Railphotog wrote: I believe plagiarism is copying something and claiming it is your original work. Using a commercial model as inspiration to make a model for one's own personal use is not the same thing.
I believe plagiarism is copying something and claiming it is your original work. Using a commercial model as inspiration to make a model for one's own personal use is not the same thing.
Inspiration and copying are very different, I won't go into detailed definitions for either word since you should already know the difference.
When you say you are using online photos of actual commercial kits in order to make a copy of it, then it's the same as if you rented a movie to make a copy of it for yourself (not necessarily to sell). See how my example is not too outlandish?
I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I would just like you to know that when you copy to the best of your ability and telling others about it, it is potentially damaging to the manufacturer. How? You're sending a message saying: "Don't pay retail for a kit, learn how to scale from pictures and build it yourself for pennies on the dollar." As tempting as this sounds, in the long run, fewer and fewer people will purchase commercial craftsman kits and eventually force a good company to close. I know how what I'm saying sounds, but even in your vast knowledge and reasoning, you have to admit that it's possible.
With all the talk about different manufacturers closing and work being outsourced to other countries, I'm surprised to see that not too many people find this kind of behaviour damaging. I'll say it a third time, do what you will, I'm not your daddy.
TONY
"If we never take the time, how can we ever have the time." - Merovingian (Matrix Reloaded)
Bob, there is one significant difference between the two examples you mention. Magazine or on-line construction articles are developed by the author with the prime intent of allowing folks to learn from them and copy them. When MRR or any other magazine publish scale plans, as they still occasionally do, they are for the specific purpose of using them for personal modelling use. I don't have an example to hand, but I do recall on the scale plans that I have see published that the copyright is mentioned in small print and specifically limits the use to personal and not for commercial use.
On the other hand, a commercial model like an FSM does not come with the specific intent of being copied. In fact as we know, the owner of the intellectual property and copyright specifically does not want it copied.
I am sorry to go on about this, but living with an artist this comes up a lot. In fact this issue is very high on the radar in the art world as we speak because there are some proposals at the Government level that would significanlty weaken an artists claim to copyright.
In the end with specific reference to GS at FSM we know for a fact that he does not approve of copies of his work.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
tomikawaTT wrote: CNJ831, Simon, et al.In literature or academie, copying somebody else's published work is called plagiarism, and is not highly thought of.
CNJ831, Simon, et al.
In literature or academie, copying somebody else's published work is called plagiarism, and is not highly thought of.
As I mentioned before, using magazine or online construction articles to make your own models falls in the same line - your modeling is using the published material as a source, the same as using published photos of a kit as a source.
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
In my admittedly biased opinion, copying an actual model, or photos and drawings of that model, is plagiarism. OTOH, if the model has a prototype and the modeler develops his (her) own plans working from prototype photos, that is simply accurate (or deliberately distorted) modeling from an existing or past real-world item. Rather like the difference between taking pieces of another scientist's research and incorporating it, unacknowledged, into your own report; versus creating your own report from the same data the other person used.
Since my prototype isn't represented very well in kits that I can buy in my LHS, I will be relying on my own photos and sketches as bases for my scratch-building and (occasional, when appropriate) kitbashing. One result - I will never be asked if that particular building is a (fillintheblank) kit.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - from my own photos and notes)
I think applying the term 'stealing' to a modeler scratchbuilding a copy, either exact or modified, of a kit is rather too strongly worded. Inspiring is more accurate in these cases.
Using the kit maker's plans gotten by a less than scrupulous method, or selling the scratchbuilt copies, or selling copies of the plans would be stealing that maker's hard earned revenue, as would claiming the design as your own creation. It's wrong and it's illegal.
There's absolutely no way to keep modelers from copying someone else's work if they're inclined to do so, it's been part of the hobby as long as there's been a hobby press supporting it. If kit makers are bothered by this, it's unfortunate, but inevitable, I think, due to the popularity of the kits.
And what of all those long out of production craftsman kits we've all seen in the pages of the magazines? You can't say that no one's copied any of those over the years.
Personally, I'm more interested in modelling local protoypes, but I can see the appeal of making a reasonable copy of such a kit if one was close enough to a building I need. I'd want to change some details, rearrange the building layout to fit the space available, or the terrain.
Paying collectors prices are, for me, out of the question. The current production prices are perfectly reasonable, I feel, considering the time and work that goes into the kit's creation.
CNJ831 wrote: As others have stated, the visibility of copied models at open houses, train shows, or in contests, is only likely to increase other hobbyist's awareness of FSM kits, potentially promoting FSM's future sales. CNJ831
As others have stated, the visibility of copied models at open houses, train shows, or in contests, is only likely to increase other hobbyist's awareness of FSM kits, potentially promoting FSM's future sales.
CNJ831
"Others" was actually me. I firmly believe that a well executed copy helps promote FSM. I am simply stating that the man himself does not like copies being made. It really does not matter in this case if one condones the practice or not, the artist himself does not.
I absolutely see your point regarding lack of availability of a limited run kit that is long out of production. However, I don't think that legally the argument stands up. Perhaps a better example. If an artist were to produce a limited edition run of 250 pieces of a screen print and then destroy the screen so that it would never be produced again. 5 years later I decide I really like the image that a friend has on the wall. I want a copy for my living room, so I take the original to the local Kinko's and ask them to duplicate it for my own personal enjoyment at home. I don't believe that Kinko's would do this as it would breech copyright. Of course there are ways I could achieve the same result without having to use a commercial printer, but it would not make them anymore legal.
To adjust the Microsoft analogy duplicating a out of production, no longer supported or sold version of Windows, office or any other ap. does not now make my copy legal.
If a guy obtains a set of the instructions/blueprints from FSM & then uses those plans to make his own version of the kit (only cheaper), then yeah, I think it's stealing. George used to send out copies of his plans to supposed customers of his who told him they "lost" the plans from the kit they "bought". When he found out that all they were doing was duplicating the kits on the cheap he changed his policy on plan replacement.
IMO if a guy fraudlently obtains a set of plans (lying about buying the kit) just so he can build a cheaper version of it, yup, it's the same as making copies of commercial videos to give to your friends.
Randy Pepprock
Downtown Deco
Railphotog wrote:"Steal others' ideas"!!! What a crock! Most of the hobby of model railroading is done by following the example of others. What do you think the "how to" articles in the magazines are??? Authors showing us how to "steal their ideas". Read and learn, practice by doing, then move on to stuff of your own.And making copies of rented movies isn't even on the same planet! I copied the basic design, that's all. Now if I were offering copies of any kits for sale, then that would be the same as copying movies.
"Steal others' ideas"!!! What a crock! Most of the hobby of model railroading is done by following the example of others. What do you think the "how to" articles in the magazines are??? Authors showing us how to "steal their ideas". Read and learn, practice by doing, then move on to stuff of your own.
And making copies of rented movies isn't even on the same planet! I copied the basic design, that's all. Now if I were offering copies of any kits for sale, then that would be the same as copying movies.
simon1966 wrote: I don't feel like paying the price for the fully loaded version of Microsoft Office 2007. For pennies on the dollar I can copy the disks to CD and write down the software key from a friends legal copy an install it on my PC. It is only for my personal enjoyment and use so I should not worry. Microsoft, who of course vigorously protect their intellectual property, would no doubt see otherwise.Is there really any difference in these scenarios? Other than the fact that a small business run by an individual simply does not have the resources to protect their designs.
I don't feel like paying the price for the fully loaded version of Microsoft Office 2007. For pennies on the dollar I can copy the disks to CD and write down the software key from a friends legal copy an install it on my PC. It is only for my personal enjoyment and use so I should not worry. Microsoft, who of course vigorously protect their intellectual property, would no doubt see otherwise.
