What drives your choice of subject matter?

[WarrenD]

Just for fun, I thought I'd throw this one out there. I got to thinking about the how and why of my modeling choices. I'm sure everyone is going to say, "Well, it's some of both."  However, when it comes down to the wire, which one is truly driving your choice.
As for me, I find it more fulfilling is my subject is one I've studied at length, if possible. My interests in modeling subjects usually have something to do with some reading I've done that I found inspiring, etc.

On my list of "to do's" because of this are:

- Any of Guynemer's crates because he's been a hero of mine since childhood
- Degelow's D.VII because in reading about him he has become my favorite of the German aces.
- Elliot White Spring's SE5 because my wife and son bought me a copy of War Bird many moons ago, etc.

The list goes on from there, but you get my meaning.

Warren

[nmroberto]

Like you said,  it's a bit of both but I do tend to choose interesting (at least to me) air craft.  I know it's probably shallow of me but I'm drawn to the AC first then the history of which particular one I decide on.

[sobrien]

My first criteria is if the aircraft interests me. Then it would be markings. I could really like a pilot and appreciate his accomplishments, but if his markings are boring, I won't build his plane. I have built mostly single seaters, but I had to have the Felistowe.
Sean

[coyotemagic]

Like Sean, it's mostly an interesting aircraft type that motivates me.  The more obscure, the better.  Then comes the scheme.  I like aircraft that embody the wood and fabric characteristics of our era of choice.  I also like rigging.  I guess that's why I'm not really a fan of the Fokker family, although you would never know it by the number of D.VIIs I've been doing lately.  In spite of my personal preferences, I do tend to get caught up in the excitement and comradery of group builds. 
There are a few pilots whose stories capture my imagination.  I plan on doing my WNW SE5a in McElroy's markings for that very reason, but for the most part, my models rarely depict mounts of the aces. 
Sometimes, I'll have a subject in mind and plan the build for months, then suddenly look at my stash and simply grab something at random for no explicable reason.  Hmm.  Guess that's not much of an answer, is it.
Cheers,
Bud

[uncletony]

membership in the virtual Jasta 2 (Rise of Flight online squadron) got me interested in Jasta 2 Boelcke...

[Des]

An interesting marking or colour scheme, not really, in my eyes all the WW1 aircraft looked good regardless of how they were dressed and colour or markings makes no difference to what I build.
The history of the pilot or squadron, again, not really, I class ALL the pilots and observers who manned these machines as heroes, some stood out above others due to their exploits but they all deserve recognition. I very very rarely build a model based on the pilot who flew it or the squadron it belonged to, I build my models because I like the aeroplane, the more wood, canvas and rigging the better.
There should be another choice in the poll - an interseting aircraft type - this I would vote for.

Des.

[eindecker]

For me it's a complex question. There are many reasons why I am attracted to specific models. First, but perhaps not the most important, it will be a subject that is of historical interest to me. For example, I have this thing for F1 cars, drivers and history. I think the Williams F14B is one of the most innovative F1 cars designed, and created such a stir that the FIAA banned it, so I tracked down a 1:12 Tamiya kit so that I'd have sufficient detail in the build.

I am a US Navy veteran and spent considerable time in the Pacific. I was born during the great naval battles off Guadalcanal in 1942 and have intense interest in that place, period and the actions in the Pacific war in general. Having read "Shattered Sword" a couple of times, I want to build the IJN Akagi and have a model on order from HLJ.

Steve McQueen's movie "Le Mans" is one of my favorite, so I have a Fujimi Porsche 917 Le Mans car kit on the shelf.

Fascinated by the early days of flight, I have built a number of Eindeckers including one Wingnut Wings E-III kit which I reviewed for the IPMS USA website, and have the E-I and will get the E-IV. History here is the driving force for these kits.

I have read a fair number of books on the American Civil War and have a 1:96 scale Cottage Industry Models USS Monitor in progress, along with a USS Alligator submarine. I plan to build another ironclad or two as well.

As far as Wingnut Wings kits go, I'd say that I'm attracted firstly by those whose histories, or the histories of their pilots, I am familiar with. Then, I look at which markings I like. I tend to lean toward more wood than canvas, i.e., on Albatraii and Rolands. I am very grateful that Wingnut Wings produce larger two and multi-crewed aircraft because I knew little about them. I'd been concentrating on the single seaters but now I have built a Junkers, an F.2b and have a Roland, DFW, Gotha and Felixstowe...

But, I don't build aircraft that I don't like the looks of. This is, of course, entirely subjective and I accept that. I can get interested in an aircraft because of the way the kit is designed and the possibilities inherent in building it. The Wingnut Wings Snipe is an example. I know little of it's history, but the look of the aircraft is intriguing and the kit looks fun and challenging to build. The "Ninak" does nothing for me.

Funky aircraft are high on my list. I'm still kicking myself for not getting a Harry Tate. In that vein, I sincerely hope that Wingnut Wings goes a little more retro and gives us something like a Taube or a Spinne or Farman kit. That would approach the "too cool" line and I'd certainly get one of each.

Not much help for your poll I'm afraid.

[Kai]

I like to chose aircraft that look different, be that the design, size or camo finish.

So the Felixstowe ticked all the boxes! Pushers I love because they just scream WWI and look so different to your average aeroplane.

German types are attractive to me because they look cool - the Albatros's for instance - and the very colourful camo finishes they can have add a lot of variety. Because the Germans built so very many types, they have a lot of variety resulting in the Roland Ciia & HB float planes, which again look different.

