peteski

Yes, the white fuzz is in the areas that were supported by wax. When the model comes from Shapeways, the wax is not fully removed, so those areas look smoother. Alcohol removes the wax, exposing the rough surface. This i normal. Only way to get rid of that is by mechanical means (rubbing/sanding, then a coat of primer should smooth things out further.

Not a Photoshop user, but don't you still end up with a bitmapped graphic file? In the Corel Draw suite I also use PhotoPaint (which is their bitmap image editor) and it also has path and lettering tools, but the final output is still a bitmap. I use older versions of Corel (10 and 12, where the latest is 19). I picked them up on eBay for a short money. But here are also freeware versions of this type of program: Gimp is a bitmap editor, and Inkscape which is vector graphics. I just can't see myself using MS Paint or PowerPoint or MS Word for accurately manipulating graphics, where the tools I use give me much better control and accuracy. It might sound snobbish, but once you start using those tools (geared to what we are trying to achieve here), you will never look back.

OK, that makes sense. I, for maximum sharpness and quality, redraw most of the bitmap artwork into vector graphics (in Corel Draw). That way I can resize and otherwise manipulate the artwork without needing to worry about its print quality.

Bill, I have few diecast 1:24 Alfa Romeo Giulietta Sprint diecast models from Hachette. They came packed in blister pack and were sold for a very affordable price. These kits have excellent wheels and tires (that was the main reason I bought them), but the car also has really pleasing lines so I'll keep one intact). If you want, PM me and I can send one of those your way. They do have a rudimentary engine detail under the hood (just a filler piece with top of the engine molded in) but the wheels are excellent. The grilles might also be usable for the Italeri kit. Like I said, the Italeri kit is also on my to-do list. Here is a photo. The holes in the wheels are actually open, but could use a bit of a cleanup.

Huh? How can higher printing resolution get *TOO* grainy? Are we talking about the same thing? Or something is not done correctly.

I'm pretty sure that either of the Tamiya clears will dull your Alclad chrome paint. Only water-based acrylic coatings should not dramatically change the Alclad chrome sheen.

Beautiful restoration of a gorgeous model.

The first post?! LOL, that was in July 2018!! In the meantime, after 50+ replies, the subject being discussed has changed quite a bit. Just look at the most recent 25 posts or so.

Um, as I see it it is neither the quality or quantity. It is the file size of the picture (image) file. And that is not even a problem because mods told us we have oodles of free space. But it is prudent not to overindulge by uploading huge photo files when they are viewed within the posts (not printed out poster-size). We might have lots of free space now, but it will eventually fill up. Makes sense upload smaller photos. Mine usually don't go over 1024 pixels across (often are 800 pixels across). Another forum I belong to automatically reduces size of huge photos being uploaded down to 1024 pixels across. That way nobody has to even think of needing to resize before uploading.

Cool! they are just about the right size for 1:24 model body, and at 3 bucks a pop are also affordable. Perfect for practicing spray painting!

As it has been mentioned, there are 2 reasons for testing paint. 1. for compatibility with the plastic model 2. to learn how to apply smooth finish. Number 1 has been covered. For number 2 one can use plastic bottles (in all sorts of shapes and sizes). Yes, I know that has been mentioned, but I'm just reiterating it. Speaking of this, I wonder where Alclad got those fluid-looking shapes they use in photos demonstrating their paints (on their website). Those would be ideal for practicing airbrushing model car bodies.

Another modeler here who just shoots paint and doesn't bother with sanding, polishing, rubbing-out, waxing . . . Nail polish over Tamiya Fine White primer and a Testors Wet Look clear. The finish is not flawless (but even polished out bodies usually have flaws - I don't believe that there is a such thing as a perfect flawless finish), but I just can't justify spending all that additional time and elbow grease to achieve almost-perfection, when I'm already close to it. I have sanded and polished out some major imperfections on couple of models, but I did not do the entire body (just the areas with the boogers). I have even glued a chip of paint that came off an A-pillar of one of my models, but unless I point it out, you won't find it (or at least judges never fund it). I agree with Michael that striving to achieve the best finish directly out of the airbrush or spray can should be the ultimate goal. But in the meantime I guess some sanding and polishing will have to be done

Meow Duke! I like the boat - a lot! Hey, even the trailer is cool.

Yes, *AFTER* they are applied to the model, Future (or PFM as the FineScale Modeler magazine calls it now) can be used as a clear coat to protect the decal. But I have not heard of anybody using Future to repair old cracked decals (still on the backing paper).

That's pretty clever! I suppose, instead of the drill bit spacer, you could use a short sacrificial piece of the tubing itself.

My eyes! Oh, my eyes! I cannot un-see that monstrosity! But it would be even worse if all the trim was gold-plated. ?

I don't find either version attractive, but yes, the original version is better. But for example I fins Lincoln Future quite nice looking.

I did some repeated testing earlier in this thread (where I found those 2 offending words) and I repeatedly got locked out (on multiple computers). The lockout seems to last few hours, then everything is back to normal. I suspect the lockout is based on the IP address of the hosts from where where the "malicious" posts originate. I suspect that this functionality is a poorly implemented "feature". Hmm . . . would that be a bug them? I also frequent another forum (which uses different forum software), and we have similar problem there too.

While I applaud all the individuals and companies involved for restoring this unique vehicle, I still think it's butt-ugly!

Thanks Matt! That is some eye-opening information. Yet another example how hackers makes our lives more difficult.

BMF might be "tedious", but it sure gives the model realism, and looks great!

The problem is that (as mentioned in this thread, and some other threads in this section of the forum) certain plain English words can falsely trigger the malicious attack filter. Couple of known words are s e l e c t followed by f r o m (without the spaces of course). The words do not have to be adjacent to trigger the filter. Did you possibly have those words in your lengthy post? There are likely undiscovered combinations of other words which will trigger the filter and the 404 error.

I hear you loud and clear! But if you ever have to upgrade your hardware (and want to access your Flicker account on the same PC which runs ArcSoft) you can take the PC with newwer OS (like Windows 7 or 10) and install Oracle VM Virtual Box free software. It makes it really easy to create a virtual machine running on your new PC and then install older OS in that virtual machine. At work we use Windows 10, but I installed the Virtual Box and then created a Windows XP virtual machine, so I can run both OSs together (and I can share files between them).

Nice model and the overall presentation!

I saw that on the news - cool! There are also 3D printed which can print buildings. Here is one example https://money.cnn.com/2017/05/02/technology/3d-printed-building-mit/index.html