Is there really any difference in these scenarios? Other than the fact that a small business run by an individual simply does not have the resources to protect their designs.
There's a very large difference between the two situations, Simon.
If I want to purchase a copy of Office '07 I have a choice of a thousand outlets, uncounted hundreds of thousands of this particular Microsoft program being for offered for sale and an availability window spanning at least a couple of years. In that case, if I make a copy of the program without direct purchase than I am denying a MS their justified price and hurting the company.
In the case of FSM, the product is in extremely limited supply from the outset. Most copies are pre-ordered, often sight-unseen and virtually none are available from FSM by the time the official release date is reached. Availability thereafter is strictly through the resale market. Sales there provide absolutely no profit to George. In addition, his policy of never re-running any kit eliminates any possibility of future sales loss.
jasperofzeal wrote: I think that modelers who steal others' ideas are far worse than those of us who find that practice damaging to manufacturers. I'm not a modeler of your calibur when it comes to structures, but I do have a lot of other good modeling skills at my disposal. I can also say with dignitiy that I wouldn't blatantly copy plank for plank what another modeler has created. What you are doing and condoning is no different than someone who goes out to rent a movie in order to make multiple copies. Like I said in my earlier post, if FSM or the like go out of business, don't go complaining that your well of "ideas" has gone dry.
I think that modelers who steal others' ideas are far worse than those of us who find that practice damaging to manufacturers. I'm not a modeler of your calibur when it comes to structures, but I do have a lot of other good modeling skills at my disposal. I can also say with dignitiy that I wouldn't blatantly copy plank for plank what another modeler has created. What you are doing and condoning is no different than someone who goes out to rent a movie in order to make multiple copies. Like I said in my earlier post, if FSM or the like go out of business, don't go complaining that your well of "ideas" has gone dry.
So tell me, in YOUR modeling, is EVERYTHING that you have ever done a complete original that is in no way based upon models or work by others? You never look at model photos for inspiration? Never watched a how-to video, attended a clinic, read a magazine or book on modeling? You work 100% from the prototype. Yea, sure.
You do your modeling YOUR way, and I'll do whatever I please. If FSM went out of business I could find lots of inspiration in other ways, which I have done. I've copied just TWO of their kits. Just having photos of their completed kits saves a lot of time, especially when doing a club project with a deadline.
By the way, I have purchased and assembled several FSM kits over the years so I don't think I'm contributing to their demise! "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery".
Here's a structure that I completely scratchbuilt on my own. Of course I did "steal" photos of machinery in the East Broad Top enginehouse that were printed in Trains!
Railphotog wrote: I think that modelers who express displeasure at such kit copying are probably jealous because they don't have the skills to do it on their own. They put down others who obviously have great hobby enjoyment by making them. Those who can, do. Those who can't, complain.
I think that modelers who express displeasure at such kit copying are probably jealous because they don't have the skills to do it on their own. They put down others who obviously have great hobby enjoyment by making them. Those who can, do. Those who can't, complain.
Bob, having said I agree with your post, I realize that I don't agree with this last statement at all. The inference is that if you have ability to knock off someone else' design it is OK and that if you feel that this is not correct then you must be an inferior modeller. I don't believe this to be the case at all. I know several very good modellers that would not, and do not condone copying. In my case you are correct, I am clearly an inferior modeller to you
You're paying for much more han a box of sticks if you buy a FSM or similar kit.
The design. Someone came up with the original creation. We can argue whether it's wrong to copy it or not but the fact remains that without the kit you wouldn't have it to copy in the first place.
The instructions & layout. A well designed kit should save you considerable trial and error time in assembly. The wood is precut for you. Window openings are already in place. Exact lengths are given for stripwood. Not to mention the step by step aging and weathering instructions, which is one of the main reasons some people like these types of kits.
