jjnewitt Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 A slight correction if I may. I'm one of the old fashioned modellers who tries to encourage others to 'have a go', and it is pleasing to know some folk are now building their own coaches. Seeking recognition isnt my game as, with my pro hat on, I do not wish to expand my regular clientel now i am semi-retired. I wasn't suggesting you were seeking recognition in the sense of fame or some similar thing. I don't want you to think I was casting aspertions on you! Perhaps understanding would have been a silghtly better word to have used in that context. By posting about your work and explaing how you've done it you want people to understand what you've done. In that sense you want them to "recognise" what is involved and what you have done, if only to encorage them. I wrote a thread on the Scalefour Society's website about building some sprung bogies for a class 47. I did it to try and show people that it's perhaps not as difficult as they think to do and encourage others to have a go. I would want however some sense of "recognition" from the reader for what I have done, I would want them to understand that the model is somehow different from the Bachmann model that I picked up on Ebay. If I came to you and said "that's a nice coach I'l go and buy one in my local model shop on Monday" you would probably explain to me that I couldn't do that and why I couldn't and then tell me how I could make one. By doing so you are wanting me to recognise that the model is something different from what you can buy off the shelf. In effect you want "recognition" of what you have done, not for any sense of kudos but simply because you have put time and effort into this model and that you made it, it is different. Everyone want to be recognised for the work they have done. This is particularly true when it comes to being paid at the end of the month! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Everyone want to be recognised for the work they have done. In a hobby that is far from everyones motivation, I can assure you. Some do yes but most certainly not all. Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjnewitt Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 In a hobby that is far from everyones motivation, I can assure you. Some do yes but most certainly not all. Cheers Jim I never said that it was a motivation. Recognition takes many different forms and not necesarily positive. It doesn't even have to come from someone else. By simply taking pleasure from what you have done you there is a degree of self recognition, aknowledgement, understanding in what you've done at work ie. "I did that". This is probably a subject for the Transactional Analysis section of a Psychology forum rather than here though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted May 13, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 13, 2012 It use to be so simple. If you took it out of a box and set it on the track it was "ready to run" If you took it out of a box and put it together and then set it on the track it was "kit built" If you had to make the parts for the kit yourself it was "scratch built" Can't the above still apply, no matter how you made the parts, or what tools you used? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buhar Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If you control the tool by hand (if only to a degree) eg a lathe or electric drill, or provide the power that makes the tool work eg a rivetting press would that be a definition that goes some way to satisfy those who don't see CAD, casting or etching as part of scratchbuilding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I suspect, and I'm happy to be proved wrong, that those who spout theory do so in the absense of practical experience. If we are going to define a branch of the hobby where people actually build something from now't, I look forward to seeing the definition of a person who builds now't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jol Wilkinson Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I suspect, and I'm happy to be proved wrong, that those who spout theory do so in the absense of practical experience. If we are going to define a branch of the hobby where people actually build something from now't, I look forward to seeing the definition of a person who builds now't. A collector? A cheque book modeller? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted May 14, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 14, 2012 Scratchbuilding from now't is know as creating. Example: In the begining God created the heaven and the earth and the first scratchbuilt locomotive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GC Jack Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Have only just picked up this debate. I think all of us like a little recognition - approval? - of what we have made. I don't know of many people, with a model railway they have built, who would never let anyone else see it. I have been on two scratch building courses at Hobby Holidays and they were fantastic. The chap who ran them was a superb scratch builder but he doesn't make his own wheels, buffers, manufacture his own paint or transfers and yet he wins scratch building prizes at shows. Personally it doesn't matter a jot to me if a model is a mix of scratch and kit parts, some of mine are - that's why I went on the course to improve those skills. Jack Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If you had to make the parts for the kit yourself it was "scratch built" I agree whole-heartedly. I guess what this debate comes down to is whether the use of tools like CAD or etching still counts as "doing it yourself". I personally feel that they do count. However as the debate shows, not everyone is in agreement on this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N15class Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 I agree whole-heartedly. I guess what this debate comes down to is whether the use of tools like CAD or etching still counts as "doing it yourself". I personally feel that they do count. However as the debate shows, not everyone is in agreement on this. I agree that CAD can be a very usefull part of the process of scratch building, but not the etching process. That takes away most of the hand skills I feel that are required for scratch building. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 ...If you had to make the parts for the kit yourself it was "scratch built".. Whilst agreeing with the rest of your post, Colin, the problem here is, as others have said in other ways, you are not making parts for a kit. If we include parts we make ourselves within the definition of "kit", then we cease to have any meaningful definition of what a kit is. It was bad enough not being able to agree what scratch building is. I agree whole-heartedly. I guess what this debate comes down to is whether the use of tools like CAD or etching still counts as "doing it yourself"... Of course they count "as doing it yourself" if you are the one doing it, but that's not the same as saying they count as scratch building. To me, there's a world of difference between individually or batch crafting components and creating a virtual model from which identical clones can be produced by an automated or semi-automated process. For example, I'm happy to include the use of machine tools to create components as one aspect of scratch building. Each object produced in this way is hand-crafted and, if several are produced, they will never be identical. On the other hand, I exclude the use of CNC machine tools simply because the driver program is written once and any number of identical clones* may be produced with no extra human input (other than loading the machine and pressing the go button). Nick * for these purposes, I'm ignoring any differences arising from machine/tool wear, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nth Degree Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 There's a fair amount of Latin in this absorbing thread. I'm sure if read allowed it would produce something nasty from Harry Potter's spell book! And with so much quality traffic through here I'm tempted to throw in a prototype question about suburban passenger traffic from Moorgate in the 60s. However, I shall resist. This topic does seem to be boiling down to a question largely of how much assistance is allowed by methods other than what we can produce on the workbench, castings and motors aside. I still find myself asking the question that if the originators of the term had been able to use the methods now available would they use them? And if they did, would they have reinvented the phrase into something that is acceptable now? I often see this term used in locos produced in the 50s and sometimes earlier. More often than not they have used chassis, boilers, cabs, etc from existing models to produce their own unique model but they are still termed 'scratchbuilt' as a definition. This assistance in producing what they wanted to model can be directly related to what is being produced today with the help of etching and 3D fabrication. Also, if someone else had followed their example they would have also produced a scratchbuilt loco; not exactly the same, just very similar. Certainly not a kit but something that uses parts of existing, and hand-fabricated parts, plus the skill of the builder to produce something unique. Should this be the accepted term? If this phrase was first coined back then and in those circumstances, I don't see how it's not applicable today. Portare in sculpturae! Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I agree that CAD can be a very usefull part of the process of scratch building, but not the etching process. That takes away most of the hand skills I feel that are required for scratch building Perhaps the experts on scratchbuilding will show us their scratchbuilt models.............? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjnewitt Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Whilst agreeing with the rest of your post, Colin, the problem here is, as others have said in other ways, you are not making parts for a kit. If we include parts we make ourselves within the definition of "kit", then we cease to have any meaningful definition of what a kit is. It was bad enough not being able to agree what scratch building is. Why? A kit is a collection of parts that when assembled form into (in our case) a model. By scratchbuilding you are making a set of parts for your own kit. If Wordsell Forever, for example, made all the parts for his F8 and put them in a box and gave them to me then I have a kit. What else do I have? It might be unique but that doesn't matter. I really don't see how all of a sudden we no longer have a meaningful definition of what a kit is because of that. There was a thread in this neighbourhood recently about someone who had come into possesion of a set of parts that someone had made for a 5" gauge Merchant Navy and beautiful parts they are to. What he has is a "kit". If the person who made the parts had put them together he would have been scratchbuilding. I still don't see why you should be afforded special status (and by using a specific term for what you do and differentiating what you do from something that is ultimately the same process you are doing that) simply because you cut your parts out by hand. Others see it differently. Perhaps the only way to please everyone in this is to simply do away with the terms scratchbuilding or kitbuilding and to describe your model in greater detail stating what you have made it from and the methods that you have empolyed to do so? My P4 Manor is built from a Malcom Mitchell kit with some modifications using Ultrascale wheels, a High Level gearbox etc. My sprung P4 bogies are built using components cut by hand from Nicel Silver sheet and brass sections as well as Ultrascale wheels, exactoscale bearings, Gibson frame spacers etc. That would probably be seen as too long winded though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted May 14, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 14, 2012 Whilst agreeing with the rest of your post, Colin, the problem here is, as others have said in other ways, you are not making parts for a kit. If we include parts we make ourselves within the definition of "kit", then we cease to have any meaningful definition of what a kit is. It was bad enough not being able to agree what scratch building is. Hi Nick. I was not trying to define what a kit is. My logic was that scratch building is where you make the parts yourself, then put them together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N15class Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Perhaps the experts on scratchbuilding will show us their scratchbuilt models.............? There are some lovely models being made in this years competition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Hi Nick. I was not trying to define what a kit is. My logic was that scratch building is where you make the parts yourself, then put them together. Hi Colin, I didn't think you were trying to define "kit", more that the use of the word opened a can of worms that Karhedron immediately developed (I was going to say "sank his teeth into" but that would have been too unpleasant a mixing of metaphors). If, instead of saying If you had to make the parts for the kit yourself it was "scratch built" you had omitted the words "for the kit" I would have been in complete agreement with you. Why? A kit is a collection of parts that when assembled form into (in our case) a