Stereotyping of Model Maker’s Capabilities

Building reputation and long term relationships with customers is one of the primary objectives of model making business’ marketing.  Clients interested in model making services in most cases will become returning customers. Whenever a client is a museum, an architect, a product developer or a designer, it is unlikely that the project they commissioned you for was the one and only. By the nature, such businesses will do other projects in the future, where they also will be in need of model maker’s assistance. If you treated them right, followed the client’s requirements, provided a high quality product by reasonable price, that client will come back for more.

Depending of the type and nature of the initial project a client might, however, to form a certain opinion of your capabilities, which might affect your whole further relationships with that client. Despite model maker’s effort to present and market his universal capabilities, a stereotype, which limits these capabilities might be imprinted on your client’s mind after completion of the initial project or a series of initial projects.

Marking using “Method of Two” and “Method of Three”

Both methods are irreplaceable when you have to divide a certain linear space into a number of smaller equal spaces. This operation doesn’t pose any threat or difficulty if a value of each space is a whole number. Say, you need to line up 20 marks with a distance of 10 mm between them. No problem. You will just lay down a ruler and place a mark every 10 mm, preferably without moving the ruler.

When you have to deal with non-round numbers, such technique will not be effective. Any attempt to lay down the ruler and draw marks with a distance between them described by a number with 2-3 digits after the comma will lead you to a mistake in overall distance. A smallest mistake in representing a complex value of the smaller space along with significant number of divisions will create a phenomena known as a Combined Mistake, which was discussed in a separate article.

Division using “method of two” and “method of three” will eliminate the very possibility of a combined mistake, help you to mark your material or component with maximum accuracy and preserve the value of the main overall distance. Both methods require you to reverse the technique of linear marking and to start from greater distance dividing it equally, piece by piece. Using these methods you don’t have to be concerned anymore about accurate representation of complex values of each particular smaller space – all you have to represent is a quantity of spaces. As a result of accurate equal division values of the smaller spaces will be kept automatically.

Combined (Cascading) Mistake

In most cases a model maker does not have to be deadly precise. A tolerance for single part or element might vary from 0.5 mm (0.020″) to 1mm (0.040″). A tolerance may be even bigger for larger models and components.  Considering that a minimal reasonable thickness of an element and a wall limit usually should not be less than 0.5 mm (at least model maker has to try to keep it that way), you don’t have to worry very much about a single mistake. Let’s emphasize the word “single” in this last phrase, because there is a treacherous phenomena known as a “combined” mistake, which must not be underestimated nor overlooked.

A combined mistake is a summary of series of single mistakes in self-repeating elements lined up to create a whole part or element.  A single mistake alone might be sometimes microscopical, which often makes it very difficult to compensate for. That single mistake, however, multiplied by number of self-repeating elements is resulting in a combined mistake in overall dimension, which might be quite significant and compromise the whole part, element or an entire model. A combined mistake is like a snow ball – the greater the number of self repeating elements, the more significant a combined mistake will be.

Classification of Scale Models

This is a first known attempt to create a classification of scale models, which we divided into two sub-classifications: by Type and by Purpose. Understanding of type and purpose of specific scale model is important as each of them has its own set of requirements as for appearance, level of detailing, durability, finish and a lifespan. Note a cross reference of product development related models such as masters and prototypes which should be recognized as both, type of scale model and purpose as well.

Classification of Scale Models By Type

Architectural Models
* exterior
* interior
* urban

Scale Replicas (including desktop models)
* AFV
* vehicles
* aircraft
* maritime
* machines/devices
* architectural
* props

Dioramas
* museum dioramas: A. constant scale diorama B. perspective diorama
* miniatures/collectibles
* film/TV sets

Sculpted Models
* mannequins
* figurines
* action figures
* sculpted miniatures/collectibles

Masters
* fabricated
* sculpted

Prototypes
* pre-production prototypes; includes concept, study and appearance models
* production prototypes; fully engineered and functioning appearance models

Classification of Scale Models By Purpose

Display
* concept
* study
* presentation
* sales
* fundraising
* museum/exhibit
* litigation
* decorative/collectible

Test
* aerodynamic
* hydrodynamic
* other

Training
* simulators
* sets
* identification replicas
* terrain & urban study

Product Development
* concept study
* masters
* prototypes

Movie/TV Production
* props
* sets