The detail castings. You can't duplicate them without spending considerable time & money to track them down. No way. It's cheaper just to buy the kit.
simon1966 wrote: Scratch building is a very important and necessary part of the hobby. It is a shame that MRR does not feature more on the subject, but that is a whole other discussion. It is highly unlikely that MRR would publish an article either today, or in the past, that would condone scratch building from a manufacturers model designs without manufacturer permission. It would be a significant breech of copyright law and would open them up to inevitable legal action. Scratch building a model from photographs and measurements of a real structure and scratch-building from photographs of someones model design are not the same legally.I know for a fact that this particular subject distresses George Selios greatly. I don't know him personally, but have heard him speak both on web pod casts and at a convention I attended where he expressed annoyance about folks that steal his designs for their own use. Obviously, because he sells out his kits and because those that are old command significantly higher values shows that ripping off his designs has no impact on his business personally. Actually, on the contrary, I think folks that post copies on the web, when acknowledging the source of the copy help promote the FSM brand! But I sense from his comments that it offends him that the modeller that copies his designs are assigning no value to his skill and talent in designing the model in the first place.
Scratch building is a very important and necessary part of the hobby. It is a shame that MRR does not feature more on the subject, but that is a whole other discussion. It is highly unlikely that MRR would publish an article either today, or in the past, that would condone scratch building from a manufacturers model designs without manufacturer permission. It would be a significant breech of copyright law and would open them up to inevitable legal action. Scratch building a model from photographs and measurements of a real structure and scratch-building from photographs of someones model design are not the same legally.
I know for a fact that this particular subject distresses George Selios greatly. I don't know him personally, but have heard him speak both on web pod casts and at a convention I attended where he expressed annoyance about folks that steal his designs for their own use. Obviously, because he sells out his kits and because those that are old command significantly higher values shows that ripping off his designs has no impact on his business personally. Actually, on the contrary, I think folks that post copies on the web, when acknowledging the source of the copy help promote the FSM brand! But I sense from his comments that it offends him that the modeller that copies his designs are assigning no value to his skill and talent in designing the model in the first place.
You said in much better words what I was trying to say.
Railphotog wrote: simon1966 wrote: But I sense from his comments that it offends him that the modeller that copies his designs are assigning no value to his skill and talent in designing the model in the first place. I don't follow this line of reasoning. Someone copying a FSM kit for their own personal satisfaction is in fact acknowledging that they appreciate the design of the kit. How would one "assign value to George's skill and talent" anyway? Pay him royalty for copying a kit's features?
simon1966 wrote: But I sense from his comments that it offends him that the modeller that copies his designs are assigning no value to his skill and talent in designing the model in the first place.
But I sense from his comments that it offends him that the modeller that copies his designs are assigning no value to his skill and talent in designing the model in the first place.
I don't follow this line of reasoning. Someone copying a FSM kit for their own personal satisfaction is in fact acknowledging that they appreciate the design of the kit. How would one "assign value to George's skill and talent" anyway? Pay him royalty for copying a kit's features?
Bob, I don't disagree with you at all. As I mentioned in my post I actually think that these copies help promote the FSM brand. They certainly don't take business away from FSM as they sell out anyway. I simply stated that I have heard George express his own concerns about this and it really seems to bother him. I think you will find that most artists are bothered when their intellectual property is copied, even if it does not materially effect them. No doubt there are some that are flattered, but in this case that is clearly not so.
The incedent that really ticked him off was when the Bartholow Coal Company kit was announced 2 years ago and there was a scratch built copy getting posted to the forums before he had even started to ship the kit!
I know exactly where he is coming from because I live this issue with my wife every day. She is a struggling professional artist creating designs for digital sewing machines. Copying and sharing of these electronic designs is rife and a source of constant upset.
As for being jealous of you. You are spot on! IMO you are one of the finest modellers on the planet and I hope one day to be able to achieve results like yours.
For what it is worth, I have never purchased an FSM kit myself. Perhaps one day, but for the time being I am content to build lower cost kits and scratch build actual structures from the area I am modelling.
