Views on contest classes and 3d printing

[bobthehobbyguy]

With the wider acceptance of using 3d printing I can see the need for rules changes.

For example if you buy stock if I purchase file for a model say the Uncertain T that should be allowed in a box stock. On the other hand if I create my own design then I think that would be have to be determined how to classify.

Please share your thoughts.

[Ace-Garageguy]

With even the current level of detail available from 3D printing (liquid), depending on how good the files were, a printed kit could blow any other "box stock" build out of the water.

That's hardly a level playing field.

3D printed parts in general are, in many cases, so superior to kit-sourced or traditional resin that there's an unfair advantage there too.

FOR INSTANCE: I have several 1-bbl carbs that were made for me by a member here that blow any other models of the same carbs totally out of the water.

Bill Cunningham has already conclusively demonstrated that spectacular 3D-printed models in 1/24-1/25 scale that are simply untouchable by any other building method are currently achievable.

So yes...some thought as to how to classify models that are entirely 3D, or use a lot of 3D parts, or are original designs (3D printed or not) needs some serious thought.

[stavanzer]

"Sarc on"

Let's just ban 3D parts. That way competition won't be unfair....

"Sarc off"

[Zoom Zoom]

19 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

With even the current level of detail available from 3D printing (liquid), depending on how good the files were, a printed kit could blow any other "box stock" build out of the water.

That's hardly a level playing field.

3D printed parts in general are, in many cases, so superior to kit-sourced or traditional resin that there's an unfair advantage there too.

FOR INSTANCE: I have several 1-bbl carbs that were made for me by a member here that blow any other models of the same carbs totally out of the water.

Bill Cunningham has already conclusively demonstrated that spectacular 3D-printed models in 1/24-1/25 scale that are simply untouchable by any other building method are currently achievable.

So yes...some thought as to how to classify models that are entirely 3D, or use a lot of 3D parts, or are original designs (3D printed or not) needs some serious thought.

He found out the hard way about "contest rules". IPMS doesn't allow a model fully 3D designed, printed and built by the creator to be considered "scratch built". That and other reasons mean I no longer am an IPMS member after decades of supporting them. Too many rules, too many of which make no sense to the model car community. I build for me, I don't build for trophies, I show my models at NNL style shows more often than contests. Why winning a $5 trophy to assume notoriety or dominance in this hobby is something I just don't quite understand. Yes, it's nice to win something, but I prefer to be pleasantly surprised than actively trying to win an award, and I'm honestly thrilled for my friends/competition when they win a trophy, including when my model is in the same category. I'm just weird that way 😁

[stavanzer]

Good For You, Bob.

IPMS is making themselves less & less relevant to the Hobby.

I don't see many young faces at IPMS Shows anymore.

[Ace-Garageguy]

49 minutes ago, Zoom Zoom said:

He found out the hard way about "contest rules". IPMS doesn't allow a model fully 3D designed, printed and built by the creator to be considered "scratch built". That and other reasons mean I no longer am an IPMS member after decades of supporting them. Too many rules, too many of which make no sense to the model car community. I build for me, I don't build for trophies, I show my models at NNL style shows more often than contests. Why winning a $5 trophy to assume notoriety or dominance in this hobby is something I just don't quite understand. Yes, it's nice to win something, but I prefer to be pleasantly surprised than actively trying to win an award, and I'm honestly thrilled for my friends/competition when they win a trophy, including when my model is in the same category. I'm just weird that way 😁

I agree entirely in principle, but the fact remains SOME people like to compete...though I'm generally not one of them (I'd have to finish something first ).

Where there is active competition, 3D printed models need some kind of class separation.

You don't road race stock Neons against CanAm cars, or even Hellcats against AA fuelers

Edited 14 hours ago by Ace-Garageguy
punctiliousness

[Zoom Zoom]

28 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

I agree entirely in principle, but the fact remains SOME people like to compete...though I'm generally not one of them (I'd have to finish something first ).

Where there is active competition, 3D printed models need some kind of class separation.

You don't road race stock Neons against CanAm cars, or even Hellcats against AA fuelers

To clarify, I have no issues whatsoever with anyone actively competing and building for competition above all else. Personally I just don't do it myself. To me the models themselves are the true trophies, along with all the friendships and camaraderie along the way. This past weekend was just one example...the COMA dinner hosted by Randy Derr, the Gem City NNL, and the Dayton Concours d'Elegance invitational model car display and the car show outside. It was all spectacular. Well worth the ride, well worth the worry over carrying the wind tunnel models 500+ miles each direction for the Concours display. An endurance test for their trip to the ACME show next month...

