# Do You Buy Or Own Recast Kits?



## crazypredator2 (Dec 1, 2009)

I am totally against recast kits, unless it's someone helping someone, who has a missing part, from an old out of production kit,i can understand that..)
i would never buy a recast kit from those recasters in thailand on ebay.
i have been ripped off one time, i bought a kit, that the owner claimed was an original kit, but turned out to be a recast, i would love to meet him in a dark alley.


----------



## mcdougall (Oct 28, 2007)

Nope...Dead against them ...
Mcdee:thumbsup:


----------



## Auroranut (Jan 12, 2008)

No. I want nothing to do with 'em....

Chris.


----------



## hedorah59 (Nov 24, 2008)

Nope - A big No to recasts here...


----------



## sprayray (May 13, 2009)

Same here !!!!!!!!!!!

Robert/Sprayray


----------



## apls (Dec 5, 2005)

In this economy, one should not have to buy recasts. Since most of us have a stockpile of unbuilt kits from the the 80's and 90's, myself included, oh boy, myself included. A kit you would have bought for $150.00 twenty years ago won't sell for that on e bay. I know George from Geometric, as an officer of the court, as he is, he went through the trouble of secruing the rights to his kits. Star Trek Next Gen was a bear, only to have some creatin rip him off. But to be honest, if someone had a copy of the Aurora Man from U.N.C.L.E. and Zorro, or if I could make a copy of those unbuilt kits, I own both of them, I would more than likely buy them. It is quite the slippery slope since I am sure most of the garage kits we buy, are moulded without paying a fee to the studio and the actor.


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

I actually have never even seen a recast or had one offered to me. I wouldn't buy one even if I could as the original would probably be a better kit to begin with and simply the dishonestly of the thing.


----------



## mcdougall (Oct 28, 2007)

I've seen them and compared to the Originals, they are a very poor cousin.... For the most part the detail is lost and usually they have horrible seam lines and enough flash to make another kit ...
...Don't forget,whole kit recasters are out to make a buck and your satisfaction is not #1 on their itinerary:freak:
Mcdee


----------



## ERVysther (May 2, 2009)

If it's a long lost kit that someone has brought back - i.e.: company gone and the kit is no longer in production - I have no issue with it...the rest of it is crapola.

Though, to this day, I've never bought one...or SEEN one for that matter!


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

ERVysther said:


> If it's a long lost kit that someone has brought back - i.e.: company gone and the kit is no longer in production - I have no issue with it...the rest of it is crapola.


i used to have that opinion, until i had a conversation with frank winspur's wife about the issue several years ago. since that time my opinion has continually shifted more and more towards there being no justification, including the kits being out of production. the only exception to that is if the original manufacturer/ involved parties give their permission for it to be remolded and reissued, which makes it a "repop" instead of a "recast".


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

I have bought some, but it was either before I knew about the whole recast thing, or it was just without knowing they were recasts.

Back in the early stages of my resin addiction when I started buying garage kits at conventions, I wondered why the quality was so utterly crappy. Now I know those were recasts.

I won't knowingly buy one now.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

razorwyre1 said:


> i used to have that opinion, until i had a conversation with frank winspur's wife about the issue several years ago. since that time my opinion has continually shifted more and more towards there being no justification, including the kits being out of production. the only exception to that is if the original manufacturer/ involved parties give their permission for it to be remolded and reissued, which makes it a "repop" instead of a "recast".


Just to spike the discussion - how about if the kit in question is no longer available, and the original creator is dead, or out of the business and doesn't care?


----------



## ERVysther (May 2, 2009)

razorwyre1 said:


> i used to have that opinion, until i had a conversation with frank winspur's wife about the issue several years ago. since that time my opinion has continually shifted more and more towards there being no justification, including the kits being out of production. the only exception to that is if the original manufacturer/ involved parties give their permission for it to be remolded and reissued, which makes it a "repop" instead of a "recast".


Mixed emotions on that - if the company is gone, the original sculptor is unavailable, it's years old - i.e "lost" kits - I honestly don't have issue with it.

That does NOT preclude ripping people off, mind you!

I do NOT support that...also, I think it depends - to me, anyway - on the motives of the re-producer - is he just out to make a fast buck, or does he genuinely love what he is doing? 

Granted, nine times out of ten, the former is the case. :drunk:

On the flip side, I have BIG issues with companies that do limited runs on kits to drive the $$$ value - yes, yes, yes, it's their right/property and *I do not support ripping them off, either *- I just find it inherently wrong to have someone produce something of that kind of high quality, charge FORTUNES for it, then break the mold and say "tough s**t" to all those who could not afford it or the like.

Quite frankly, the producer (be it an individual or company) looks like a bona fide idiot in such cases to me...doesn't it make more sense to cater to your PAYING audience rather than act like a spoiled brat? 

A few extra castings and maybe a lower price would make a lot more happy and line the producers wallet a tad more, too, ya' think? 

I mean this *is* part of their livelihood, no?

Once more, I'm not justifying recasts in this case, but it leaves an ill taste in my mouth to witness that kind of behavior.

FYI - I'm not a supporter of this hobby being "art" per se on the level of Michelangelo or that - it *is* art, but I consider it more pop art, really, but again, just an opinion....I think my feeling here to the more obnoxious producers is GET OVER YOURSELVES!!! 

And I think this is where a lot of the controversy stems from - this is supposed to be about *fun*, isn't it? 

Before someone goes ballistic on me, do not think for one minute I do not understand supply and demand, cost vs. profit margins, inflation and economic downturns - I help my wife run her own business - and all the other realities that go into this. I understand them quite well, but, I must say, some of these folks behavior flies in the face of making a profit.

Just thinking out loud, no one should take this as anything more than an opinion.

Finally, an apology in advance to anyone who reads this - including the moderators - who thinks I am out of line.

Just my two cents. :wave:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

I was out of line once, but a nice guy held my place for me.


----------



## mcdougall (Oct 28, 2007)

Me in line...
-----------------------------------------------------


Me out of line... 
--------------------------:woohoo: ---------------------------

Mcdee :tongue:


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

crazypredator2 said:


> I am totally against recast kits, unless it's someone helping someone, who has a missing part, from an old out of production kit,i can understand that..)
> i would never buy a recast kit from those recasters in thailand on ebay.
> i have been ripped off one time, i bought a kit, that the owner claimed was an original kit, but turned out to be a recast, i would love to meet him in a dark alley.



Wow. So you are implying the intention to commit violence against a stranger who him/herself may have also been duped into thinking it was an original; state you are *totally* against *except when*; and start a thread with a subject that has an established hobbytalk history of being locked for excessive emotions on all sides. Nice! :thumbsup:

My congrats to John for being the first to stand up against the vitriole with his tale of honesty. I'll lend my voice and say the first few I bought were before I was aware of even the phrase 'recaster'. At that point, I was addicted to resin models and diving into the real casts at hundreds of dollars a pop. I will go further and say recasts are good for one thing: learning resin. If you just dropped several hundred dollars on your dream kit, and it is resin, you do not want to mess it up for lack of experience. By dealing with the worst problems recasts typically present, one learns how to do it right on a cheap proxy.

I've heard hatred against recasters, (Thai especially) expressed in simple terms that they are simply ripping off the original producer to the extreme notion that they are criminal enterprises funding all sorts of hideous deeds. I'll throw in CIA fronts as they know the fat dork model geeks in the US love their naked anime babes. Easy black market money to fund your next drug/illegal arms op right there.

Yeah, really great topic to rile people up this one is. This should've been locked with the very first post.


----------



## crazypredator2 (Dec 1, 2009)

God bless you model man.


----------



## modelgeek (Jul 14, 2005)

crazypredator2 said:


> God bless you model man.


And God Bless you Peter Parker!!!


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

I don't support recasting, and have reported some individuals, companies, web sites, etc. that sell recasts. Over the years I have bought a couple. One was a resin casting of the Aurora Seaview. Admittedly I bought that in the late 80s and really wasnt that aware about recasting.

In most cases I buy plastic kits anyway and those generally dont have the $$$ behind them that rare resin kits have in the first place. 

