1/32 Kitty Hawk F-5E Kicked Up A Notch. Oct 3/19. Finished!

[jimbo59]

Woo Hoo!  Another chuck build

 

[dodgem37]

Welcome back, girlfriend.  It's good to see your smile again.

 

Sincerely,

Mark

Edited January 11, 2019 by dodgem37

[LSP_Matt]

IIRC I found similar issues to other modellers when fitting the canopy using this resin set. Something to do with the hinge mechanism, canopy rails and seat. HTH.

 

Matty

[chuck540z3]

Thanks guys.

 

5 hours ago, LSP_Matt said:

IIRC I found similar issues to other modellers when fitting the canopy using this resin set. Something to do with the hinge mechanism, canopy rails and seat. HTH.

 

Matty

 

Thanks Matt.  When contemplating whether or not I was going to use the Black Box pit I dry fit the canopy support and it didn't fit too well, but then again, the kit parts don't fit very well either!  Despite the groove in the clear canopy to fit the kit support, they don't even touch without some trimming and modification, so I'm not sure what parts I'm going to use, but it will likely be kit canopy parts attached to BB resin parts.  In any case, I have never seen such a cluttered and complicated array of parts, rods and pulleys on a jet canopy before, which adds to the complexity of this build, but also the opportunity to show-case a lot of interesting detail.

 

Cheers,

Chuck

[Durangokid]

I'm really glad you are doing a build thread on this kit.  This one is on my short list to do and your build threads are always so helpful.

 

Bryan

[chuck540z3]

I have been asked a few times lately how I take pics of my models, so I’d like to share some of my techniques here.  I am not really a big photographer myself and my camera knowledge is limited, but over time, my pics have improved along with my modeling skills as I learn new tricks through trial and error.   To me, taking good pics of our models is mandatory if you are going to display them here, because if I see a model build with crappy pics taken from a phone, I just move on, because you can’t tell if the modeling is good or not.

Below is a cut/paste of a tutorial I did 6 years ago, updated with my current views, with asterisks on what I think are the most important items.

 

 

Taking Good Pics of Your Models

 

Camera

The first thing you need is a decent camera, but owning a fancy DSLR with all the bells and whistles isn’t necessary, but it sure helps. Besides having a good lens and decent resolution of at least 8 MP, the camera needs to have an aperture priority setting, so that you can fix the aperture to a high number, giving a small aperture. The camera also needs to be able to focus on objects from a minimum of 2 feet or less. Zoom lenses help if you need to be further away, but maximum aperture settings often deteriorate as you zoom in. Most point and shoot cameras have a macro setting which is often displayed as a flower for close-ups, but just make sure you can adjust the aperture at the same time if you leave it on this setting.  For the record, I use a full frame Nikon D610 (24 mp) with a 60mm Micro lens for 90% of my shots and occasionally my Nikon D810 (36 mp) for completed model shots.

 

*Lens and Focus

If you can afford it, buy a dedicated “Macro/ Micro” lens and always focus by hand.  Some of the shorter fixed lenses of 50 mm or less work well too, but most zoom lenses don’t have f-stops high enough at the focal lengths you want and sometimes they have distortion.  That’s why they still sell fixed focal length lenses, often at much higher prices that zoom lenses: They quite simply take better and sharper pictures.  Auto-focus should be avoided, because the camera usually locks onto something you don’t want in focus, rather than the area you do.

 

*Aperture Priority

A maximum aperture of “f-22” or higher is recommended for most model photography. With high aperture settings, you can achieve good depth of field, which is critical for close-up or “macro/micro” photography. If you are taking a close-up of your model from, say, 1 foot away at f-3.5, the object you focused on will be in focus, but the parts of the model just in front or behind the focus point will be blurry. With a higher aperture number of f-22 or higher, almost everything a few inches in front and a few inches behind the subject will also be in focus. My macro lens on my camera has a very high maximum aperture of f-36, so almost everything is in focus without any fuss.

