Tamiya Spitfire Mk XVI

[Bomber_County]

12 hours ago, JohnB said:

Could be. I don't remember having so much trouble with my earlier builds. But I've slept since then LOL.

Always good to walk away, breathe, sleep......

[JohnB]

Here is how it looks after application of primer. Pretty piss poor if I do say so myself! I'm undecided if I should try to remove the side cowling and risk buggering it up or just leave it as is. I'm leaning toward trying to remove it and re-fitting, etc. We'll see.

 

[krow113]

You can sand the rear panels front edge to match them up a little...or skin the side panel with some plastic card to build up the lower edge.

The fat lady hasn't sung ...yet.

[JohnB]

2 minutes ago, krow113 said:

You can sand the rear panels front edge to match them up a little...or skin the side panel with some plastic card to build up the lower edge.

The fat lady hasn't sung ...yet.

True but I elected to remove the side panel (thank goodness for debonder). After cleanup I will re-attach it, etc. Fingers crossed.

[krow113]

lol

or just do that!

good stuff.

 

[JohnB]

Mo betta I think!

Note to self: Next time you build a Tamiya Spitfire leave off the side panels until after the nose section is attached to the fuselage.

 

 

 

 

[Bomber_County]

Nice catch John, If I’d tried that it would be on the SOD now.........

[JohnB]

42 minutes ago, Bomber_County said:

Nice catch John, If I’d tried that it would be on the SOD now.........

Thanks! I hate to have to go back and "fix" something that I screwed up. Too nice a kit to put it aside, etc.

[Fidd88]

I think that more (diffused) light is going to greatly improve the "grainy" appearance of your photo's, and the "depth of field" ie how much is simultaneously in focus. Also, some older digital cameras - say 10-15 years old - tend to take overly grainy pictures in macro mode.

I'd try more light before ditching your camera though!

Edited July 15, 2020 by Fidd88
clarification

[JohnB]

2 hours ago, Fidd88 said:

I think that more (diffused) light is going to greatly improve the "grainy" appearance of your photo's, and the "depth of field" ie how much is simultaneously in focus. Also, some older digital cameras - say 10-15 years old - tend to take overly grainy pictures in macro mode.

I'd try more light before ditching your camera though!

My camera is something like 15 years old. And I usually use macro mode. Still taking different approaches to try to get better photos. Time will tell!

[Fidd88]

That figures really. (Lots) more lighting may help, so worth trying first! Be warned that old-fashioned incandescent bulbs may result in a distinct yellow tinge to photographs of objects illuminated by such bulbs. A multi-LED with "cool" (blueish) LEDS is favourite I think. I use a desk-lamp and an LED spot from overhead, plus incandescent bulbs when taking mine, using tracing paper - if needbe - to provide a more diffused light.

Macro photography is not very forgiving. The other thing you might try, is photographing against a lighter grey background instead of black, which would work in a film camera by allowing a larger aperture, therefore better depth of field and might help a bit with the grainy problem.

[JohnB]

8 minutes ago, Fidd88 said:

That figures really. (Lots) more lighting may help, so worth trying first! Be warned that old-fashioned incandescent bulbs may result in a distinct yellow tinge to photographs of objects illuminated by such bulbs. A multi-LED with "cool" (blueish) LEDS is favourite I think. I use a desk-lamp and an LED spot from overhead, plus incandescent bulbs when taking mine, using tracing paper - if needbe - to provide a more diffused light.

Macro photography is not very forgiving. The other thing you might try, is photographing against a lighter grey background instead of black, which would work in a film camera by allowing a larger aperture, therefore better depth of field and might help a bit with the grainy problem.

Thanks for your input.

[JohnB]

As of today. Decaling is next. (I have been adjusting and readjusting my camera settings, etc but still not a satisfactory improvement).

 

[BlrwestSiR]

Looks good John. I'm always impressed by the glossiness of your finishes. 

Carl

[JohnB]

19 minutes ago, BlrwestSiR said:

Looks good John. I'm always impressed by the glossiness of your finishes. 

Carl

Thanks Carl. Credit goes to Xtracolor on this one. Great paint.

[Bomber_County]

Just now, JohnB said:

Thanks Carl. Credit goes to Xtracolor on this one. Great paint.

Enamel or acrylic?........I still have some old enamels, I reckon their Zinc Chromate is perfect colour, IMHO........

[JohnB]

37 minutes ago, Bomber_County said:

Enamel or acrylic?........I still have some old enamels, I reckon their Zinc Chromate is perfect colour, IMHO........

Enamels. That's about all I ever use except in a pinch.

[JohnB]

Bought a new camera and this is my 1st test shot. MO BETTA!!!! LOL

 

[DocRob]

I can even see, that there are some exhausts missing , second best thing after the invention of the wheel John. Now we will see the fastest quality builds in Hi-Res.

Cheers Rob

[Bomber_County]

42 minutes ago, JohnB said:

Bought a new camera and this is my 1st test shot. MO BETTA!!!! LOL

I would say, looking very nice indeed, did you add matt coat?

[JohnB]

Another test shot. Yes, over sprayed with Alclad Kleer Flat. (A little fuzzy this one.)

 

[BlrwestSiR]

Really nice there John. AU-J is one I'm hoping to build at some point. 

Carl

[JohnB]

12 minutes ago, BlrwestSiR said:

Really nice there John. AU-J is one I'm hoping to build at some point. 

Carl

Thanks Carl. The 2 photos I have show it really weathered but I don't plan to do that. Moderation.

[CrankyCrafstman]

She's looking real nice John 

Ron G 

[GazzaS]

Lovely, John!  Great photo upgrade, too.