Pointe du hoc diorama

[bspnick]

This diorama we used two different scales, 1:32 and 1:72.

The cliffs, top of the bunker, barbed wire and water were all scratch made.

These photos are in a WWII multi episode documentary called The Great Crusade which we have created using toy soldiers, plastic models, veteran interviews,etc...

Episode 4 will be released soon.

Sorry to get off topic.

Hope you all like our Pointe Du Hoc diorama. That's all of the pics that I can find.

View attachment 46684

View attachment 46685

View attachment 46686

View attachment 46687

View attachment 46688

View attachment 46689

 

[phalinmegob]

thats outstanding,what did you use for the water, love the waves breaking against the landers.

 

[noble]

Outstanding job old son top notch.

scott

 

[aaron]

Another nice dio. Genius using the smaller scale to show distance. Vewy vewy cwever.

 

[michaelm]

Really great work, the perspective is brilliant.

 

[stona]

Ditto,love it.

Steve

 

[bspnick]

Thanks guys for your kind words.

I can't tell you what we actually use to create the water effect because it's something that we developed which took several years to do and we just want to keep it our little secret for a short time longer.

I can tell you that there are between 3 and 4 layers involved plus another secret ingredient as a topper. lol

Nick

 

[CDW]

Like the images and the diorama.

How much post editing do you do on the original image, i can see there's a bit done, i used to enhance and adjust images for customers when i had the graphics business. I like how subtle any post work is on your images i must say.

Not intending to take away from the overall impressiveness just interested in what the "default image" has done to it to get it to this stage.

If you have any before and after images i'd be interested to see these.

 

[HAWKERHUNTER]

So now I am confused. Colin has obviously spotted something. The pictures are tremendous but if the images have been enhanced then as Colin has suggested some photos of the model as it is would be great. Iam sure its still a great build but I dont want to comment on an enhanced inmage if that is what we are being shown. Could we have some clarification please.?

 

[phalinmegob]

i think its just the background images of the sky and haze on the horizon,blurring the edge of the diorama

 

[aaron]

I can't tell you what we actually use to create the water effect because it's something that we developed which took several years to do and we just want to keep it our little secret for a short time longer.I can tell you that there are between 3 and 4 layers involved plus another secret ingredient as a topper. lol

Nick

This is the first time that the answer to "how did you do that" is "i cant tell you". LAME.

Our hobby is all about sharing our teqs and details. What if the greats like Shep and Verlinden told us that.

Sorry if this offends but it is what it is.

 

[dubster72]

Aaron, I think that's because these are examples of commercial dioramas produced on a commission basis, hence the secrecy!

 

[bspnick]

This is the first time that the answer to "how did you do that" is "i cant tell you". LAME.Our hobby is all about sharing our teqs and details. What if the greats like Shep and Verlinden told us that.

Sorry if this offends but it is what it is.

I'm sorry that you feel that way.

Sorry if I offended you or any other artists on this thread. None intended.

Your talents are far greater than mine.

These dioramas are not model teaching tools but but are made for the purpose to tribute all of those veterans who served, past and present.

There is a time and place for how to lessons and if you wanted a how to lesson then maybe that's where you should be looking.

I mean that in a good way not a sarcastic one.

Nick

 

[aaron]

My bad.

 

[dubster72]

I'm sorry that you feel that way.Sorry if I offended you or any other artists on this thread. None intended.

Your talents are far greater than mine.

These dioramas are not model teaching tools but but are made for the purpose to tribute all of those veterans who served, past and present.

There is a time and place for how to lessons and if you wanted a how to lesson then maybe that's where you should be looking.

I mean that in a good way not a sarcastic one.

Nick

What you say is fair enough Nick & your trade secrets are probably exactly that, but I feel this forum is a place to share ideas & techniques. In my 3 years+ of being a member, no-one has ever failed to share their ideas.

In fact, most of what's posted in this forum is both a tribute of sorts & a ' how to ' lesson. That's how we learn & progress.

Cheers

Patrick

 

[HAWKERHUNTER]

well guys this is where I am at with all this. If these images have been touched up, enhanced or what ever then in my mind its a bit unfair to all the guys who work so hard on there models to make them so lifelike without such aids. What we should be showing is the model as it is in order for people to appraise it fully. I cant see any harm in showing the model in its completed state and then including some shots that you declare have been touched up for effect. I want to complement someones skill with a model not a computer so with that in mind I find that I cannot pass comments on these models based on these pictures because I dont know what is real and what is not.

 

[tr1ckey66]

...and that's one point of view.

Personally I can see that there is an obvious talent painting the figures and vehicles. The diorama has been produced with whatever post production techniques he/they has at his/their disposal because building such a diorama in 1/35 is impractical. I don't take it as an insult as a modeller, and as an Art Director by trade I can see most of the post production work done (i know, for instance, that there is only one landing craft shot twice). Maybe that's why I don't see it as an insult?

You want to know how the water is done - well, looks like a plastic sheet with fibre brake water to me with a bit of blur to hide the edges. But I think you're missing the point. They've achieved a great result one particular way. Do you really just want to copy what they've done?

I know this. These guys are not the first to use photo editing software on this forum. I know for a fact that Tyrrel has extended some backgrounds on his dioramas (which is perfectly understandable). Does it offend me knowing he has? Absolutely not. Does it detract from his obvious modelling talent? No. Photoshop will not turn a poor model into an award winner it can however help in it's presentation.

Personally, I always finish my dioramas so they can be viewed as a whole, but I don't see that as the only way. I see lots of dioramas on this site with lots of 'model eye view' shots and no hint of the diorama as a whole. Is that cheating?

I do kind of agree with you in so much that I would far rather see a superbly finished vehicle, figure or aircraft than a poor diorama. This tendency toward putting everything in a diorama smacks a little of 'playing at soldiers'. This diorama however does not fall into that category. I can see how it's been done and except it for what it is.

well done guys

Paul

 

[andyrobs]

I'm with Steve (hawkerhunter) on this. I think it would have been better showing the dio without the enhancements. I don't mind a photoshopped background, but personally I think some of the excellent work in this dio was spoilt by trying to work out what was real and what was computer generated

Cheers, Andrew

 

[spanner570]

Consider this....A lot depends on how individuals interpret the word 'Enhancement'

Take two examples:- Graham (fenlander) posted his little french scout tank on here, and the background was a photoshop picture of a forest.

I did some elementry water colour background paintings for my Omaha Beach Landing.

Both backgrounds were greeted favourably, but they were enhancements whichever way you look at it, and not modelling as such.

I don't really see the difference between what Graham and I did to the computer generated stuff on this and the Pegasus dio.

I understand that to some folks might think what has been done as sort of 'Bending the rules' but let's chill a bit and just accept the images for what they are......Excellent painting and quality pictures.

Ron

 

[Ian M]

Sorry Ron I have to disagree. Its one thing to put the model in front of a background picture, as it is still the model that is the focus.

Would it be accepted if I took a few photos of say a torpedo boat that I had built, then photoshop it onto a photo of a real motor boat, post it and sit back and wait for all the "Wow thats a great dio, fantastic sea and the wake from the boat is really well done".......

I accept the pictures for what they are, digitally altered images that distract from the models.

Ian M