Since I have somewhat of an objective opinion, being new to this site and the myriad of information found here relating to military modeling, I feel like I should say something regarding the idea of "realism" as it applies to the many different posters here who like to weigh in on what is realistic and what is not.

Firstly, the idea of "realism" is a concept when it is applied to the arts, meaning that realism is a technique, rather than the goal of the art form. Art can never escape subjectivity, nor can things which are representations of actual objects, ever be 100% accurately represented.

Filmmakers struggled with this idea early on in the history of film, mainly because they began to realize that after they were done shooting the film, so too was the moment gone, and even though the moment they had filmed was fresh and vivid in their minds, the audience almost always had a totally different perspective and therefore interpreted the scene "incorrectly". It wasn't until someone decided to piece together scenes from different perspectives, showing only what was necessary for the filmmakers to "speak" their message to the audience that the audience began to "get it". Shortly after that, in the 30's, Salvatore Dali and Louis Bunuel blew the world away by exploring the new medium of film and opening people's eyes to vast possibilities of expression within.

Whole 'nother story, still realism eventually found its way into filmmaking and spawned some great movies and moviemakers a/la Citizen Kane and Casablanca. Still it is only one way to make a movie and most great movies employ several different concepts or techniques and not a one is wrong. It is the true artisan who can take what the past has given in technique and elaborate in their own way that creates something unique and personal.

I realize that military modeling is about faithfully reproducing warcraft in battle or otherwise, but after reading some of the threads here, especially regarding painting and weathering techniques, I have to totally agree with those folks unwilling to subscribe to the aforementioned "status quo" and applaud them for not allowing their own subbjectivity to dissuade them from trying new things.

In respect to authenticity I'd like to add that, even if you're standing in front of the tank, the guy next to you is not necessarily seeing the same thing you are.

This essay was created after a long night of enamel brushing.

I for one welcome the new "technique", it puts a whole new spin on what can be done with an airbrush and some paint. However I don't think it's something totally revolutionary that will become the norm for future generations of modelers. I tend to think of modeling as a form of art, some might not but I beg to differ. The color modulation style - at least for me is an even more artistic approach to modeling than other methods and I'm glad that MIG released a DVD covering the essentials behind it. I bought it a few weeks ago and I'm going to try and apply this to my Ferdinand that I'm currently working on. I'm nowhere near as experienced as others out here but I find it an interesting way to finish a model and therefore I'm willing to give it a try. If the result is not satisfactory to me I'll try a different method and leave this one behind me, simple as that, I might also return to it in some time just to see if the experience I'll have gained by then will influence the result.

So keep your fingers crossed for me, painting on the Ferdinand starts end of January.

Keep modeling, no matter how you do it!

-Mike-