I have heard that 1/72 is gaining popularity from several sources including this forum. While it is clearly more diffucult to model details, it does make some dioramas more practical. What do you guys think?

I enjoy working on the small stuff. I started 1/72 again when I was away from home and living in a hotel room for 4 months. A 1/72 scale Abrams was at the PX and only $5 and change. I could begin the kit and put the in progress model in a shoe box for safe keeping from the cleaning lady.

I've always carried a small Airfix kit with me when I travelled. Sometimes it was a plane, other times a tank. With the updated security on airlines, I can't travel with that stuff as easily any more.

I've recently found (within the past two years), the Revell of Germany kits. They are superb 1/72 scale kits. Prior to this the Braille Scale kits were all old Airfix, Matchbox, Hasegawa, Esci or Fujimi kits. Some of these are great, but for the most part, they suffer from age. The new Revell kits gave 1/72 scale new life and added some much needed modern armor into the mix. Add to this the newer Eastern European 1/72 scale kits, and we have quite a selection to chose from.

Also, as you point out, 1/72 scale is much smaller so it takes up less space. I don't do the diorama thing so I just part the kits on the shelf.

I’ve seen some beautifully done 1/72 armor, and interesting subjects as well. Rob is right when he says Revell of Germany has really been doing a great job in that scale. I wish I could build them better, just because of space constraints, but even with a magnifier, it’s difficult to do them justice for me. If your eyesight is good and you aren’t all thumbs like me, have at it I say. Some of those kits build up into beautiful models.

Mike

Like Mike, I have a little problem with building brail scale. But I can't help picking up some of the kits, and have finished one. I'm collecting 1/72 scale ambulance models and hope to complete a few.
Chuck

I stopped building 1/72 Armor awhile back because I got tired of being laughed at for building toys (by fellow modelers). But, things like this get out of hand in a hurry at scales above 1/72, don't you think ?

One of my efforts a few years ago, it's only 18" x 18". The top odf an old end table we were getting rid of.

I have been building only 1/72 for about 4 months now. You can see examples in my gallery.

Yes, more new kits are being released all the time and for the most part they are getting better and better. Revell probably being the finest examples. Dragon has a new line but I hear VERY mixed reviews about them.

I have to disagree about detail. Most of the 1/35 models I see are built OOB. The newest Revell kits have nearly the same level of detail as the newest Tamiya kits. Yes, this may seem hard to believe but I challenge you to compare for yourself.

And, there is PE being sold for 1/72 as well as resin aftermarket. Plus, the small scale forces you to do many things for yourself that you may not have needed to do in 1/35. I think this makes for better modelers in the long run.

If you would like to see an example of an AMAZING 1/72 model, go to Missing Lynx and look under the constructive comments dg. There is a T34 on the first page that will blow your mind. It looks better than about 99% of the 1/35 models I have seen.

Keep in mind the models are smaller so some detail will not be even be visible. I don't see this as a disadvantage given the quality of the new kits.

Oh, as far as the toy issue - I tend to look at my 1/35 models more as toys now when comparing to my 1/72 kits. It's all a matter of perception!

And, I find myself spending almost as long on my small scale as I do on 1/35. But, I sure like the fact that I can buy 3 or 4 small kits for the price of one new Tamiya kit. And space is an issue too.

Steve

Wait until you try to assemble PE .50cal ammo links in 1/72

Even though most of my kits are 1:35. I really enjoy building 1:72 scale. I find it a lot more rewarding and you get a lot more done in the same time. It can also produce quite equal detail as larger scales. I have seen a few 1:72 scale builds that are very good.

I am currently playing around with 5X 1:72 scale kits and enjoying every moment.

Here is Old Faithful.

