Funny this coming up about now. When I started my Beginners Series videos, I focused on getting a finished model using the bare-bones basics. Very few, easily accessible tools and supplies and the basic techniques are what I focused on. Then as the videos progressed, I added secondary tools and materials. But the focus was on keeping it simple.
I suffered from this Spencer - all the gear and no idea. Unfortunately I'm an 'incompetent perfectionist' so I have to fight all the time against trying to be an expert from day 1. The best advice I had in my hundred of hours of watching YT videos was from a guy called Jon Bius, which was basically you won't improve unless you build stuff - lots of stuff. So I'm on that journey, albeit with that perfectionist on my shoulder the whole time.
Good to see you back Spencer. The last time you were on was just before you were going across the pong. Hope you enjoyed yourself? Have to agree with all your comments - despite my many years (wrong side of 70) I still class myself as a beginner. Great video, keep them up. Best wishes.
That was a very good video. I was particularly taken by the “basics” concept you speak to. You’re right and I’ve just returned again to the hobby after a few years off. I’m trying brush painting again, which I’ve not done in nearly 30 years! Boy is it hard to get right. I’d be really interested to see a video on brush painting a complete model start to finish and to demonstrate that the basics are really the foundation to all we aspire to. How about it?
Hello Spencer, a good video with a point well made. I have been modelling for a long time and whole heartedly agree with your sentiments. I have made hundreds of models over my time and have found myself more recently sucked into this fully loaded workshop syndrome. The result was the modelling equivalent of the golfing yips! I ground to a halt with lots of after market bits and bobs, specialised tools,
Great video! I am of the conviction that a well constructed and well painted model will look great in the display case regardless if its an old Monogram or a new Tamiya.
A good craftsman never blames his tools - I agree with this and as such have purchased a cheap airbrush (£15) till I learn my craft, good analogy with your drummer‘s story illustrating the point well too! Good to have you back Mr Pollard, missed you - can we say that sort of thing? Keep up the good work, enjoyed the build of the Spit in this month‘s mag. David
Detail a-plenty for me Spencer and ideal for my ‘newly-returned‘ skill-set! And for those with more experience it surely forms a good foundation for a great wee build. Thanks, D.
Hi Spencer. I really enjoyed your latest video, in particular you thoughts on learning the craft of modelling as a better route to enjoyment and results than relying on products. I'm building the Kittyhawk SU-17 too. As you said, its a beautiful kit that needs some experience and patience to put together, but I think it rewards both. Keep up the good work.
hi Spencer,I think your right about throwing money into your our hobby in the sense that I recently used a top range iwata airbrush and failed to get along with the way it worked 🖐😞🖑, I'll stick to my neo, happy modelling, tim the primered thumb 🖒😆
Spencer, just randomly came across this video. Was a builder years ago and been toying (no pun intended) with the idea of getting back. I was intrigued by your comments about skill and the drumming. I too am a drummer; can you provide a link/URL/? so I can watch it too? BTW, checked your FB - no pix of your drums... Dude, if you're a DW guy (I suspect) show those puppies!
Hello, just wanted to know if your book covering your build of the Italiari Tornado is having a second printing as I am desperately seeking a copy. Thank you
The book has sold out for now and I have no plans for any further reprints. Question: why didn’t you contact me through the email that I posted on my Blog with all of the book details, rather than asking this question against an unrelated video, on here?
I think it's more that beginners have been made to believe that they cannot build to a decent standard without all the bells and whistles. The modelling media and 'pros' in their RUclips videos or books have been selling this idea for years. It keeps the industry going. I think that the expensive models would make for a rotten building experience for me, you learn very little until you come to painting. Stuff from Airfix and Revel for everyone and Classic Airframes or even vac-form as your skills improve.
