Merriman's Submarine Modelling Masterclass

[merriman]

 

[merriman]

 

[merriman]

 

[merriman]

 

[merriman]

 

[Wardster]

David, I am in utterly absolute awe of your craft, and I am unsurprisingly dead certain that I will never ascend anywhere near your level of mastery. My only point is that for craftsmen way above my league you might consider putting more detailed explanations with your visuals to allow kindred spirits to carry on your trade as a legacy.

Please don't take this as a rebuke, good sir, or as being mean-spirited or anything, but David's been doing this sort of thing (being in "Mentor Mode") for a long time ... and back, twenty-some years ago, when he was posting (elsewhere) in a fashion like the one you described, (some) people crapped all over him, in a VERY public fashion. I won't name people's names, or even site names. One of the kinds of comments I remember the most vividly, was that one of David's masterclasses (my term for it, not David's) about a specific sci-fi vehicle, was far too verbose. Far too long. The claim made, back then, by persons like that, was essentially that anyone who actually knew what they were doing, could explain it in far less words / pages / pictures than David had used. Those of us who "stuck with it" and re-re-re-read anything that we didn't at first understand, and who looked at pictures, over and over and over (at intervals; it need not be done in one sitting) ended up with all kinds of cool and awesome knowledge. Those who chose to be hyper-critical, back then, didn't seem to get much out of doing that sort of thing. My advice, as someone who still loves to sit at that feet of a master model builder, is to allow yourself the time it will take, to learn this stuff, incrementally. If you pick up one percent at a time, in one session, and another percent, in another session -- that's good progress. At least as I see it, anyway. I guess I'm trying to say, "Don't expect knowledge acquisition to be fast or to be super-obvious, right away." Another point I'd make is that a lot of folks don't know as much about a subject (and I'm not even limiting that to this hobby, let alone, to these forums!) as they think they do. David's been there. For decades. He knows what works. And what doesn't work well -- both in terms of materials, and processes; along with tools, et cetera. Studying at his feet has been one of the things I personally have felt humbly privileged to have done, over the last two decades or more, now. Ages ago, in private emails, he was answering questions I had about how to "loft off" lines and what not, so that I could better replicate things like sci-fi space ships that had very complicated hull shapes. After putting in all kinds of work, and getting to the point where I had reasonably good / accurate plan view drawings of the Dark Star spacecraft, and a profile view drawing, and end view drawings. I was looking at the huge work load it took for me to get to that point. I was tired. I wanted to quit -- on my own project, mind you! I was thinking "time to let the master take over, if he's willing to do so" from that point on. But no, he stressed (gently but firmly) that without multiple drawings of cross sections, too, the drawings I was trying to create, weren't going to be enough for someone who built things from scratch, to be able to make a 3D physical replica of that fictional space craft. My point is that it took me one more full year, as I recall it now, to get to the point where I had "stumbled through" some different ways to figure out how to do what needed to be done, next. But every craft I built a model of, from that point in time, always had OODLES of cross-sectional drawings included. It took me a long time to get to the point where I appreciated how much those added to a set of drawings. He kindly answered any of my questions -- BUT -- I had to basically prove that I had tried, first. I had to be able to show him "this is what I tried, and these are the results I ended up with". And THEN he was more than kind with his time, in answering my "Now what?" questions.

For a person who is offering to teach things, time management is critical. Energy, too. Guys like me were picking his brains, as it were -- and learned a great deal, because of it. Other guys were mocking him, and saying that he was too verbose; that David was assuming his readers were all far too stupid to understand anything he was offering -- and stuff like that. Now, it appears he's being told that he's not being verbose enough. There is no happy medium, other than what he's already offered. I still look back on that year of sort of "guided self-training," in regards to cross sections and their worth, as one of the most fruitful periods of study I had ever engaged in.

One of the periods where I tried something new (new-to-me, that is) and "stumbled through it, pretty well" was in regards to a Renshape type of propeller blade, for a steampunk naval vessel. When David saw pics of what I'd done, he asked me where I'd learned to do that. I told him, "I learned it from you. I gathered up every old Cabal Report I could find, or any other online lesson where you offered pics and words about how to create those twisting, head-exploding shapes, and I just kept re-re-reading them, till I thought I sort-of kind-of understood what was going on. I went out into the garage, with some pattern maker's material, and I tried it. And with some few patient attempts at translating theory into hands-on instruction, I finally got a result that I liked."

Just one person's two cents / dos centavos. I'm saying this in what I hope is understood to be a helpful set of intentions. Too many people seem to want to download decades of instruction, into their heads, instantly. As I see it: real life (and the human brain) doesn't work that way. A few decades ago, David was catching abuse for being, allegedly, too verbose; and including too many pictures / pages worth of info. Some of us learned good stuff, back then, and actually wanted MORE pages of info. So I was thrilled when I found this place, a few months ago.

Don't be upset with the pace of your personal progress, as long as some is being made. As a buddy of mine used to say, "Rome wasn't built in a day. It wasn't sacked in a day, either".

 

[Wardster]

Thanks. When Ellie and I established D&E Miniatures we had to build what the client wanted. Now that I'm retired, I build WHAT I WANT to build. I wish I had done a better job of photo-documenting more of that work. Most of our work now only seen in old copies of model magazines, trade organs, and the occasional yellowed magazine or newspaper article. Oh, well.

Which some of us still very much treasure ... the old DVD's from CultTVman's site ... Cabal Reports on the web, from days gone by ... and various back issues of Fine Scale Modeler, or the original iteration of Sci-Fi & Fantasy Modeler, or any number of other cool old magazine appearances.

 

[merriman]

Thank, Ward, made my day. Nice to know the work is occasionally referenced.

