airliner-civil-aircraft-modeller.com

Hi all,
I have just been watching some YouTube model-build tutorials and, while there is no doubt that some of the builders create absolute works of art, it seems that some really go overboard with the toning, highlighting, and weathering.
This may have some applicability with military types.....however I am not sure that it is particularly relevant or realistic for airliners.
Don't get me wrong......a certain level of weathering and staining around airliner wheel wells, engines, and control surfaces etc. is indeed appropriate, (not to mention the characteristic aerobridge black "kiss" marks around entry doors), but most airlines try to keep their aircraft relatively clean and presentable.
And if you are talking VIP or Private/Business jets....they are usually absolutely immaculate, spotless, and clean in their presentation.
So what is everyone's thoughts on toning, highlighting, and weathering ??
TOR

I agree, the artistic side of it is taken too far and is overdone in a lot of cases. You will always find someone drag up a picture of some very dirty aircraft as justification, sometimes not even the same type.

Also agree on some dirtiness on airliners, but I have seen some builds where that has gone too far as well. Especially when a black wash is run over the whole model, over a mainly white scheme it looks too much to me.

I don't weather or highlight much as when I get to the end of a build I can't be bothered to do any more.

I've always said that you should build the model how you want to and not how others want it. I build for me and if others don't like it then that is their problem, not mine. Besides you can never build a 100% accurate model no matter what the rivet counters say. Yeah sure there are some models that I think the weathering etc has been overdone but that's just in my opinion. By the same token I have flown on some extremely filthy QF and VA aircraft, and not just the areas Ray W mentioned either, so it's not that far fetched really. Besides I think weathering etc adds interest and breaks up a sea of white. I do agree with the black panel line wash applied but once again that's just my opinion. There's some stuff that people that are way, way better modellers than me do that I think looks bloody ridiculous but that doesn't mean they're wrong for doing it. I just try to appreciate the work that has gone into the effect they've created even if I don't like it. And you can always learn a new technique and temper it to your own tastes as well. I've weathered military models before as I enjoy doing it but I still haven't weathered a civvy model as yet. I really should do something about that. That's my 2c on that

OK - I'll weigh in.
Now I love me a dirty plane or a corroded tank or even a muddy Subaru, BUT, only where it's appropriate.
I'd not begrudge someone from making the model how they see or want it to be but that doesn't stop me from disliking it just as I don't expect all to fawn over my outpourings.
One thing I find annoying is what I call "The Verlinden effect" where every crease, fold, panel line or bump is outlined in a dark colour beyond reality.
Yes there are examples of heavily weathered objects, but in general, for example, you can't see the panel lines at 40 paces so if the scale of the model is say, smaller than 1/72 - ease up on the friggin black lines !
Airliners with black lines all over them just look horrid IMO and totally unrealistic, but if it's appropriate ( according to that photo you took on your last Thailand junket) then fair'nuff. Still looks wrong but.
Conversely - if I see a Tornado with a clean tail I'm immediately suspicious - have you seen how filthy they get after just one flight ?
Then there's the tank brigade and their Shermans and Tigers that look all rusted and forlorn. Most of these vehicles were new at the time of use so unless it's a T34 found languishing in the back row at a Syrian warehouse thirty years down the track it's not going to be rusted to the hilt.
Oh and another thing, M113s are predominantly made out of aluminium with only certain parts that rust. Metallurgy is a thing.
Did you know that not all exhaust stains are black ?

That's about as dirty as I like my wartime aircraft. ( Yes the aerials are wrong - there's a reason for that which you can read about elsewhere )
Tell a lie - this Beaufort I really made dirty - but that was based on some research on what was happening in PNG at the time.

Conversely I made my 1/32 MB339 as dirty as I observed a modern RNZAF aircraft to be whilst being operated, potentially to full capacity every second weekend.

ie - not very.

So my thoughts on the matter.
Less is more.
Black is never black.
If you can model NM finishes effectively you are a better man than I.
Pastels are good.
Mud effects the wheel wells as well as the wheels.
Learn about nuln oil if you're making figures. ( It's like Verlinden-lite)
Preshading is bollocks.
OK preshading sometimes isn't bollocks but if you're laying on the panel lines with your eBay purchased Gundam marker and filling in the panel line via your art shop Kuretake pen with your Winsor & Newton black ink and dry-brushing from a wet palette using Citadel chunky paint then why the hell did you preshade ?
I got you good by saying preshading is bollocks yeah ? I don't really think it's bollocks.
Sporadic misting via an airbrush using Testors dullcote with just a hint of a darker shade or lighter shade of the subject colour is a good way to subtley "weather" a panel.
Don't get me started on gloss finishes - mainly because I'm not an expert. I'd just say "go Pledge it fanbois" and wait for the fallout.

I recall walking into the main QF pax secure area at Tullamarine and seeing a row of 737-800s, all white but all with different levels of gloss and cleanliness. It was very interesting and if I was going to make five identical QF 737s then I might try to replicate the differences between them. But that sort of things doesn't interest me so I make my models to look as though they've just been pushed out of the paint shop. That's what pleases me and I also like that appearance on other modellers output. Others can do whatever they like and if I don't appreciate it that's my loss. Any differences in taste is only relevant, I think, if models are being judged by people who like, or don't like, weathering. This apparently happened at the US Nationals this year and has caused a little wailing and gnashing of teeth.