[Zoom Zoom]

1 hour ago, stavanzer said:

Good For You, Bob.

IPMS is making themselves less & less relevant to the Hobby.

I don't see many young faces at IPMS Shows anymore.

I was chapter contact for many years. Then they "upgraded" their process to renew the club charter to online only. The website is so frustratingly over-complicated, spent hours on the phone with them 3 consecutive years, and then gave up and handed it off to another club member to deal with. Despite national support for our show, including some IPMS higher-ups coming to our show to see how we do it and are so successful, yet the organization just isn't in step with the times or anything outside of their sphere of aircraft/military. I will say we have a local IPMS contest that's excellent as they have a car guy running those categories. And doing it right. But he's definitely an outlier. 

[StevenGuthmiller]

I don’t necessarily have any issues with 3-D printed parts, but I do feel that a distinction should be made in a contest between 3-D printed parts and scratch made parts.

I think that that should at least be disclosed.

I would want to know as a judge if a part was made from scratch, or printed.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

Steve

[StevenGuthmiller]

3 hours ago, stavanzer said:

Good For You, Bob.

IPMS is making themselves less & less relevant to the Hobby.

I don't see many young faces at IPMS Shows anymore.

I see a LOT of them.

Gundam and figures are becoming increasingly popular at many shows, and a good number of them are created by young modelers.

My biggest gripe about some IPMS shows is their lack of seriousness with automotive modelers.

There are certainly a lot of military/aviation snobs at these shows, even though some of the shows I have attended display upwards of a third of the entrants being automotive subjects.

All one needs to do is observe the category lists for the shows.

You might have three or four automotive categories, but there are often dozens of  military and aviation subjects, sometimes with some of the weirdest distinctions.

Do we really need an entire category for “post war eastern block artillery?”

 

 

Steve

Edited 12 hours ago by StevenGuthmiller

[Zoom Zoom]

If a person uses CAD to design a part from scratch, and 3D prints it, and uses traditional finishing techniques to detail it, how is that any different than if they drew up plans in pencil on vellum (or a napkin...I don't care) and then machined or scratch built the the parts from various materials?  It could be equal effort in time alone. It's one thing if someone buys a ready-made 3D part vs. designing it from the ground up.

This is a big problem with IPMS. In previous efforts to frustrate modelers they had strict rules about using more than X% metal/metal components in models because they can't get past their "International Plastic Modelers" moniker and get with modern times. They help create all the hilarious acronyms for IPMS...many that I don't need to spell out for obvious reasons (on this forum). 

[stavanzer]

4 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I see a LOT of them.

Gundam and figures are becoming increasingly popular at many shows, and a good number of them are created by young modelers.

 

Do we really need an entire category for “post war eastern block artillery?”

Steve

I've not seen many of the Gundam Kits in shows, but I know they FLY off the shelves at the local Hobby Lobby! Good to see the IPMS letting those in. Our Local IPMS chapter had a long and bitter discussion about "whether or not they were Models" and "do they belong in our contests". It was finally decided to allow them in, but the acrimony caused a few members to leave.

 

"Do we really need an entire category for “post war eastern block artillery?”

Were the artillery tractors a separate category? Around here they would have been!

I'm glad your group is in the 21st century. The Local is still firmly in the 20th!

(and Darn Proud of It, By Jiminy!)

Edited 12 hours ago by stavanzer

[Zoom Zoom]

IIRC Bandai, the producer of the lion's share of Gundam kits, is the largest plastic model producer in the world. I'm glad that there's something that younger builders actually want to build. Car modelers got a big boost from video games/gamers. I know a bunch of car enthusiasts in their 20's-40's, some of them are now model car builders, they're into it due to life playing video games.

I had a Playstation 5 and wore it out. I know the Nurburgring better than my own driveway 😆 . I wasted countless hours, but I also built models of some of my favorite cars. I didn't dare go out and drive after playing Need For Speed Underground....

[stavanzer]

9 minutes ago, Zoom Zoom said:

many that I don't need to spell out for obvious reasons (on this forum).

Oh, Bob, can you share a Few of the "safe" ones, please?

[Ace-Garageguy]

28 minutes ago, Zoom Zoom said:

If a person uses CAD to design a part from scratch, and 3D prints it, and uses traditional finishing techniques to detail it, how is that any different than if they drew up plans in pencil on vellum (or a napkin...I don't care) and then machined or scratch built the the parts from various materials?  It could be equal effort in time alone. It's one thing if someone buys a ready-made 3D part vs. designing it from the ground up.