Some recasts are hard to catch. There is/was a Korean outfit named Elfin that sold recasts as their own product, boxed up, shrink wrapped etc. Elfin was distributed in the US by major hobby wholesalers. Its not like recasts are strictly a back room deal or something you find online from Thiland...


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

I accidentally bought a recast Facehugger kit once. Should have known since it was $12.

I'll be sure to check next time.

Oh, recasting is evil!


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

I have three or four kits in my stash that I'm sure are recasts, but they were purchased before I knew about recast kits; now I wouldn't spend 10¢ on a recast. As for someone casting a single resin replacement part for an obsolete kit, either for themselves or as a favor for a fellow modeler, I don't have a problem with that.


----------



## Dr. Pretorius (Nov 17, 2000)

The two first resin kits I bought were recasts. That was back in 1989 when I had no idea what recasting was. In fact resin kits were so new to me that it wasn't until the GK movement started picking up steam over the next couple of years that I became aware of the whole recasting aspect of the hobby.

Overall, I'm against recasting. I do have some recast "parts"(i.e. the missing parts for the PL King Kong).

I don't have many resin kits left in my collection due to the great influx of styrene(Thanks Moebius, Monarch, Round2, and the rest!).

I'm aware that over the years recasting has driven many a sculptor and producer out of the hobby.

That is a loss indeed.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

djnick66 said:


> Some recasts are hard to catch. There is/was a Korean outfit named Elfin that sold recasts as their own product, boxed up, shrink wrapped etc. Elfin was distributed in the US by major hobby wholesalers. Its not like recasts are strictly a back room deal or something you find online from Thiland...


I bought some Elfin kits at HiWay Hobby! I guess they didn't know they were recasts either!


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Dr. Pretorius said:


> Overall, I'm against recasting. I do have some recast "parts"(i.e. the missing parts for the PL King Kong).


I don't consider resin replacement parts for styrene kits as "recasts". I think of them as "resin cast" parts. Being able to acquire a missing part to a classic kit in order to finish it off is certainly not in any way unethical. Even great services like The Parts Pit cannot always provide the required missing part that someone may need in order to complete a kit.

It is also sad that many classic kits are sought out just for a few parts in order to build a studio-scale replica of an effects miniature. Once the necessary parts are picked out, it renders the rest of the kit unbuildable. It's great that a few individuals are providing resin casts of those particular sought-after parts, therefore saving and keeping intact many classic and rare kits that would otherwise just be parted out.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

razorwyre1 said:


> frank winspur's wife...


You'll have to introduce me to her sometime, I must have had a heck of a weekend to get married and not even know it!


----------



## aurora1craig (Apr 25, 2008)

*Wedding*

Ha ha good one Frank:tongue::tongue::tongue:


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

Only one. I used the main bits (a Shadow Battle Crab) and heavily re-built it to have a correct one. Never finished it. 

I Do buy ONE cast model railroad item, usually a structure and will make a mold of the parts to make duplicates. I don't sell them, and it probably costs more to make a mold and than cast copies, but this is usually due to lack of availability, or age of the original kit. Currently I have 7 molds which has parts for 5 structures. Mostly 1920's - 1930's era coal miners houses, small bungalows, and components for 2 and 3 story townhouses, that I'm not even using on my current railroad.


----------



## rusty nail (Aug 9, 2008)

Recast are BAD. To me they have become a cancer in the hobby. It's too bad people can't try and make an HONEST dime!


----------



## Auroranut (Jan 12, 2008)

Moebius said:


> You'll have to introduce me to her sometime, I must have had a heck of a weekend to get married and not even know it!


Didn't your mother warn you about drinking your profit margin while you're at Wonderfest?.....

Chris.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

I have never bought/never will buy recasts (knowingly--been lucky so far in that respect) but have purchased some items that were unlicensed but with most, in my opinion, nearly inaccurate enough to qualify as some other property entirely.


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

Moebius said:


> You'll have to introduce me to her sometime, I must have had a heck of a weekend to get married and not even know it!


ok, thats weird. a person i presumed to be your wife then..... now i'm totally confused!


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

Moebius said:


> You'll have to introduce me to her sometime, I must have had a heck of a weekend to get married and not even know it!


please clarify something for me: do you (or did you) own and operate "doll and hobby shoppe" in florida? somehow i got the impression that you did, and that you, along with "your wife", owned it. 
im about 95% certain that it was someone from "doll and hobby shoppe" i was speaking to about the issue at hand. whoever the "mystery woman" was, she got my head screwed on straight regarding recasts.


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

The Monsters in Motion Jeff Yagher sculpts of the original Aurora box art kits are not considered recasts I think? I was curious as I noted on a board somewhere some negative comments about MIM. I just picked up their Phantom and Dracula resin box art kits and they look pretty nice, albeit somewhat costly. But I assume they are doing whatever they need as far as legality. And I assume they contracted with Jeff for the sculpts.


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

Moebius said:


> You'll have to introduce me to her sometime, I must have had a heck of a weekend to get married and not even know it!


That's how it happens to a few people Frank! A guy in my office went off skiing some years back, got married during the trip and then got divorced at the end of the trip. I don't know if he was ever aware it happened either!:thumbsup:


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

rkoenn said:


> The Monsters in Motion Jeff Yagher sculpts of the original Aurora box art kits are not considered recasts I think? I was curious as I noted on a board somewhere some negative comments about MIM. I just picked up their Phantom and Dracula resin box art kits and they look pretty nice, albeit somewhat costly. But I assume they are doing whatever they need as far as legality. And I assume they contracted with Jeff for the sculpts.


A recast is when someone takes an existing kit created by someone else, makes a rubber mold, and sells copies as their own new kit. A kit based on a box art painting isn't a recast. Its just an original sculpt based on a painting. Now, if you bought one of those kits (which are very well done) and made a mold of it yourself, and started selling copies... thats a recast.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

razorwyre1 said:


> please clarify something for me: do you (or did you) own and operate "doll and hobby shoppe" in florida? somehow i got the impression that you did, and that you, along with "your wife", owned it.
> im about 95% certain that it was someone from "doll and hobby shoppe" i was speaking to about the issue at hand. whoever the "mystery woman" was, she got my head screwed on straight regarding recasts.


Yes. No wife, current or ex. We had seven women working there at one time, as well as my sister and mother....


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

I'm not chicken to be honest and say as long as a kit is no longer in production , and the original owner has no intention of re-issuing the kit, I have no problem with it . I know MANY garage kit producers who are still around got their start making recasts. Truth hurts, I'm no longer a Clubhouse parrot. I buy mostly styrene now- I know the kits are fully licensed!


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

rusty nail said:


> Recast are BAD. To me they have become a cancer in the hobby. It's too bad people can't try and make an HONEST dime!


Most Resin makers are not making an honest dime- They are making UNLICENSED KITS!


----------



## hedorah59 (Nov 24, 2008)

Mitchellmania said:


> I'm not chicken to be honest and say as long as a kit is no longer in production , and the original owner has no intention of re-issuing the kit, I have no problem with it . I know MANY garage kit producers who are still around got their start making recasts. Truth hurts, I'm no longer a Clubhouse parrot. I buy mostly styrene now- I know the kits are fully licensed!



How do you know the original owner has no intention of re-issuing something? How do you know that some other producer won't come along and pay the rights holder for the right to re-issue it, like Polar Lights or Moebius?

There is absolutely no excuse for recasting. Period.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

For instance Fatman productions went out of business a long and is in parts unknown (like many other companies).
Some of his kits have turned up- how did these people get them? I DON'T CARE! again I DON"T CARE. I WILL BUY A RECAST OF A KIT NO LONGER IN CIRCULATION.
Many of the resin companies you are so loyal to (as was I spending thousands of dollars on) HAVE MADE RECASTS!!! That's a fact!


----------



## hedorah59 (Nov 24, 2008)

While they may be in 'Parts unknown', whose to say that they will not return someday and want to re-issue their kits? Just because they have been away from the hobby does not give anyone else the right to recast their kits. 

And yes there are a lot of kit companies that have made recasts, but what does that have to do with this? You say that I am loyal to these companies, How do you know what companies I am 'loyal' to?


