Accurate drawings

[JMSmith]

or the nearest thing,

as was pointed out by michael he did not have good drawings, this is no excuse, just ask, between us we must have about the best set of drawing for any aircraft, so using second best is not an option.
you guys are the best profile artist there is, so don't "ruin the ship for half a pennys worth of tar"

if you need something just ask.

right getting off my soapbox now before i fall off.

[sparty72]

Did i miss something lol

[GiantFlyingRobots]

I better retire my drawing tablet then, cos that is my modus operandi.

[JMSmith]

don't you dare!

without people like you doing drawings we would not have any

this comment was for the profile guys, not the grafters like you and me that spend weeks doing drawings and then get bored when it comes to painting (me that is)

[JMSmith]

just to expand on this,

most technical drawing people tend to miss or get something wrong, along comes people like GFR and myself and we redo the drawings rectifying the faults we find, usually after many hour/days studying photos, then along comes A.N.Other and finds something we missed, only by this process can the drawing become accurate.

the best way to start is with the works Station drawings, these give exact measurements from front to back and all places in between.

i included my drawing of the Vengeance, this as now been passed on to RJC who is doing a book about it next year.
this is the ONLY accurate side view of this aircraft anywhere. apart from the thousands of works drawing held at the Smithonian, which are available for several hundred pounds

[GrubbyFingers]

Even then, John, while a Station Diagram does give the designed distances between stations, I've seen plenty that bear little relationship to the actual shape of the aircraft.

(I'm not suggesting YOUR diagram is innaccurate!!)

Graeme

[JMSmith]

hi graeme,

this is very correct, the station drawings only give you the exact distance between stations, the outline shape is an whole new ball game.

[GiantFlyingRobots]

Hey John, I think you are getting Grubby and me mixed up, I never do the technical drawing (although I have the Illustrator skill in spades) before I commence a profile, I use what is readily available and go from there, the day somebody is crazy enough to start paying for my work is the day that I will take profile creation seriously. Right now and for the foreseeable future I do this for my own amusement only.

[Ugo Crisponi]

Hey John, I think you are getting Grubby and me mixed up, I never do the technical drawing (although I have the Illustrator skill in spades) before I commence a profile, I use what is readily available and go from there, the day somebody is crazy enough to start paying for my work is the day that I will take profile creation seriously. Right now and for the foreseeable future I do this for my own amusement only.

Touch?!

Don't know why all this has started, but personally agree with GFR.

I know my profiles may be the most inaccurate around here, especially the linedrawings. But if I may say, producing one "perfect" profile based on the most accurate possible tech drawing, starting from scratch, would take too much time, and never been payback enough. If my aim is to make the definitive book on a particular model, I would invest money and time to get the blueprints from the archives of the manufacturer and redrawn on them. But I know anyone would spend enough money to cover all this timework purchasing my final work.

Beside, is like making a kit model spending lots of hours and money in aftermarket to make the best cockpit ever in 1/48 or rather in 1/72. Somthing hard to see after closing the fuselages. And maybe, making the faded camouflage with a brush rather than with an airbrush, or messing around with decals.

I know most of people out there wish to have a piece of aviation art on the wall. And they can't easily distingush an F-18 from a Mig-29 at first sight most of the time. And ART is not always hyperealism. If this were my aiming, I would start a 3D software course.

Sometimes I regret myself to spend too much time behind details and large files. The final results are like boomerang: "oh, see how this guy make photoshopping"....my good God, I spent 10 hours on that cockpit glass!

BTW, I respect the way each of you draw. And each is different thankfully. If John think we all should ask for the best available linedrawing or blueprint before starting a color profile he is right in a way. But I wander who can say "My tech drawings are the most accurate ever"....

Sorry for long post!

Ugo

[Jesters-Ink]

Well . . .I'm in the shitz cuz I've only ever made 1 profile set from line drawings and they are not finished yet . . . .using the Me262 from our very own Otter.
I've always used masses and masses of photographs, (right . . .bin the lot and start again)

No such thing as a perfect drawing, no such thing as a perfect profile, but there are a few guys on here who's styles I really like and would pay for if I wasn't doing my own shitz.