British types outside of the DH2 and Fe2 I'm not so keen on. I enjoy the build, but the preponderance of PC10 means I just don't look forward to painting. Pheon helps with their decals though.

[WarrenD]

Hey guys, quit apologizing for your answers as there is no right or wrong answer in this. I was curious about what drives folks to model what they do. It's just for grins.

Des, I'd say that being interested in a particular a/c because of how it looks or how it's made falls under the same kind of category as color scheme/markings.

It seems that most of the posters are firmly in the markings/color scheme/aircraft side of things as opposed to the history of the pilot, etc, but the poll numbers, at least in this early stage, have them almost even at 7:5.

Interesting!

Warren

[RAGIII]

Warren, I Model Squadrons from both sides, have for years so I chose Pilot or Squadron. I do Aircraft of JG1, 19,43, and 56 Squadron RFC/RAF, The Lafayette Escadrille(N124/SPA124, etc. On the other hand I also try to choose interesting markings within the parameters I HAVE SET. Also break away occasionally if I just like the Aircraft, such as the Sopwith Triplane, DH2, and my future(hopefully), builds of 2 seaters like the Salmson!
RAGIII

[davecww1]

Hi Warren,
As you know from my previous correspondence on several other forums, the history of certain pilots and aircraft especially interest me, especially the Lafayette Escadrile or its fore-bearer, Escadrille Americane.  Seeing that that's what I'm concentrating on I have to build more than a couple of different Nieuports.  But in order to narrow down a whole squadron of aircraft I choose the best looking to me, aslong as the pilot has historical significance.  This has also lead me to widen my horizon, for next year I want to complete not just a few N.124 aircraft, but a collection of Nieuports over Verdun for the 1916 centennial.  So not only the Nieuport 11 and 16 flown by americans, but also by Guynemer, Nungesser and Navarre.  So history/pilots is the first consideration, but then figuring which of Navarre's 4 or 5 different Nieuports I want to do it comes down to what will look best on the shelf, therefore I will choose the most striking and unique one, the N.16 with red fuselage and clear doped linen upper wing. 
Dave C

[Edo]

hi Dave! a good question, but as Des said, I'd vote for an intresting aircraft type.
to me the overall shape, the ingenuity of those first attempt to make something actually fly are irresistible. the more a plane seems, well, a plane (resembling what came in later years), the less is atractive! 
ciao
edo

[andonio64]

Hallo, I missed this...
This is a good topic indeed and triggers many thoughts, I personally am always interested by the man / the men who used the plane I decide to model, so before starting I do some research about the story of the pilots fewing the plane I chose to build, sometimes I chose to build a plane after having read the story... I also look for a photo of the man I am reading about.
The  markings or color schemes come after.
Sometimes it could happen I get curious about a color scheme that becomes the starting point of my research, but if it does not lead to a pilot in the end it is likely to be abandoned.

So Des, as you anticipated I'm one who could say: "Well, it's some of both" but I definitely vote for the pilot(s) driving the machines.

Ciao

Antonio

[stefanbuss]

For me it's a matter of the subject's weirdness sometimes (like the Albatros D.V veteran, that came from JaSta 11 and ended up in FEA6 as a trainer), it's uglyness (Junker J.1 anyone) or some personal relationship to the subject. The last point has triggered quite a few topics:

- The second to last Panther (the tank) ever built is now on permanent display in the Wehrtechnische Studiensammlung in Koblenz. It has received the nickname "Ulrike", which is my wife's name. So that tank had to be built.
- For some years i was employed near Toulouse/France, and i was very interested in the biography of Hermann Graf, then (who was a football player and Jagdflieger during WW2). Hermann Graf was commanding an ErgJG during 1943, in Toulouse, so i had to build one of his (very colourful) aircraft as well.
- The WNW W.12 early has a marking option for 1401/17, which was stationed at the Seeflugstation List on the island of Sylt (Germany). I was born on Sylt and lived there for some twenty years - seeing that option not only made me buy the kit, but decided the markings immediately. And i like the type's design, btw.

Markings are normally a subject for my wife, who decides what version will be built, in case the "personal relationship" doesn't overrule everything else.

Stefan

[Pgtaylorart]

As an artist, I'm a visual person and am drawn to the looks of an airplane first and foremost. In fact, I usually don't even know anything about the pilot or much of the history of a particular plane. I'm very interested in the history as a whole of WW1 aircraft and the evolution of each type. I don't know if that makes me shallow, but I see nothing wrong with appreciating something purely on aesthetics.

I'm a bit unusual though. I actually prefer drab colors. PC10, CDL -especially where the ribs show through. Even with the wild German colors I prefer the more muted tones on some Fokker D.VIIs, etc., and the Albatros with mostly varnished wood fuselages. Somehow, models with good weathering, drab colors and natural wood, cloth, and metal surfaces look much more realistic to my eye. Although to the credit of the amazing modelers here, many of the brightly colored and unusual schemes have been successfully accomplished.

Ultimately what draws me is the hand made craftsman quality of WW1 aircraft. The beautiful wood finishes, hand sewn linens and leathers, bare metals of differing contrasting colors and textures, brush painted markings and personal graphics, and lacy, intricate rigging, sometimes akin to the beauty of a clipper ship. Add to this the mud, dirt, dust, oil, grime, and there's no end to the possibilities in taking modeling to a true art form.

-George