David

 

[martinbayer]

Please don't take this as a rebuke, good sir, or as being mean-spirited or anything, but David's been doing this sort of thing (being in "Mentor Mode") for a long time ... and back, twenty-some years ago, when he was posting (elsewhere) in a fashion like the one you described, (some) people crapped all over him, in a VERY public fashion. I won't name people's names, or even site names. One of the kinds of comments I remember the most vividly, was that one of David's masterclasses (my term for it, not David's) about a specific sci-fi vehicle, was far too verbose. Far too long. The claim made, back then, by persons like that, was essentially that anyone who actually knew what they were doing, could explain it in far less words / pages / pictures than David had used. Those of us who "stuck with it" and re-re-re-read anything that we didn't at first understand, and who looked at pictures, over and over and over (at intervals; it need not be done in one sitting) ended up with all kinds of cool and awesome knowledge. Those who chose to be hyper-critical, back then, didn't seem to get much out of doing that sort of thing. My advice, as someone who still loves to sit at that feet of a master model builder, is to allow yourself the time it will take, to learn this stuff, incrementally. If you pick up one percent at a time, in one session, and another percent, in another session -- that's good progress. At least as I see it, anyway. I guess I'm trying to say, "Don't expect knowledge acquisition to be fast or to be super-obvious, right away." Another point I'd make is that a lot of folks don't know as much about a subject (and I'm not even limiting that to this hobby, let alone, to these forums!) as they think they do. David's been there. For decades. He knows what works. And what doesn't work well -- both in terms of materials, and processes; along with tools, et cetera. Studying at his feet has been one of the things I personally have felt humbly privileged to have done, over the last two decades or more, now. Ages ago, in private emails, he was answering questions I had about how to "loft off" lines and what not, so that I could better replicate things like sci-fi space ships that had very complicated hull shapes. After putting in all kinds of work, and getting to the point where I had reasonably good / accurate plan view drawings of the Dark Star spacecraft, and a profile view drawing, and end view drawings. I was looking at the huge work load it took for me to get to that point. I was tired. I wanted to quit -- on my own project, mind you! I was thinking "time to let the master take over, if he's willing to do so" from that point on. But no, he stressed (gently but firmly) that without multiple drawings of cross sections, too, the drawings I was trying to create, weren't going to be enough for someone who built things from scratch, to be able to make a 3D physical replica of that fictional space craft. My point is that it took me one more full year, as I recall it now, to get to the point where I had "stumbled through" some different ways to figure out how to do what needed to be done, next. But every craft I built a model of, from that point in time, always had OODLES of cross-sectional drawings included. It took me a long time to get to the point where I appreciated how much those added to a set of drawings. He kindly answered any of my questions -- BUT -- I had to basically prove that I had tried, first. I had to be able to show him "this is what I tried, and these are the results I ended up with". And THEN he was more than kind with his time, in answering my "Now what?" questions.

For a person who is offering to teach things, time management is critical. Energy, too. Guys like me were picking his brains, as it were -- and learned a great deal, because of it. Other guys were mocking him, and saying that he was too verbose; that David was assuming his readers were all far too stupid to understand anything he was offering -- and stuff like that. Now, it appears he's being told that he's not being verbose enough. There is no happy medium, other than what he's already offered. I still look back on that year of sort of "guided self-training," in regards to cross sections and their worth, as one of the most fruitful periods of study I had ever engaged in.

One of the periods where I tried something new (new-to-me, that is) and "stumbled through it, pretty well" was in regards to a Renshape type of propeller blade, for a steampunk naval vessel. When David saw pics of what I'd done, he asked me where I'd learned to do that. I told him, "I learned it from you. I gathered up every old Cabal Report I could find, or any other online lesson where you offered pics and words about how to create those twisting, head-exploding shapes, and I just kept re-re-reading them, till I thought I sort-of kind-of understood what was going on. I went out into the garage, with some pattern maker's material, and I tried it. And with some few patient attempts at translating theory into hands-on instruction, I finally got a result that I liked."

Just one person's two cents / dos centavos. I'm saying this in what I hope is understood to be a helpful set of intentions. Too many people seem to want to download decades of instruction, into their heads, instantly. As I see it: real life (and the human brain) doesn't work that way. A few decades ago, David was catching abuse for being, allegedly, too verbose; and including too many pictures / pages worth of info. Some of us learned good stuff, back then, and actually wanted MORE pages of info. So I was thrilled when I found this place, a few months ago.

Don't be upset with the pace of your personal progress, as long as some is being made. As a buddy of mine used to say, "Rome wasn't built in a day. It wasn't sacked in a day, either".

I take note of your opinion and maintain mine . I strongly disagree with your statement that "There is no happy medium". I have only seen a small fraction of David's oeuvre over the decades, so I am unaware of the large majority of the documentary output he's already offered, and as a result it may well be the case that there was a point in time where the balance between text and illustrations he used to explain his approach would have been optimal in my view, but a pictureless wall of words (like the one you produced above ) is clearly one extreme, while simply posting a set of sequential progress photographs without any explanations at all is the other. Based on your message to David I downloaded his Nautilus Drydocks files, and I would much prefer a return to that format that includes written explanations and references to techniques, processes, materials, tools, parts, and products, but I realize that beggars and freeloaders can't be choosers, so I'll take what I can get .

 

[Wardster]

I take note of your opinion and maintain mine . I strongly disagree with your statement that "There is no happy medium". I have only seen a small fraction of David's oeuvre over the decades, so I am unaware of the large majority of the documentatry output he's already offered, and as a result it may well be the case that there was a point in time where the balance between text and illustrations he used to explain his approach would have been optimal in my view, but a pictureless wall of words (like the one you produced above ) is clearly one extreme, while simply posting a set of sequential progress photographs without any explanations at all is the other. Based on your message to David I downloaded his Nautilus Drydocks files, and I would much prefer a return to that format that includes written explanations and references to techniques, processes, materials, tools, parts, and products, but I realize that beggars and freeloaders can't be choosers, so I'll take what I can get .

How about if I offer this, as an idea of (perhaps, with David's permission) to get you a bit closer to what I believe you're hoping to obtain ... assuming David is okay with this idea, and assuming that I actually have picture-posting privileges, over here (I'm still pretty new to these forums, after all) ... I could offer to scan in some of the "balanced" articles he did, that were in print, in various cool old publications that I have copies of. And what I don't upload (because I don't have copies of certain things) perhaps other folks here could scan in, and upload for the group to see. It would still be various portions of David's body of work, of course. But I doubt any of us have seen all of it. I know I have not. That way, guys like you get to see some more of "the good stuff". And from the point of view of an "archivist," at least some of it is being "preserved" (in a sense) via carefully scanning it in, and uploading it.