I've made copies of two FSM kits over the years. The first one was McKenzie Milling. I really liked the look of the old delapidated feed store/mill. But the cost to me being in Canada would have been way over the top, something I would never spend hobby money on. I had experience in scratchbuilding structures, so I decided to make my own copy. This was before the Internet and all I had to go on were several photos in the FSM ads. I drew my own plans from the photos and went from there. I didn't duplicate the pond and water wheel because I was making my model on a 1" thick piece of styrofoam, as a diorama. I look at the FMS photos as my "prototype" that I copied. Photos showed different views of the kit structure in ways that I could never see from a real prototype structure.
Here's how my copy turned out:
Quite some time later our local club had a model building project, to make a diorama with an industry served by a rail line. Around that time FSM released their "Baxters' Building Supplies" kit, which I saw as being an ideal subject for my take on the project. This time I was able to find many photos of the kit on the FSM website and in their print ads.
My version isn't exactly like the FSM kit, but is mostly like it. I had great fun in figuring out what when were, what materials I could use, and building sequences. My version cost but a fraction of the FSM kits $300.00 or so price tag:
jasperofzeal wrote: CNJ831 wrote: simon1966 wrote: On another forum there was a discussion which looked at the savings that would be achieved through scratch-building. With the cost of scribed siding and strip wood having gone up. When one adds in the cost of all the detail parts the savings are not nearly as great as one might imagine. For most scratch builders it does not feel like things are costing anything to make because the materials are all at hand having been purchased long ago.I'm sorry, Simon, but that is simply untrue. The Jeffries Point structure that I illustrated in my earlier post, is an exact copy of the FSM original, short of a few very similar detail castings I had to substitute for what would have come in the kit. It cost me slightly less than $50 in materials - TOTAL. I had none of the materials on-hand and I kept close track, so I know this to be fact. The FSM kit for this building was selling on-line for $300-$400 at the time. I've since done a copy of FSM's Seafood Emporium kit, which cost me even less than Jeffries Point and that kit is typically in the $400 or better range today. My Jewel Series #1 Pile Driver, copied exactly from FSM plans, ran around $25-$30, with the kit currently being offered for $100-$150. There is nothing difficult about replicating any FSM kit if you have any reasonable model building talent. Years ago, MR was filled with articles about scratch building and illustrations of readers efforts. For decades this was considered simply a basic skill that all serious model railroaders learned. One can save a great deal by scratchbuilding when it comes to replicating kits of FSM's calibur. CNJ831All I can say is 'wow' to your building skills. What I'm not impressed with is your habit of stealing other people's ideas. Instead of stealing ideas by scaling from an ad picture or online photograph, why not look for prototype structures to get ideas from and create your own structures? I ain't your daddy, so do what you want, just don't come on here complaining later on that FSM shut down and now you have nowhere to steal ideas from.
CNJ831 wrote: simon1966 wrote: On another forum there was a discussion which looked at the savings that would be achieved through scratch-building. With the cost of scribed siding and strip wood having gone up. When one adds in the cost of all the detail parts the savings are not nearly as great as one might imagine. For most scratch builders it does not feel like things are costing anything to make because the materials are all at hand having been purchased long ago.I'm sorry, Simon, but that is simply untrue. The Jeffries Point structure that I illustrated in my earlier post, is an exact copy of the FSM original, short of a few very similar detail castings I had to substitute for what would have come in the kit. It cost me slightly less than $50 in materials - TOTAL. I had none of the materials on-hand and I kept close track, so I know this to be fact. The FSM kit for this building was selling on-line for $300-$400 at the time. I've since done a copy of FSM's Seafood Emporium kit, which cost me even less than Jeffries Point and that kit is typically in the $400 or better range today. My Jewel Series #1 Pile Driver, copied exactly from FSM plans, ran around $25-$30, with the kit currently being offered for $100-$150. There is nothing difficult about replicating any FSM kit if you have any reasonable model building talent. Years ago, MR was filled with articles about scratch building and illustrations of readers efforts. For decades this was considered simply a basic skill that all serious model railroaders learned. One can save a great deal by scratchbuilding when it comes to replicating kits of FSM's calibur. CNJ831
simon1966 wrote: On another forum there was a discussion which looked at the savings that would be achieved through scratch-building. With the cost of scribed siding and strip wood having gone up. When one adds in the cost of all the detail parts the savings are not nearly as great as one might imagine. For most scratch builders it does not feel like things are costing anything to make because the materials are all at hand having been purchased long ago.