model. By scratchbuilding you are making a set of parts for your own kit. If Wordsell Forever, for example, made all the parts for his F8 and put them in a box and gave them to me then I have a kit. What else do I have? It might be unique but that doesn't matter... See above, but also it is the act of giving you the box of parts that creates a form of kit. One would also hope that he had made a test build and provided some sort of instructions, but we all know the reality of some kits... We are used to kit manufacturer involving such production techniques as moulding and etching but, in principle, there is no reason why someone should not produce a kit for others to assemble by handcrafting the components. Colin's comment and my response concerned the situation where the producer of parts and the builder were one and the same. I still don't see why you should be afforded special status (and by using a specific term for what you do and differentiating what you do from something that is ultimately the same process you are doing that) simply because you cut your parts out by hand. I wonder how many times this has to be repeated; differentiating between methods does not confer a special status on anybody.It merely describes the chosen method. This is simply a matter of individual choice, of using the skills and methods that you have available. If the methods are different, what on earth does "ultimately the same process" mean. The results may be similar but not necessarily the way by which you get there. Perhaps the only way to please everyone in this is to simply do away with the terms scratchbuilding or kitbuilding and to describe your model in greater detail stating what you have made it from and the methods that you have empolyed to do so?... By all means add information to describe your methods. That's what I've argued for all along, but not by abandoning perfectly serviceable terms. Far better to add appropriate new terms to describe new methods. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 There was a thread in this neighbourhood recently about someone who had come into possesion of a set of parts that someone had made for a 5" gauge Merchant Navy and beautiful parts they are to. What he has is a "kit". If the person who made the parts had put them together he would have been scratchbuilding. I agree. Some people feel that as soon as the parts become reproducible, it ceases to be a scratchbuild and becomes a kit. I prefer your definition that it only becomes a kit when put together by someone who did not make the parts (what whatever means). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I agree. Some people feel that as soon as the parts become reproducible, it ceases to be a scratchbuild and becomes a kit. I don't, but I do feel that as soon as the parts become automatically reproducible, it ceases to be entirely scratchbuilt. Whether it becomes a kit is another matter entirely, dependent on an intention to supply it to others for building. I think you are mixing two rather different issues here. I prefer your definition that it only becomes a kit when put together by someone who did not make the parts (what whatever means). Yes, that's fine, but it is at odds with the first half of Justin's paragraph where he said ...By scratchbuilding you are making a set of parts for your own kit... to me, that just dilutes the meaning of "kit". Nick edit to clarify who said what Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N15class Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 I agree. Some people feel that as soon as the parts become reproducible, it ceases to be a scratchbuild and becomes a kit. I prefer your definition that it only becomes a kit when put together by someone who did not make the parts (what whatever means). How does this work with etches as you have not used any skill in cutting them out. I know you will say that it is in the use of the CAD that the skill lays. I agree there is great skill required in that. But that does not show any skill in the forming of the parts. Plus how would you do it if the project needed card or plastic for the build? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugsley Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Plus how would you do it if the project needed card or plastic for the build? Laser cutting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 How does this work with etches as you have not used any skill in cutting them out. I know you will say that it is in the use of the CAD that the skill lays. I agree there is great skill required in that. But that does not show any skill in the forming of the parts. That is being elitist to say that scratch-building must demonstrate a skill in forming the parts. If I cut out a set of card rectangles and glue them together to make a box, then paint it blue, stick it on wheels and call it a class 47, it is scratch-built. I doubt that it would demonstrate any skill that the average 7-year old could not accomplish. The term "scratch-built" describes how the item was made it is NOT a reflection of the skills of the maker. If we want to see the level of skill, we look at the results, not the label applied to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I'll bet most contributors have no experience of kitbuilding let alone scratchbuilding other than talking a good model, and so a 14-page diatribe on the subject is meaningless. Scratchbuilding is as much about building as producing the parts and the best set of metal parts in the world is a waste of space unless folk learn to construct in metal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
N15class Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 That is being elitist to say that scratch-building must demonstrate a skill in forming the parts. If I cut out a set of card rectangles and glue them together to make a box, then paint it blue, stick it on wheels and call it a class 47, it is scratch-built. I doubt that it would demonstrate any skill that the average 7-year old could not accomplish. The term "scratch-built" describes how the item was made it is NOT a reflection of the skills of the maker. If we want to see the level of skill, we look at the results, not the label applied to them. I agree it is the end result that matters. Yes it is about the way it is made I agree with you there too. But to say there are no skills involve I think is wrong. You have great skills in CAD work which in turn make some lovely etches. But there is in that no skill in cutting out the parts for your "scratch built" model. Your first comment about being elitist. I am not there are far better moddellers than I. But what is scratch building if it is not about cutting out and forming sheet into models? Your statement does not hold water. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.