I'm curious Spencer - did you buy the KH Su-17 or was it sent to you by the manufacturer or distributor? My impression is that you're being very "easy" on this kit and on the manufacturer. My opinion is that a kit being manufactured in a modern factory should be less "fit intensive", and based on some of the issues with the Su-17 from KH I believe you're being very kind. Kitty Hawk has proven via a series of releases that they have some significant engineering issues that are completely overlooked in your remarks. I look forward to your response.
We weren't sent it by Kittyhawk, no, it was given to me by a model shop who offered it to me to build, the shop owner being a personal friend. Why am I being easy on the kit - I didn't think I was, unless you want me to discuss issues that you think are there and I didn't experience. Have you built the kit? The impressions that I have given in this video, the previous videos and the in-depth article that I've written for Model Airplane International, are how I saw it during the build. Is this model tough to build? Yes. Does it have significant fit issues and need a ton of filler? Absolutely not. This is a kit that needs a degree of care, forward planning and experience to build, but is no more difficult than many others in its class. And frankly, the less than subtle idea that I've glossed over issues because it was given to me couldn't be wider from the mark, as neither Kittyhawk or the model shop, have in the past, or will in the future, advertise with us - which I assume is what you are hinting at. I discussed the kit as I saw it and wasn't swayed by previous kits (which would be silly, because KH are still learning and each is a development of the last) or what others had said about it. Previous kits may have had issues, this one didn't. I can't - or rather, won't - make up problems simply to fit in with what others seem to think, either through personal experience, or third-party commentaries. Never have, never will. I built the kit, I highlighted problems that I found and then discussed those that I assumed would arise, but didn't. I told it as I saw it, nothing more, nothing less... Thanks for the comment.
First, thanks for replying Spencer. Let me start by answering your question - NO, I haven't built the Kitty Hawk Su-17. Why not? First of all, a six-piece fuselage with no positive attachment points. Second, the wing fence fit issues you mentioned. Third, my previous experience with Kitty Hawk kits. I've successfully built the F-101 as well as the F-8F Cougar (actually I built the display kit used in the US) and the Jaguar T2. I've also binned two of their kits - the MiG-25 and the 1/32 F-86D. The Cougar was one of their best kits, and the F-101 was "troublesome" at many points in the build. I had hoped that their engineering would improve along the way, but based on everything I read, there is no way I am spending my hard-earned money on a kit that by most accounts has significant issues in obvious areas. The cockpit looks spectacular and the variable-geometry wings look great. That's about it for that. Your contention that "KH are still learning and each is a development of the last" is debatable. I can list the kits that have awful fit and finish, and there is no linear progression. You've also not addressed my statement that a modern company using CAD technology to design kits and make molds should not have the level of problems that their kits do. Again, I refer back to the six-piece fuselage on the Su-17 - I have no problem with assembling six parts to get there, but why why why are there no locating tabs? Why do some of the fuselage sections have mismatched arcs? I would argue that KH doesn't have anyone who builds models involved in the design phase of their kits. I'm surely not saying that you need to say X or Y to fall in line with anyone, but if you have to preface a discussion about a modern kit issued in 2017 with a discussion about "it's not the wand, it's the magician" then I respectfully disagree. I'll be spending my money on the Hobby Boss Su-17. The one with the two-piece fuselage. Cheers!
Which is entirely your choice - no-one is forcing you to buy the kit and then build it. Buy the HobbyBoss kit, build it, love it, cuddle it and call it George. That's entirely up to you. Now, if you want to know more about my thoughts on the KH Kit, you can check out the September issue of Model Airplane International...
Sure thing Spencer - based on the tenor of your response let me rush out and pay to read that. I presented my points and you gave me smarmy predictable responses. But it's your room, your rules. Let me go and cuddle my kit... SMH
Very disappointing to hear obvious design flaws and avoidable fitment issues (Kitty Hawk is designing kits in a computer, right? This is 2017 last time I checked) handwaved away as this being an "Advanced kit" and not for beginning modelers. The difference between Beginning and Advanced should be how far you can take a kit as far as customization, weathering, and realism, not whether you can cobble together a brand new kit that just rolled off the line with major problems.