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

I bet you if we had a pole on who buys recasts and make it anonymous, you who see some true numbers. Off the boards I know the truth!


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

... Never mind, life's too short. ...


----------



## hedorah59 (Nov 24, 2008)

That is probably true 

Anyhow, I made my points and am done with this discussion. It has been discussed to death before, and probably will be again. At least we kept it civil!


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

Yes those who point the finger got three coming back at them!


----------



## Chuck (Apr 29, 1999)

Define recast. By some definitions nearly everyone is a buyer of recasts.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Even if 90 percent of hobbyists were pro-recast, it would still be unethical. I suspect there's actually a much lower percentage among mainstream garage-kit hobbyists, and maybe even among the anime lovers.

If you think it's wrong to produce unlicensed kits, then it's hypocritical to buy or resell them, no matter whether they come from the original source or a recaster.

Want to debate licensing? Fine, debate it. But if you think it's only moral to buy a licensed kit of an intellectual property, then it's still immoral to buy a recast.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

In the hobby, Chuck, "recast" has a negative connotation. Basically, someone acquires a kit by whatever means, makes a mold of it and sells copies. The recaster is able to sell it for less because he doesn't have many of the upfront expenses, such as paying a sculptor, and thus undercuts the original producer.

George Stephenson's original GEOmetric Design — which licensed many of its products — lost tons of overseas business to recasters, which is part of what inspired him to sell the business years ago.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

Mitchellmania said:


> For instance Fatman productions went out of business a long and is in parts unknown (like many other companies).
> Some of his kits have turned up- how did these people get them? I DON'T CARE! again I DON"T CARE. I WILL BUY A RECAST OF A KIT NO LONGER IN CIRCULATION.
> Many of the resin companies you are so loyal to (as was I spending thousands of dollars on) HAVE MADE RECASTS!!! That's a fact!


I can tell you on the Fatman stuff how that happened. I bought some of the old kits from Fairbanx to manufacture years ago. Frank "bought" some from me, and never paid me for them. I gave them to Dave over at Lunatic Fringe a few years ago as I felt they were still mine having never received a payment. I'm sure there were others that were "reclaimed" under similar circumstances.


----------



## Chuck (Apr 29, 1999)

Todd P. said:


> In the hobby, Chuck, "recast" has a negative connotation. Basically, someone acquires a kit by whatever means, makes a mold of it and sells copies. The recaster is able to sell it for less because he doesn't have many of the upfront expenses, such as paying a sculptor, and thus undercuts the original producer.
> 
> George Stephenson's original GEOmetric Design — which licensed many of its products — lost tons of overseas business to recasters, which is part of what inspired him to sell the business years ago.


That is a good start. However, you would need to add some more detail in order to fully "define" a recast. 

After 20+ years in this hobby, I have a good idea of what I consider to be a recast. However, it seems that there are widely differing opinions on this thread, which only serve to further the misinformation surrounding this issue. 

The notion of someone reproducing perhaps 20 copies of an Aurora Pirate and being labeled a recaster versus a major company producing 5000 copies of the Hunchback and being lauded as a heroe eludes me.

There was the hobbyist that was casting The Aurora Bride of Frankenstein, who did fine work I might add, who abandoned the project. The reason? He learned that Polar Lights was about to redo the kit in styrene. Is either one a recaster?


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Chuck said:


> The notion of someone reproducing perhaps 20 copies of an Aurora Pirate and being labeled a recaster versus a major company producing 5000 copies of the Hunchback and being lauded as a heroe eludes me.


If the pirate character was public domain then I don't think he would _fairly_ be labeled as a recaster.



Chuck said:


> There was the hobbyist that was casting The Aurora Bride of Frankenstein, who did fine work I might add, who abandoned the project. The reason? He learned that Polar Lights was about to redo the kit in styrene. Is either one a recaster?


Technically, Polar Lights weren't recasters because they paid for the rights to the character.


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

Mitchellmania said:


> Many of the resin companies you are so loyal to (as was I spending thousands of dollars on) HAVE MADE RECASTS!!! That's a fact!


That's painting with a pretty broad brush. Exactly which companies are you referring to? There's a big difference between a dealer and a kit producer.

A lot of these statements sound exactly like the arguments recasters use to justify their actions.

Licensing is a completely separate issue. Just because a kit is unlicensed does not make it right to recast it.

No matter what side of the fence you are on with unlicensed kits, there would be no garage kit hobby without them. Period. All the risk, both legally and financially, falls squarely on the producer. They pay for the sculpt, molding, casting, packaging, and so on. All of the producers I know are in it for the love of the hobby, not to turn a quick buck, or purposely make limited runs to jack up the price as someone else said. Numbers are limited because you're screwed if you produce too many and can't sell them. No one is getting rich.

Recasters are parasites. For those not in the know, a recaster will go to a show like Wonderfest, buy kits, take them home, mold them, cast them, and sell them as their own product. They are inferior quality - they shrink in size, loose detail, and castings are often badly made with inferior materials. As mentioned, their kits are cheaper because they have none of the up front production costs. As a buyer of recasts, you get what you pay for, and you are supporting thieves to the detriment of the original sculptor and producer who may eventually be forced to produce fewer new kits or get out of the hobby altogether. And that affects us all.

Just ask GeoMetric, Screamin' and Horizon about the effects of recasting.

Oh, wait. You can't. The practice is part of what drove them out of business.


----------



## Chuck (Apr 29, 1999)

Zorro said:


> Technically, Polar Lights weren't recasters because they paid for the rights to the character.


For the Bride, yes that is true - both Universal and the Elsa Lanchester estate. But I don't think that they paid for the rights to that specific part-for-part model kit. I don't think they got permission from the original owner of the art (model kit) whether that is a sculptor, the company that the sculptor worked for, or the company that the sculptor sold the rights to for his artwork. Remember, this is about recasting, not licensing, and whether or not reproducing someones artwork without their permission is unethical or even illegal.


----------



## hedorah59 (Nov 24, 2008)

I was under the impression that they also paid Revell to issue those kits, in some cases even using the original molds?


----------



## Chuck (Apr 29, 1999)

hedorah59 said:


> I was under the impression that they also paid Revell to issue those kits, in some cases even using the original molds?


In some cases. Addams Family Haunted House was the first PL kit. I have heard that PL was unsure if the molds still existed when they re-did the molds. This was a great business risk and could have been the end of PL before they even began. Bride was retooled, as were the Robot, Cyclops, Hunchback, probably others. Frankenstein, Mummy, Dracula, Wolfman, Creature, Forgotten Prisoner, Kong, Godzilla were produced by Revell for PL. Not sure about Ghidorah and Rodan. That's it from the top of my head.


----------



## xsavoie (Jun 29, 1999)

I don't think that casting resin kit replicas from AURORA would be considered as recasting.Aurora is dead and not coming back.I did buy a few recast replicas,I believe from Thailand,but they were resin kits of sculptures that I had never seen before,so I assumed that they were made by artists from Thailand.But of course,if I know that they would be recasts that other sculptors are now still producing,I can practically guarantee that I would refuse to buy them.Other long ot of production kits that are no longer issued by the sculptors,that might be different.Desperate measures for desperate times,so to speak.Just gotta get this sculpture in other words.


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Chuck said:


> But I don't think that they paid for the rights to that specific part-for-part model kit. I don't think they got permission from the original owner of the art (model kit) whether that is a sculptor, the company that the sculptor worked for, or the company that the sculptor sold the rights to for his artwork. Remember, this is about recasting, not licensing, and whether or not reproducing someones artwork without their permission is unethical or even illegal.


Well its about a _whole lot of things_ which is why these threads never go anywhere but in circles. I never worked for Polar Lights but it makes sense to me that since Aurora was a defunct company - and since (I assume) their artists and sculptors had worked for them as contactors - that any agreement those contactors had with Aurora were no longer binding 30 years down the road when PL started doing repops. I'm confident that everything PL did was perfectly _legal._ Whether it was _ethical_ is purely a matter of _opinion_ - which is why these threads never go anywhere but in circles.


