Scratchbuilding vs. Kitbashing

[Nate]

I've seen the misuse and mix-up of "scratchbuild" and "kitbashed", but the one that always makes me chuckle is when a model is presented as "box-stock".... except for the wheels, intake, decals, and tires from other kits. Forgive me if I'm mistaken here, but doesn't 'box stock' mean, well, BOX STOCK!?

That's one of my biggest pet peeves, too. I've seen write-ups that say "it's fully wired and plumbed, but box-stock." Drives me nuts!

[MikeMc]

OK I made this with an old fan and tubing and sheet styrene then I glued it and molded it.

Besides being a swamp cooler what is it??

[Danno]

OK I made this with an old fan and tubing and sheet styrene then I glued it and molded it.

Besides being a swamp cooler what is it??

Unpainted. (?)

[Chuck Most]

Scratchbashed!!!!

[Brett Barrow]

By this definition, wouldn't the models from the original Star Wars be considered kit-bashed?

I think when you use and modify a kit part in a way for something it was not intended, that's scratch building. Kit parts have become your medium and your raw material.

Taking a fan clutch and using it on a swamp cooler, that's scratch-building to me. You were able to look at an un-related part and see the potential in it. Are there plenty of far more impressive examples of scratch-building out there? Sure, but it's fundamentally the same thing. Scratch-builders use commercial fittings all the time, like Grandt Line or Tichy nuts and bolts, and nobody slights them for it, they see a part that fits the need for a detail on their model, and if you see a kit part that fits the need of a detail, then what's the difference?

Taking 5 different car bodies, cutting them into 50 pieces and making a new car body out of them is kit bashing, because they were car bodies to start with, and they're still a car body. Is this more difficult and more impressive from a modeling standpoint than the other thing? Yes, totally, but who says kit-bashing isn't just as impressive or as difficult as scratch-building?

I think it's all just semantics that we think that one is somehow superior to the other. Maybe we need to come up with a name that encapsulates both techniques, like, I don't know, calling it modeling?

[Chuck Most]

Maybe we need to come up with a name that encapsulates both techniques, like, I don't know, calling it modeling?

Modeling!? You madman!!!!

[Harry P.]

I think it's all just semantics that we think that one is somehow superior to the other. Maybe we need to come up with a name that encapsulates both techniques, like, I don't know, calling it modeling?

It's not about which is "superior," that's not the question. It's about using the two terms interchangeably, which they are not (in my opinion).

[Modelmartin]

I think it's pretty awesome when a scratch builder adds their own mold lines and ejector pin marks just to throw people off...

For subtlety I put my mold lines and ejecter pin marks in unorthodox places just to trip up the people who accuse me of using kits!!

[coopdad]

It's not about which is "superior," that's not the question. It's about using the two terms interchangeably, which they are not (in my opinion).

So we agree, the terms are not interchangeable. And we all seem to agree that scratchbuilding holds a little "prestige" (for lack of better term) than kitbashing. I would like to hear opinions about the gray area... how many box parts could still allowed and still call it scratchbuilt?

If you scratchbuild am entire car then use wheels/tires from an existing kit, can it still be called scratchbuilt? What if the engine is also in the car?

John

[Modelmartin]

Maybe we need to come up with a name that encapsulates both techniques, like, I don't know, calling it modeling?

I don't do any modeling. I don't know how to pose and use make-up etc. I rather enjoy model building or modelmaking, however.

[Harry P.]

I don't do any modeling. I don't know how to pose and use make-up etc. I rather enjoy model building or modelmaking, however. :D

I'm sure that with the right makeup, lighting and a soft-focus lens we could make you fairly passable...

[Harry P.]

So we agree, the terms are not interchangeable. And we all seem to agree that scratchbuilding holds a little "prestige" (for lack of better term) than kitbashing. I would like to hear opinions about the gray area... how many box parts could still allowed and still call it scratchbuilt?

If you scratchbuild am entire car then use wheels/tires from an existing kit, can it still be called scratchbuilt? What if the engine is also in the car?

John

Like I said, scratchbuilding and kitbashing are not mutually exclusive... you can combine a body and chassis from kit A, an interior from kit B and an engine from kit C, along with scratchbuilt headers, a scratchbuilt roll cage and a scratchbuilt rear spoiler. But that model isn't "scratchbuilt"... only certain components are.

[sjordan2]

This kind of nomenclature can really get weird. Let's say there's a huge difference between OOB and Factory Stock. For example, in my case regarding the Mercedes 300 SL, you need the Entex or Minicraft Gullwing, The Italeri Gullwing and the Italeri 300 SL Roadster all put together to build an accurate factory stock Gullwing or Roadster. Not one of them has it right, but bash them all together and you've got one of the best models in the world. And all of them need a tiny bit of scratchbuilding (I choose to go with the one-word version of scratchbuilding).

[David G.]