On another forum there was a discussion which looked at the savings that would be achieved through scratch-building. With the cost of scribed siding and strip wood having gone up. When one adds in the cost of all the detail parts the savings are not nearly as great as one might imagine. For most scratch builders it does not feel like things are costing anything to make because the materials are all at hand having been purchased long ago.
I'm sorry, Simon, but that is simply untrue. The Jeffries Point structure that I illustrated in my earlier post, is an exact copy of the FSM original, short of a few very similar detail castings I had to substitute for what would have come in the kit. It cost me slightly less than $50 in materials - TOTAL. I had none of the materials on-hand and I kept close track, so I know this to be fact. The FSM kit for this building was selling on-line for $300-$400 at the time.
I've since done a copy of FSM's Seafood Emporium kit, which cost me even less than Jeffries Point and that kit is typically in the $400 or better range today. My Jewel Series #1 Pile Driver, copied exactly from FSM plans, ran around $25-$30, with the kit currently being offered for $100-$150.
There is nothing difficult about replicating any FSM kit if you have any reasonable model building talent. Years ago, MR was filled with articles about scratch building and illustrations of readers efforts. For decades this was considered simply a basic skill that all serious model railroaders learned. One can save a great deal by scratchbuilding when it comes to replicating kits of FSM's calibur.
All I can say is 'wow' to your building skills. What I'm not impressed with is your habit of stealing other people's ideas. Instead of stealing ideas by scaling from an ad picture or online photograph, why not look for prototype structures to get ideas from and create your own structures? I ain't your daddy, so do what you want, just don't come on here complaining later on that FSM shut down and now you have nowhere to steal ideas from.
Sorry, I don't see any difference here. Photo of model, photo of prototype, photo of painting. All are equal sources of ideas for building your own model. MR used to run articles and plans on building interesting models that had no actual prototype - the E. L. Moore series being a favorite of many.
Enjoy
Paul
Texas Zepher wrote: CNJ831 wrote:copied exactly from FSM plans,How hard would it have been without those plans?
CNJ831 wrote:copied exactly from FSM plans,
Not hard at all. I did my other FSM copies based on numerous internet photos that were available. A hobbyist with any real modeling experience should easily be able to scale out the necessary construction drawing from those photos.
And addressing Simon's reply to my post...the current street price of FSM kit ARE their current values. There is no price at the collector's level and another price for regular street sales. And it is irrelevant what the kit may have retailed for 20 years ago. The current price is the preceived value of the kit. Likewise, the fact is that copies can be scratchbuilt for an average of around $.15 on the dollar, which in my book is a very substantial savings these days.
What's "simply untrue"?
CNJ831, your point is valid but on the other forum the discussion centered around the retail price for a kit, not the inflated collectors price for a kit. All I said was that the savings were not nearly as great as people imagined. Not that there were no savings. $50 in materials to scratch build a structure is probably a lot more than some folks would think it would be, which was the point of the post.
They are very good kits, not for kids.
simon1966 wrote: Randy, just out of curiosity how many hours do you think you have in total in the design and prototyping of this kit?
Randy, just out of curiosity how many hours do you think you have in total in the design and prototyping of this kit?
I started the design of the kit last Oct. and have spent most of the time in between then & now designing, casting, packing & shipping it. It is my full time job (& I love it!).