That's your opinion (that advanced modelling is all about painting and weathering, and not the construction of an accurate replica). Many highly praised Tamiya kits, like the P-47(clear parts), and even the P-38J (rads) and the F-35 (nose and canopy), have serious accuracy discrepancies that some Kittyhawks do not have. You should be glad your viewpoint is usually winning anyway, since Kittyhawk are now defunct...
So a guy buys a cheap set of drums makes them sound good is the same as someone buying an expensive Kitty Hawk and finding that it is rubbish. Surely a higher price should be a better kit. I do agree that having all the best equipment is not the necessarily the best idea.
But that's the point, it isn't rubbish. It builds into a perfectly fine model, it just needs more attention than a bog-standard Tamiya kit. Did I not make that clear?
No you did not. It makes a perfectly fine kit yes, but at the same price as a Tamiya is should be easier, why charge the price they do for something that is as well engineered as say a revell with all their issues, they make fine kits too with work. My issue is just that premium price you should get a premium kit that you can build and paint without all the extra fancy little extra tools, keeping it simple, you want a kit that fights you every inch of the way you buy something cheaper and have fun with it, not the expensive kit.
Let me clear this up: I built this kit with nothing more, nothing less than I would use for a stock plastic kit from the likes of Tamiya, Airfix, Hasegawa. What fancy extra little tools do you think I used? And fights you all the way - why, because it needs a little skill to put together? I hate to put this to you, but not all kits are for beginners, so are for more advanced modellers - that's just the way it is! But I'll ask again - what fancy tools do you think I used?
Complaining that the quality of fit is not proportional to the price is a bit of a red herring. The Kittyhawk Fitter looks reasonably sound once built, which, sorry, is not always the case with many, many of the most praised Tamiyas. I can easily spot numerous small discrepancies even in their F-35. Even the recent P-38J looks wrong in the radiator shape and depth of the nacelles in front of the wing, under some angles... Your interpretation of quality boils down to fit. This is how Tamiya's 1/48 P-47 has been heaped with praise for 20 years, and, sorry again, just in the clear parts alone it was always rubbish, as new P-47 kits now coming out will demonstrate. I don't care about fit issues if the kit is sound in accuracy, with in-scale details, but most modellers prize fit above all else, which is why they still pound on Kittyhawk even after it's dead. There are qualities other than fit and engineering in models, and I am firmly on Spencer's side in this.
You are correct in that it's carpenter and not the tools, but... (always a BIG BUTT) you do need some good basic tools and quality costs. But you weren't going in that direction anyway. I do believe that a good quality kit will help a new modeler more than a poor quality kit where they have to fill, sand and rescribe their life away before they can put down a layer paint.. I would never recommend anyone's first model should be a Monogram 1/48 P-40b just because they are inexpensive. It's an awful kit. Spend some extra cash and buy they Airfix. The probelm in the States is that there are very few local hobby shops (mainlty Hobby Town). Most people go to Michaels or Hobby Lobby where all they sell is the same Revellogram kits that have been around since the 1960s. They are dated. Yes an experienced modeler can make them look great, but a beginner will get frustrated. We all know we learn to walk before we run, but who starts out walking in crap?
great to see you back Spencer, totally agree point well made ! look forward to reading your article in the next issue
Ah! Just the kind of thing I was hoping for for the cool down of the day ... and a beer! Great to have a new vid from you.
Funny this coming up about now.
When I started my Beginners Series videos, I focused on getting a finished model using the bare-bones basics. Very few, easily accessible tools and supplies and the basic techniques are what I focused on. Then as the videos progressed, I added secondary tools and materials. But the focus was on keeping it simple.
Brilliant - just as it should be.
