As presumably you only bought kits of subjects that interested you and of which you therefore had some knowledge and reference material, I’d be interested to read those reviews regardless of the age of the kit.
The ones that I find least useful are by people who were sent a kit of a subject of which they have almost no knowledge and therefore their qualifications to write such a review are questionable. I’ve had review items myself that fit that description and feel ill equipped to comment intelligently without engaging in extensive research into a subject in which I have no interest, which generally destroys such enthusiasm as I may have had.
So please feel free to write reviews based on your criteria. Of course if you have paid hard currency for them, you also need feel no obligation to be non-critical as you might with items provided free of charge.
Site Talk
Site announcements, comments, or feedback about the site.
Site announcements, comments, or feedback about the site.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Jim Starkweather
Why I Write Reviews For This Site
RLlockie
Joined: September 06, 2013
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 938 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 09:14 PM UTC
j76lr
Joined: September 22, 2006
KitMaker: 1,081 posts
Armorama: 1,066 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 09:27 PM UTC
Write whatever you want to ! Dont let ANYONE discourage you . Take it from where it comes from !
drabslab
Joined: September 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,186 posts
Armorama: 190 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 09:31 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The ones that I find least useful are by people who were sent a kit of a subject of which they have almost no knowledge and therefore their qualifications to write such a review are questionable.
Now this is really interesting!!!!
It would be quite nice if you could explain how you identify the reviews made by people who were sent a kit of a subject of which they have no knowledge
It would spare me a lot of reading
Railspltr
Joined: March 19, 2010
KitMaker: 96 posts
Armorama: 62 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 09:48 PM UTC
I for one thank you for your work. Most of the kits I have worked on are older ones. I have rarely been able to financially justify buying the latest available kit. 
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 11:29 PM UTC
Quoted Text
It needs to be understood that Armorama does not run comparison reviews on the network. We have no issues with information as regards alternate kits being available, but direct comparison is fround upon.
Be interested to know the reasoning behind this decision.
CMOT
Editor-in-Chief
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 12:49 AM UTC
You will have to take that up with Jim as he sets the rules.
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 01:13 AM UTC
Quoted Text
You will have to take that up with Jim as he sets the rules.
Well the questions there for Jim, but if you are repeating the decision one would assume you are party to the reasoning it's in place.
CMOT
Editor-in-ChiefJoined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 01:34 AM UTC
Sorry but this was an instruction I never questioned.
RLlockie
Joined: September 06, 2013
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 938 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 02:11 AM UTC
Well the big clue is usually when they state that in the review. Otherwise I have to go by whether what they write contradicts what I know to be matters of fact but that is obviously only possible if I know anything about the subject myself.
I am not criticising them for lack of knowledge of the subject - as I said, I have been asked to review things of which I have no knowledge - merely pointing out the utility that they have to me.
I am not criticising them for lack of knowledge of the subject - as I said, I have been asked to review things of which I have no knowledge - merely pointing out the utility that they have to me.
joepanzer
Joined: January 21, 2004
KitMaker: 803 posts
Armorama: 740 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 05:13 AM UTC
I would wager that most modelers aren't interested in portraying Baron von Glockenspeil's Panzer9 on 14Mar43. They just want a cool looking model.
I feel that most are concerned more with fit issues, part counts, ease of assembly, etc.
Rock on Mark.
I have that PzIII kit in the stash.
I feel that most are concerned more with fit issues, part counts, ease of assembly, etc.
Rock on Mark.
I have that PzIII kit in the stash.
babaoriley
Joined: June 23, 2017
KitMaker: 195 posts
Armorama: 179 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 06:07 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Now this is really interesting!!!!
It would be quite nice if you could explain how you identify the reviews made by people who were sent a kit of a subject of which they have no knowledge
It would spare me a lot of reading
I can recall a review in which the builder said the instructions were vague and he had to guess where a particular piece went. With two minutes research I could see that he had guessed wrong and had glued the piece in the wrong location, and that made me skeptical of the overall quality of his review. Given that modelers tend to be as picky about accuracy as they are about assembly, painting, weathering etc., a reviewer whose research is sloppy (or completely absent) is probably not doing a good job. I assume that's the sort of thing that might cause someone to think a reviewer isn't qualified.
brekinapez
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 06:24 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
Now this is really interesting!!!!
It would be quite nice if you could explain how you identify the reviews made by people who were sent a kit of a subject of which they have no knowledge
It would spare me a lot of reading
I can recall a review in which the builder said the instructions were vague and he had to guess where a particular piece went. With two minutes research I could see that he had guessed wrong and had glued the piece in the wrong location, and that made me skeptical of the overall quality of his review. Given that modelers tend to be as picky about accuracy as they are about assembly, painting, weathering etc., a reviewer whose research is sloppy (or completely absent) is probably not doing a good job. I assume that's the sort of thing that might cause someone to think a reviewer isn't qualified.
