"Certification" guidelines discussion

Re: Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby j p » Tue Oct 06, 2015 7:37 pm

Marquette wrote:Paint - in terms of colour - can be very subjective. Lettering accuracy, however, is a fairly concrete exercise: how well does the model's lettering and marking match the available photos?


Is color included in "livery" or in "paint"? The color is subjective, of course. Therefore, more than one person should evaluate it. Preferably with an idea about the variations of the color as new (different batch) as well as changes of the color due to the external factors (weather, spilled liquids, rust dust from brakes, soot etc.). Another thing is reliability of color pictures, especially for old cars. They change with time.
With some of that knowledge, we can get to quite wide tolerance for the colors.
Example: Pennsy dark green locomotive enamel can be from black to dark green, it was getting more green with the age of the paint. But it should not be olive green because even rotten wrecks which were not repainted for decades do not get that color.
Belcher Oil tankcar can be from white through ivory to beige.

"Paint" includes also: missing paint or paint where it is not supposed to be (windows), masking failures, decals wrong - visible difference in gloss, print too thick/thin or something missing, misalignment of multicolor print (settings of the printing machine).
j p
 
Posts: 1200
Images: 69
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby Marquette » Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:11 pm

Good points - so paint and livery could each be assessed for two separate things:

1: "technical" - quality of the paint/lettering and placement - shape, sharpness, etc.
2: "accuracy" - colour(s), shape, positioning and appearance of lettering and graphics, etc.
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby CSD » Tue Oct 06, 2015 11:59 pm

rdikken wrote:... Please react my friends.


Okay. This by far the worst idea I have ever heard on this forum. The whole thing sounds like a scam.

Just to we're clear: At the behest of a salesman we are to form a group who is to develop a seal of approval that will have manufacturers falling all over themselves just for the privilege of applying it to their packaging. Right?

I have a real problem with this being a TTnut or even TT community initiative and would prefer not to be associated with it in any way, shape or form. I urge the membership of this forum to give some thought to the legitimacy of this idea before volunteering to do free R&D work for a certain Dutch hobby shop.
Mark
//S
User avatar
CSD
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: St. Albert, Alberta, Canada

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby ConducTTor » Wed Oct 07, 2015 12:56 am

Let's give it a try. It may or may not work out.
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby dileTTante » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:05 am

I agree with Mark, but I wouldn't have worded it so strongly.
-Terry C.
dileTTante
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:37 am

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby Marquette » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:09 am

Well, hm. Can it not be entirely independent, even though the idea may have come from a distributor? I'm not sure I see why it couldn't be...?
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby dileTTante » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:23 am

Just review the products as do model railroad magazines. The people who care will be advised by the reviews. The manufacturer can cite the reviews if it comes to that. If the manufacturer strives for realism he will be rewarded with sales.

-Terry C.
dileTTante
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:37 am

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby Marquette » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:28 am

But then that would fall under point 3 of ConducTTor's new rules regarding discussion of models, no?
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby dileTTante » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:52 am

The rules have no provision for praising a model. That could be #4.
And the banning of criticism is unwise.

-Terry C
dileTTante
 
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 12:37 am

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby CN-TT » Wed Oct 07, 2015 10:14 am

The following is my opinon:
I don't need a 'Certification' because it doesn't matter to me. I believe the standards that would be set wouldn't match with my standards anyway.
For me it's a waste of time (a lot of endless non fruitful discussions) and I really can't see the benefits.
Just buy a NA TT product and let the others know what YOU think and WHY!

Bjoern
You gotta do much more than believe if you really wanna change things!

"The GuiTTar Case" Gallery
"The GuiTTar Case" YouTube
User avatar
CN-TT
 
Posts: 368
Images: 99
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:51 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests