I have come to the conclusion that most people that receive kits to review are in fact not reviews it's a preview.
You can only call it a review if you have built the kit and talked about any issues or errors.

I mean you don't review a hotel by looking a pictures you have to stay there first.
Or if you are to review a game you need to play it first before making any comments.
You tube are full of people reviewing kits with the sprues still in the poly bags hows that a review.

I agree. I hate 'in-box' reviews.

You're right. It's a preview not a review. Though I have gotten to the point where just looking at parts on the sprue and the instructions I can determine if I'll buy a kit.

I can deal with most production problems because in my experience two thirds of them are user error and it's all part of the hobby. If I wanted ease of assembly I'd stick to DIY hex key furniture.

DIY hex key furniture...



I almost woke up my wife laughing ....:-)


Hey Karl (and I mean this with no animosity )
At this time there is a saturation of new and up-dated releases. this makes it easy to volunteer and complete a build review.

I did and I was amazed at the wonderful level of focus it gave me to accomplish the build - and I was enlightened as to the time suck it can take to do a step by step build review.

But I would do it again in a heart beat.
( Jim.../hint/hint/ ...LOL )

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/review/12234

From what I have seen these past few years here on AoA, (sic) is a group of fellow modelers that are wonderfully happy to acknowledge and support the positives of the craft, and any attempt to share.


I always am eager to see a BUILD review !

Your review on Trumpeters 2S7 SPG is how to do a review.
I know reviews if done properly are time consuming but they should be done at some sort of level as your review.

I agree that opening the box and providing photos of intact sprues isn't a review. It is definitely a preview. However, I do believe that a preview is valuable to the community.

I rarely buy a kit as soon as it is released. I wait to see the sprue shots or photos of the instructions to see if the investment is worth it.

As my stash has got larger, I am buying fewer kits and am being more selective.

Having said that, a good build review is important to the hobby as well. As others have said, the quantity and pace of kit releases makes it almost impossible to get a build review done of everything that comes out in a timely manner.

Both types of review have their merits. A build review is usually more valuable than a simple peek-in-the-box but sometimes the simple peek-in-the box can provide valuable information like:
1. Amount of flash ?
2. Horrible sink marks ?
3. Vinyl tyres have already softened/damaged the styrene parts?
4. Resin kits: Lots of air bubbles ruining surface detail?
5. Are the wheels circular? Yes, I have a couple of resin kits where the wheels are not round ...
6. Packaging. Poor packaging can cause broken and/or missing parts.
7. Warped parts? Applies to both resin and styrene kits
8. Decals. Well printed or is everything messy and off-center?
9. Detailing. Soft, minimal, crisp, other adjectives?
10. Resin or styrene missing from some parts? Has happened ...
11. Umpteenth re-issue, molds for injection molded kits are showing their age with increasing flash and misalignments.
12. One piece gun barrels. Does the two half cylinders line up properly?
13. Exaggerated release angles turning rectangular boxes into pyramids?
14. Parts breakdown. Too few parts can lead to missing/clumsy details. Too many just creates more work and more chances of making mistakes when building.
15. Overly thick and clumsy parts ?

Build review adds value like:
1. Can it be assembled without too much fuss.
2. Fit of parts?
3. Can warped parts be persuaded into fitting despite being warped?
4. Does the reviewer know the real thing and can he/she point out errors? Will it look like the real thing once assembled?
(I'd rather take a slightly difficult and correct kit vs an easy build which is incorrect)
Some build reviews assemble the parts and say that there were no problems without noticing some dimensional or detail errors (Black Plague is in a league of it's own, incorrect AND difficult to assemble).

/ Robin

Having done both in-box and full build reviews, I think there's a crucial third dimension that Robin hints at - does the reviewer know enough about the subject to say if the kit resembles the real thing? I've seen in-box reviews that tell me loads about the accuracy of the kit (as well as a handy parts-breakdown that might help me pick donors for kit-bashing), and full builds that tell me nothing other than that the parts do/don't fit together. Ideally we'd have full builds that tell us about history and accuracy of the parts too, as well as how they go together, but given a stark choice between knowledge only or fit only, I'll take the in-box with knowledge every time.

A typical in-box review generally takes me about a full day to complete, including photography, photo editing, and writing text. That's time I take away from the hobby of building my stash. A build review can easily add another 3-5 days (build, photos, more text) spread out into those precious hobby hours I don't have enough of. So, I reckon I've averaged maybe a 4:1 ratio of in-box to build reviews simply because there's never enough time. Now, if we could get every knowledgeable modeller out there to do a build review per quarter, then maybe we'd have enough resource to go around!

"Previews" are fine if they actually add something to the existing sprue shot article pages that are out there. Some I've seen had close-ups at different angles rather than just straight on, but frequently there's no explanation of what it's trying to show.