I would add this: just having a "list" of what David did, in print, at one point or another, would be of great benefit to some of his interested fans. So even "just" that much, would help some of us.

What sayest thou, oh mighty one?

Would folks here be stepping on your toes, if we did any of this? Or if we did something like it? Are there any things we would not know about, that would make doing this stuff a "no-no"?

EDIT -- I want to make a few (hopefully helpful) comments to Martin Bayer, in regards to when he said this part of the above quote ... "I strongly disagree with your statement that "There is no happy medium". I have only seen a small fraction of David's oeuvre over the decades ..."

I guess I meant something more akin to, "In the minds of some viewers, no matter what any person who writes anything might say, to some specific people, it's going to be way too much verbiage and/or way too many photos; and to others, it's not nearly going to be enough."

I was trying to say that there's no easily-found consensus, among readers, on any writer's output. Add in differences in desired "tone," or "pace," or "depth," and what I was trying to say was that no writer is ever going to "please everyone". That I don't see how it is possible.

But, I do know of things that David has published ... and I'm happy to talk about those with enough detail that, hopefully, folks who want to find more of what he's said, can find it.

I also say that as a guy who has, in the past, written / photographed some scale modeling articles that got published, in one place or another. (Mostly "Sci-Fi & Fantasy Modeller" out of England, and a few articles in "Seaways' Ships In Scale". Both of which are out of print -- the traditional publishing world isn't as healthy as it once was, and some publications folded.)

My (admittedly limited) experiences lead me to believe that, generally speaking, the folks that love what you are offering, almost never "chime in" -- especially if you're not doing any publishing on the internet, but what you sent in, was published in the traditional (that is, "on paper") manner. But wow, do some readers ever throw their hats into the ring, with no hesitation, when that readers feels they have some reason to be angry at some writer, or other! Viciously so, in some cases. What I mainly meant was that there's no single "one size fits all" writerly definition of "how much is enough" as compared to "too little" or "too much".

I offer the following link, knowing that the author that link refers to (Larry Correia) is probably popular with some folks, here. (Or so I would assume?) He talks a lot more eloquently than I know how to, on the subject of what readers and writers might expect from one another ...

A Capitalist Novelist’s Guide to Fan Expectations and How Not To Be A Douche | Monster Hunter Nation

monsterhunternation.com

 

[Wardster]

To add to the very short list I had started, a post or three above ...

I know that "Fine Scale Modeler" used to have an index of all back issues, so, finding a copy of that and then looking up David's name, should show all (or at least most?) of his FSM appearances. I know that some folks kind of look down on that publication, but once upon a time, they had a lot more of what might be called "hardcore" scale modeling content, on a regular basis. And David was in his "Publish or Perish" mindset, in the days before the internet was what it is, these days. I can't speak for anyone else, but all of David's articles in FSM are still, as I see it, top-notch stuff. I particularly liked his article on the technique of "screeding"; but many others "rocked," as well.

Index-wise: ditto for the SubCommittee's "SCR" publication. If memory serves, not too many years back, the SCR folks came up with an index of what is probably all of their articles, up until that point. I'm not sure how searchable it is -- it's been a while since I took a look at that index.

Off the top of my head, I know that the two main DVD's that were once released by CultTVman were volume's number five ("Flying Submarine"; one disc) and volume seven (two discs, about the Seaview). With both of those being radio controlled vehicles; not "just" static models. I'm sure there are lots of tapes, and later discs, made by other sources / outlets, with Dave's contents. I only have a few of the discs. (There's some content on YouTube, too, I believe.)

That's probably just barely scratching the surface of all the info that David has shared, thus far.

 

[Wardster]

Thank, Ward, made my day. Nice to know the work is occasionally referenced.

David

Heehee. More like "routinely reverenced" ... but I'm glad you enjoyed seeing those words.

I have also been meaning to thank you, good sir, for the very kind comments you had made, several months ago -- back in what I believe was post #736 on this thread.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/merrimans-submarine-modelling-masterclass.31899/page-19#post-643869

... with those thoughts being very important ones, to me. Thanks much, my friend and mentor!

 

[Wardster]

For those who might hope to see more info, about what David has done, "in print" (and/or on the web), here are a few more items that would look good on a "Great Big List," as it were.

I glanced through some now-old (early-to-mid 2000's) scale modeling info, on an older PC I have, and was able to confirm a few things I had previously suspected, but hadn't "confirmed" ... so now I can add "Scale Modeler" magazine to the list of periodicals that David was once published in. I only had a few back issues of that publication, but I know that he did some articles in the 1990s. I'd love it if other folks here, who knew of exact issues or dates of his articles, would post that info. (I'm assuming here that David won't mind his "stalkers," errrr, his students and/or his "fans," like me, contributing info towards creating such publication lists?)

A publication out of England, called "Sci-Fi & Fantasy Modeller," came out in two different time periods. They were more or less a standard-for-the-time magazine, in / around the 1990s-ish time period. In that earlier incarnation, I know that David did articles in at least three issues of that publication: #29, #30, and #34. Those first two were a two-part'er called "So, you want to build effects miniatures?" and it covered not only Dave's work for the Star Trek universe, but Greg Jein's work, as well. The content of #34 was called a "Photo Scrapbook" and it showed a fair number of finished projects Merriman had worked on, over the years / decades. Keep in mind that it was the standard, at that time, for a lot of magazines to mostly have black-and-white photos, rather than "all colour" pages. (Which would have made the price very high.) I'm not saying those are every single thing he ever contributed; just the ones I found, right away, more or less from memory, by looking through my personal collection of back issues of SF&FM.

There is a book by "Evergreen Scale Models" called "Basic and Advanced Tips and Techniques For Styrene Modeling" that David has some content in. (Along with some other experts.) Subtitle on that publication is "How to Build, Paint and Finish Realistic Styrene Models". (Excellent book, or at least I think so!) Copyright date of the year 2000. It says "Compiled by Bob Hayden". I had, if memory serves, purchased my copy directly from the Evergreen people. It may still be "out"?

