We have seen this argued all over several different boards, sometimes from novices and sometimes from "seasoned" BWF collectors. Now the blog is going to put you to the test:
What do you think the rules are for qualifying a car for Black With Flames status?????
Let the fun begin!
P.S.
The "Committee" already knows!
I think the car paint should be all black, unlike the current rule where the car has to be mostly black. I know that would disqualify alot of the current BWF cars, but that's OK with me.
ReplyDeleteAnd it would make the judging of a car so much easier, and it would truly be a BWF car.
Okay, so David votes all black, with no two-toning or multiple colors. What standard would you hold for "flames", David?
ReplyDeleteThere are various styles of flames, as we all know. For now, I'd say that if the car was totally black and if it had any flame style on it, it would be considered BWF. I say that now, but I reserve the right to change my criteria.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we need another, rather generic category called ABWF (almost BWF). In that, you could toss all the 2 tone paint job w/flames cars.
Let's hear some more opinions as well!
ReplyDeleteThink if the car is around %50 black and has flames, it counts. Some cars are harder to decipher than others and I think cutting it off to only included all black cars isn't fair.
ReplyDeleteI think the 50% black rule is a fairly good one, in most cases. The base color should at least be black, as with the Millennium Bus, where the gold flames clearly cover more than 50%. I think it's a matter of personal choice Vs. common sense in most debates, but it's a fun debate nontheless, and is sometimes even educational to see how the human mind deciphers these things, as well as to see how personal preferance can at times throw all rules to the dogs in the best of us.
ReplyDeleteWe've seen one example that's both interesting and fun here recently with the two tone cars. I've argued that the two tone cars fall under the existing rules of a BWF. However, I've also pointed out that most people will say they aren't BWFs due to the upper part of the car striking the eyes first and formost. It's an illusion that the upper part of the car is greater than 50% due to the windows becoming a mental part of that space, instead of the glass openings they really are. The votes currently on that thread prove this to be a correct assumption.
For further proof, take a look at the "accepted two tone BWF" known as the Chi Town Hustler, where the two tones are reversed and black is the top color. Nothing else about this car is different than any other two toner, the optical illusion is still working, it is actually less than 50% black, but it readily accepted, while most others are not.
One other interesting factor to consider is the package label. The Swamp-Gas GTO (as Swifty has fittingly dubbed it) is even more difficult to see as flames than the dreaded "streamer" van, or some of the tribal flames. Yet, it's an accepted BWF due to the label on the package saying it was intended to be flames.
On the other hand let us not forget the more recent "Gray With Flames" Olds, also intended to be a BWF, as indicated on the package. Yet this one is highly debated. It clealry has flames, but the base color is a dark gray. I would gather then, to most people, the base color being dark black is actually a more important factor that the appearance of the flames on the car.
Or, as Roadwarrior has said, gray is just a lighter shade of black. As an artist, I know this statement to be true, and is widely agreed upon. Yet, some shades of gray can actually be so light as to appear to be more of an off-white, than gray.
So where does one draw the line? Which rules are actually followed by the majority of collectors, and which ones are subject to change as a matter of personal opinion? I can't think of a single rule set forth by "The Committe" that hasn't been bent, or changed entirely depending on whether a certain car is thought of as widely attractive, or majorly ugly by popular opinion.
Conclusion: You are free to choose for yourself. Add whatever you like if the logic rings true in your own head. I know I've debated several, like the GWF Olds, for a long time before deciding to admit it, or reject it. I eventually added this one, as Brad's statement sank in and made sense here...at least for the darker shades of gray. But I still consider it an oddity among my BWF collection.
Nuff said!