Oh, I had that happen on another forum. When I asked this guy what exactly he wasn't understanding in order to possibly offer some advice because I had not had a problem with the part of the kit in question, he triggered and started accusing me of being some condescending rivet-counter (huh?) who did nothing but criticize the work of others simply to be mean. That was a good indication he probably wasn't ready to start reviewing kits.
brekinapez
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 06:29 AM UTC
Possibly comparison reviews might upset some of the vendors who do business with Jim if they feel people are unfairly trashing their products or a brand favoritism seems to be implied.
JPTRR
Managing Editor
#051
Joined: December 21, 2002
KitMaker: 7,772 posts
Armorama: 2,447 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 07:36 AM UTC
Mark,
Keep reviewing every kit that you want to, latest-greatest or some old slag of plastic from the 1960s. I appreciate all of your reasons and the posts of the many supporters. You will also find that models from out-of-business companies can be useful and popular, too.
Keep up the good work.
Keep reviewing every kit that you want to, latest-greatest or some old slag of plastic from the 1960s. I appreciate all of your reasons and the posts of the many supporters. You will also find that models from out-of-business companies can be useful and popular, too.
Keep up the good work.
PzDave
Joined: November 28, 2012
KitMaker: 319 posts
Armorama: 285 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 07:42 AM UTC
Quoted Text
G'day Mark
Don't worry about the people who complain about your reviews - they're probably those who never contribute anything. I fully support your approach - keep up the good work.
Regards
Rob
PzDave
Joined: November 28, 2012
KitMaker: 319 posts
Armorama: 285 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 07:43 AM UTC
Ditto
babaoriley
Joined: June 23, 2017
KitMaker: 195 posts
Armorama: 179 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 09:40 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It needs to be understood that Armorama does not run comparison reviews on the network. We have no issues with information as regards alternate kits being available, but direct comparison is fround upon.
I wasn't aware of that policy, but house rules are house rules so it's no problem. The reason such an approach would be useful to me is having recently returned to modeling after decades living in a 1:1 scale world, it would be handy to know that Brand A's kit of a certain vehicle is very dated and far less accurate and detailed than the much newer kit from Brand B. However those who have been buying and building kits all that time probably don't need such info as they have direct experience of the brands over the years if not the specific kits.
Thanks for the clarification.
babaoriley
Joined: June 23, 2017
KitMaker: 195 posts
Armorama: 179 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 10:09 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I would wager that most modelers aren't interested in portraying Baron von Glockenspeil's Panzer9 on 14Mar43. They just want a cool looking model.
I feel that most are concerned more with fit issues, part counts, ease of assembly, etc.
Rock on Mark.
I have that PzIII kit in the stash.
Exactly, well said. Fit, degree of difficulty, significant errors--those are the things I want to know about. Representing an individual vehicle is going to be something the modeler will attempt based on photographic evidence, and that's an art form all its own. As for accuracy, IMO the overall artistic impact of a build (e.g. a model that tells a story) counts for more than microscopic adherence to the original blueprints. But the next guy can't live with a model where the toolbox is a millimeter too short, this hobby accommodates many different approaches.
babaoriley
Joined: June 23, 2017
KitMaker: 195 posts
Armorama: 179 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 10:16 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Oh, I had that happen on another forum. When I asked this guy what exactly he wasn't understanding in order to possibly offer some advice because I had not had a problem with the part of the kit in question, he triggered and started accusing me of being some condescending rivet-counter (huh?) who did nothing but criticize the work of others simply to be mean. That was a good indication he probably wasn't ready to start reviewing kits.
Indeed, helpful advice shouldn't trigger a reaction like that. In the case I referred to it wasn't a matter of obsessing over the right number of rivets, it was not realizing that the part in question had a specific job on the real vehicle and gluing it sideways and in the wrong location showed a surprising lack of interest in how the real vehicle worked. All I did was look for photos of real vehicles and the correct position was instantly obvious--it seemed a logical approach given that the instructions were lacking.
barkingdigger
Associate Editor#013
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,981 posts
Armorama: 3,403 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 17, 2018 - 10:26 PM UTC
Mark, you're a man after my own heart! I have added more than a few reviews of old Italeri kits here precisely because I could not find any on-line reviews and felt I should at least share the fruits of my own painstakingly-gathered research to help other modellers. I don't care if anyone says "why bother with that old dog?" because I know there will be others out there who have the kit and find my review via their browser, and even if they don't leave a comment I've helped brighten their day!
As for comparison reviews, I can see the danger that Mfgr X may take umbrage when their shiny new kit comes out bottom. But if I am reviewing "older kit from Mfgr Y" and notice a detail that is better than that on "new kit from Mfgr X" I will say so. (Only if I have proof to back it up, of course! But after several decades in the hobby the depths of my stash are truly scary...) Likewise I will say when the older kit has lumpy detail that was done better in a newer kit. It's all about giving readers the facts so they can decide what to build.
As for comparison reviews, I can see the danger that Mfgr X may take umbrage when their shiny new kit comes out bottom. But if I am reviewing "older kit from Mfgr Y" and notice a detail that is better than that on "new kit from Mfgr X" I will say so. (Only if I have proof to back it up, of course! But after several decades in the hobby the depths of my stash are truly scary...) Likewise I will say when the older kit has lumpy detail that was done better in a newer kit. It's all about giving readers the facts so they can decide what to build.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.