Over time, I'll see what I can do, about coming up with "Wayback Machine" archived web pages for things like the articles that David was releasing, in places like CultTVman's web site. For the time being, here's one such archived old, perhaps non-functional link ... in the original form (as taken from a print-out of all of those pages, which I had apparently printed out, in 2007) ...

http://culttvman.com/scratchbuilding.html

I didn't try it, but I assume that link, above, no longer works. Which is okay, because here is what a person finds, when they type that older link into the "Wayback Machine" itself:

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

That's a link to one of (in my opinion) David's most glorious (if also infamous) web articles. It's the one where he talks about how he was building a "Dove" fictional spacecraft, from scratch. The intro section, alone, bent so many people's noses out of shape, that it was arguably a legendary thing to have seen the meltdowns, "live," back then. But it's still awesome info!

Note that I'm only linking, above, to what amounts to be a "menu page" of possible "crawls" of that content, by the archivists who regularly venture out onto the internet, and archive things. So you'll have to look around, a bit, and pick one or more particular "crawls" to get as much of it as you can. At a glance, it looks like the tail end of 2008 might be a good place to search ... ??

Unless David tells me to stop doing this, I'll see what else I can come up with, over time, in terms of links to his great old articles from a couple of decades ago, once hosted on Cult's web site.

EDIT -- I couldn't help myself. I had to cut-and-paste the intro's text, from that article ...

(quotes on)

I, of course, need no introduction. However, before I proceed further, lets get some terms straight:

Most of you are common kit-assemblers. You are not 'model builders'. You simply stick model kits together. That painted hunk of styrene or resin resting so proudly on your dresser: the real model building was performed not by you, but by a guy who worked the masters, from which the tools that made the plastic parts were made, the parts that were dumped into a box, a box containing the plastic kit parts you bought at the store.

(Nowadays, CAD and CNC technologies have even dispensed with the need of employing Model Builders - Some companies take the work straight from drawing, to tool, to injection forming machine, to you, the kit assembler).

No, you stick model kits together, you are not a Model Builder.

I, on the other hand (and a precious few other CultTVMan guild members), am a true Model Builder - I create models from the basic construction mediums.

Accomplished Model Builders work with such mediums as clay, wood, metal, sheet plastic (and extruded industrial shapes), expanded foams, resin, and the like. We employ fabrication techniques to render those raw materials to the desired shape: machine and wood turning, resin and metal casting, acid-etching, GRP lay-up, vacuforming, and numerous other methods of achieving a model part or master. What technique the experienced model builder employs is driven by his real-life shop experience with the materials being worked and the physical challenges presented to the finished product.

Model Builders are compelled to acquire and sift through photos, plans, text and VHS/DVD/film records that pertain to the prototype; the subject; the 'real thing' we are making a model representation of. Further, Model Builders often have to prepare exacting orthographic drawings (projections of the subject in plan, profile, ends, and sections). Drawings needed to perform the critical layout and assembly tasks.

I am a Model Builder! I have and continue to invest a great deal of time and talent as I perfect my craft. I design, build, and popularize the kind of stuff you kit assemblers can only wait and hope to be realized as a styrene or resin kit - something you can handle. You guy's have to wait for someone else to produce resin parts to jazz up the same old ST kits. It's you guy's who have to sift through an array of after market painting stencils and decals, made by someone else, in order to breath a little new life into the same old kit subjects - model kits that thousands of others have stuck together. How boring!

Wouldn't you want to have the skills to achieve any subject, in model form, you wished? Would you rather not have to wait decades for your favorite SF subject to be produced as a simple kit? Hoping that some manufacturer takes on the risk of marketing such an esoteric subject at all!

You kit assemblers (most of my audience here) are likely to spend your entire lives talking about that ultimate scratch-build project', yet you'll never get farther than talking about it. Most SF kit assemblers talk about the craft yet invests very little time or effort perfecting their work. Did I just describe you, bunky?

I've been to two Wonderfest events. Saw lots of talking in the halls, in the suites, in the restaurant downstairs. But, I only saw a precious few worthwhile SF vehicle models on the tables. There were a lot of talented people roaming the halls at that convention (and other competitions), why don't you take advantage? Stop those guy's who's work you respect, and suck their brains dry?

Well, I can't teach you discipline. But, I can teach you a few techniques. If you have the guts to listen and the smarts to learn. follow me.

(quotes off)

 

[merriman]

How about if I offer this, as an idea of (perhaps, with David's permission) to get you a bit closer to what I believe you're hoping to obtain ... assuming David is okay with this idea, and assuming that I actually have picture-posting privileges, over here (I'm still pretty new to these forums, after all) ... I could offer to scan in some of the "balanced" articles he did, that were in print, in various cool old publications that I have copies of. And what I don't upload (because I don't have copies of certain things) perhaps other folks here could scan in, and upload for the group to see. It would still be various portions of David's body of work, of course. But I doubt any of us have seen all of it. I know I have not. That way, guys like you get to see some more of "the good stuff". And from the point of view of an "archivist," at least some of it is being "preserved" (in a sense) via carefully scanning it in, and uploading it.

I would add this: just having a "list" of what David did, in print, at one point or another, would be of great benefit to some of his interested fans. So even "just" that much, would help some of us.

What sayest thou, oh mighty one?

Would folks here be stepping on your toes, if we did any of this? Or if we did something like it? Are there any things we would not know about, that would make doing this stuff a "no-no"?

If it's OK with this forums Administrator and Moderators... shit yeah! It's OK with me. I'm flattered, Ward. You keeper-of-the-flame, you.

David

 

[Wardster]

If it's OK with this forums Administrator and Moderators... shit yeah! It's OK with me. I'm flattered, Ward. You keeper-of-the-flame, you.

David

Awesomeness! Bwaahaha! Thank you kindly, generous sir, for being okay with this sort of thing!