 

*Tripod and Self-timer

The next thing your camera needs is a self timer and the ability to fix it to a tripod. With high aperture settings, the shutter speeds will decrease dramatically, so you can’t hand-hold the camera without getting some blurring from shake. Anything longer than about 1/100 of a second will likely have some blur, but you can sometimes hand hold 1/60 of a second if you’re very steady. For maximum apertures of f-22 or more and the lighting I routinely use, my shutter speeds are often one second or more, so a tripod is a must along with a self timer, so that you are not touching the camera when the shutter is released.

 

Lighting

Generally speaking, you can’t have enough light when taking pics, so try to have 2-3 light sources coming from various angles to fill in shadows. Having one light source stronger than the other is OK, which creates a natural looking shadow, but if the light is too strong from one direction, it will overpower what the camera measures for light. If you can find them, there are some excellent coiled gas bulbs available that give off strong natural and balanced light of 3200 to 5000K, which is a “color temperature” close to natural light. They are not expensive- about $8 each- and I use at least 2 of them in goose-neck lamps over my model and sometimes one held in my hand, so that I can direct the light at shadows that I want to tone down as the self timer on my camera takes the pic. Check out “Alzo Digital” here for lamps:

 

Alzo Digital Lamps

 

There are now a lot of LED light sources that do the same thing and although they are more expensive, the prices are starting to come down to the affordable level.

 

White Balance

Colors will shift according to your light source. Fluorescent lighting is greenish in color, incandescent lighting is reddish and natural sunlight is neutral, which is why many modelers take their pics outdoors. You can hand hold many outdoor pics due to the strong light and resultant fast shutter speeds, even at high apertures, but strong sunlight can also produce too harsh shadows, so a cloudy day is often better than a sunny day to take pics. If you’re taking pics under artificial light, you need to compensate for the color shift of your light source and many cameras have a white balance compensation setting, other than “auto”. More sophisticated cameras allow you take a measurement of the colors your light source is sending to your model, by taking a picture of a white card (sometimes grey) as a base line for what is supposed to be pure white, which is saved as a setting in the camera. The pics you take are then color shifted accordingly to provide a neutral look, rather than one that is red looking because you used an incandescent light bulb, etc.

 

ISO

This is the sensitivity of your digital light sensor, with low numbers of 100 to 400 being the most commonly used. ISO settings in this range will give your pics the most resolution, but sometimes you need a higher ISO setting to get the pics you want under poor light. High ISO settings, however, tend to be grainy, with the higher the number the grainier the pic. My camera goes to a smoking high setting of 12,000 (and higher), but the pics will look fairly pixilated. If you have good light and a tripod, you don’t need to worry about using a high ISO setting, so you should leave it as low as possible.

 

Flash

If you own flash umbrellas and light tents, you know a heck of a lot more about photography than I ever will, but for most people who use the built-in flash on their camera, my advice is to leave the flash down and never use it. Flashes tend to totally overpower the front light of the photograph, making them look artificial and washed out. With adjustable external flashes you can bounce the light off the ceiling, etc. to create a more natural look, which might work great for some. I like to use my own external lighting so that I can see what the pic should look like before I take it, rather than what it might look like with a flash.

 

Light metering

Many cameras give you options for how the light is measured on your light sensor, from tiny “spot metering” to versions that measure a wider spectrum in your viewfinder. I generally use the spot metering option, because I can control where the lighting is measured. This isn’t all that important due to “bracketing”, which I also use.

 

Bracketing

Most of the time your pics will be properly exposed automatically, but sometimes you might want a little bit darker or lighter pic as a comparison to choose from. I used to also shoot 1 “stop” under and 1 stop over what the camera measures as correct, so that I had 3 pics for every shot, then chose the best one and deleted the other two.  My camera does this automatically if I set it this way, but you can always do it manually if your camera doesn't have this capability. I sometimes find that the slightly overexposed pic is the best and sometimes it’s the under exposed one, so it's good to have choices.

