I just read Paul Owens comments on weathering and he is spot on.

The tendency today is for cartoonish weathering of AFVs. Ripped, rusted and damaged paint flaked tanks with tons of stowage, cans, bottles and even the kitchen sink. They look "neat" but not very realistic.

I would like to discuss this with other tread heads since my frustration level is rising steadily.

I usually spend consideable time researching my modeling project on both the net and my library. To build a historically accurate, properly weathered model and be beatened by some cartoon tank really frosts me.

Some examples of my work can be found on the OCIPMS web site. www.ipmsoc.org
Look at the gallery Section and check out the first Member Gallery. Let me know what you think.

GSP

I agree that this is often overdone, but I think it depends on what your trying to re-create. In a lot of the Desert Storm pictures I have the vehicles are loaded very heavily and quite dirty. Also in a dio with mud the tank would look pretty odd if it where clean. I will also say a tank covered in mud sitting on a shelf by it's self looks odd to me also. During some time periods there was lot of rust and at others there is hardly any. Same goes with most other effects. But if I saw for instance a Desert Storm M1A1 that wasn't dirty and packed with gear it would look out of place to me. If the same tank had a bunch of rust it would also look odd. Just depends on the situation. I would agree that most of the stuff is often overdone but it does have a place. And if someone has fun doing it they should. They arn't building it for me anyway.

Don't let it get to you to much. Maybe judges reward that type of model to much, don't know I have only entered one contest. But if they do just build the way you feel is right (historicaly accurate) and hope for the best. If winning is more important you may have to give the judges more of what they want. Doesn't make it right and but if thats the way it is there isn't much else you can do.

I hope you don't let competitions frustrate you too much, George, or it takes the fun away from modeling.
I was thinking about this very topic earlier today, actually, and I realized that there are two main branches of model making. There's the 'realistic' style, which strives to make an exact replica of the real thing, and there's what I call the 'artistic' (not cartoonish) style. This classification is not just for weathering, but for all phases of modeling, but we'll stick to the topic here about weathering.
General Patton clearly subscribes to the 'realistic' style of weathering, as does Paul Owen, who wrote the "Weathering Heresies" article, I believe. Although I named the other style 'artistic', it does not mean the 'realists' are not imaginative. They are, perhaps, even more so. If they are to throw away the drybrushing they feel is inaccurate, they must develop new techniques that appear more realistic.
The 'artistic' style also has a large following. To these people, the object of modeling is not to make a perfect replica of a subject, but to make something they (and others) will think looks good. They'll do the drybrushing in conjunction with the wash, because of the neat look they believe it gives their model, and it may not be specifically for weathering, but to give it a more 3D appearance. Generally, 'artists' are trying to make a model that looks right, not necessarily one that is right.
Now that I have defined what I believe are the two very broad distinctions of weathering (modeling) styles, we must ask if one is completely wrong, or if one is better than the other. In my opinion, no matter which approach you take, 'artistic' or 'realistic', you are still modeling. We must remember that we are trying to represent something that is considerably larger than the model we have to work with (in most cases 35 times larger). I don't think, then, that weathering is black and white. Because what we are working with isn't real, people are naturally going to have different impressions of what looks real as well as what looks best (these two are not always the same). Judges in competitions are not much different, and this is why one approach does not always triumph over the other.
Having said all this, I also believe that it is not necessary to follow either the 'realistic' or the 'artistic' approach. A modeler is perfectly capable of doing both. For one model, they may wish to approach it from a 'realist's' perspective, while for another they could approach it from an 'artist's' angle. There are aspects of both methods that are enjoyable, so a modeler can certainly do both. He/she can also combine the two approaches, being the 'realist' for one aspect of the model and an 'artist' for another aspect. In the end, it comes down to what you enjoy the most. We should not feel constrained to follow one supposedly 'better' method. After all, modeling is, for most people, a hobby. It's supposed to be fun.

Nic

I am with you on this on GS Patton. It seems anymore, that you have to trash(weather heavily) your vehicle and throw enough gear on it for a squad to compete in a contest. I for one don't want everyone one of my vehicles to look like it has gone to hell and back. But, if I don't, I can't compete. So, it is a catch 22.