This is a big problem with IPMS. In previous efforts to frustrate modelers they had strict rules about using more than X% metal/metal components in models because they can't get past their "International Plastic Modelers" moniker and get with modern times. They help create all the hilarious acronyms for IPMS...many that I don't need to spell out for obvious reasons (on this forum). 

Entirely different skill sets.

Being a fabricator and machinist myself in 1:1, I don't see any similarity whatsoever.

Just like digital processing of photography has nothing in common with old-school enlargers and chemistry (which I also do).

Or digital production of "art" with key strokes and mouse clicks and programs sidesteps an entire litany of fine motor skills, mastery and use of various media, and eye-hand coordination.

As someone who also draws, paints, and sculpts, it kinda chaps my backside sometimes seeing all the oohing and ahhing over digitally-produced work that would be literally next to impossible using traditional methods.

EDIT: I think some of the digital stuff is great. Don't get me wrong.

But it's also different enough in the skills employed to achieve it so as to make clear distinctions as to how it was produced necessary.

Edited 11 hours ago by Ace-Garageguy
punctiliousness

[Zoom Zoom]

3 minutes ago, stavanzer said:

Oh, Bob, can you share a Few of the "safe" ones, please?

The only safe one I recall is IMPS because people mis-type it all the time. And Imps perfectly describes some of their membership...

 

 

[Zoom Zoom]

Bill Cunningham was/still is an amazing designer/machinist/fabricator long before he graduated/shifted gears to 3D design and printing. Different process but it took him years to perfect it. Just a different skill set, tool set and materials. The actual printing takes less time, but the work to print parts to that level of perfection each time takes him countless hours of time and countless test prints until he's happy. I watched a master machinist at the shop take weeks to get a fairly new CNC machine moved over from Mazmart's old engine shop to work properly, with help from 2 others at the shop and lots of video conference time with the manufacturer. Meanwhile I was playing with quarter scale models, now complete...

Edited 11 hours ago by Zoom Zoom

[Ace-Garageguy]

One more point: while I am in absolute awe of Bill Cunningham's exquisite birdcage Maser and his more recent DeTomaso, among others, IF I had any interest in competing, there's not a hope in jello that I (or most likely anyone) could top his work using traditional methods, particularly in 1/24-1/25.

Again, my CanAm car vs something off the showroom floor analogy, even highly modified to race, holds true.

And yes, I'm aware Mr. Cunningham had mastered all the traditional skills before moving into 3D.

And that probably has a lot to do with why I hold his digitally-assisted work in such high regard.

 

Edited 11 hours ago by Ace-Garageguy
punctiliousness

[Dragline]

For my part they will need their own catagory clearly. The advantages are far too obvious. I've been looking at offerings that have complete fuel systems and separate pieces for nearly every item. The Renaissance has begun.

[StevenGuthmiller]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Entirely different skill sets.

Being a fabricator and machinist myself in 1:1, I don't see any similarity whatsoever.

Just like digital processing of photography has nothing in common with old-school enlargers and chemistry (which I also do).

Or digital production of "art" with key strokes and mouse clicks and programs sidesteps an entire litany of fine motor skills, mastery and use of various media, and eye-hand coordination.

As someone who also draws, paints, and sculpts, it kinda chaps my backside sometimes seeing all the oohing and ahhing over digitally-produced work that would be literally next to impossible using traditional methods.

EDIT: I think some of the digital stuff is great. Don't get me wrong.

But it's also different enough in the skills employed to achieve it so as to make clear distinctions as to how it was produced necessary.

I agree completely.

 

 

Steve

[Lownslow]

Gatekeeping the younger modelers because they used technology is diabolical work, then people wonder why kids on social media that build models avoid the older crowds

[bobss396]

20 years ago I was hearing people grumble at shows over my entries due to the fact that I made machined parts for my cars. But the trend did catch on, to a point.

3D kits or parts don't jump out of the box and build themselves. They often need some work to them.

I've been using 3D parts for a while and just finished my first full 3D kit.

Nobody has ever said much about conventional resin cast parts or kits at shows. 3D stuff is still resin-based for the most part. The process is different, that's how I see it.

My club is IPMS based, we did that to take advantage of insurances, etc. BUT... we do our own thing. We have nothing in our contest rules about 3D made parts or kits.