be reading the thread and posting on it?

Because it's ALWAYS special to have a worthless opinion on things that are meaningless and trivial, and to make that opinion known worldwide.

I blame it on faceborg, where everyone MUST comment on what you had for breakfast.

X-zackly.

[bobthehobbyguy]

But you are still placing a requirement on a specific modeler (whomever that is) that they are not allowed to ever under any circumstance cut corners, even when building a model for themselves, granted possibly being seen in public. I equate a statement like that to suggesting that a MLB pitcher can't go out and play baseball with some kids in the park because he isn't putting his all into striking them out and OMG he is ruining baseball.

Good point.

[PARTSMARTY]

I build for the love of building. and like Richard Manson who was "spot on" when he said about building for the hobby but sometimes we push the envelope to better ourselves. no better reasoning for building than that.i will never care about living up to an image or trying to impress anyone. it's building model cars 101.You never strop building for yourself.

Edited November 15, 2014 by PARTSMARTY

[Jeff Johnston]

Simple. Never.