I'll hold off on uploading any scanned images, for right now, just in case the admins or the mods might have some potential copyright types of issues, regarding fans uploading page scans? I truly don't want to step on anyone's toes, on that; and I do take copyrights seriously, etc.

But in the meantime, I will (happily!) keep going on things like looking up my old printouts of some of your CultTVman article series, so that I can type in the then-current web links ... which might lead to "buried treasure" that are semi-hidden in the archives of the Wayback Machine.

Thanks again, David! You rock, my friend and mentor!

 

[Wardster]

Article series -- "David Merriman's Fifty Seven Inch Seaview"

Link to original article, on CultTVman's web site. (Note that this old link may no longer work.)

http://culttvman.com/david_merriman_s_57__seaview.html

Menu page on the "Wayback Machine":

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

 

[Wardster]

Article series -- "David Merriman's Flying Sub"

Link to original article, on CultTVman's web site. (Note that this old link may no longer work.)

http://culttvman.com/david_merriman_s_flying_sub_pr.html

Menu page on the "Wayback Machine":

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

 

[Wardster]

Article series -- "David Merriman's Classic Enterprise"

Link to original article, on CultTVman's web site. (Note that this old link may no longer work.)

http://culttvman.com/david_merriman___building_the_.html

Menu page on the "Wayback Machine":

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

 

[Wardster]

Article series -- "David Merriman's Acid-Etching Article"

Link to original article, on CultTVman's web site. (Note that this old link may no longer work.)

http://culttvman.com/acid-etching.html

Menu page on the "Wayback Machine":

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

 

[Wardster]

Article series -- "David Merriman's Scratch-built Dove Spacecraft"

Link to original article, on CultTVman's web site. (Note that this old link may no longer work.)

http://culttvman.com/scratchbuilding.html

Menu page on the "Wayback Machine":

Wayback Machine

web.archive.org

 

[Wardster]

Here's a link to the book I had mentioned (several posts ago) that was by Evergreen Scale Models:

14 - HOW TO BOOK STYRENE MODELING

Styrene Modeling is the first comprehensive book on modeling with styrene. You’ll find hundreds of tips and techniques on how to assemble and improve plastic kits. Styrene Modeling includes detailed, how-to modeling advice from more than a dozen accomplished craftsmen who have built every...

evergreenscalemodels.com

Again -- This isn't a "totally by David, only" book. But he's got some really good info in it, so that's why I'm including it. (I don't wanna leave out any goodness, now, do I!?)

Note that it appears that site has a free PDF that a person can download, as a sample chapter.

 

[Wardster]

And here's a (partial) index of all of the articles that were once put out, by a periodical called "Fine Scale Modeler" magazine. Note that this link only covers the period from when that publication first began (in 1982) on up through 1997 ...

1982-1997 All Time Index: Volumes 1-15 | Finescale Modeler Magazine

USING THE INDEX: Most feature articles have been indexed two or more times - once by title, again under the author's last name, and by subject. An asterisk (*) preceding an entry indicates a feature listed by its title.

finescale.com

This next link should let you have access to some more of their index listings -- one per year, it looks like, after their first 15 volumes ...

Magazine Index | Finescale Modeler Magazine

FineScale Modeler magazine - Essential magazine for scale model builders, model kit reviews, how-to scale modeling, and scale modeling products.

finescale.com

I know that at least one article by David came out in FSM, in the year 2002: the "screeding" article I had mentioned was in FSM's Feb 2002 issue. (On pages 48 through 51; and all in full color.) I am not organized enough, with my personal collection of FSM back issues, to know, off-hand, which other issues David had articles in. Seems like several, from back in the 1980s and/or 1990s.

 

[Wardster]

This time, I'm going to try to attach a (*.PDF) file. It's an index to the first one-hundred plus issues of the SCR periodical; made by an organization that is still around. I'm fairly sure (?) that they may (?) have made another, then-newer index file at some point? But this is the index file that I have on hand, so it's the one I'll include here. (See attachment, if all goes well.) David used to be quite active in that "SubCommittee" group (as some of you readers likely already know) ... so there's likely to be quite a few very detailed, cool how-to articles that a person can look up. (And can still obtain, through that group; as far as I know. One low annual membership fee gives you access to, as far as I know, the entire run of SCR publications -- across several decades of its existence.)

Here's a link to that group's spot on the web -- where you can look for SCR back issues, etc.

Home | Subcommittee

www.subcommittee.com

 

[Wardster]

This link, I can't check (my browser is acting up; sorry!) but I think it's valid as the YouTube channel that David has some videos uploaded to. (Apologies if I'm not listing the right one, or whatever?)

https://www.youtube.com/user/montigobear/videos

 

[Wardster]

As for things that David used to release, online, that he once called "Cabal Reports" ... those were super interesting, too ... but I'm not sure I have the most recent / accurate web links to them? I'll include what looks (?) like the two most recent bookmarks, so folks can access that cool info.

David Merriman's Cabal Reports Etc - The Sub-drivers Forum

Read David Merriman's Cabal Reports Here.

forum.rc-sub.com

Merriman Cabal Reports | Drydocks

www.rc-submarine.com

 

[Wardster]

I feel like I'm reading an advert's text, when I say this next part ... "But wait, there's even more!"

I know that David once wrote for a publication called "Scale Modeler," but I don't have anything even remotely worthy of being called a "list" or an "index" of what articles he once submitted, for publication, in that periodical. (Sorry!) Is anyone aware of a list of such things? Or an "index"?

The only issues of "Scale Modeler" that I'm reasonably certain David had articles in were the June 1989 (v24) issue and the sep 1992 (v27) issue. Knowing David, he likely had a (no pun intended) boatload of other articles in this publication, over time, but I have no listing of what issues, etc.

 

[Wardster]

I know that David (as I had mentioned, earlier) also released DVDs, and before that, I believe tapes, showing various kinds of scale modeling info. I have no listings of what titles would be included on that sub-list, either. I'm pretty sure that David released some when he was working with a fellow that, if memory serves, was named Mike Caswell. But I'm not sure what that list once looked like.

