today's work

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Originally posted by DrSchmidt
    ****ing biped's! (said a very smug Martian)

    Leave a comment:


  • DrSchmidt
    replied
    http://www.failcompilation.net/People are awesome right? Well this win compilation proves it again! This video contains people who are winning big time! Huge...


    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Originally posted by DrSchmidt
    Must be a sign of superiority when a species can afford to build tanks with an inherently unstable concept. It's like humans walking upright on two legs....
    Milk-stool, meet Segway. Segway... milk-stool.

    Leave a comment:


  • DrSchmidt
    replied
    Must be a sign of superiority when a species can afford to build tanks with an inherently unstable concept. It's like humans walking upright on two legs....

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Originally posted by DrSchmidt
    Working on a "War of the Worlds" diorama?
    Indeed, Doctor. I Alway's had a fascination with the Martian machines since reading Well's description of their technology -- obviously rich in machinery -- describing the Martian's, who either had no concept of or exercised a disdain for the wheel and fixed pivot within their instrumentalities. How do you make a conveyance without wheels or cams? Most intriguing problem.

    Off and on I've been making models of these critters for decades.





















    David

    Leave a comment:


  • DrSchmidt
    replied
    Working on a "War of the Worlds" diorama?

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Originally posted by Ken_NJ

    I like this method!
    Yeah, Ken. Me too. Much better control of the vertical than using a brush or sponge. I'll soften the contrast and sharpen the 'streaking' effect with vertical sweeps of a black paint loaded spray-brush. Film at Eleven.

    David

    Leave a comment:


  • Ken_NJ
    replied
    Originally posted by He Who Shall Not Be Named


    I like this method!

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied























    Leave a comment:


  • JHapprich
    replied
    Yes indeed they look more appropriate, the tapered set is more of the 636' type

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Originally posted by JHapprich
    Two sets of Fwd planes for the Kilo? Why?
    Good catch. The 'tapered' set of bow planes were provided with the SWM kit. The bigger, squared off planes I scratch built off of plans and pictures -- A bit bigger and more scale like.






    David

    Leave a comment:


  • JHapprich
    replied
    Two sets of Fwd planes for the Kilo? Why?

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied


















    Leave a comment:


  • MFR1964
    replied
    Thanks Jake,

    Still a size you can handle, my type VII is scale 1:35, giving me a lenght of about 2 meters, still a length you can handle on your own.
    As for figures, i would go with the 1:35 crewmembers, search for tankcrews and aircrews.

    Manfred.

    Leave a comment:


  • Davjacva
    replied
    Originally posted by MFR1964
    David, scale 1/48 you say, that is a good scale, not too big and still big enough for the details
    Type VII or type IX?

    Manfred.
    Manfred,
    this Engels kit is about the second version of their kit, so late 80's. Since it's a IXC, it's 1/39.5 scale. I based this on the actual sub being about 253'. The model comes out at 77" long. The real sub in meters was...77 meters, so you see how they got the scaling. It also matches the 1/72 Type IXC perfectly in numbers and dimensions. The current Engels, which they say is a IXD2, is not correct, as it's still 77" long, and that version was about 30' longer in real life, yet the model is the same exact size. Who scales to 1/39.5? This makes getting figures problematic off the shelf.
    Jake

    Leave a comment:

Working...