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

Chuck said:


> For the Bride, yes that is true - both Universal and the Elsa Lanchester estate. But I don't think that they paid for the rights to that specific part-for-part model kit. I don't think they got permission from the original owner of the art (model kit) whether that is a sculptor, the company that the sculptor worked for, or the company that the sculptor sold the rights to for his artwork. Remember, this is about recasting, not licensing, and whether or not reproducing someones artwork without their permission is unethical or even illegal.


How do you know that? You really think any company producing mass-market styrene kits would not make sure their legal t's were crossed and their i's dotted and all permissions are obtained? So, by extension, Moebius can now be counted among the recasters even though they secured the rights to RE-RELEASE Captain Action, The Voyager, Wonder Woman, Superboy, the Confederate Raider, 2001 Moonbus, and Monster Scenes?

This isn't the same thing at all.

Acquiring the rights to re-release a mass-produced kit is vastly different than the issue of garage kit recasting.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Hear that? The lock is coming...


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

Not trying to come across as fanning the flames or jumping on anyone. It's a heated issue to be sure, and people do see a lot of gray areas and make a lot of assumptions. This has been argued across the boards for a loooooooong time.

I stand by what I've said, but it's nothing personal. Like politics and religion, it's probably a topic best left alone in this venue.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

You shouldn't apologize. Sure it's a heated issue, but it's relevant to this hobby. If it isn't debated among hobbyists, where will it be?

Pretending it doesn't happen would just make it easier to rip off producers, both the big guys (if there are any left) and the little ones.

Shining a light on the effect recasters and their customers have on all kit builders is the only way to educate people about it. If that hurts someone's feelings, what a shame. I'm much more concerned about the frustrations, demoralizations and financial difficulties of the people who put so much work into these things we all enjoy and then see it ripped off by lowlifes and their supporters.

Sure, this thread could stand to get locked down, but I for one have learned a couple of valuable things from it.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

As I said before , my first Resin kit purchase back in 1993 was the Lost in Space Cyclops. From there I purchased many old Aurora resin kits (Bride of Frank, Munsters Living Room, Land of the Giants Snake) Yes I paid a lot of money for them (but less than an original), but it got me back into building models. These kits didn't hurt the price of the original Auroras. When Polar Lights re-issued these kits , did I buy them? EVERY SINGLE ONE! I did notice at the model shows almost all the dealers dealt in recasts/ Bilikens, Japanese kits you name it. And I purchased some of those. All these helped my modeling skills.
And Then I purchased hundreds of resin models from these same "legit" dealers of their own sculpts I have been a member member of Hobby Talk since 1992, and I was a Clubhouse member since 1992 also. I spent THOUSANDS of dollars with MANY of the dealers at the Clubhouse, and there were many 'issues' of commission kits that took years to get, I even went so far as to threaten one of those producers that I would make a molds and fulfill the orders hoping to get the guy moving to produce the kits (that was EXACTLY my intention). So, My so called friends at the Clubhouse were taking my money with one hand , and stabbing me in the back with another, and you wonder WHY I am bitter about the Clubhouse?!! They are using me and good people like Wayne the Dane as targets for their paranoia? I still feel the same way I did about resin kits if a kit is not produced a recast will do. Remember the ones who yell the loudest ARE the most GUILTY of recasting and that is a fact!!! That's the truth I'm done. Be sure to copy and post this over at the Clubhouse Y'all!:wave:


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

I suppose its somewhat hypocritical, but I make a distinction between someone (or even a company like Polar Lights or Moebius) making a copy of a long discontinued, injection molded plastic kit, and someone who pulls copies of resin or vinyl figures and resells them.

With the plastic kits, whether they are copied in resin or styrene, the copies appeal to different markets to a large degree. The limited sales of an expensive resin Wonder Woman recast to a select bunch of model geeks won't effect over the counter sales of a mass produced, mass market plastic kit. Most of the limited number of people that buy the resin recast would pick up the plastic recast anyway.

I would call kits like the Polar Lights Seaview, Lost in Space Robot, Bellringer/Hunchback a recast. They are not made from an original mold. PL just reversed engineered a mold from an original kit. Its no different than say Marco's Miniatures or Lunar Model's part for part resin recasts of the Lost in Space Robot. Licensing is a different issue. The PL kits were licensed, but that has nothing to do with the actual, physical process of making the kit.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

The Clubhouse has more than 4,000 members.

djnick, your distinction isn't hypocritical. I don't buy resin recasts of those long-gone plastic kits, but I agree that there's a difference.


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

Before this horse is completely pulverized, there are a couple of terms and ideas here that are bothering me.

Your distinction is correct. It's the terminology I think is off.

Recast is a term that applies to the garage kit industry. Recasting is piracy and carries a very heavy stigma within the hobby. Polar Lights and Moebius do not remotely belong in this discussion. They stand on very firm legal and ethical ground regardless of whether new tooling has to me made to re-release a classic kit. The physical process of making the kit is not what recasting is about. Acquiring the rights and reproducing a kit is not recasting just because the original molds no longer exist.

It's a matter of semantics, but I think there is a very important distinction between a recast and a re-release.

And at least in my opinion, no one in their right mind would purchase both a resin recast and the styrene release. The cost difference is pretty big, and the styrene version is sure to be superior in every way. I've seen the old Lunar robot. Garbage, to say the least! Those types of recasts might have been relevant back in the 90s, but so many classics have been re-released in styrene that they are now pretty much moot.


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

Maybe the term for the legal styrene versions should be "re-pop?"


----------



## bizzarobrian (Oct 4, 2009)

This is why I love this board & believe it superior to a certain other well known board.I got booted for bringing up this very same question.The other part of my question was is it stealing to release an unlicensed kit? Uncalled for hostility went on & as a result I was ousted.All I was trying to do was get the feelers out to see how everyone felt about both the questions.Oh well,I`m glad I`m here & there are a great bunch of people & I thank you all for that.


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

Dr. Brad said:


> Maybe the term for the legal styrene versions should be "re-pop?"


Yes, that's actually the more popular word for it.


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

Wow.
Three pages in this thread before I had a chance to answer.

I do not buy recast kits.
I have never done so.

As far as I know...

All of my kits are styrene from ERTL, Monogram, and Polar Lights.
They are Star Trek kits.
Probably not recasts, right?

I did buy some resin kits years ago: two Shuttlepods from Federation Models, and the _Larson_-class conversion kit from Starshipmodeler.com, the "Space Station 2000" and Bulk Freighters from DLD productions.

I figure they weren't recasts.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

Dave P said:


> Before this horse is completely pulverized, there are a couple of terms and ideas here that are bothering me.
> 
> at least in my opinion, no one in their right mind would purchase both a resin recast and the styrene release. The cost difference is pretty big, and the styrene version is sure to be superior in every way.


I purchased the resin Aurora kits years BEFORE Polar Lights released theirs!!
I never thought they would EVER be re-released. Here is the BEST argument for not buying recasts:


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Dr. Brad said:


> Maybe the term for the legal styrene versions should be "re-pop?"


In the plastic kit realm its sort of a grey area. Take three Revell kits for example... Dracula, the Mummy and Rommel's Rod. All three are currently in production. Now, Dracula is made from the original Aurora mold, but in altered form with a new head added. Revell Germany would describe this kit as a "modified reissue" or "modified tooling" which is accurate. The Mummy kit is straight from the old mold as-is with no new parts. Its just another reissue. Rommel's Rod is NOT a reissue. Nor is it a repop, which is a common term for reissue. The kit itself is more akin to a recast in that Revell made an all new mold for the kit. I assume they worked from an original Monogram kit, and reverse engineered the new mold. The process is no different than the process a "recaster" uses... they get an original kit, make molds of the parts and cast their own. The legal issues are another matter. Since Revell owns Monogram (maker of the original Rommel's Rod) and also has a contract with Tom Daniel (designer of RR) their current kit is perfectly legal and acceptable. In essence the current RR kit is an all new product. It is NOT identical to the original kit in several ways (color, detail changes, parts count changes) but it is close.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

Iran's gone nuclear and were arguing about models ...:freak:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Mitchellmania said:


> Iran's gone nuclear and were arguing about models ...:freak:


well, this is a modelling forum after all. There are plenty of other political forums where you can go nuclear about Iran's atomics...