 

[Wardster]

As for the three articles by David that I mentioned, that were in the earlier incarnation of SF&FM ... those I might be able to secure permission to post. I say that because I once asked for (in writing, and received, in writing) permission to post my own articles that had been in the later incarnation of "Sci-Fi & Fantasy Modeller". I won't know until I ask, if they'll be okay with that? But since I can just screen-grab what David said, above, showing that he's okay with it ... hopefully, SF&FM's guys (publishers) would be okay with me scanning in the individual pages from David's 1990s-era articles, in reasonably hi-res, so that they could be posted here. It's worth asking them; so I'll do that.

If anyone cares to see some "student work" that was done by (me) one of Mister Merriman's "scale modeling students / cult members / disciples / or whatever," here's a link for that:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/2043682082594379/user/100068411671599/

Over there, I posted most of the articles I once did, which had appeared in print, in the second incarnation of SF&FM. (My real name = "Ward Shrake"; pen name used on that online group = "Ward Ess".) I tried to upload only one article per "album" -- consisting of individual page scans, plus some of the original photos; so some of the details could be seen more clearly, than in the sometimes shrunken-down images. There's some other nerdy silliness by me, over there, too.

Anyway, I'm hoping that I can relay a message to the publishers of that Late Great magazine, through their editor (which I still stay in pretty regular contact with) ... so, hopefully, I can get official permission from those folks, to scan in David's 1990s article, and post them here.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Anyway, I'm hoping that I can relay a message to the publishers of that Late Great magazine, through their editor (which I still stay in pretty regular contact with) ... so, hopefully, I can get official permission from those folks, to scan in David's 1990s article, and post them here.

Good Luck!

 

[Wardster]

Good Luck!

Thanks! And I just did that, a bit ago. So it's "in the works," as far as asking for permission ... I sent a screen-grab with the request, so that they can see that David's okay with this stuff happening.

 

[Wardster]

Questions for the "Powers That Be" on these forums -- since I don't want to "do bad stuff" even if it is "potentially morally ambiguous" stuff, that is being done with good intent behind it.

If it sounds like I'm over-doing the caution: I asked my own publishers if it was okay to release my own articles, online, even though they were out of that business, several years before I had asked; and the original written (informal, via email) agreement between them and me was that all rights reverted to me, after their first publication of any given article. That said, I think they had only asked (at the start of me working with them) that they hoped I would be okay with it, if they had ever asked me to be a part of any "best of" specials they might make (standard questions they had with any then-new author, or so it seemed) and they would prefer that I waited two years, after the publication date, to release anything of my own articles, online. Thus giving them time to sell off any back issues they might still have in stock.

So I have a history of being pretty cautious; and trying to be "more than fair".

In prep for when I (later) get around to dealing with David's older articles, from the periodical named "Fine Scale Modeler," I made two screen-grabs.

One image shows that "Merriman" is a known search term, on that web site; but I'm not seeing anything specific, as of now, that is tied to that name. They did list a heading, with his first name added, like products used to fall under that heading -- so they "know that term," as it were. But I was hoping, initially, I could just link directly to back issues; telling folks here to buy that back issue. The only one (back issue) I tried to pull up, though, in their back issue section, said "This product is out of stock and is currently discontinued". Which seems to me to be more like "it is arguably morally okay to offer scans" than "that back issue was still in stock, but you offered a copy of it, anyway; which is uncool". So, before I do anything, I want to "pause to check".

(I'm also asking, so I can test if I can upload images ... which I hadn't yet tried to do, over here.)

I guess I'm asking the mods / admins on these forums if I scan in the pages for some back issue's article, that David Merriman originally wrote, and I'm doing that with David's okay, and it is no longer for sale by that publication (which I'd be happy to prove -- see below) ... is it okay for me to upload scans of that one article, from that one back issue? Or ... ??

I'd rather ask a few nerdy questions, than to risk ticking off anyone, by rushing into such things.

 

[Wardster]

An update: over the last 24 hours, I looked around, within my personal collection of scale modeling magazines, and (thus far) have found eleven "printed on paper" articles by David D. Merriman III, that I plan to scan in, at some point. I might have some others, too -- I'll keep looking, to see what other articles I may already have, which I can easily lay my hands on, for scanning purposes.

Because some folks here (like me) might prefer "the real thing" to scans, and might want to hunt these back issues down, on places like eBay, I'll include some hopefully-helpful search details.

The articles that I know I already have, which are now awaiting scanning, are these back issues:

- - - -

"Fine Scale Modeler" magazine; Nov/Dec 1984 issue; "Casting Resin Parts in RTV Molds"; article is 3.66 pages long (with photos and line drawings; all are B&W). Note that David is pictured, near a body of water, dressed head to toe in what looks to me like a "hard hat" diving suit -- the sort of thing that writers like Jules Verne would have probably greatly appreciated seeing.

- - - -

"Fine Scale Modeler" magazine; April 1987 issue; "Scratchbuilding C.S.S. Hunley in 1/24 scale"; article is six pages long (1 page = color; 5 = B&W); the article includes scale drawings (plan; profile; ends).

- - - -

"Fine Scale Modeler" magazine; May 1994 issue; "Advanced Molding and Casting Techniques"; article is four pages long (mostly in color); subtitle on article is "Making RTV and fiberglass molds to produce a cast-resin and white-metal 1/96 scale RAN Collins-class submarine".

- - - -

"Fine Scale Modeler" magazine; Feb 2002 issue; "Meet Screeding -- Create your own parts with this unique modeling technique"; article is four pages long (mostly in color); articles covers how to create parts that are both linear (straight line) parts, or radial (ring-like or circular) parts. A fictional (movie, 1955; "Conquest of Space") space station is created, using both techniques.

- - - -

"Scale Modeler" magazine; June 1989 issue (volume 24, number 6); "Building the U.S.S. Gato Nuclear Fast Attack Submarine"; 9.66 pages long (4 in color; rest are B&W).

- - - -

"Scale Modeler" magazine; Sep 1992 issue (volume 27 number 9); Part one; Article title is "Building A Model The Naval Research Submarine NR-1" with a subtitle of "Building A Museum Quality 1/192 Scale Model Of This Nuclear-Powered Research Submarine, Which Was Placed In Service In 1969"; article is 7.33 pages long (most is B&W; one page is in color).

