Cacique Caribe | 27 Nov 2008 5:07 a.m. PST |
|
Cacique Caribe | 27 Nov 2008 5:08 a.m. PST |
Or should I just add big eyes and clip the tails off a bunch of Waggamaephs? CC |
14th Brooklyn | 27 Nov 2008 5:19 a.m. PST |
I would say 6 to 7 mm tall. Cheers, Burkhard |
Cacique Caribe | 27 Nov 2008 5:26 a.m. PST |
That is tiny but, I suppose, it also goes along with the description in the novel "Little Fuzzy": "He turned quickly to see two wide eyes staring up at him out of a ball of golden fur. Whatever it was, it had a round head and big ears and a vaguely humanoid face with a little snub nose. It was sitting on its haunches, and in that position it was about a foot high. It had two tiny hands with opposing thumbs." link link Hmm. CC |
SimonF | 27 Nov 2008 6:40 a.m. PST |
"Or should I just add big eyes and clip the tails off a bunch of Waggamaephs?" Honestly, you probably should. These would be really tiny. |
SimonF | 27 Nov 2008 6:41 a.m. PST |
Unless you want them to be, you know, accurate or something.
|
RavenscraftCybernetics | 27 Nov 2008 8:32 a.m. PST |
6-8 mm should be accurate. please measure from the bottom of the foot to the top of the head =P measuring to the eye would just be silly in this case. |
Mardaddy | 27 Nov 2008 10:21 a.m. PST |
I recall buying a load of Fuzzies via internet on the cheap a few years ago; I cannot recall where though – Eureka? In fact, I still have them in a drawer. |
Coelacanth1938 | 27 Nov 2008 11:10 a.m. PST |
link I have a few of them. They're about 15mm at most. Very nicely done too. |
Cacique Caribe | 27 Nov 2008 12:07 p.m. PST |
Gents, Would either one of you be willing to sell me one of each variant? Thanks. CC |
Murvihill | 27 Nov 2008 12:22 p.m. PST |
That'd make a great movie, or even mini-series. |
Cacique Caribe | 13 Feb 2009 4:33 p.m. PST |
If only GZG, or someone as enterprising, gave it a shot and made 15mm non-fuzzies with little spears and such . . . . . . perhaps some 6-8 variants of them? Even at 15mm in height, they would look so cool outnumbering the poor humans. I think the key characteristic to maintain is their prominent and penetrating eyes, don't you think? CC |
ZeroGee2 | 16 Feb 2009 12:32 a.m. PST |
I had (have? it may still be in a box somewhere) one of the Archive ones from way back – I think it was around 10-12mm tall. |
Cacique Caribe | 16 Feb 2009 12:35 a.m. PST |
|
ZeroGee2 | 16 Feb 2009 2:12 p.m. PST |
Very much like the pics, as far as I can recall – especially the shape of the blade weapon; I assume it was sculpted from (sorry, "inspired by"
. <GRIN>) these very paintings. Jon (GZG) |
Zephyr1 | 16 Feb 2009 4:06 p.m. PST |
Even at 15mm in height, they would look so cool outnumbering the poor humans. "Fire up the weed whacker, Cletus! Them lil' furry things is a-comin'!" ;-) |
flooglestreet | 16 Feb 2009 5:49 p.m. PST |
As I recall, the archive figures were about half the height of a 25mm figure. From the artwork, you might be able to convert a 6mm figure if you can work with things that small. |
Cacique Caribe | 13 May 2009 7:59 a.m. PST |
|
Cacique Caribe | 14 Jul 2009 7:11 a.m. PST |
I guess someone has saved me the trouble of sculpting my own . . . Looks like these would work great as Ewoks and Fuzzies: link TMP link And these are their bigger cousins: link link CC |
Cacique Caribe | 14 Aug 2009 4:24 p.m. PST |
|
SimonF | 14 Aug 2009 5:23 p.m. PST |
From the pictures at the top, it looks like they should be about 5-6mm to be properly "in scale" (but maybe not proportioned like a 6mm mini). The 20mm wookiees are probably too big, and maybe too advanced/militaristic to fit with the spear-wielding teddy bears. Also not cute enough. GEM's ewoks are a better match. You probably won't find anything better – they're only 10mm to the top of the head, suitably cute and not too advanced in technology. |
Cacique Caribe | 04 Sep 2009 12:05 a.m. PST |
|
Cacique Caribe | 02 Apr 2011 11:23 p.m. PST |
Would love to see someone make several 10-12mm tall, done just like this, but in 5-6 poses: link link link link Dan |