 

*HDR (High Dynamic Range)

Most DSLR’s have some auto compensation for HDR, to smooth out the dark areas and very light areas of a photograph, but a true HDR photograph on my Nikon camera takes 3 different pics then stitches them together into one, automatically.  This is the single biggest discovery I have made recently, that has improved my photography of models the most.  To do this properly the camera should be on a tripod to eliminate camera shake, which it already is for the reasons above.  The camera takes a properly exposed pic of the very bright areas, then one of the average areas, then a third of the dark areas, then combines them into just one photograph.  Under strong light, close-up photography often has very light and very dark areas in the same pic, so the average of both is measured and taken, which can sometimes still look wrong.

 

*Background

Ideally, you don’t want to see anything in the background, because it can distract from the model. Having all sorts of modeling crap in the background for an in-progress shot can add some nice realism to your photography, but for a finished model, I want to see nothing but the model and maybe the diorama the model is placed on. To accomplish this on a finished model, I use a very easy and cheap background, which is a large roll of white poster paper that is placed on the flat surface like a desk or table and draped up and taped to the wall behind, so that you can’t see any folds. Since your photograph is focused on the model, the background will be slightly out of focus, achieving a nice “nothingness” to the background or as the pros call it, “Bokeh”. For in-progress shots, I usually use a blue background, which creates a strong contrast with the grey plastic parts, making them “jump out” in the pic.

 

File Format

I have some photography geek friends who tell me to always shoot my pics in “RAW” format, so that you can play with all the information the camera has recorded on a computer without the compression (and loss of data) by converting the pic to “jpg”.  I don’t do that, because my pics are already huge at over 7,000 pixels across and when I shrink them down to 1,024- 1,200 pixels across to fit these forum pages, shooting in RAW is overkill.  That’s just my opinion, but it is also shared by some pro photographers like this guy:

 

RAW vs. jpeg

 

*Computer Editing

All pics can be improved and enhanced with photo editing software. Contrast, brightness, shadow compensation, histogram manipulation, color shifting, cropping and sharpening are some of the more common things tweaked after you take the pic. This step is VERY important, because every single pic I take is improved significantly by doing so. This all takes some practice to get it right and there are many software packages out there, but I quite like the standard, free and easy to use “Windows Live Photo Gallery” that comes with Windows 7 and you can also download for free for Windows 10.  I’m sure there are free Apple versions that are equal, or you can step up and buy the Adobe Photoshop software if you want to get really serious, although I never have found the need so far.

 

Now a couple of examples to show depth of field (and show off my models) :

 

 

In this pic of my recent Spitfire, I am using a fairly middle of the road aperture of f-14 that is focused on the engine only.  It is clear and the foreground wing is not, which brings your eye to just the engine.

 

 

 

 

Here I’ve done the opposite, with a focus on the wing and fuselage only, also at f-14

 

 

 

 

For this deep shot, I’m using my maximum aperture of f-36, which keeps the front of the prop all the way back to the front of the cockpit in focus.  Normally, the engine would be in focus and nothing else.

 

 

 

 

Same for my Eagle.  Just about everything is in focus, even though there is lots of depth and potential focus points.

 

 

 

 

FYI, Here is my modeling work area and a computer screen with details of the starboard side of an F-5E, which is quite wrong on the KH kit, that I am currently changing.

 

 

 

 

On the other side of the screen is my small photo-booth, where I take all of my in-progress shots.  For 1/48 scale or small 1/32 models like my Spitfire, it’s all I need, including the shots of the finished model.  For my huge 24” F-15C Eagle, sub-assemblies are OK, but the final shots of the model must be taken elsewhere where I can stretch out a larger background.  This little booth has a small light on either side that usually provides enough lighting for my pics, especially with the HDR settings I use.  For some applications where I need more light, I turn on the goose-necked lamp above as well.  All lighting is diffused through the white screens and all lamps are 4-5,000K gas filled lamps as described above.

 

 

 

Note the lint roller to the left.  That blue background always has crap on it!

 

 

 

And just for laughs, here’s a print of one of my favorite aircraft over my work area, which provided inspiration for my Spitfire build.  My father had this over his own desk 40 years ago and it never gets old.