- - - -

"Scale Modeler" magazine; Oct 1992 issue (volume 27, number 10); Part two of the NR-1 Naval Research submarine article; 5.66 pages long (one color page).

- - - -

"Scale Models International"; Jan 1992 issue; "A Look At D&E Miniatures -- Mat Irvine describes American modeller David Merriman's Garage Company"; article is 3 pages long (all B&W).

- - - -

"Sci-Fi & Fantasy Models" magazine; Issue #29 (approx 1998 time period); Article title is "So, You Want To Build Effects Miniatures?!"; This is part one of a two-part article; 5 pages long (one page is in color; rest is B&W.) Most of the photos and text are describing Greg Jein's and ILM's work on creating a rather large physical model of a fictional space vessel from the Star Trek universe; the "NCC-1701-D" or "Enterprise D". Greg Jein had shared slides with David Merriman; and the latter is describing the work done, to create a master of that model; mold it; and cast a copy of it (in a lighter material); with some photos showing the paint work being done on the final model.

- - - -

"Sci-Fi & Fantasy Models" magazine; Issue #30 (approx 1998 time period); Article title is "So, You Want To Build Effects Miniatures?!"; This is part two of a two-part article; 6.75 pages long (all in B&W). This article covers various scale modeling things that D&E Miniatures did, within the world of making physical models of fictional spacecraft (warp engine parts, etc.) and also some work on making effects models for use on locally-produced TV shows.

- - - -

"Sci-Fi & Fantasy Models" magazine; Issue #34 (approx 1999 time period); Article title is "David Merriman -- A Photo Scrapbook"; article is 5 B&W pages long -- plus about 3/4 of the inside front cover (in color). Shows a good selection of various models built by the author, over time.

- - - -

... and that's all for now, folks! I'll keep looking, to see what else I can come up with ... but there is already a LOT of info that's been linked to, or described, for folks here to go and explore!! (The links to the place where the download-able zip file of the Cabal Reports are, is around 300 megabytes of kick-ass scale modeling content, just by itself; if memory serves!! And those few articles I included Wayback Machine menu pages to, for the articles once hosted on the web site of CultTVman, are "classic" articles, in my opinion -- with oodles of how-to details to ponder.)

 

[Wardster]

(Thanks for the "likes," Scott Kenny"! Much appreciated!)

For those who love getting your hands on real paper magazines, it looks like there may be a chance to still get at least one of the back issues from FSM.

I had no joy (as you folks saw, above) with looking for the 2002 issue, online, at FSM's Back Issue search function. The 1984 issue wasn't even listed (which does not make sense to a completist like me, but what-cha-gonna-do?) and the 1987 issue just gave me a "page not found" error ... but this one looks okay:

FineScale Modeler May 1994

May 1994

kalmbachhobbystore.com

That's the May 1994 issue of FSM, with an article in it, by Mr. Merriman. So it looks like that one may (if it's not a database mistake) still be available?

Also: in nerding out, and looking through some folders on some older PCs in my collection, I came up with some download-able PDF files, that were official index's. And surprise, surprise: that version goes back farther than today's web site does. I'm not sure what that's all about. But I'll upload that file, anyway.

 

[Wardster]

An update -- I recently received written confirmation via email (through editor, Andy Pearson) that Mike Reccia, the publisher of "Sci-Fi & Fantasy Models," magazine, has no problems with David Merriman's work from SF&FM being scanned in, by me, and shared with fans of that man's work ... so I'll get to work on scanning in those three back issues from that cool 1990's UK publication. (Thanks much to Mike R. and Andy P., for their mega-coolness in all of this!)

Meanwhile: I was re-reading the cool old article in issue #34 of SF&FM, and I was reminded that I still have a DVD of a movie that some of David's sci-fi model work was once seen in. Some of the movies that David worked on, tended to be very well-known properties, with huge budgets and top-notch screenwriters; along with top-name TV or feature film stars. This movie wasn't one of those. I haven't watched the film in years, but I don't recall thinking that it was the best screen-writing, or acting, or the like -- but that's kind of par for the course, on a lot of "B" movies. (And some modern day folks might argue that's true with too many of today's high-budget Hollywood entertainment, too -- but I'll behave, and try not to insult anyone's favorite franchises.) My point is that a lot of folks look past that part of things, and just enjoy things for what they are. Personally, I had only bought the DVD to be able to see some of David's sci-fi models, as created for that production; so the rest of the film was kind of not relevant, to me.

As a side note: having done a bit of low-level (mostly "background") acting, myself, around 2000 to 2003-ish, I can say that low-budget productions are often the most fun to work on! And the flying saucers models David made are represented on the DVD's front cover ... which is also likely a fun thing, for any model-makers to see. Not every movie or TV show has to have a huge budget, to be fun to work on some part of it! I'm sure this film was no different, in that regard.

Anyway, the film seems to have been released under at least two different names. The name mentioned in issue #34 of the 1990s version of SF&FM was "Midnight Movie Massacre" but the DVD that I have calls itself "Attack From Mars". Here's what the DVD sleeve artwork looks like ...



I'll try to get the article from issue #34 of Sci-Fi & Fantasy Models scanned in, soon-ish, so that you folks here can see the various cool models in that article; including some close-ups of some of the models used in the "B-movie," above.

 

[Wardster]

Okay ... Here's the scans for David's late-1990s article, as seen in issue #34 of "Sci-Fi & Fantasy Models". I don't have a way to turn these separate images into one PDF file, so it's going to be a process of me scanning and uploading individual images: one image per page. I did take care during the scanning process, to make these look as nice as possible. (Starting with my own back issue collection, which I tend to keep in reasonably good condition -- excepting that they're meant as original "reading" copies -- not as some museum-grade, super-pristine versions.) I scanned in the covers, and the tables of contents, too: so that fans of "the real thing" would have a better idea of what to look for, if they want to seek out an original copy of this issue.