One thing about the modern recasting techniques- there is a trend of using 3-D printers to create new masters for casting based on someone elses kit. You scan the parts, rescale the final 3-D to a new size and seel that. The people who created the source kit and all the research that went into making it accurate never see a dime and the new kit is in competition with the original kit for the same market. I am not going to get into specifics, other threads have been already done about these particular kits, but it is in a new area of recasting. The molds are not pulled off the source kit, the detail is mostly transfered intact and the scale is altered (along with some detail tweaking) so in theory it is not a true recast. It is a weird new area where the overhead for research and mastering is eliminated from the cost of the 'new' kit but it is also not a direct lift but a digitally scanned clone.

.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

Just trying to put trifles into perspective. :wave:


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Richard Baker said:


> well, this is a modelling forum after all. There are plenty of other political forums where you can go nuclear about Iran's atomics...
> 
> One thing about the modern recasting techniques- there is a trend of using 3-D printers to create new masters for casting based on someone elses kit. You scan the parts, rescale the final 3-D to a new size and seel that. The people who created the source kit and all the research that went into making it accurate never see a dime and the new kit is in competition with the original kit for the same market. I am not going to get into specifics, other threads have been already done about these particular kits, but it is in a new area of recasting. The molds are not pulled off the source kit, the detail is mostly transfered intact and the scale is altered (along with some detail tweaking) so in theory it is not a true recast. It is a weird new area where the overhead for research and mastering is eliminated from the cost of the 'new' kit but it is also not a direct lift but a digitally scanned clone.
> 
> .


Overhead for research and mastering is elminated, but huge upfront costs for printers and such is incurred and if you don't know how to pull polygons, paying a 3d artist to do that for you. 

But like you say, this is not a recast at all. Just as you can take any piece of art or graphic, change colors and alter the composition 'enough', you have a unique artwork. On commercial turf, that's why off-brand companies can get away with using similar-enough colors and design to look like the major brand they are 'copying'. 

When nano-tech truly hits and anything can be synthed, a digital scan of, say the Mona Lisa, can be reproduced on a per-chemical/molecule basis, who's to say which was the original anymore?


----------



## Auroranut (Jan 12, 2008)

This is crap!!! 
I used to love coming here to talk about models and modelling with my mates- now there's so much negativity and division it's getting stupid!! 
Why the hell do we always have to get dragged down on this topic when we already know about the parasites that are ripping off the resin kit producers?
We say it's for the new guys, but there's enough info out there for ANYONE to find out about recasting if they look!!
The paranoia that it's creating is ridiculous! Even I've been accused in certain circles of being a bloody recaster and I'm absolutely jack of it!!
All these threads do is suck the fun out of the forums and it's about time people pulled their heads in and got back to enjoying the hobby we love instead of asking who approves or disapproves of recasting. It's asking for trouble- almost like baiting.....
This place is beginning to feel less and less like the Hobbytalk I knew....

Chris.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

Gee, I was kind of hoping we'd talk more about my missing "wife"... Perspective guys, we need some perspective here!


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

Oh, I wouldn't go that far. I've seen these discussions on other boards devolve into witch hunts and accusations pretty quickly. For the most part, this has been a pretty level-headed exchange of viewpoints and information. I don't see any paranoia here, although I agree there's more than enough of it out there.

Frank - I think she's in Taiwan being recast as we speak.


----------



## Auroranut (Jan 12, 2008)

Sorry guys- I'm in a hell of a lot of physical pain today and the meds don't want to work....
I'm just sick of all the crap.....

Chris.


----------



## sprayray (May 13, 2009)

Chris hope you feel better buddy , something said different for a change ! 



Robert.


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

Moebius said:


> Gee, I was kind of hoping we'd talk more about my missing "wife"... Perspective guys, we need some perspective here!


frank, sorry about that... it was a case of mistaken identity (i tried to pm and e mail you about this after extracting my foot from my mouth last week). i did drink a LOT back in those days, so who knows. the info that this mystery woman said still relevant though.

auroranut, i hear you about both the pain and the frustration (and for that matter the meds. im on so many painkillers that i rattle when i walk). its an old issue to be sure, but just a few weeks ago i noticed someone that had no idea what recasts were and was shocked to discover anyone would do such a thing. unfortunately a lot of new members dont read the introductory threads and faq's, so they do need to be told. (especially considering how divisive this issue has become.)

i agree that this particular thread has had a few posts that do seem like baiting... the idea of lumping R2 and moebius in with the recasters is terrible. theres a huge difference between spending all the time, expense and trouble making sure that all the legal "i"s are dotted and "t"s crossed, and investing in a metal mold, costing 10s of thousands of dollars, and someone pouring a couple of hundred bucks in silicone on a whim. it really smacks of trying to make a soiled reputation look better by dirtying the name of others. 

mr. baker, the 3-d printers/ rapid prototyping issue was discussed elsewhere, and it seems (at the present time anyway) that it is so expensive, and the amount of finishing required to get the piece into an acceptable form is so labor intensive, make it impractical to use for kit recasting. turns out that its really easier and cheaper to get someone just to sculpt up a new original, and anyone with the talent, skills and facilities to create original pieces isnt going to bother with recasts anyway.

whew that became a long-winded rant........


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Moebius said:


> Gee, I was kind of hoping we'd talk more about my missing "wife"


Morgan Fairchild? 


Yeeaaah, that's the ticket...


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Auroranut said:


> This is crap!!!
> I used to love coming here to talk about models and modelling with my mates- now there's so much negativity and division it's getting stupid!!
> Why the hell do we always have to get dragged down on this topic when we already know about the parasites that are ripping off the resin kit producers?
> We say it's for the new guys, but there's enough info out there for ANYONE to find out about recasting if they look!!
> ...


You're no recaster, Chris, you're a freakin' saint. Never would have finished my Tarzan without your parts.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

Yes, let's just move on! :wave:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

razorwyre1 said:


> mr. baker, the 3-d printers/ rapid prototyping issue was discussed elsewhere, and it seems (at the present time anyway) that it is so expensive, and the amount of finishing required to get the piece into an acceptable form is so labor intensive, make it impractical to use for kit recasting. turns out that its really easier and cheaper to get someone just to sculpt up a new original, and anyone with the talent, skills and facilities to create original pieces isnt going to bother with recasts anyway.
> 
> whew that became a long-winded rant........


For a small GKr or Hong Kong ripper yes, but there is at least one company producing kits in volume which seem to be based on other kits- models scale different, but the detail approximated to match the studio models is almost identical. Even with parts matching from a different scale kit of the same subject the full amount of detail could not be duplicated that well.
I once had to build two miniatures, one half size to the other. Just finding donor kits in that scale differnece was nearly impossible. There are not too many kits of the same subjest that, for example, are released in 1/144 & 1/72- mostly tanks and some airplanes. Some detail can be from a donor kit and then the other scale would be hand crafted to match somewhat.
3D scan and printing equipment is still expensive, but companies do it as a provided service so you do not have to buy hardware.

.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

John P said:


> Morgan Fairchild?
> 
> 
> Yeeaaah, that's the ticket...


No Morgan, but I did meet Stefanie Powers at Chiller in the fall.... She still has it!


----------



## xsavoie (Jun 29, 1999)

I guess that the bottom line is that we should avoid buying the real recast kits which are resin replicas made from the already sculpted resin kits coming from the original sculptors.Auroranut is right,this is a very negative thread,we should rather open a new thread talking about the fantastic sculptors of our times and the fantastic sculptures they create.


----------



## junglelord (Mar 6, 2007)

John P said:


> I have bought some, but it was either before I knew about the whole recast thing, or it was just without knowing they were recasts.
> 
> Back in the early stages of my resin addiction when I started buying garage kits at conventions, I wondered why the quality was so utterly crappy. Now I know those were recasts.
> 
> I won't knowingly buy one now.


I have a Seaview recast.
Same thing, I did not know about any of that when I bought it on ebay.
I now know better.


----------



## bizzarobrian (Oct 4, 2009)

Dave P said:


> Oh, I wouldn't go that far. I've seen these discussions on other boards devolve into witch hunts and accusations pretty quickly. For the most part, this has been a pretty level-headed exchange of viewpoints and information. I don't see any paranoia here, although I agree there's more than enough of it out there.
> 
> Frank - I think she's in Taiwan being recast as we speak.