I saw one review where the guy spent a long paragraph complaing about a kit's packaging. There was nothing wrong with it and no damage, but he didn't like end-opening boxes because he liked using the kit box as a tray while building. He reduced the kit's score because of it. The entire packaging realm can be handled in short order:

Packaging was adequate to prevent damage.
Packaging was inadequate to prevent damage.

Anything more is unnecessary and suspicious. Is it word-padding to cover up poor coverage of something important?

Knowledge of the subject is also a necessity to add any value. A preview that says something like "Not used in the build are parts on sprue F are most of the parts needed to make version used in 1943. The missing engine covers can be easily made from sheet plastic."

I have seen a number of build reviews where the writer just isn't a very good modeler. When I see joints slathered in putty, mold seams in the middle of parts, and sprue nubs left on edges, I really question whether the "poor fit" is the fault of kit's engineering.

KL

I will read a in box review to hear opinions and 1st impressions,but i'm not plunking down my money until I see some build logs or build reviews.

I don't in-boxes. They help me to see the quality of the plastic and detail before I decide to buy or not. I find build reviews most helpful, I will admit but they aren't as easy to do as in-boxes so they are done as often for a certain kit. I will not deny that some people do in-boxes better than many others. There's one person on a different website whose in-box reviews I can't stand for various reasons. Two of which is that he goes into great detail on a BOX ART review and he only describes what sprues hold what. That's nice and all but he mentions next to nothing on the quality or any other aspects of the kit. I tend to avoid his reviews (not naming anyone obviously). Cookie Sewell does pretty good reviews though. If there's a new kit I'd definitely look for his review.

Im a bit confused... there are a bunch of people who have formulated and made honest opinion about whats right/wrong with in box and that there should be no such thing... why is there still a list of samples when there are so many people who know what it should be? Stop talking and start volunteering your time to build those kits, take photos every step of the way, write down your progress and everything that slows it down about the kit and the build, and finish it in a timely fashion and get it published!

I personally say kudos and thanks to those people who put their own kit aside and contribute ANYTHING to Kitmaker network, weather it book, build, in box review or moderating forums, all the behind the scene stuff that goes on.... not the least of which are the people who have to actually ship these kits out and track their progress!

Back when I was building as a teenager we didn't have fancy digital cameras for doing our step-by-step reviews; we had to do oil paintings. Really tended to draw out a build.

One thing I really liked about the modeling scene in Japan was that kits were sold unsealed so you could open the box in the store and do your own hands-on in-box (p)review. The build reviews are valuable as sources of information for problems that don't reveal themselves until you actually try to insert Tab A into slot B. But I can certainly understand how tedious it must be to try to do a thorough review when you are also trying to focus on your build.

Well, here I am. I'm one of those guys, who voluntarily use my precious spare time contributing to this forum, by writing reviews. Yes, I mostly do those dreaded In-box's, and the reason is very simple; time!
It really take me a lot of hours to build a kit, so it has to be a somewhat special kit, if a take on the big task of doing a full build review or a feature.
I totally agree with Mr. Nilsson on his perspectives on the two different types of reviews. The facts of the subject is important to incorporate in the review, but even after a thorough search, something might have slipped under the radar or down right incorrect, and then you guys with better knowledge, are to step in. I've been corrected some times before, and hopefully will again, if making a mistake.
Bottom line is, that we "In-boxer's" really try to inform you all about a certain kit in the best way possible. And to be honest, I actually thought it was appreciated more.
But maybe, as Brian suggested, someone more dedicated should take over the task, and show us all how it's done
Btw, we actually also pay the full postage for the kit, which in my case is around 35$, and if the package is caught in customs, it's an extra 25$ on top
Regards
Jacob

In a perfect world, Armorama would have hundreds of good writers who could receive a kit, build it in a matter of days, and then write an intelligent (and intelligible) build review. Hell, they would do a step-by-step build with photos.

But this isn't a perfect world. Jim Starkweather's videos of his "mail call" days show that the site gets TONS of products every week. And if Armorama doesn't get those kits reviewed quickly, they fall off the conveyor belt of the Internet and y'all don't even care.

What's worse, though, is the manufacturers stop providing review samples. If you're rich and retired and build lots of models, you can pay for kits and then review them. But for a site like this, review samples are essential to having a robust reviews section.

Then there's the problem with "contributors" who ask for kits or accept them when offered, and then take FOREVER (or worse, NEVER) to finish their reviews. Part of Darren Baker's job is running down the slackers who can't bother to finish their reviews. Yes, I know, life happens and sometimes we don't finish a review quickly because we're all volunteers here for the most part. But if you want to review a kit, you need to finish your reviews in a timely manner.

Do in-box reviews matter? I think they do. I can tell a lot from them when someone talks about the level of the molding, the amount of flash, what the decals look like and what camo schemes are offered. And given the gossipy nature of the Internet these days, we frequently hear about kits with problems well in advance of receiving the review sample.

That allows a good reviewer to acknowledge the controversy, yet still write a review based on his or her experience of the kit.