I never said they were "cheap". But I think if the average modeler started to carve the patterns for a kit like this they'd think the kits were a bargin by the time they were done. : ). Cheers.
corsair7 wrote: downtowndeco wrote: tatans wrote:You forgot the PRICE. The Dead End Alleyway is a seven building set that features 3 types of brick, cracked stucco, concrete and dilapitated clapboard. It retails at $279.95 + $15.00 S&H. You can see it at our site, www.downtowndeco.com MR had a photo in their "What's New?" section in July I think. Randy PepprockDDNot to put you or your efforts down, that isn't cheap either. Irv
downtowndeco wrote: tatans wrote:You forgot the PRICE. The Dead End Alleyway is a seven building set that features 3 types of brick, cracked stucco, concrete and dilapitated clapboard. It retails at $279.95 + $15.00 S&H. You can see it at our site, www.downtowndeco.com MR had a photo in their "What's New?" section in July I think. Randy PepprockDD
tatans wrote:You forgot the PRICE.
The Dead End Alleyway is a seven building set that features 3 types of brick, cracked stucco, concrete and dilapitated clapboard. It retails at $279.95 + $15.00 S&H. You can see it at our site, www.downtowndeco.com MR had a photo in their "What's New?" section in July I think.
Randy PepprockDD
Not to put you or your efforts down, that isn't cheap either.
Irv
There are, however, surely people who have no interest in scratchbuilding and are quite willing to pay someone else to do all the design and research work for them.
It's all a matter of priorities, like anything else in this hobby. Allotting time to more personally enjoyable aspects while spending more money for ready to use items allows each person to enjoy what they like most, while minimizing the time spent on what they don't enjoy.
For some the price is not an issue, for others scratchbuilding makes more sense and is more fun.
I admire the work of both.
The fact that these limited runs of relatively expensive kits sell out illustrates that they need no justification from us. They are what they are, take them or leave them as you will. There is certainly a very attentive audience waiting each new offering.
What I like about the kits is that I don't have to draw the plans or get all the detail parts. They are really scratch build with someone else's plans(modified ussually) and more cute details than I would ever find.
The cost of scratch building, if you count the cost of all those little packages of things, is not much cheaper.
I like to build them, not design them, so I think they are cool. Now to save another pile of money to get one.
Several folks seem to be missing the point. These kits are not cheap, they are not meant to be cheap. There are plenty of cheap kits on the market for those that want to purchase cheap kits. These kits allow a modeller of modest ability to create works of art that only the most accomplished scratch builders can achieve. Actually, in most cases better because most modellers can't make the detail castings.
If you were to examine the number of hours of work that goes into the design and manufacturing of these items and factor in the materials costs you will likely find that these gentlemen are not overcharging. They are earning modest wage for their time to create these items. None of these guys are getting rich doing this!
Each to their own of course, but I don't think we can really knock these types of models for their cost as when one studies the economics of producing them in the US the price is not outlandish. Further more there is clearly a market for them. If Randy has sold out his production run he has clearly met a demand.
Of course you could always go and buy 7 Walthers made in China mass produced plastic structure kits for $30 odd each and spend best part of $250!
PASMITH wrote: tatans wrote:YIKES: Just saw some building kits on eeeebay, some company called FSM, they started @ $200 and up to $400 and they were still bidding, one bid had 20 bids. $400.00 for a kit build???? Now I know why I scratch. can this be possible???Scratching is always better.Peter Smith, Memphis
tatans wrote:YIKES: Just saw some building kits on eeeebay, some company called FSM, they started @ $200 and up to $400 and they were still bidding, one bid had 20 bids. $400.00 for a kit build???? Now I know why I scratch. can this be possible???
Not everyone has the skill/knowledge/ability to scratchbuild. So for them a kit may be the only answer. But many of use haven't built a kit that wasn't made out of plastic or even kitbashed a plastic kit to produce something else. But paying the amount of money FSM kits cost is also prohibitive.