And there is no need for hostility.It`s just a question.The fella asking is not saying he approves of recasts.Yes it has come up before & no one has to answer especially if you are tired of it being discussed.Just bypass & go look at another thread.


----------



## wolfman66 (Feb 18, 2006)

Chuck said:


> Define recast. By some definitions nearly everyone is a buyer of recasts.


Not True!I will not buy a recast and if cant afford the original then will do without until have the money to buy it.Same goes for my Mask collection .


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Moebius said:


> No Morgan, but I did meet Stefanie Powers at Chiller in the fall.... She still has it!


Hey! She's _mine_, dammit!

_*runs off to watch a Hart to Hart episode._


----------



## cunumdrum (Jun 26, 2009)

*Hey You can have mine, wait a minute,*



Moebius said:


> Gee, I was kind of hoping we'd talk more about my missing "wife"... Perspective guys, we need some perspective here!


She loves my hobby and supports it 100%. Sorry I'm keeping her. Will a recast do? Might be a few defects though!:wave:


----------



## apls (Dec 5, 2005)

Does anyone know if the "repop" of Superboy, will have the original insignias (3), or is it a recast sort to speak from 1974?


----------



## sprayray (May 13, 2009)

Nope will be like 1960's version .


Robert.


----------



## FLKitbuilder (Apr 10, 2011)

Personally, I don't think we can discuss recasts enough, especially for the newer members of the hobby. When I got into it about 9 years ago..I spend quite a bit on Ebay buying, what I thought were legitimate models..Horizon Frankenstein, and the Geometric Medusa. They were recasts. I've since acquired the real Geo Medusa but not the Horizon Frankie. Both are sitting in bags unbuilt and will stay that way. At the tiime, Horizon was out of business, but Geometric was still selling the Medusa kit. 

But even a few minutes spent on Ebay and you can see how an unsuspecting newb could get taken for hundreds of $$'s or whatever currency they use; 
not to mention a particular British company that sells recasts of Horizon, Geo and Billikens, however, they at least, do say that they are recasts. 

This is a difficult question, somewhat akin to the abandonware issue in computer software. Is it piracy to provide old computer games for free if the company either no longer exists or no longer sells that program? Technically, it probably is, but who gets hurt by it? Certainly not the copyright owner who no longer sells it or desires to make $$ from it. 

The same might be said for kits that are no longer being produced. Does selling a Billiken recast impact the price of a true Billiken? I highly doubt it, considering the usually poor quality of recasts. Should older kit builders like us be the only ones with access to the great kits of the 80's and 90's, just because the companies either no longer exist or won't produce them anymore? I think it would be a real shame for newer figure kit builders to never be able to build a Geometric Wolfman, or Horizon Creature, or a Ymir or Cyclops or any of the other classic vinyl kits of the 80's and 90's. With the exception of Polar Lights kits on Ebay and now Monarch, there are very few affordable kits left out there for new builders. Almost any Horizon kit is at least $65 or $70 now..that's a lot for someone just getting into the hobby and some of the rarest ones go into the hundreds. 

My main problem with the recasting industry is not that they are taking money away from producers. In a lot of cases, they aren't, not with Billiken and Horizon recasts especially. It's that the quality of the materials and the castings are atrocious and that they don't usually state that they are not originals. Other than that I can't see why anyone should get upset about out of production kits being recast as long as the quality is good and the company either, no longer exists, or has no intention of making more of the kits. However, I do understand that recasting is one of the reasons these companies are no longer in business so I can understand the harsh feelings, and I feel that way about Geo recasts since I know George which makes it somewhat personal. 
With every issue there is a black and white side and a grey area in between. I guess I fall pretty much in the grey area. How I feel would depend pretty much on what kit is being recast. Is it to provide people with the ability to build a model no longer in production or is it to make money on cheap, lousy quality copies? Resin recasts of Aurora kits (before PL and Mobius) and some OOP famous vinyl kits I think are the former, Thai vinyl recasts made with cheap vinyl and lousy castings are the latter. 
Since I haven't purchased anything from the aforementioned British company, I don't know where they fall in the spectrum.


----------



## apls (Dec 5, 2005)

I may have to buy recasts of the missing Baterangs from revelles Batman forever kits. Batman and Robin. Unless someone has them out there.


----------



## BronzeGiant (Jun 8, 2007)

razorwyre1 said:


> i used to have that opinion, until i had a conversation with frank winspur's wife about the issue several years ago. since that time my opinion has continually shifted more and more towards there being no justification, including the kits being out of production. the only exception to that is if the original manufacturer/ involved parties give their permission for it to be remolded and reissued, which makes it a "repop" instead of a "recast".


I have a question for you then. If the kit is LONG out of production and the company that produced it is LONG gone; why, then should a modeler be denied the satisfaction of buying and building said kit simply because he, for example, didn't start into the hobby until long after the mfg. died?

I have no problem with recasts of kits that are, as I said, LONG out of production by companies that are LONG gone. Recasts of in production kits or kits by companies still around, no. But I see no harm in the other, if that puts me on the other side of the coin from most, oh well; won't be the first time.

Steve


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

I think it's more a matter of principal with the "after the fact" recasting. I don't see any harm in it either, really. Other than buying an inferior product. 

If Universal, Marvel or whomever don't care to go after anyone, or didn't care to bother with giving the original makers permission to run the kits, why should I care? Some will say the artist and the company that made the original are getting ripped off. Odds are, they didn't have permission to produce the kit in the first place. This has been stated in this or one of the other threads. That, to me, says the kit producers were ripping off the ones who own the likeness.


----------



## wolfman66 (Feb 18, 2006)

I was taught if you cant afford the Original then do without and that goes with everything else that buy besides kits.But if you hang in there a Original will popup like the one that just saw right now on ebay a Original Geo Vinyl King Kong mint in the box for $36. and change .Thats $40.00 dollars cheaper than the one that scored not to long ago.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

What you were taught doesn't address the lack of licensing for the original kits. How was it okay for these companies to just go ahead with production, in the first place? Anyone?

EDIT: I've never built ANY garage kit. Not that I won't ever.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

Would just like to point out that Billiken, Horizon, Screamin, Intelig and Geo all had licenses for their kits. When they got recast, the license holders wouldn’t lift a finger to help them.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Understood. That makes a difference, while the kit is being produced. How does it make a difference once the company isn't producing the kit and has sold off all of it's product? There is no money lost.

I'm not arguing. I'm genuinely curious about this.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

Well how’s about how the recasts devalue the collector’s purchase? Say a collector of original kits bought an original Horizon Franky for $49.00 when it came out. If at some point he decided to sell it, wouldn’t he be upset to find the recasts going for around $10.00 each on ebay? At this point it’s not hurting the original producers (because they may have already been put out business because of recasting) it’s hurting the value of the modeler’s collection.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Nope. That doesn't work. The collector will be selling to a collector. A collector isn't going to be buying a recast. Otherwise, he would only be forcing a builder to pay too much for a kit.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> Nope. That doesn't work. The collector will be selling to a collector.


How can you make that assumption? The collector, who is not a dealer, would most likely be selling through Ebay or a board. He just want’s to get his original investment of $49.00 back. But there he is competing with Thai recasts for one fifth the price. You’re telling me that doesn’t hurt his potential of reselling the kit? 

You know, KJ, I’m not sure if you actually believe all you’re posting or if you just like to argue. If it’s the second please let me know now because I’ll just stop posting responses to you.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

If you have a problem with unlicensed products, then you should have a problem with recasts. They're never, ever, ever licensed.

By the way, I'll echo a statement made in another thread: Many companies are seldom interested in even hearing from garage-kit producers who want to obtain a license. They make it all but impossible to even find contact info for the right people to query. Even if you do find out who to direct those queries to, they don't reply. It's just not worth their time.