I suffered from this Spencer - all the gear and no idea. Unfortunately I'm an 'incompetent perfectionist' so I have to fight all the time against trying to be an expert from day 1. The best advice I had in my hundred of hours of watching YT videos was from a guy called Jon Bius, which was basically you won't improve unless you build stuff - lots of stuff. So I'm on that journey, albeit with that perfectionist on my shoulder the whole time.
Good to see you back Spencer. The last time you were on was just before you were going across the pong. Hope you enjoyed yourself? Have to agree with all your comments - despite my many years (wrong side of 70) I still class myself as a beginner. Great video, keep them up. Best wishes.
That was a very good video. I was particularly taken by the “basics” concept you speak to. You’re right and I’ve just returned again to the hobby after a few years off. I’m trying brush painting again, which I’ve not done in nearly 30 years! Boy is it hard to get right. I’d be really interested to see a video on brush painting a complete model start to finish and to demonstrate that the basics are really the foundation to all we aspire to. How about it?
Hello Spencer, a good video with a point well made. I have been modelling for a long time and whole heartedly agree with your sentiments. I have made hundreds of models over my time and have found myself more recently sucked into this fully loaded workshop syndrome.
The result was the modelling equivalent of the golfing yips! I ground to a halt with lots of after market bits and bobs, specialised tools,
So now I am back to where I started with simple 1/72 scale aircraft kits made well.
Hey Spencer, glad to see you back. Enjoyed the video.
Great video, Spencer. I like d the discussion at the beginning. I hope to see more of that type.
Great video! I am of the conviction that a well constructed and well painted model will look great in the display case regardless if its an old Monogram or a new Tamiya.
100% agree. There's a lot to be said for going back to Golden Oldies now and then.
A good craftsman never blames his tools - I agree with this and as such have purchased a cheap airbrush (£15) till I learn my craft, good analogy with your drummer‘s story illustrating the point well too! Good to have you back Mr Pollard, missed you - can we say that sort of thing? Keep up the good work, enjoyed the build of the Spit in this month‘s mag. David
Except Kitty Hawk charges top dollar for their kits. The price sets expectations.
I was talking about airbrushes? Not the kit AM.
Which in this case, are more than met, or do you not think it's detailed and intricate enough for the money?
Detail a-plenty for me Spencer and ideal for my ‘newly-returned‘ skill-set! And for those with more experience it surely forms a good foundation for a great wee build. Thanks, D.
Hi Spencer. I really enjoyed your latest video, in particular you thoughts on learning the craft of modelling as a better route to enjoyment and results than relying on products. I'm building the Kittyhawk SU-17 too. As you said, its a beautiful kit that needs some experience and patience to put together, but I think it rewards both. Keep up the good work.
Thanks a lot - I'm pleased that you enjoyed it and the ideas presented were of use! :)
hi Spencer,I think your right about throwing money into your our hobby in the sense that I recently used a top range iwata airbrush and failed to get along with the way it worked 🖐😞🖑, I'll stick to my neo, happy modelling, tim the primered thumb 🖒😆
Spencer, just randomly came across this video. Was a builder years ago and been toying (no pun intended) with the idea of getting back. I was intrigued by your comments about skill and the drumming. I too am a drummer; can you provide a link/URL/? so I can watch it too? BTW, checked your FB - no pix of your drums... Dude, if you're a DW guy (I suspect) show those puppies!
Here you go!
ruclips.net/video/ti6u-Aqo1Ik/видео.html
Hello, just wanted to know if your book covering your build of the Italiari Tornado is having a second printing as I am desperately seeking a copy.
Thank you
The book has sold out for now and I have no plans for any further reprints. Question: why didn’t you contact me through the email that I posted on my Blog with all of the book details, rather than asking this question against an unrelated video, on here?
@@SpencerPollardScaleModels I wish I could answer that !
I have no idea ? Didn’t know you had a blogggv
Re-print that book fool ! Many of us want it !