If you can do well in Braille Scale (I can't see that well any more) you are flat GOOD! Check out Alberto Casirati's gems at
http://wwi-models.org/Images/Casirati/index.html

Currently, I am going through a braille scale "phase." I like them for a couple of reasons. The first is that a lot of the extras, like interiors and superdetailing, need to be scratchbuilt. This is a big deal for me at least because I can then build something that is completely unique and different because there isn't aftermarket "cut and paste" stuff that can be used to build these items. I also like them because of the cash issue. If I wanted to, I can build an M1A1 HA, an M2A2, and buy the figures for a dio all for about the same amount of money as a good quality 1:35 scale model. Just my 2 cents.
Kyle

...Oooohhhhh, I'm going to get in trouble now. O.K., to begin with. Just to be safe, I'll pose a few 'devil's advocate' questions/observations first.
(man, I know I shouldn't do this )
Even though I have absolute respect and admiration for most "small scale" accomplishments. Is it just me, or, is there a 'separate' measuring stick used with it? In other words, I have admired many a small scale dio, even down to some pretty impressive 'HO' scale mini-dio's. They have all the same basic modeling criteria covered. But, (and here's where my question is thrown to the wolf's) isn't there an immediate shift in our general judgement/critique regarding that model/dio?
I mean, I have observed (in great detail) the difference's between absolutely superb military miniature diorama's that sold (many years ago) for fortune's that had impeccably rendered detail in small scale (old lead miniatures). But, the smaller scale figures (again, old lead figures), were judged identically (again, for 'sale'). The 'issue' being that, even with people spending their hard-earned money on self-stroking vignette's, they still applied a 'different' measuring stick to the smaller scale dios, than the larger scale offerings.
My apologies, but unfortunately I was 'privy' to the adult military miniatures society of collector's early in my life. I spent a decent amount of time going from one 'figure' show, to another, back in the sixties in New York City.
Please don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy the smaller scale's. In fact I am envious of the ability to work in those scale's because of my failing eyesight, but. I also realize from my experience all the way back to my youth, that there is a 'different' sense of measure employed with the scale as well.
That's not to say it's 'less' than anything else. I'm just making the point that our 'perception' is adjusted.....that's all.

Tread.

......still friend's? :-)

I've been building mostly in braille scale since 1968. My first were an old Monogram 1/72 A-1E Skyraider (first run) and a Monogram F7F Tigercat (first run). I started in armor as soon as soon as the local drug store started stocking Hasagawa.

Tread,

I would just put in that oftentimes with the web I find myself looking at the composition of a good diorama, and only after I find out that it is small scale do I actually put more stock in it. I think that the small scale allows for a larger setting, which in turn is more impressive. If I can't tell the detail difference through photos on the web then I'm super impressed.

I can't comment on any opinions re: 1/35 versus 1/72 since I have no experience dealing with other people's judgments between the two.

Stephen

After being away for sometime from modeling I found myself tinkering with this scale less than 4 months ago, I do mostly 1/35 modern armor & I can say that this is a good scale to get into. It was a bit difficult for me from the start but I could say that it's a challenge when I finished my model. Besides from saving you space it's also much cheaper than the 1/35 scale. Just my opinion.

Howdy Cactus,

For the record, I agree. Anytime anyone can make 1/76th scale look like 1/35th scale....well, they've accomplished something is right!
But that just supports my point then doesn't it?

Tread.

Tread

You mean like these from:
http://www.ontheway.us/default.htm

By Philippe Bonnet


By Stephen Brezinski


and by Ludovic Bertrand


These guys build, paint and weather 1:72 scale better than I can do 1:35.

1/72 has come a long way, and it has a lot of up sides to it, like blending in 1/72 aircraft to it, there is very few 1/35 aircraft, the only down size I seen to them is when I put a model together I want to put a model together, the more parts the more challenge, I've seen 1/72 kits that only have 3 or 4 main parts and that is it, to me that isn't putting a model together, somebody else done all the work for you, you are just organizing a few pieces, but then again I have seen soom with over a hundred pieces, now that would be fun to me, but it is knowing which ones are like that and which ones are not. All 1/35 have a lot of pieces, so there is no question. A lot of manufacturers won't put on the box how many pieces, but it is up to the individual on what he or she likes, wheather or not they are up to the challenge, but like they said earlier they are looking more true to real life then ever before, and I been leaning my vote over to 1/72, but I'd never give up on 1/35, I even wished everything was 1/35 so you could intermix, cars and big trucks are 1/24, and tanks and jeeps are 1/35, and you airplanes are either 1/72 or 1/48, there is no way to set them side by side on my shelfs and look right, and it takes a lot more room to separate, or just stick with one theme.

Tread,

I have no idea where you are coming from on this one. I try to be as critical, if not more so, with my small scale than with 1/35.

Yes, they are different scales and maybe that is where the difference lies. But, I don't see 1/72 more like toys that 1/35.