I guess the argument some would make is, if Universal doesn't want to talk to you about licensing Frankenstein's Monster, just don't do it. That's a legitimate argument, I guess, although I've been awfully happy with some of the Frankie GKs I've bought. Heck, I wouldn't even own a copy of the _Curse of the Werewolf_ DVD if I didn't so enjoy a few garage kits of the subject. It's not the only time the owners of a property have in some small way benefited from a hobbyist who has gained an interest in a subject because of a model kit.

A last point: At least one of the major figure-kit producers today used to produce unlicensed garage kits. I couldn't even guess how many of the sculptors working for the plastic kit companies, Sideshow and more have sculpted, or do sculpt, unlicensed products. GK production is a great proving ground for many talented people, and the producers behind them — who are seldom well-off individuals — scrape up the cash that helps motivate and finance those people.

I'm a GK producer myself and go out on a limb every time I commission a sculpture, and part of what hangs over me is the knowledge that someday one of the guys the recast customers is financing is going to get hold of my product, and rip it off. Maybe the product that customer will buy is a long-out-of-production kit, but the person who recast that will recast my currently produced kit as well. When that happens, I'm going to be nuclear angry, demoralized and financially hard hit. I may quit. And because of that, I'm going to keep being indignant when I read about recasters being portrayed as harmless.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

Well said, Todd. :thumbsup:


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Facto2 said:


> You know, KJ, I’m not sure if you actually believe all you’re posting or if you just like to argue. If it’s the second please let me know now because I’ll just stop posting responses to you.


I just like to argue, so don't post anymore. 

My statement: "The collector will be selling to a collector" Is perfectly reasonable, given your assumption that the recasts will hurt the value of his original. A collector will buy the original to collect, not to build. The recasts will be bought by the guy who just wants to paint a Frankenstein monster. *To the collector, the original kit is still worth the $200 he'll STILL pay for the high priced hunk of plastic. It won't matter ONE LITTLE BIT that there is a recast kit out there.* To the builder, the price is probably far too high to justify--ridiculously so, in some cases. 

Todd P, are you obtaining licenses for your kits? If not, stop talking. You're a part of the problem; not the solution. All your justifications mean nothing, if you yourself aren't playing by the rules.

Well said, my nose...


----------



## Auroranut (Jan 12, 2008)

KJ, not that you'll care, but you just lost my respect....


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> I just like to argue, so don't post anymore.
> My statement: "The collector will be selling to a collector" Is perfectly reasonable, given your assumption that the recasts will hurt the value of his original. A collector will buy the original to collect, not to build. The recasts will be bought by the guy who just wants to paint a Frankenstein monster. *To the collector, the original kit is still worth the $200 he'll STILL pay for the high priced hunk of plastic. It won't matter ONE LITTLE BIT that there is a recast kit out there.* To the builder, the price is probably far too high to justify--ridiculously so, in some cases. Todd P, are you obtaining licenses for your kits? If not, stop talking. You're a part of the problem; not the solution. All your justifications mean nothing, if you yourself aren't playing by the rules.
> Well said, my nose...


Okay, I lied about not posting again. Here’s an illustration for you that helps you see what ultimately happens to the hobby with recasting.










And by the way, who are YOU to tell Todd he’s part of the problem and not part of the solution. Todd produces kits most of which I believe are in public domain. What have you done? Didn’t you just say that you don’t even build figure kits. What gives you the right to comment like this on Todd when you don’t even know the garage kit hobby or the market you’re talking about?

Would it get you upset to know that a Yagher Classics Vol. 1 (and you probably don’t even know what that is) recently sold on Ebay for $800 + dollars? Probably. It upset me only because I wasn’t the seller. 

But seriously, I don’t like your attack on Todd. He actually is part of the hobby. He DOES something beside bitch and moan and argue on a board. All I can see you doing is commenting here on something you admit to knowing nothing about. 

Todd’s a good person and between his producing and blogs he’s done more FOR the hobby than I think you ever will. 

And why don’t you be honest about one thing. Your real problem is the price of the kits. You want to get everything cheap because that’s all you can afford. But stop bitching about the prices. Learn to live without. Unless for some reason you seem to feel you are automatically entitled to anything you want. 

Why are you fighting this war? And by the way, who’s freaking rules? Your's?. And who said you get to make up the rules?

Mods/admin, if you feel I was over the top with this post please delete it. I just hate when a bully picks on someone else.


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

Facto2}
[IMG said:


> http://toomanymen.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/ouroboros_by_saki_blackwing.jpg[/IMG]


great illustration for both the effect of recasting on the hobby and for this particular argument.


----------



## Jimmy B (Apr 19, 2000)

Wake me when the Ghost comes out


----------



## BronzeGiant (Jun 8, 2007)

Facto2 said:


> But stop bitching about the prices. Learn to live without.


There's an elitist statement if ever I heard one......

Steve


----------



## IanWilkinson (Apr 23, 2010)

Sorry but i can't believe how some people will 'bite!'.. i myself pay well over the top for original kits, i get almost all of them from America. I think nothing of paying around $200 for a kit then have to pay $55 shipping to the UK then import tax is around another $55.. so my $200 kit cost me around $300+. i can only afford a few kits a year becouse of this, and would do this any day rather than purchase 30 crap, bad made recast kits for the same money - I would also like to point out, the Thai recast Resin kits.. what is in there Resin??... i dont think they are bothered about illegal chemicals or god knows what they use!.. so also think about your health!.. Help our hobby out and purchase ORIGINAL kits.. it will continue to grow from people like Todd who is one of the greatest people to know!..


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

I need to ask, what company or models does Todd produce? Does he have a website? I am always curious to look at possible models to purchase.

Bob K.


----------



## Scott J (Jun 21, 2000)

Kit Junkie, 
Frankly.......you are an ass!! Had to get that out. You've probably never spent more than $30 on a model in your life. Don't knock those that do and because we can afford to don't treat us like we're the bad guys. Personally I could care less if you ever buy a garage kit. But if you aren't than YOU should be the one to stop talking. You obviously don't know anything about garage kits or that portion of the hobby. The debate about recasts is a seperate debate from that of licensing. Sounds to me like you've been sniffing too much glue!! Stay in your part of the hobby and leave the "elitests" to theirs!!

SJ


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Scott J said:


> Kit Junkie,
> Frankly.......you are an ass!!


 Is the not spending more than $30 on a kit meant to belittle me or make me look like less of a person than you? Couple that with name calling and you just made yourself look like a spoiled child. Thanks for being here.  


Facto2: "Todd produces kits most of which I believe are in public domain".

Most of which? ha! :freak: 

Question: Is stealing from a thief a sin?

Rules? I was speaking about licensing. How childish is the thought I was "making up the rules".





Auroranut said:


> KJ, not that you'll care, but you just lost my respect....


I never asked for it. Good day.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Jimmy B said:


> Wake me when the Ghost comes out


you will see a recast of the ghost before the real one comes out :hat:


----------



## Jimmy B (Apr 19, 2000)

To the original question - "Do you own or buy recasts?" my answer is yes (I think). A few years back before I read up on the whole recast controversy I found a Stateside seller offering this vinal Zombie kit entitled "I'm Back" for about $20.00 American + S&H.
Not thinking anything of it and always wanting a Zombie figure kit I snagged it. 

I looking at it retrospect I took a hosing on this thing because its awful. Warped Base, thin plastic, ect.
Now I'm aware I'll find this mess for a song on ebay anytime I feel like doing a search on I'm Back always out of Taiwan. 
I'm pretty sure that's where the stateside guy got it and he just passed it on.


----------



## pugknows (May 28, 2002)

I have recast 2 kits in the house, all were handed to me out of frustration, a friend bought some kits on E-bay and once we learned they were recasts he just handed them over. They are coming to Wonderfest to see if we can do a recasting display... or at least have them there for people to learn the differences, then they either hit the garbage or are used for future demonstrations...maybe a episode on recasting Monster Model Review episode....hmmmm. 
Rob
Monster Model Review


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Deleted.


----------



## FalcignoArt.com (Dec 5, 2010)

Kitjunkie: First, let's be clear, you wrote:

"P.S. I never once said I support recasting. I said I don't see the harm in someone building a recast of a long gone kit form a defunct company."

Well, Since I never referred to you or singled you out in my earlier post, I never said that you support recasting. OK, glad we are clear on that.