How do I even find your Blogggg
I think it's more that beginners have been made to believe that they cannot build to a decent standard without all the bells and whistles. The modelling media and 'pros' in their RUclips videos or books have been selling this idea for years. It keeps the industry going.
I think that the expensive models would make for a rotten building experience for me, you learn very little until you come to painting. Stuff from Airfix and Revel for everyone and Classic Airframes or even vac-form as your skills improve.
This is so true!
I'm curious Spencer - did you buy the KH Su-17 or was it sent to you by the manufacturer or distributor? My impression is that you're being very "easy" on this kit and on the manufacturer. My opinion is that a kit being manufactured in a modern factory should be less "fit intensive", and based on some of the issues with the Su-17 from KH I believe you're being very kind. Kitty Hawk has proven via a series of releases that they have some significant engineering issues that are completely overlooked in your remarks. I look forward to your response.
We weren't sent it by Kittyhawk, no, it was given to me by a model shop who offered it to me to build, the shop owner being a personal friend. Why am I being easy on the kit - I didn't think I was, unless you want me to discuss issues that you think are there and I didn't experience. Have you built the kit? The impressions that I have given in this video, the previous videos and the in-depth article that I've written for Model Airplane International, are how I saw it during the build. Is this model tough to build? Yes. Does it have significant fit issues and need a ton of filler? Absolutely not. This is a kit that needs a degree of care, forward planning and experience to build, but is no more difficult than many others in its class. And frankly, the less than subtle idea that I've glossed over issues because it was given to me couldn't be wider from the mark, as neither Kittyhawk or the model shop, have in the past, or will in the future, advertise with us - which I assume is what you are hinting at. I discussed the kit as I saw it and wasn't swayed by previous kits (which would be silly, because KH are still learning and each is a development of the last) or what others had said about it. Previous kits may have had issues, this one didn't. I can't - or rather, won't - make up problems simply to fit in with what others seem to think, either through personal experience, or third-party commentaries. Never have, never will. I built the kit, I highlighted problems that I found and then discussed those that I assumed would arise, but didn't. I told it as I saw it, nothing more, nothing less...
Thanks for the comment.
First, thanks for replying Spencer. Let me start by answering your question - NO, I haven't built the Kitty Hawk Su-17. Why not? First of all, a six-piece fuselage with no positive attachment points. Second, the wing fence fit issues you mentioned. Third, my previous experience with Kitty Hawk kits. I've successfully built the F-101 as well as the F-8F Cougar (actually I built the display kit used in the US) and the Jaguar T2. I've also binned two of their kits - the MiG-25 and the 1/32 F-86D. The Cougar was one of their best kits, and the F-101 was "troublesome" at many points in the build. I had hoped that their engineering would improve along the way, but based on everything I read, there is no way I am spending my hard-earned money on a kit that by most accounts has significant issues in obvious areas. The cockpit looks spectacular and the variable-geometry wings look great. That's about it for that.
Your contention that "KH are still learning and each is a development of the last" is debatable. I can list the kits that have awful fit and finish, and there is no linear progression. You've also not addressed my statement that a modern company using CAD technology to design kits and make molds should not have the level of problems that their kits do. Again, I refer back to the six-piece fuselage on the Su-17 - I have no problem with assembling six parts to get there, but why why why are there no locating tabs? Why do some of the fuselage sections have mismatched arcs? I would argue that KH doesn't have anyone who builds models involved in the design phase of their kits.
I'm surely not saying that you need to say X or Y to fall in line with anyone, but if you have to preface a discussion about a modern kit issued in 2017 with a discussion about "it's not the wand, it's the magician" then I respectfully disagree. I'll be spending my money on the Hobby Boss Su-17. The one with the two-piece fuselage. Cheers!
Which is entirely your choice - no-one is forcing you to buy the kit and then build it. Buy the HobbyBoss kit, build it, love it, cuddle it and call it George. That's entirely up to you. Now, if you want to know more about my thoughts on the KH Kit, you can check out the September issue of Model Airplane International...
