Etched Metal - Why?

[dabhand]

Never was taken to replace aptly shaped, if overscale, parts with 'flat' etched parts,  Even those metal replacements incorporating 'detail' on otherwise flat surfaces eg large coolant vents/intakes such as on the Ju87 etc. I note some manufacturers pre-paint such parts and wondered if this lead to more problems than solutions eg marching colours used/fixative damaging paint finish/bending [perhaps] flaking such paint off etc.

 

Each to their own for sure, but given the standard of detail often provided on modern injection moulded kits, what advantages do 'etched metal' parts offer?  

 

 

[peebeep]

Whatever floats your boat at the end of the day. Personally I find a nicely executed panel or console superior to equivalent plastic parts. True, some PE can appear to be two dimensional, although there are ways to improve upon it, such as blobs of PVA on throttle and mixture handles etc., but comparing say a moulded gunsight/HUD frame against PE? No contest. Also a basic ship model can be transformed with PE into something spectacular. The thing is there's no law that says you must use everything on the fret, if a plastic part is perfectly satisfactory I wouldn't use PE. 

[Bish1707821547]

No matter how well detailethe kit, it still can't match the detail of much of the PE and resin sets. It is true that not all the PE included is often useful, the trick is knowing what not to use. I have never had a problem with colour matching, in many cases the IP is a different colour to the bulk of the pit.

Each to their own for sure, but i'll stick to spruching upaircraft with PE if i can.

[Dooberon]

I'd say etched detail, well the ones I've used (eduard) are 2.5 D. A lot of the detail you bend into shape like the seatbelts, or like the instrument panels you stick one piece to another to create depth. They look extraordinary. As for paint matching, that is something to bear in mind, but I just simply adjust the paint to look as close to the etch as I can. Some variation can look quite nice too. Whether or not you need it depends entirely on you, if you can't see through the canopy a cockpit set is probably a waste, though sometimes it is really handy and the detail is sometimes mind boggling. I remember using a set for a Mig 21, the first time, it gives you details you never see in plastic, like handles coming from the panels, mirrors, tiny little vanes and antennaes. Really cool stuff but quite tricky to use, can't hurt to get 1 set and see if you get on with it.

[Ratch]

I think 3-D printed details will make etch virtually obsolete.

[Bish1707821547]

I think 3-D printed details will make etch virtually obsolete.

I doubt it, especially the very small parts. I have used 3D pruinted parts and they are nice. But they are fragile and have a rough surface. I certainly can't see 72nd control leavers o for a cockpit in 72nd. There is a place for both.

[peebeep]

At the moment PE is far more cost effective. I've got some 3D printed panels, but they're hideously expensive for what you get. The sets below are exquisitely printed, but cost nearly fifteen quid between them.

 

/media/tinymce_upload/6c5efa4e08de19902689b55b55f1aed9.JPG

 

/media/tinymce_upload/a1b5a338ca652b72d5e62731f6e104c1.JPG

 

/media/tinymce_upload/43b8b9932b6f39c8c3723e96932d8057.JPG

 

[Cornishfrogboy]

If you built 1/350 (or 1/700) scale warships, then you would see exactly why Photo Etch can be such an amazing material. Railings, Lattice Masts, Radars etc etc are transformed from at best, over scale blobs into something difficult to distinguish from the real thing.

etch can be great for aircraft flaps, bomb bays and panels also. Clearly other items, such as multi layered instrument panels are often better in resin.

As in all things, what you spend is often directly related to the finished result (along with modelling skills).

As a recent example..

USS Nimitz 1/350 scale kit (£145), 

Etch £120

extra aircraft x 60 £75

Etch and individual transfers for all 80 aircraft £90

lighting kit £15

Decent flight deck decals £35

Just building the kit straight out of the box would have been very disappointing indeed and I would not bother. With the fully fabricated Hangar deck (scratch built) and all of the above, the result was very satisfying. If I could only have purchased one of the above items.. it would have been the ships photo etch or possibly the individual air wing decals. You gets what you pays for.

[dabhand]

I can see the benefits that PE offers for smaller scale kits eg warships.boats etc, but can see no real benefits for larger scale kits especially given the current standrards of moulding.  but it's a case of what ever floats yur boat i guess! 

 

And just in case I appear totally anti, I have recently used some etched in a 1.48 stuka I was buiding!

[Bish1707821547]

Even in 35th scale, etch has an advantage. PE tool clamsp are much finer than clunky plastic ones, even on the most modern kits. Its true that with many of the more recent kits PE is not needed as much on those from the 90's, but it certainly has its users on the best kits. It would have been tricky to replicate the track guards on this Tiger with the plastic kit parts. And even with Dragon slide moulding, the side skirts were still to thick to be displayed removed from the hull.

[Sailorman]

Everything has a use in model making.  As I recall when Gerry Adams was bulding the model of Stingray for the TV series in the 1960's they had used the top of a common bathroom tap for the ratemaster (read propellor) similar to the one shown here.   The model is the Comet Miniatures vac-form which had a specially moulded part ......but you might remember the types of tap that was used on the original Stingray.  They were very popular in the 1960's.

So the rule is  ........there is no rule.  There is room for anything and everything in model making./media/tinymce_upload/b0479639483285eb2dccf2907468d893.jpg

/media/tinymce_upload/af1411a471b60d4c5bf264fcff892173.JPG

[Kenneth ONeill]

Eduard tampo-printed pre-miscoloured photo etched is a step too far IMO. Older sets where the panel was bare brass relief etched, with a photo film backing for the gauges produced a much better result by paint and dry brush the panel face and paint the reverse of the film white for gauge needles and markings.

[Darrin Bransgrove]

This definitely a thorny subject. Initially, I hated PE. As is well known, the superglue seems to stick everything else except the part to the kit. But I persevered and got some tools, and with practice have become vastly better than early days. Simply put, if you are happy with what the kit gives you and can create something you are pleased with, steer away from PE. However, if you want a nice, neat instrument panel, for example, PE results can be stunning. Same with seatbelts. But its not just about enhancing detail that might be already present, but adding detail left off. For example, I'm currently adding on the superb detail set from Atlantic to Airfix HMS Daring. This includes beautiful antenna array that improve the kits, but also railings and other parts that are not present. It has nearly driven me to an early grave, but I can see the final result will be impressive and an enormous sense of satisfaction.

[peebeep]

"Each to their own for sure, but given the standard of detail often provided on modern injection moulded kits, what advantages do 'etched metal' parts offer?"

In my opinion there are some parts that work very well in PE, others less so, for instance seat harnesses, grilles and framing can look very good. Where it falls down is in trying to replicate parts that have sectional shapes, a flat piece simply doesn't cut the mustard. I think one thing to bear in mind is that there's no law that says you must use every single part off of a PE fret.