I see 1/72 given the same critical eye as any other scale nowadays!

Steve

Straightedge,

PST for example lists the number of pieces in their kits on their site. www.ontheway.us sometimes has piece listings and almost always has a shot of the sprues. Every new Revell and Hasegawa kit has a million pieces, and I'm not just counting the tracks. Sometimes I find it refreshing to do a Italeri/ESCI kit like the King Tiger currently under construction--I did a few steps and I was done! Now, if that kit only didn't have rubber band tracks that were about 10 scale feet too long!!!

S

I really enjoy building 1/35 scale. But, when I am on a trip and I just have to work some plastic, I go for the 1/72 scale. The detail is really nice and I have seen some work that was truly exquisite, but, I just like 1/35 better. I also do not change mind set when I am judging them. The quality of the work is what is important in whatever scale is being judged.
capnjock

I have to admit i recently started soing some more small scale stuff. the detail in the current crop of kits is superb, just look at the Extra tech stuff. they also allow people who don't have much room to try to create things they wouldn't dream of in 1/35. For example, italeri are planning a small scale DUKW. Now i hve always wanted to do a dio of a few coming into land on a beach. I would never have done it in 1/35 but i am now contemplating it.

Great thread, lots of great view points, all well put.

I like 1/72 as a diversion from 1/35th. It's fun to build and is less expensive less space limits etc. As far as detail goes. There are some people who go crazy and add detail just as much as they would in larger scales.
My feeling from a 'builders' perspective is that if I can pull off a technique in 1/72 scale that makes my diorama look like a bigger scale then I do judge it differently. So bottom line I think there is a 'different view point' I don't think that that is bad, just different.
In the movie industry you don't judge a short film the same way you judge a feature length film.

I think that's a great analogy. I like to see fantastic work in all scale and subjects; I just maybe think about each one a differently.

Stephen

This is really cool guys! 1/72 is really close to my heart. I started out by getting the 1/72 Union infantry when I was 8 yrs. old. I saw a reenactment, and decided to re-create the battles, etc. Back then my philosophy was "why spend $6 on 4 figures, when I can spen $4 and get 50 troops?" Then I got interested in learning more about what I was painting. Which eventually led to me graduating Ohio State with a degree in History.
I gave up 1/72 when I stopped winning awards at local fairs, and the 1/35 stuff took home all the ribbons. Seeing all of your posts, I've decided to dive back into 1/72 scale (while keeping up with my big stuff...) I wonder if my detailing will be better now, after a few years of practice!

Howdy fellas,

Just checked back on this thread. Apparently there's been some very well thought out input on the subject posted. Not a surprise, since there's such a great bunch o' bloke's here!
Thx Savage for the link and the pics on the small scale stuff...very nice execution. Especially the 'T-55 'Enigma'...very nice.
And sniper. I understand your 'misunderstanding' of the point I'm trying to make. It really is just a matter of perception. And the very best way I can think of describing my point (at least in words), is this; IMHO (I'm prefacing), The most ACCURATE...(just waiting a moment for the word to stop resonating)...example of a miniature replication of anything, is a version built that truly appears like a miniaturized version of a 1:1 scale example of the thing itself! Meaning, that if you could literally use a "Honey, I shrunk the kids" raygun on the real thing, and shrunk it down to either 1/35th scale, or 1/72nd scale, or 1/350th scale . or 1/700th scale, or...........Then, you would have the most accurate rendition of the model in question! Now, anything less than that, becomes an exercise in 'perception'.
At this point I'll do my best to alienate the 'floaty' guys. Most of the warships I've seen built are extremely good examples of model building. But the same 'touchstone' should be applied IMO. A 'beginnning' point should be the (let's just call it ) 'Honey, I shrunk' version. Then judge from that 'baseline'. Believe me, I'm not trying to 'stir the pot' or anything. All I'm doing, I think, is saying what needs to be said, and not what needs to be heard.
My apologies.

(Please don't throw anything at me )

Tread.

Oh. And to give you an example of something looking like a miniaturized version of a 1:1 scale real thing....look at Gunnies work. He tends to depict 'clean' example's, with no overdone weathering, etc. But his models are superb in regards to adhering to the 'Honey, I shrunk' analogy.
BTW, Gunnie did not pay, reimburse, or recompense me in any way to say the above