So if you feel reviews could be better, step and be part of the solution.

My post should read "I don't mind in-boxes." I forgot to edit it before time expired.

We sort of figured it out from the context


In-boxes are like in-laws, some are good and some you can do better without

/ Robin

I like Bills, Jacobs and Robins approach.
Personally, I do prefer built reviews also, however, before every building process, there is an unboxing of some kind. As long as a built review follows the in-box and there is information about the history and specifications given, it is totally awesome.

Time is a scarce resource and as such, many might just not have the time to finish reviews to the standards of some people. As such I am rather having problems with quick, zero research reviews, no matter whether they are in-box or built review. But after all, credit must be given to those doing reviews as it takes up a lot of time when done properly! Prost to you Jacob, great input there, without In_boxes, there would be no base to go by.
Have a great evening all.

A slightly different angle to the whole build/review thing:
I subscribed to a modelling magazine for a year or so many years ago. They had build/review features for new/newish kits.
There was a short section about the real thing, then a few lines about the contents of the kit. Maybe a quarter of a page about various faults, errors and omissions that the builder had fixed in some way, a few pictures showing the general area where the correction had been done and then 2 or 3 pages detailing how the author had painted and weathered the model.
I stopped subscribing after a while.
I wanted to get information about how to fix the faults, not that part X was incorrectly detailed and this was fixed with some strips and a bolt head. I couldn't care less about the painting and weathering, I have my own style for that part of the whole process.

I also did a build/review for a website (Dragons first Kugelblitz kit). I wrote what I would like to read. Described and showed in detail where the faults were, sunk areas of plastic, shallow hollows, drilled out the muzzle brakes, fixed atachments for the spare track links, drilled out the track links to insert track pins so that the links could hang properly instead of being glued to the armour.
This vehicle probably never made it out of the factory gates so it was painted factory fresh.

Did I get any feedback regarding the work and information?
I slightly disappointed remark about not having done any weathering ... It was my kit bought with my credit card so I build and paint it whichever way I want to
Oh well, differences of taste and preferences I suppose
/ Robin

Both the in-box review/preview & the build review generally provide the rest of us with useful info on kits and AM items. I appreciate the time & effort spent by the folks doing these reviews. Sure, there sometimes are pointless or irrelevant blabs re; someone's personal preference, but what I look for is the info pertinent to a kit I'm considering buying/building as noted by several others in their posts. I'll also try to find more than one review on a kit when possible. If I had the means, I'd get a digital camera & learn how to load pics, and sign up for a review.

G'day everybody

Having read all of the above posts, which were not only interesting but also informative, is anybody doing or planning to do a review of the Takom King Tiger with interior? To my knowledge, there are at least three different versions, but to date the review pages have been curiously silent on the matter.

Regards

Rob

Rob, according to the list of samples accessible from the front page, no, there isn't one in the pipeline; there are some Takom kits, but not a KT. I don't know if all the Takom kits get sent, Darren or Jim may be able answer that.

I think inbox or previews are fine but I might be a bit bias
If someone opens the box and tells me, the hatches have no inside detail, the tracks are bad, the decals don't give many options, and the 5 figures in it all have really bad detail/faces............ well that helps me a lot. If the same reviewer than opens the same tank from a different company and says its much better then that also helps me a great deal. The better the knowledge the reviewer has the better the review.....hopefully.

Just some points....
You can get great text but bad pics
You can get pics with not much text
Someone who started modelling 5 minutes ago can do a review
Someone can do a review whose been modelling for ages but cant build a kit and blames it on the model kit.
Sometimes someone can build a kit and paint it and it just doesn't do the kit justice.

Sometimes a reviewer can spend a day or days doing a review which is their time and money and the audience reads it, thinks that's great, goes and buys it but doesn't leave a comment or thankyou to the reviewer. So the reviewer says to himself.....well what's the point of doing more reviews!!
Just a example of this and I am not whinging at all but will use this a an example..... I posted pics of a model show (armour pics) it got 1080 views on this site but only 5 people made a comment. Or a review that gets 11600 views and only 10 comments. Sometimes you ask is the effort worth the reward/comments

Sometimes someone can do a review in their own time and means well, than you get a "smarter Wiser BETTER COOLER Modeller" rip into the review saying what's wrong with it. This might be why some people may not be keen on doing reviews.

All in all I say both inbox/preview and builds are great. As I say and do.......if you don't like a review just move on to one you do like. If you don't like or think most are good enough....do your own

One last thing, reviews take a lot of time be it pics or videos. Its not a simple/fast 5 minute thing, so if you read or view a review/build take the time to say thanks to the reviewer

Just my thoughts

Takom sends kits at random points and Meng does not to my knowledge.

When I did reviews, comments were nice but I measured how useful the review was more by how many looked at it. I did way more reviews on reference material than kits since I don't really count myself as a rivet counter. But even if I miss something, I can count on experts leaving comments on what I miss (which I appreciate).