By this definition, wouldn't the models from the original Star Wars be considered kit-bashed?

Yes.

I think when you use and modify a kit part in a way for something it was not intended, that's scratch building. Kit parts have become your medium and your raw material.

I disagree. For my "Reaver" I took the front of a '58 Impala and the back of a '57 Chevy and glued them together. In my opinion, all I did was "Bash" the two kits together. I didn't build or create either of the two kit parts I used as my raw materials.

Taking a fan clutch and using it on a swamp cooler, that's scratch-building to me. You were able to look at an un-related part and see the potential in it. Are there plenty of far more impressive examples of scratch-building out there? Sure, but it's fundamentally the same thing. Scratch-builders use commercial fittings all the time, like Grandt Line or Tichy nuts and bolts, and nobody slights them for it, they see a part that fits the need for a detail on their model, and if you see a kit part that fits the need of a detail, then what's the difference?

I've been reading Model Railroader for years- actually decades, and when those guys do the wright-ups on their models, they do say that it is "Scratchbuilt with Grandt Line windows and doors." They do give credit for work that was created by others. It does make a difference.

Taking 5 different car bodies, cutting them into 50 pieces and making a new car body out of them is kit bashing, because they were car bodies to start with, and they're still a car body. Is this more difficult and more impressive from a modeling standpoint than the other thing? Yes, totally, but who says kit-bashing isn't just as impressive or as difficult as scratch-building?

I agree with you on this point. I think kitbashing is every bit as important and impressive as scratchbuilding. Often it takes more imigination to work with what's available, than to make something to fit the need.

I think it's all just semantics that we think that one is somehow superior to the other. Maybe we need to come up with a name that encapsulates both techniques, like, I don't know, calling it modeling?

I think we need a clear distinction between the two terms. They're not interchangeable. There are members of this community who could scratchbuild... build an entire model... from scratch. I think they deserve the credit for the skill and work it takes one to do that.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but this is a very important subject to me. As a model builder, artist and musician, I've had IPs stolen, misused or misappropriated on different occasions. To have someone else receive the credit for something I've created is one of the worst feelings I've known.

David G.

[highway]

Since there seems to be much debate still on the modified/scratchbuilt/kitbashed terms, I found this on the IPMS website. It is the offical IPMS competition handbook.

http://www.ipmsusa.org/competition_handbook/CH_index.html

This is the main areas of discussion here, copied from the handbook:

"SCRATCH-BUILT models may incorporate parts from other kits, but these should be generally unrelated to their original identity, except for minor parts such as wheels, guns, etc. Models determined to be scratch-built must be entered in the proper scratch-built category.

CONVERSION category entries must represent a version different from that provided by the basic kit. The conversion must contain significant structural modifications to the basic kit involving extensive changes in contour or configuration. These changes must be the work of the entrant. In addition to the normal judging criteria common to the entire contest, judges of the Conversion Category will give special consideration to the complexity of the conversion. A conversion accomplished with primarily commercial aftermarket parts will be at a disadvantage, therefore, against a conversion accomplished primarily by the builder's craftsmanship--assuming both are finished to similar standards. Simple conversions may be entered in regular categories. More extensive conversions, however, must be entered in the appropriate conversion category. The builder must detail the conversion changes made to the base kit on the entry sheet or accompanying documentation. Judges have the ultimate authority to determine a model's category placement, and such decisions by judges will be final."

[Agent G]

My last build used mostly parts from the box, however......

I added (bashed) the wheels and tires from another kit.

I made (scratchbuilt) the fuel tank and trunk floor from plastic tube and sheet.

That's how I see the terms defined.

G

[Danno]

My last build used mostly parts from the box, however......

I added (bashed) the wheels and tires from another kit.

I made (scratchbuilt) the fuel tank and trunk floor from plastic tube and sheet.

That's how I see the terms defined.

G

I'm with you, Wayne. And if you changed a part by adding plastic and putty, you modified (modified) it.

Edited August 2, 2010 by Danno

[Brett Barrow]

I think when you use and modify a kit part in a way for something it was not intended, that's scratch building. Kit parts have become your medium and your raw material.

I disagree. For my "Reaver" I took the front of a '58 Impala and the back of a '57 Chevy and glued them together. In my opinion, all I did was "Bash" the two kits together. I didn't build or create either of the two kit parts I used as my raw materials.

I guess you wrote that before reading my full post, as that's exactly the example I give later as not scratch building.

Taking a fan clutch and using it on a swamp cooler, that's scratch-building to me. You were able to look at an un-related part and see the potential in it. Are there plenty of far more impressive examples of scratch-building out there? Sure, but it's fundamentally the same thing. Scratch-builders use commercial fittings all the time, like Grandt Line or Tichy nuts and bolts, and nobody slights them for it, they see a part that fits the need for a detail on their model, and if you see a kit part that fits the need of a detail, then what's the difference?