Technical note: this is sort of the "web" version of these scans. I did scans at 300 dots per inch, on my trusty old HP flatbed scanner; but the file sizes were so huge that I made digital copies, as second files, from those 300 dpi scans -- reducing those secondary files down to 50% in size, pixel-wise; or 1/4 in file size. (So it's sort of like making "150 dpi scans" ... but not exactly.)

Anyway ... here they are ... and as noted, I did ask for and receive permission from David, himself, as the original author of these articles; and I also asked for and received permission from Mike, the publisher; and both of those folks were okay with sharing these older articles, in this way. I should note that no one is making these images / articles "public domain," though -- this is still David Merriman's stuff; it's just being shared with fans.

 

[merriman]

 

[Wardster]

As promised, here's the next installment in a series of scanned "vintage" articles ... with (as mentioned before) David Merriman's approval, since he's the author of these original articles.

In re-reading this article's text, Nerdy Little Me couldn't help but notice some tantalizing notes, for magazine article collectors: showing me that (as I had suspected and/or strongly believed would be the case) my small collection of articles once penned by Mister Merriman is barely scratching the surface of what he originally had caused to be in print, in various publications.

Note that on the first actual page of this article, the text in the first column mentions that David "... is also a modelling writer and his articles on space, science fiction, aeronautical and nautical matters have appeared in such as Scale Modeler, Scale Ship Modeler, and in Japan, Model Art".

I take it since UK-based publications tend to use two "L's" in the word "modeller" and US-based publications tend to only use one "L" in that word, that the "Scale Ship Modeler" publication may be US-based? (I am not sure if I have any back issues of a publication with that exact name, but I definitely have "some" of various US-based ship modeling publications. I'll take a look.)

I already knew about some articles that appeared in "Scale Modeler" -- but I'm assuming that there are many more articles in those magazines, than I currently know about -- so I hope other folks here, over time, will endeavor to "fill in any gaps" that I might unfortunately leave, with my future scans from the few other back issues I currently have. (Or, alternately, will list the specific names / dates of any I didn't mention, in the lists I made, a few posts ago.)

I'm just trying to get the ball rolling, here, folks ... but I definitely don't "have everything".

Also note that (in the paragraph just below the one, quoted above) it says "... and the review can be found in the September 1990 edition of SMI". I would assume that "SMI" apparently means this same publication, that is, in that back issue of "Scale Models International".

 

[Wardster]

I was originally going to post these scans of cool old articles in some kind of "sensible" order ... but what the heck, anarchy it is, on the precise order these end up getting posted in. Here's one of the four total appearances I am presently aware of, when / where David Merriman had an article in this publication. (The list of all of the publications I have on hand, and could scan in, is several posts ago. Note that, as mentioned previously, I did check this company's web site, first, to make sure this back issue was no longer being sold. Seems like this one is out of stock; drat. I'm including the cover page and the table of contents, with all of these scans, so fans of having "the real (paper-based) thing" in their collections, could look for back issues in other places.)

 

[merriman]

 

[Wardster]

Questions for you, David: I'm wondering about paint chemistry. It appears you clearly built up multiple layers of paints. I assume that the layers closest to the substrate would have had to take both chemically attacks, and also attacks via abrasion, to resist the weathering steps. Not to mention any knocks or bumps or collisions that the model would take, during it's life. Based on what you've said in the past, I'm assuming you very likely used automotive grade primers, then auto-grade paints, initially. Then, I'm guessing some kind of a tough clear coat? Then, what's the chemistry on the weathering paints you used? Looks almost like gray primer, in terms of color; but I'm doubting that's what it is? I'm assuming that it could be acrylic paints, or ... ??

Also ... behind the scenes, I'm still scanning in more of your articles. I have five more of them scanned in, so far (the other two by SF&FM and 2 more from FSM) but I want to wait a day or two before posting most of them -- to be sure that I didn't make any scanning errors.

Meanwhile ... here's an enlargement I made, from your Nov-Dec 1984 article in "Fine Scale Modeler" magazine. This first one's just a straight-forward 600 dpi flatbed scanner image.




This next one is that same basic image, but with a "Guassian Blur" filter having been run on it, to attempt to knock back some of the "screening" effect that FSM introduced, during the printing process. (Using a value of "2.00" I believe it was.) If anyone wonders what equipment I'm using, it's all pretty old, by today's standards. I'm using a graphics manipulation program called "Paint Shop Pro," by JASC software; version 5.01, from the late 1990s. And an HP scanner that isn't a lot more new than that. On a PC that's pretty much a thrift-store find, by today's standards. But it gets the job done, well enough to please me, for most tasks.) Anyway, here's the version that's been somewhat "filtered" to reduce that printer's screening pattern, as much as I could.



The reason the equipment I'm using is of any importance, in this context, will be apparent when I upload the Fine Scale Modeler article, that originally came out in late 1984. They're showing a one-page article, elsewhere in that same issue, with an Apple II series home computer being used, to do scale calculations; with two 5.25 inch floppy disc drives visible in that article's photo. And they did something that used to be fairly common, back then: printing a listing in the article, that the magazine's buyer was supposed to type in ... this being WAY before anything like the public internet existed. Heck, Personal Computer's were not even called "PC's" back in the mid-1980s: instead, they got called things like "IBM semi-compatibles," back then. Black and white (or green-tinted B&W, or yellow-tinted) screens were common. Colors were not: either on a screen, or on that era's printers. A mouse, as an input device, hadn't yet become common. And storage devices as physically as small as CD-ROM discs, that users could save data to, may as well have been science-fiction, at that point. And no, USB and the internet didn't exist, either.

I bring all of that techie stuff up to say that, yes, Mister Merriman even had kick-ass advice for we scale modelers, way back when PC technology was still very much in its infancy! Even back then, the advice he was giving, in print, was solid info with a high "signal to noise ratio".

And having seen other articles, in various publications, from back then ... yeah, Merriman was sharing the good / advanced scale modeling info with his readers, even four decades ago.

So if it sounds like I'm in "bow down and worship" mode, over the contents of the various how-to articles that David once got published, hey, that's only because that's the case. (So there.)