My other thought about this is that I put enough time and energy into my models, airliners in particular, to make them look as close to perfect as I can so I don't feel inclined to spend even more time and energy weathering to detract from what I've already done. As the Modelling Mojo guys say, 'so many kits, so little time'.

I'll go with what Unci Les says.

Less is more - unless:
Pre-shading is bollocks. Aeroplanes don't "pre-shade", they post fade, post grime, post dust, post chip.
I too do not like the Verlinden/Spanish school over overdone panel lines, high lighting - it's more "comic book" effects to me - I call this "Tank weathering". Of course some aircraft do heavily weather - like out in the Russian Front, Western Desert, South Pacific coral islands, etc during WW2 - any aircraft that had to seriously rough it in the field. But once again it's all about photo references - of the actual aeroplane or at the least others in the same theatre as a guide. One the other side of the coin, Luftwaffe fighters in France say up to 1943 were typically kept pretty clean, lived in large hangars and were often waxed for a handful more knots. US ANG jets in the 50's & 60's were kept squeaky clean. USN carrier aircraft get filthy. Helo's and A-10s in Afghanistan got pretty dirty and grubby too.

For me, photo references are everything - trying to replicate that image in scale. I've not built a airliner - will though have a crack one day at maybe a DC-3, something iconic like that. Having walked under a Dak in the past I know how utterly grimy they can be as being typical radials they haemorrhage oil, which then mixes with dirt. I've been on plenty of airliners where one can see grease/oil grime from control surfaces & flaps, so one can add that to top of wings - with reference to photos. Jets leak in particular hydraulic fluid as it's under such high pressure and will leak out of wheel wells and stain the underside of the aeroplane. Of course it all depends on how well and how often they're cleaned. To replicate this sort of grime I use artist oils and it's so easy. Raw Umber (brown), Paynes Grey (dark grey) and white when required to lighten plus yellow and one can mix up any kind of a oily dirty sludge wash thinking with turps (for burps!). Thinly apply to panel lines, wheel wells, fuel stains, streaking back from bearings, actuators on control surfaces and flaps and streak back due to air flow. It goes down fairly rough, but let it semi dry for say half an hour, then get a cotton bud that's slightly damp with turps and remove what you don't want - thinning it out further. It's seriously so easy and the most fun I have modelling as it will make the model absolutely pop.

So as far as weathering/filtering/highlighting is concerned, less is more unless modelling some combat aircraft that is actually heavily weathered and filthy. This is supposed to be a fun hobby even though at time it can feel like a chore, so I can only suggest doing whatever that makes it fun. Personally the whole "weathering" thing is the most fun part in modelling - it's that icing on the cake that makes the model pop - so long as it's realistic. I've seen so many great builds wrecked by way over heavy panel lines and pre-shading - just so unrealistic. If the modeller had done nothing the model would be more accurate as all aeroplanes are clean at some point - particularly when brand new.

Ah, the rise of "immaculate filth". To win IPMS contests you must have a weathered model, but that weathering must be perfect. Perfectly picked out panel lines, perfectly shaded in the center of each panel a lighter colour, pencil straight cordite stains from the guns, evenly sized and distributed paint chips and clean mud on the tires.

BradG wrote:Ah, the rise of "immaculate filth". To win IPMS contests you must have a weathered model, but that weathering must be perfect. Perfectly picked out panel lines, perfectly shaded in the center of each panel a lighter colour, pencil straight cordite stains from the guns, evenly sized and distributed paint chips and clean mud on the tires.

"Immaculate filth" - love it, great term. There are a few current weathering techniques I just don't get at all. The lighter shading in the centre of a panel is kinda weird as I've never seen any photos of actual aircraft showing this - have you? Pencil straight cordite stains - I've seen plenty of gun stains forward of the barrel say on a engine cowl, but not seen thick long black streaks back from the barrels along the wing, perhaps very light sooting around where the gun barrel exits the wing. I really don't get "pre-shading" either. Things out in the weather don't pre-shade, but post fade - wear and tear, fading, chipping - and not evenly spaced, but where actual wear and tear occurs - climbing onto wings, chipping on removable panels and fasteners and on prop blades from sucking up grit and small stones (more so on the rear of the blade too generally.

Reference photos are everything. Some combat aircraft in some theatres do indeed get very dirty, grimy and faded - out in the desert, operating from fields out on the Russian front, flying from coral atolls in the Pacific, etc. Other combat aircraft had it far easier being housed in nice hangars and getting a good clean and a wax to add a few knots. So it's all relative. Aeroplanes get cleaned too. It would indeed be sad if a certain weathering technique was being expected by the judges and the model not judged against actual reference photos. Many modellers do not like weathering their aeroplanes much and obviously aircraft do start out new. So in a way, we're all right - from no weathering to extreme weathering so long as it's in accordance to reference photos. That's how I try to approach how much or little weathering I do. I'm pretty over "tank weathering" on aeroplanes.

Here are a couple of reference photos I've collected highlighting extreme differences in weathering on combat aircraft.

1. Rather clean and waxed Fw-190 - Western Front. Plenty of examples of this.

153781055_209423920929984_6147851139876741338_o by Adam Dormer, on Flickr

2. Extremely filthy A-10 from blasting away with its GAU-8.

142026398_3768290563230611_1263565053836781831_n by Adam Dormer, on Flickr

This is just why reference photos are so important - well I think so anyway. In regards to the A-10, once given a clean all that gun blast cordite grime disappears like magic! So a clean A-10 is correct as is a ultra filthy one. It's all relative.