Overall, the subject is pretty black and white. This is a hobby. If we want to compete, we have to give the judges what they want. Otherwise, we must do what we like and accept that it isn't competitive.

Lastly, welcome to Armorama. This is a great place visited by great people. And, it is constantly improving.

Just my opinion, but when we took M1A1s out to gunnery in Texas, they looked fairly "clean" with minimal stowage in the bustle racks and nothing over the blast panels. However, when we did REFORGER on M60A3s, the tanks looked like gypsy wagons with all sorts of gear hanging all over it like camouflage sets on each side (in the bags), tarps, MRE cases, bustle rack crammed with duffle bags and ruck sacks. LBE (suspenders, canteen, web belt, Kevlars) hooked to spots on top of the turret or stuffed in a corner of the bustle rack.

Desert Storm was a happy medium with a lot of storage, but not as much as a REFORGER.

Greetings GSP,
I'd like to offer my 2 cents on this topic.
I've been going to model shows for over 15 years now. I've seen the prefered style for building and painting armor models change back and forth between the "artistic" and "realistic" style several times. I now do figures and I'm seeing the same type of thing happen in that arena too. In my opinion (and it's only my opinion), we modellers need to decide what we are in this hobby for. If we want to build models that will win awards at shows, then we will need to follow these trends and build accordingly. If, on the other hand, we are building our models for our own pleasure, then we need simply to decide how we best want our models to appear.
My style of building and painting has changed over the years. Part of it is an improvement in my abilities (I think) and part is a result of seeing other peoples models that I admire. I do enjoy bringing home awards. But that is no longer as important to me as my being pleased with the results of my efforts. In fact, my style of figure painting, and the scale and subject matter, are not what is currently in vogue in the hobby.
Even at my best, I will probably never win a gold medal at a major show. And that's okay with me. I'm very happy with the way I paint my figures. In the end, that's what is important to me.

As someone who has competed for over 20 years and judged at the local and regional level for almost as long, let me give this perspective.
I look at a model for its overall appeal. My prejudice is that weathering is very easily overdone. Tracks and road wheels caked in two scale feet of mud ust don't work for me. Remember, at some point, mud, like snow, will render a vehicle inopperable. If the vehicle is still moving past the mud patch, the wheels and tracks will quickly loose much of the coating unless there's a thatching to hold it together. Snow will quickly melt from anywhere there's heat and will become very gray to black where it stays attached if it has any contact with external dirt. Hatches will lose snow quickly, gun barrels will drop snow almost as soon as the sun comes out. Crews will have to clean vision ports and their view imediately. Anywhere the crew is going to have to step will have to be cleaned immediately down to the paint or crew members will be taking flying leaps to the ground.
As Neil Young said, rust never sleeps. If untreated steel or iron is exposed to the elements, it rusts almost immediately. Look at your drum brakes, your exhaust, even steel disk brake rotors. Unless it's constantly being rubbed, exposed metal will not have a shiny metal look. Rust streaks happen in cars even before the paint has worn complpetely away. After only one winter with blistered paint, a white car will start to show rust streaks. Been there, done that. This was particularly true in cars from the 70's and earliler.
I learned drybrushing as a way if increasing the effect of light on a smaller than life object. The best way to understand this is to look at a painted model where only one color has been used. Except under harsh, direct light it wil look flat. Look at your car in the driveway. There are high point that will look almost white and other shodows will look almost black. Observe someone in a black shirt. There are places where the light hits where ythe fabric again will look almost white and range to depthless black in the shadows. Without some form of shadowing and highlighting, this effect is lost in a scale model.

Hi!
I completely agree with Craig post (see above).
Here in Brazil is the same thing, but contrary, in the contests they're over prizing vehicles with just a little of weathering, and I like it very wethered, so you can figure, I barely took a 3rd in a contest
But I like my models the way they are and I'll stick with them that way, because i got pleasure making them this way, and this is the point ....
Do what you like the way you like (I've read it on someone post here...)
Have fun

Thanks one and all for the encouragement. I thought it was just me seeing this trend, but it seems more universal. So its back to the workbench for me.