On 1/17/06, Dr. Core <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just think classifying an item "model' or "not" would be by assembly method but not by available means of customization.
It's in vinyl & paint, so 5 parts are probably okay. The only thing I see is that it's assembled vs un-assembled.
No, I'm not hang with vinyl. Would you think vaccu-form model "models"? it's even more different for assembly versus our "model on a tree", but it's a model nevertheless.
Actually, I'm fine with what you listed out and think GC WB as an orthodox model; I'm just saying the GC BZ or GC QM wouldn't be more distant than GC WB as a model. In fact you're assuming me on the wrong direction.... I wouldn't just put GC BZ/QM to between MSiA/model only for their vinyl part but not GC WB as there's none... they're both "not as model as I expect" for me. GC WB seems to be just a stand for GC line when it's designed.
Okay. But if so we'd only have EX models in Gundam as "models", and dammit even EX don't need glue.... I still think traditionally that you need glue & paint to consider a model finished, but I found HGUC/MG is just fine as models, only with clever design and material... kinda like good ol' SF3D/Ma.K with good part design.
I think our discussion here get a bit far form GML
purpose and start to bore people. I'd be happy to accept GC WB as
model, especially as I indicate assembly method would be the big point
on defining "model".
To me, assembly vs customization is purely semantics. 'assembly' is
the 'means', 'customization' is the 'ends'. You choose to define
typical by assembly, fine... if you want. But why do I care about
assembly? Only thing I can think of is customization.
I just think classifying an item "model' or "not" would be by assembly method but not by available means of customization.
> I think I'd refine the way I am trying to ask you: why'd you think GC
> BZ is less orthodox than GC QM or GC WB. Even if they don't assemble
> the upper body of GC BZ, it'd just be probably 5 pieces... only that
The 1/550 kit takes 12 parts to do that one single
(pre-assembled/pre-painted) part in 1/400 GC BZ.
It's in vinyl & paint, so 5 parts are probably okay. The only thing I see is that it's assembled vs un-assembled.
> they're bigger chunks of vinyl than the GC QM's body. For GC WB, I
> can take your word of it as I can't tell which pieces are vinyl and
> which are styrene, yet for assembly they're probably still different
> from HGUC/MG type assembly method. Correct?
GC WB is middle of the road typical conventional orthodox average
unadventurous like HGUC/MG. GC WB sits somewhere between an HGUC and
the old 1/1200 kit. GC QM sits somewhere between HGUC and MSIA.
I think perhaps for you it's not about customization or assembly. You
have a hang-up about vinyl so in your mind QM and BZ are in the same
class despite the fact that assembly philosophy is so difference.
No, I'm not hang with vinyl. Would you think vaccu-form model "models"? it's even more different for assembly versus our "model on a tree", but it's a model nevertheless.
Well here is a complete list of vinyl parts in GC WB:
1. Gundam
2. Guncannon
3. Guntank
Rather less, proportion-wise, than HGLM Eva and MG Patlabor. There's
also some use of metal screws, about a little less than PG models.
Ok, we covered customization, assembly and materials. Now you will
still disagree with me, and I will still be wondering why you disagree
with me. So we are actually still stuck at square one.
Actually, I'm fine with what you listed out and think GC WB as an orthodox model; I'm just saying the GC BZ or GC QM wouldn't be more distant than GC WB as a model. In fact you're assuming me on the wrong direction.... I wouldn't just put GC BZ/QM to between MSiA/model only for their vinyl part but not GC WB as there's none... they're both "not as model as I expect" for me. GC WB seems to be just a stand for GC line when it's designed.
You confused my point, I wasn't putting MSIA inside the model range, I
am putting HGUC kits in the so-toy-like-it's-barely-model bin.
Okay. But if so we'd only have EX models in Gundam as "models", and dammit even EX don't need glue.... I still think traditionally that you need glue & paint to consider a model finished, but I found HGUC/MG is just fine as models, only with clever design and material... kinda like good ol' SF3D/Ma.K with good part design.
--
Boaz
http://myturnaspace.blogspot.com