I've been reading Model Railroader for years- actually decades, and when those guys do the wright-ups on their models, they do say that it is "Scratchbuilt with Grandt Line windows and doors." They do give credit for work that was created by others. It does make a difference.

I said "nobody slights them for it", meaning that no one asserts that they're less of a modeler because they didn't scratch build 100% of every part on the model, or that judges dock points because they used existing parts. I'm all for giving credit where credit is due.

quote

"SCRATCH-BUILT models may incorporate parts from other kits, but these should be generally unrelated to their original identity, except for minor parts such as wheels, guns, etc. Models determined to be scratch-built must be entered in the proper scratch-built category.

/quote

That's exactly what I'm saying. Example - you need a Small Block Chevy with a Muncie 4-speed, but your kit engine has a Powerglide, so you -

#1 - find an engine that has the correct transmission, chop it off and use it on your model. That's kit-bashing

#2 - take a missle from an aircraft kit, and a mantlet from a tank kit, whatever you find that has a similar shape, cut and modify them, add some putty and styrene bits to create the correct transmission. Now that's scratch building. Neither part is recognizable in the finished model.

[bill w]

IMHO I think if you take a 1:1 part, make your drawing, scale it down and carve it, glue pieces of plastic together etc. etc. that's scratch building.

I also think if you take the roof from a car and make a door out of it that's scratch building, everything else is kitbashing.

Bill

[David G.]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Example - you need a Small Block Chevy with a Muncie 4-speed, but your kit engine has a Powerglide, so you -

#1 - find an engine that has the correct transmission, chop it off and use it on your model. That's kit-bashing

#2 - take a missle from an aircraft kit, and a mantlet from a tank kit, whatever you find that has a similar shape, cut and modify them, add some putty and styrene bits to create the correct transmission. Now that's scratch building. Neither part is recognizable in the finished model.

It took us a while, but, for the most part, we seem to have finally met in the middle.

I'm still not sure I agree with you on the second point, but I do see your reasoning behind it.

Personally, I would still refer to your second example as a kitbash, but that's just me. No hard feelings, I hope.

Regards,

David G.

[Brett Barrow]

It took us a while, but, for the most part, we seem to have finally met in the middle.

I'm still not sure I agree with you on the second point, but I do see your reasoning behind it.

Personally, I would still refer to your second example as a kitbash, but that's just me. No hard feelings, I hope.

Regards,

David G.

No hard feelings at all, I would never take anything anyone said over the internet personally. You can call it whatever you want to call it, my real beef is with those who think of scratch building as some sort of morally superior form of modeling. The IPMS would call it scratchbuilt, but AMPS, on the other hand, would call it "home-made" and models with "home-made" details traditionally tend to score lower than those festooned with aftermarket additions in their competitions. Weird, huh?

[MikeMc]

Well then I scratchbuilt the swampcooler on my OOB 47 Aerosedan with custom wheels and paint.

Now I know, I will sleep better tonight!!

[Aaronw]

It took us a while, but, for the most part, we seem to have finally met in the middle.

I'm still not sure I agree with you on the second point, but I do see your reasoning behind it.

Personally, I would still refer to your second example as a kitbash, but that's just me. No hard feelings, I hope.

Regards,

David G.

I'd actually agree with Brett on point 2, if you built a transmission from a missile and some misc tank parts, I don't see that as really being any different from using some Evergreen strip, sheet, rod and tubing.

In the big picture I think people could avoid the terminology problem entirely by just saying what they did.

I took the kit sleeper and stretched it with some styrene sheet and strips, I used parts from two other kits and my sisters Barbie dream house to spice up the interior of the sleeper. I built the heavy duty bumper from styrene strip, and an old can opener, the pads on the bumper were actually from a length of 1/35 Tiger tank tracks I cut up.

Simple, and explains exactly what you did leaving little room for confusion.

Edited August 3, 2010 by Aaronw

[Danno]

I'd actually agree with Brett on point 2, if you built a transmission from a missile and some misc tank parts, I don't see that as really being any different from using some Evergreen strip, sheet, rod and tubing.

In the big picture I think people could avoid the terminology problem entirely by just saying what they did.

Simple, and explains exactly what you did leaving little room for confusion.

Wow! Aaron! What a concept: straight talk. It would clear up a lot.

[Chuck Most]

I'd actually agree with Brett on point 2, if you built a transmission from a missile and some misc tank parts, I don't see that as really being any different from using some Evergreen strip, sheet, rod and tubing.

In the big picture I think people could avoid the terminology problem entirely by just saying what they did.

Simple, and explains exactly what you did leaving little room for confusion.

Exactly! I rarely if ever scratchbuild 100% of a component- I'll usually throw a few "found objects" in there if they'll work. Even if you are just using strips of Plastruct or Evergreen, that's no different from using a kit part along with it! (A "TRUE" scratchbuilder would have made his OWN plastic! )