 

 

 

 

Hope that helps!

Chuck

Edited January 11, 2019 by chuck540z3

[dodgem37]

I wish my space was so organized.  I love Barrie Clarks' image.  It's a classic.  Thanks for sharing.  It is always my pleasure to drop by your threads.

 

Sincerely,

Mark

[TorbenD]

Great to see another one getting the Chuck treatment 

Torben

[Dragon]

Glad you're back and with another "Kicked Up A Notch" build! They are always enjoyable to view and learn from.

[chuck540z3]

Jan12/19

 

Quick update.  The KH F-5E SIG had identified a few panel line and other surface errors on this kit, so from now on I'm checking this detail using references of all surfaces and if I can, correcting as many as possible.  The front starboard side fuselage wall is especially problematic, because just about all of it is wrong.  It appears that KH has taken the detail from the port side like the canopy release handle, step panel, water release handle, etc. and just made an mirror image of most of it on this opposite side.  Also, the starboard side is missing the AOA vane, which even Hasegawa supplies with their old kit.

 

Here's what I mean.  These details should all be removed and the front two panels should be flipped, with the oval one on the top, which is where the AOA vane should go.  I'm changing this now before I paint or detail the interior sidewalls, to minimize possible damage.

 

 

Using CA glue to fill all the fine detail, I sanded it smooth, then re-scribed every panel line and re-punched every rivet, which I will likely do for the entire model.  No biggy, because I kind of like it!    I usually do this for all my models to make the fine detail extra crisp, although the Spitfire required only the addition of rivet detail, rather than fixing the kit ones.  Although I've made the excellent 1/32 Tamiya Mustang before, I think the Tamiya Spitfire might be the best injection kit ever made at any scale.

 

Anyway, here is the port side on the top, which should have this surface detail, while the detail is now gone from the starboard side with the front panels corrected, and the AOA vane inserted slightly off-center within the oval panel from the Hasegawa kit.  Now that I look at it again, I should have added two more of those circular static ports just below the rescue panel at the front like the port side.  There is also a small square "air scoop" that should be added just ahead of the canopy release handle on the port side.

 

 

 

That is all!

 

Cheers,

Chuck

Edited January 12, 2019 by chuck540z3

[dodgem37]

Nice start.  Good clean fun.

 

Sincerely,

Mark

[Marcel111]

On 1/9/2019 at 11:58 PM, chuck540z3 said:

Thanks Marcel!

 

As for the camo-scheme, I don't think so, but never say never.  Camo paint jobs look really cool, but I've done two of them in a row already (F-15C Aggressor, Spitfire) and I'd like to try something a bit different.

 

How about letting crazy take over and going for something like this. Hard to imagine what other subject will ever let you have the opportunity.

 

Cheers,

 

Marcel

 

 

[chuck540z3]

4 hours ago, Marcel111 said:

 

How about letting crazy take over and going for something like this. Hard to imagine what other subject will ever let you have the opportunity.

 

Cheers,

 

Marcel

 

 

 

Sorry Buddy, but that Iranian scheme doesn't do much for me.  Having said that, this one does turn my crank!  Tempting....

 

 

The masking alone would be weeks of work!

 

Cheers,

Chuck

Edited January 12, 2019 by chuck540z3

[dsahling1]

We really need to get you into doing a highly weathered aircraft, like a Russian Su-27 from the arctic region or an old MiG-29.  Airbrushing these requires a lot of skill, patience, and study, but its a lot of fun.  I've been in the middle of a little modeling hiatus (soon to be over once I get some custom decals in the mail), I'm doing a 1/32 scale diorama featuring 3 Su-27 Flankers, 1 Mi-8 Hip, a couple Russian ground vehicles, figures/ground crew & equipment, terrain, etc.  I'm planning on turning it into a WIP once I've gotten the first "test" plane done and have mastered and figured out the building techniques.  Anyhow I think once you see the airbrushing result from the technique I use you might take an interest :-)  Consider it for next time!

[Marcel111]

Chuck, agree, that tiger scheme is just incredible!