I can understand the desire to put a perfect finish on the object you have spent so much time creating. To distress the finished article really seems to go against all you have bee trying to acheive for all those hours (years). That said the best models Iv'e seen and certainly the ones I look at for longest at shows are the one where the model engineer has done just that. Not making it look battered about but really trying to understand the loco or traction engine in use. Foot steps and hand hold worn shiny by usage of crews odd corners uncleaned where it's difficult to get a rag in. Paint knocked of on corners that get hit by shovels, oil cans or lumps of coal and the detritus of daily use. These are the things that make a model come alive to me… Anyone else feel this way?

People who have the patience and the attention span which allows them to build complicated things often also have a thing about attention to detail

So mucking something up goes against the grain

Surely if they start off shiney and new they will "mature" to " weathered and worn" over time? Whenever I've bought a new ( or "new" S/H) car it starts off shiney and new and I try to keep it looking like that. In a very short time I give up and it looks "comfortably used". Why should models be any different? I've never found a need to simulate rust as that seems to happen automatically.

Norman

It is also 'custom and practice'. In model railways and model boats it is a recognised option to produce a weathered model and be duly credited for the achievement in exhibitions. In ME it simply isn't normal. Perhaps due to the fact that often full size they did endevour to roll a loco out of the shops in imaculate contidion (mainline not shunter) or a Victorian waterworks would be made as a marbled hall with a polished brass beam engine inside.

Just look at the equivalent today – do Airbus deliver you a new jet with pre-applied oil leaks?

Perhaps the same reason some people will take a well-preserved, running, vintage motorbike or car and "restore" it with a standard of chrome, paint and polished aluminium even brighter and shinier than it left the factory with.

Some people just like to make bright and shiny things. Others like them worn and comfortable.

Maybe Mike but if you've spent months (nay – years! – or even years and years) working away at something maybe you prefer it to LOOK nice at the end – I know I do. Shiny always appeals to me more that dull.

If you are driven by the need to compete for prizes and "authenticity" gains extra points then I guess you have to follow that path but how many folk ARE driven by competition? I do this for "ME" and if I'm satisfied then thats what I seek – which brings me back to shiney!

Would I drill a hole in my Myford? – I'd much rather not – so I'd seek a workaround if possible. When you do stuff for a living like John S then the drivers are different.

Norman

I prefer models to look at least vaguely like the real think Boatbuilders are the worst offenders – brass railing replace rusty, may-times painted iron with a texture like 'The Thing' from the Fantatstic Four.

My shunter looked like a toy as originally painted, I had to matt it down, but I still fee like adding 'rust'. It also showed up the tiniest flaws, while with a matt finish they just look like part of teh 'character'. Excuse the poor colour balance on these shots.

Neil

Before:

After: