David Hingtgen

I'm very surprised. I firmly stand by my "texture map of the Ent-A over altered polygons" statement. Incredibly lazy and uninspired. And funkily proportioned. Very hard to tell from that angle if it follows one of the main rules of Roddenberry's Trek ship design---nacelles must be visible from the front. Effectively that means they have to be above or below the saucer.

IMHO the problem isn't the overall shape/design, it's the little details. Anyone who has built a movie-era Trek kit knows "all the little things" that define movie-era Trek ships. And that has nearly every one. It's more movie-era-esque than the Ent-A, Reliant, or Excelsior. In fact, that slavish incorporation of all those little things is what says "fan-made" to me--they're little things that most people don't recognize/realize. It's too much a copy of what's come before, and this movie has clearly shown that "copying existing stuff" is NOT their art direction. Frankly, it's almost like if you took the texture map of the Ent-A, and placed it on a new polygonal model. The shape may be different, but all the little details are the same.

Too much like the refit. That design would piss off hard-core Trekkies more than any casting decision.

Sarcasm--you mean paying 95% of MISB for one that's scratched, dirty, missing half the pages in the manual and the artwork sleeve at Gamestop isn't a good value? (and they somehow show up in that condition the same week they're released)

The point is things are going backwards. Console games used to have to be "perfect" when arriving on shelves. Now they can be buggy as hell. (PC games weren't much different--15 years ago few people could go online to download a patch--and a couple megs would take all night)

...and then download updates, patches, and more patches until the game actually works on something other than a developer's system. QA and bug-checking no longer exists for videogames, they figure they'll just make everyone download patches if something doesn't work.

Just changing the brake pads. (and if I get more money/confidence---magnaflow catback next spring--maybe---I have no desire for it to be louder, I just want to open up the exhaust---mufflers alone may give what I want, apparently the mufflers are actually the main restriction in my car)

Thompson rocked in this ep. (though honestly it felt like he was filling in for "original badass corporate HRG" since HRG is now more like "family protector vengeful HRG")

I'm paranoid enough that I plan to NEVER get under my car unless it's on a professional hydraulic lift. (heck, I feel weird crawling under it when it's sitting on all 4 tires) But I still don't want it to fall while sitting beside it with my arm in the fenderwell... (Honestly, my main fear is damaging the car via improper jacking/jack). Aluminum subframe.

I've gotta ask--how'd you paint the canopy?

This is basically a US-only question: Any suggestions on a jack/jackstands to buy? I don't intend to jack the car up more than once or twice a year but I also don't want it falling on me. Want to spend less than a hundred for jack and stands. Car is a Grand Prix GXP, and they are just a bit lower than other Grand Prixs, so clearance is a minor issue. (it's not a Vette or anything, but one inch can make all the difference in the world). My car is also reported as requiring a surprisingly high lift height to actually get it off the wheels. (ramps are not an option at all---I'm buying a jack so I can take the wheels off) Sears Craftsman seems to be VERY hit-or-miss lately, yet a surprising number of people seem to like the cheapest one out there--the GM Goodwrench stuff from Wal-Mart. I have the following stores locally: Wal-Mart Sears (which do not have any jacks on sale at the moment) NAPA Autozone Advance Auto O'Reilly

Tamiya clear red and clear blue have the same problem as food coloring---they turn brown when mixed. I'll try mixing them again with the ratio that kinda sorta worked with dye earlier. (but Tamiya colored clear is SO inherently sticky and streaky, I don't know how I'd ever apply it evenly even airbrushing) As for red #3--actually, my really old food colors don't have it at all, but the newer ones do, including the one I looked at in the store today. Maybe they re-introduced a "safer" version? Or at least, determined it was safe enough to use in small amounts, as a "strengthener" to red 40.

Sure? Because mine rubbed on the first transformation, and get worse every time.

Different type of plastic used AFAIK, I only found one instance of someone trying RID on injection molded clear styrene, said it looked awful. (R/C canopies are usually ABS or vac-form AFAIK) Dye will "pool" just like paint, just in a different way---and you have NO way to control it. And again, many RC canopies are single-piece, smooth, frameless clear plastic, so there's no features that could interfere. ::edit:: Lexan? That behaves very differently than "normal" modeling plastic--paints, glues, and sands different.

I don't think I've ever seen/heard of airbrush ink. How intensely colored is it? I found some citadel games purple wash, but it seemed too streaky/uneven in the bottle, just watching how it behaved by swirling it around. ::edit:: I found this--airbrush "color", and they have transparent dioxazine purple--dioxazine is THE purple pigment IMHO, anything made with it has to be intense. A couple hours ago I was wondering if I could buy raw dioxazine purple pigments somewhere, and if they'd mix with future. http://www.dickblick.com/zz253/21/ (we just got a Dick Blick store here recently, ONLY place in town that sells flow-aid) PS--lilac sharpie doesn't work. Every color seems to behave quite differently. Strangely, sharpie over dried Future is BAD, streaks/sticks, weird. Sharpie over bare plastic is much better. The rougher the surface the better---but that kinda goes against having a smooth shiny canopy.

I've found the icing "pastes" from Wiltons. But they have sugar and corn syrup in them. They'd go bad after a while. I also figure they'd be too sticky to paint with no matter how thinned. (they're awesome for frosting though) Will experiment more tonight with my red #3/40 mix. (couldn't find pure #3) Opacity/intensity isn't the problem, it's raw "what hue they make when mixed". Just a few drops makes a nice canopy tint.

If you don't believe me, try it yourself. Or at least, Red #40 and Blue #1 sure don't make purple when mixed together (despite what the box says). Now, the purple icing tint (unsuitable for mixing with future) was made of red and blue food coloring, but maybe it used blue #2 or something. But the "common food color from a grocer" doesn't work. Instantly makes brown, even with only small amounts of red added to the blue. Impure/multi-spectral colors or something. A purplish-brown for sure, but brown. I need to go read the list of what's on the purple tint again, see if it uses different dyes. Of course, I have no idea where to get blue #2 or red #3 if it uses them, both are fairly rare. PS---testing with Sharpies last night was promising, bought a "lilac" one on my way home after voting, will see how it goes. (they were on sale too, so little lost if it doesn't work) ::edit:: Hmmn, found an old bottle of red--and it has a mix of red #40 and red #3. And it almost made purple for a second. Needs an incredibly high ratio, like 10:1 blue:red. Will experiment more tonight. Maybe it really does depend on WHICH red and blue you have. If I could find pure red #3....

Personally, I think trying to make a fighter-only out of it would be a waste.

I'm pretty sure Sharpie will streak. Will experiment a bit with my red and orange ones on some spare clear bits, and see if buying a purple one might be worth it. Future+Tamiya clear does NOT work. They don't mix. At all. It's a really cool effect to watch though, they're much worse than oil and water. (actually, I've found Future doesn't mix with any paint I've tried, except Tamiya Flat base--which isn't really paint) It mixes great with food color, it's just that red+blue food color won't make purple. If I can find purple food color, that would probably work well. India ink---I don't think I've ever seen purple.

I changed the topic description----it was incredibly descriptive IMHO, that's all people do around here...

Ep 12 is great for reference. Yes, there is a little red spot at the base of the head laser, but on the kit even a 25/0 brush won't cut it I think. Also a good view of the sides of the jaw showing the white/grey/black layering, as well as the grey "mouth" inside the jaw.

Gah, so close. Got another successful coat on the sensors, but they're still not purple enough. Think I got the windscreen done well. But after 3 attempts on the main canopy, and finally getting the left side nice enough and not streaked---I noticed the right side dried with an obvious streak/clump smear. Stripping it now, will re-Future tonight, try to paint it again tomorrow. Getting better, though I'd hoped I'd be done with canopy tinting today!

We do have a Halloween thread too: http://macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?show...25&start=25

Hasbro also shows long stacks in most of their ads for both reissue G1 and MP...

IMHO, the *defining* feature of the VF-25 is how skinny it is. (So as to accomodate full armor yet not look like the Stay-Puft Marshmallow man that the VF-1, VF-0, and VF-11 do). I believe that was Kawamori's stated goal/intention/reason for the -25's appearance. If it's not skinny--it doesn't look like a VF-25. (you have to admit, it's incredibly generic-looking in fighter mode, so battroid mode has to be the defining feature)