You also wrote:

"It's insulting to someones intelligence that anyone could somehow justify producing a kit without permission of the license holder. You are making pirated copies when you produce an unlicensed kit. I don't care what your justification is. You're wrong. Live with it."


I'll answer this line by line, then I'm done.

1. It's insulting to someones intelligence that anyone could somehow justify producing a kit without permission of the license holder.

That's your opinion, which you are entitled to, but the various reasons for this have been explained many times. I guess, you have long been (and apparently will remain) unaware of what a garage kit is, and why they continue to exist. Actually, you have often said you know nothing about Garage Kits...so it is kinda strange that you play devil's advocate in all these types of threads. Strange, because I don't go into forums about producing full size automobiles just to weigh in on the various aspects of full size automobile construction. But whatever , you seem like a nice guy and I aim to be the same.

2. You are making pirated copies when you produce an unlicensed kit. 

OK pal, this is NOT true. When someone produces an unlicensed kit they are still creating the kit from scratch. They are infringing on an existing character's likeness but they are NOT making a pirated copy. Taking a statue of Snow White from the Disney store, molding it, casting it, and selling it. THAT is a pirated Copy. Going by your logic here, you are saying that if I created a beautiful oil painting of Frankenstein's Monster holding his Bride it would be the same thing as you taking my painting, slapping it down on a photocopier, and hitting the print button.

Sorry Mr. Junkie, but that's not the same thing.

Now, if I walked around with my painting and told people I was the brainchild who created Frankenstein's Monster...I'd be a lying douche for sure, but no Garage Kit Producer has ever claimed they created a copyrighted character.

What they have done is make their own sculpture inspired by an existing character. Now, if you are going to say that's the same thing as recasting....please go back and read the whole "photocopied" analogy I wrote a bit earlier. 

Now, your last sentence:

"I don't care what your justification is. You're wrong. Live with it."

This leads me back to what I had already stated quite clearly,

Simply speaking, you seem to love arguing very extreme points about a topic you openly state you know nothing about.

That said...just what do you hope to accomplish?

I honestly don't know and at this juncture...I don't even think you know.

Would you prefer that all the garage kit people just closed up shop completely leaving only styrene figures & vehicles still around?

Have a good day sir.

-Mike


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Mike, regardless of your comment that I "know nothing of the garage kit industry" what's to know about copyright infringement, apart from the fact that one is making something he has no right to make? 

You: "What they have done is make a their own sculpture inspired by an existing character" 

Me: In most cases, the same likeness or design as the original. 

My points would only be "extreme" to someone on the other side of the argument. What is is what is. A copyright is a copyright. If you produce Frankenstein in the likeness of the movie character, you infringe on the copyright of the likeness held by Universal. It's simple as that.

Some say: "If you can't afford it, do without." I liken that to: If you can't get a license, don't produce the kit.

You can't see that it's wrong to (basically) steal the likeness? It doesn't matter to me that you sculpted it, at all. It's not the sculpting that is the issue. The issue is selling copies. Your reproduction infringes on the copyright.


Todd P: "I'm feeling kind of stupid now for standing up for you when you said you were giving up the hobby to save your marriage."

Me: I never said that. You've mistaken me for someone else.


Oh... Mike, I think you're a good guy, too. Thank you.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

Hey, Kit Junkie. What's your real name?


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

Here is a hypothetical question about recasting. I've been interested in getting kits of the Revell Beatles that were produced back in the 60s but they are out of production, difficult on to find eBay, and will likely never be produced again. Now if someone I knew had an unassembled kit and could cast a resin replica for me is that illegal? I suppose at the most technical level it is but this is not going to take any income away from Revell and for serious collectors it is not going to make any difference to the value of their collection. And even in the guy made a couple of hundred I see no impact on the general market and I rather doubt he could sell all of them unless the quality was outstanding. If he started mass producing and marketing them Revell might decide to go after him although it is unlikely they will ever repop these models anyway. In fact, I believe there is a guy on eBay doing this although I have read the recasts are fairly low quality. I hate to belabor the point but was curious about this.

I suppose I have mixed feelings on the issue. I can see the points about the fact that some of these urchins have put legit GK producers out of business but if the company has been out of business for years and will never produce the kit again I wonder about the morale conundrum presented. And there is that pick and choose scenario, if this is some oriental operation mass producing these that is totally illegal. If it was a small GK outfit doing it for a few fans who simply can't get the kit anymore at all does that make a difference. I'd love to pickup that Janus Man of a Thousand Faces but doubt I will ever see it available at any price not already finished. Just thinking at the keyboard. I have never bought a recast and don't plan on it either but just thinking.

Bob K.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Facto2 said:


> Hey, Kit Junkie. What's your real name?


If I told you, I'd have to kill you.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> If I told you, I'd have to kill you.


Aww, come on. We’re all friends here, right? Okay, I’ll start. My name is John Tucky. I don’t mind having my name attached to what I think and post.

Your turn.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Sorry, I guess you're right, I confused you with someone else who previously gave me good trader feedback. Plus, I'd already come back to delete what I thought bordered on a low blow. Not as low as some of the things you've said about me in your responses, though.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Facto2 said:


> Aww, come on. We’re all friends here, right? Okay, I’ll start. My name is John Tucky. I don’t mind having my name attached to what I think and post.
> 
> Your turn.


It doesn't matter what my name is. It has nothing to do with the subject at all. Why would you need it? That's kind of creepy. 

Todd P, Could you please post what I said about you that was low?


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> It doesn't matter what my name is. It has nothing to do with the subject at all. Why would you need it? That's kind of creepy.


We’re having a friendly discussion, right? Don’t you like to know the name of the person you’re talking to. Isn’t that just normal. Or maybe you find normal “creepy.” Come on. You now have my name. What’s yours? I mean unless you don’t want your name attached to what you think and post.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

It has nothing to do with having my name attached. It has everything to do with privacy. Thanks for asking.


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

I do my OWN recasts of existing kits. I do this for my model railroad. I buy one expensive cast kit and then I make molds which I pay for. I make the copies with Alumilite which I pay for. The copies sit next to the original on the layout. I have 3 building kits I've copied, and two freight cars I've copied. I don't sell my copies. I don't let anyone borrow my molds. 

I DO have a single re-cast model of a Shadow Battle Crab. Didn't know it when I bought it. I copied the 3 body segments as molds and do the tentacles as steel tube with tin foil wrapped around it. I had planned to make 5 of them, but after I moved I didn't have a place for it, so I actually never even completed the original.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> It has nothing to do with having my name attached. It has everything to do with privacy. Thanks for asking.


So by privacy you mean being an internet terrorist. See, terrorists do things but never have their specific names attached. Like you with your opinions. Since you are so passionate about your opinions and so willing to fight the battle I’d think you’d want to have your name attached and take pride in what you’ve accomplished. So again, what’s your name?


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Now, I'll make it my pet project to shut you down.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Facto2 said:


> So by privacy you mean being an internet terrorist. See, terrorists do things but never have their specific names attached. Like you with your opinions. Since you are so passionate about your opinions and so willing to fight the battle I’d think you’d want to have your name attached and take pride in what you’ve accomplished. So again, what’s your name?


Terrorist? That's laughable! Are you stunted?


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> Now, I'll make it my pet project to shut you down.


Was that directed at me or Scott?


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Facto2 said:


> Was that directed at me or Scott?


Actually anyone producing unlicensed kits. All I asked for was privacy. Now it's an issue.


----------



## Facto2 (Nov 16, 2010)

kit-junkie said:


> Are you stunted?


Depends on who you talk to.


----------



## kit-junkie (Apr 8, 2005)

Leave it to a brain dead millwright to screw everything up. Must have bumped your head a few times. Eh, Scotty? Got ya a bit shell shocked?


----------



## Scott J (Jun 21, 2000)

C'mon Craig......it's not too hard to look at your old posts and get your info. Really no one to blame but yourself. I'm not the "brain dead" one that started all this. I do hope the mods here look at who is "threatening" kit producers here and they take appropriate action and throw you out like they should.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

You three need to take your feud off this forum - now. 

Thread is locked!


----------