Sure thing Spencer - based on the tenor of your response let me rush out and pay to read that. I presented my points and you gave me smarmy predictable responses. But it's your room, your rules. Let me go and cuddle my kit... SMH
I'm glad I could be of assistance! Enjoy the kit! :)
Very disappointing to hear obvious design flaws and avoidable fitment issues (Kitty Hawk is designing kits in a computer, right? This is 2017 last time I checked) handwaved away as this being an "Advanced kit" and not for beginning modelers. The difference between Beginning and Advanced should be how far you can take a kit as far as customization, weathering, and realism, not whether you can cobble together a brand new kit that just rolled off the line with major problems.
That's your opinion (that advanced modelling is all about painting and weathering, and not the construction of an accurate replica). Many highly praised Tamiya kits, like the P-47(clear parts), and even the P-38J (rads) and the F-35 (nose and canopy), have serious accuracy discrepancies that some Kittyhawks do not have. You should be glad your viewpoint is usually winning anyway, since Kittyhawk are now defunct...
Thank you for a great video.
Good points well made!
That should have read 'pond'. ☺
So a guy buys a cheap set of drums makes them sound good is the same as someone buying an expensive Kitty Hawk and finding that it is rubbish. Surely a higher price should be a better kit. I do agree that having all the best equipment is not the necessarily the best idea.
But that's the point, it isn't rubbish. It builds into a perfectly fine model, it just needs more attention than a bog-standard Tamiya kit. Did I not make that clear?
No you did not. It makes a perfectly fine kit yes, but at the same price as a Tamiya is should be easier, why charge the price they do for something that is as well engineered as say a revell with all their issues, they make fine kits too with work. My issue is just that premium price you should get a premium kit that you can build and paint without all the extra fancy little extra tools, keeping it simple, you want a kit that fights you every inch of the way you buy something cheaper and have fun with it, not the expensive kit.
Let me clear this up: I built this kit with nothing more, nothing less than I would use for a stock plastic kit from the likes of Tamiya, Airfix, Hasegawa. What fancy extra little tools do you think I used? And fights you all the way - why, because it needs a little skill to put together? I hate to put this to you, but not all kits are for beginners, so are for more advanced modellers - that's just the way it is! But I'll ask again - what fancy tools do you think I used?
Complaining that the quality of fit is not proportional to the price is a bit of a red herring. The Kittyhawk Fitter looks reasonably sound once built, which, sorry, is not always the case with many, many of the most praised Tamiyas. I can easily spot numerous small discrepancies even in their F-35. Even the recent P-38J looks wrong in the radiator shape and depth of the nacelles in front of the wing, under some angles... Your interpretation of quality boils down to fit. This is how Tamiya's 1/48 P-47 has been heaped with praise for 20 years, and, sorry again, just in the clear parts alone it was always rubbish, as new P-47 kits now coming out will demonstrate. I don't care about fit issues if the kit is sound in accuracy, with in-scale details, but most modellers prize fit above all else, which is why they still pound on Kittyhawk even after it's dead. There are qualities other than fit and engineering in models, and I am firmly on Spencer's side in this.
You are correct in that it's carpenter and not the tools, but... (always a BIG BUTT) you do need some good basic tools and quality costs. But you weren't going in that direction anyway.
I do believe that a good quality kit will help a new modeler more than a poor quality kit where they have to fill, sand and rescribe their life away before they can put down a layer paint.. I would never recommend anyone's first model should be a Monogram 1/48 P-40b just because they are inexpensive. It's an awful kit. Spend some extra cash and buy they Airfix.
The probelm in the States is that there are very few local hobby shops (mainlty Hobby Town). Most people go to Michaels or Hobby Lobby where all they sell is the same Revellogram kits that have been around since the 1960s. They are dated. Yes an experienced modeler can make them look great, but a beginner will get frustrated.
We all know we learn to walk before we run, but who starts out walking in crap?