It's my pleasure to present a special page on "Unseen Dio's & Unshowed Vignettes" showing around a dozen dioramas built by Geng - my former modeler that have never been named or listed in my menu.

Sample pics :









For more pics, please visit my special page :

http://www.falconbbs.com/model26e.htm

Have fun!

Hmm, I wonder what the Pzr IV exhaust is doing on the edge of the 88mm emplacement in the first pic?

There's a mouldseam on the 88mm shell about to be loaded into the 88 in pic two, and the rangefinder (in front of the 88) is not holding his rangefinder...

Some good camo painting in pic 3, pitty that the poor bases let them down.



Cheers
Henk

I like how these models are painted (especially the chocolate chip pattern) but I must agree that bases leave a lot to be desired. In some cases they seem to be just thrown together and it shows. Not a lot of attention to detail. In the last photo you can actually see the plaster drips on the wall and there was no attempt to smooth those out. Too bad because these could be outstanding dios.

Way too many knock out pin marks and seams on these. It makes it looks as if they have just been assembled...not built. I hope you're not paying your workforce too much Phaisal. You should maybe have a go at building one yourself......

Vinnie

I know you're happy with them Phaisal, but the sinkmarks on the inside of the shield of the 88 in pic two are really a no-no. I'm not a rivet counter, and often cover little mistakes or inaccuracies with a tarpaulin, camonet or stowage or such, but if I sell a model, I would not sell it with suchs glaring mistakes. I know you expect your builders to work double quick, but this is sloppy work.

It seems that your builders are good painters, maybe it would be better to have the models displayed on a blank wooden base.

Cheers
Henk

Have to agree with the others. Hope you are not paying too much for these. They are quite sloppy. Lots of seam lines, unfilled ejector pin marks, drips in plaster on walls, sloppy bases, not much attention to detail, etc. The Panver IV exhaust on the side of the 88 emplacement looks totally out of place as well. I know you think they are great and you are happy with them, but the quality is not that great and should be much better for "professionally" built pieces that you are paying for. I wouldn't brag about them.

Why don't you build a few and show us your work, then we can help you to improve. You would probably get a better response than showing mediocre pieces by supposedly "professional builders" who you pay to do them.

Frankly, they are ripping you off with that level of quality.

No dude. It's a hand gesture, accompanied by the words, "Ah what a glorious morning to blow stuff up."

A pity, these are close to being very good, just need some tweaking. By bigest question the the WWI guys is whether or not an 88 would be in a hardened position like that in an anti-tank role rather than AA. Seems to go against the whole "Blitzkrieg" concept. I ask because I have no clue. WWII isn't my bag.

thanks for sharing!!
very excellent!
Ron

Yes, the 88 was used extensively as a AT gun, and very succesful. It would however not be positioned in a building as depicted in this dio, as it would have meant manhandeling the monster in position...
The dollies are detached from the riggers when the gun is in postion, and in this position the forward dolly would be in the far corner, and impossible to remove.

Cheers
Henk

Thanks. I knew it was used in the AT role, as that's how I build the ones I do. (still have some leftover wheel sets) Just couldn't see the sense of the hardened position in that particual role. My main two efforts are artillery and IDF these days.

Great looking dio's thanks for showing them.

Ron

Is that one dio in pic 3, or several placed together for the shot? In pic2 & 3 you can actually see the lumps of glue or putty that have been used to stick the figs to the base. No attempt to even hide these. The American 'dio' is particularly bad. several figs are just floating off. Good figs. Crap dios.

Many thanks for your kind comments, Henk, Marty, 18Bravo and Ron!

For the others that complained about the quality of the dio's, they probably did not read
the text that comes before the pictures in my page which says "Their quality is not so decent,
so viewers' discretion is adviced". They have no rights to complain, they have been warned!

We are not complaining. Simply pointing out that they are not up to the qaulity that one would expect for "professionally" built pieces. When you post something for review and comment, don't get upset if every reply isn't, "Hey, that is wonderful, the best _____ (insert model here) that I have ever seen." Especially if it is of inferior quality. If you can't take some constructive criticism of your precious "Professional Builders," don't post their works. Some of us do tell it as we see them. If that is not to your liking, oh well, we are being honest. Blowing sunshine up everyones a%$ and saying everything is always great doesn't help anyone to improve their skills.

Furthermore, as far as I can tell from the posts, everyone is talking about the pictures you posted here. I for one didn't even look at your web page. There is no disclaimer here to their quality.

I think it's a waste of time, Gino. He's not the builder, the builder's don't seem to care since they get their bucks, and Phaisal doesn't seem to be able to see the difference between these dios and even the more average ones on this site. I try not to comment on his pix, but I just can't restrain myself sometimes