"28mm = 1/35. A daydream?" Topic

Hi all

There is an issue that's been wondering me for some time now (I don't want this to be the typical discussion of proportioned vs heroic figures and of course this post has no intention to be a rant or claim against anything. I just want to know what you guys think, and if other modellers and painters have the same (or different) thoughts.

Why isn't there any manufacturer of real looking 28mm or 30mm historical figures?

I have seen the recent release of Star Wars figs. in 30mm (Knight Models) and I have to say I really envy those SW/Fantasy buffs that will be able to paint those figures (regardless price issues).
I mean, don't you thin that, for example if figures like these T.Meier's FIW figures were commercially available they would sell very good?

picture
picture

People that like to paint or wargame and paint in this scale would always want to splat some paint in such beauties. I buy the odd pack of Perry's , Empress Ebob, Victrix etc. just to get hold of a particular figure, just for it's natural look., proportions, pose etc… Do other painters do the same?

Top sculptors(say: Ebob, Paul Hicks, Tom Meier, The Perrys, Richard Ansell, T. Bousted, etc..) have enough skill to model these figures with nearly the detail as a 1/35 (within the logical size-detail limitation) but for some reason or another they are simply unavailable, or the sculptors are never commissioned for this type of work .
Is it a sales/market issue?

Luckily some wargame's figure manufactures are recently aiming for more realistic looking figures, and maybe it's just a matter of time to reach those standards, that Fantasy modellers/Painters are now enjoying.

What do you guys think?

a tricky concept commercialy designing wargames size figures aimed at painters..or is it? dare I say much of the detail would be wasted? It looks good from half a metre is a generally accepted standard by many gamers, painters,customers of painters and painting services..

I'd say it's a combination of factors:

Until the 1990's spin cast metal figures were made in lead based alloy which was quite soft. Superfine details would get dinged by ordinary handling and thin points like ankles and bayonets would bend too easily. There is obviously a tendency to hold onto the previous style so as not to make your entire product line obsolete even if there were a clamor for more realistic proportions.

Which there is not because some people simply prefer a cartoony style, also gamers get used to a certain look until it becomes normal for them and they don't want their collections to be obsolete either.

Then there is the problem of working with this level of finesse. It's simply more demanding and time consuming the models would cost more to sculpt and require more skill and cost to manufacture. An 8% shrink on a cartoony figure doesn't do much damage but when tolerances are fine it's quite noticeable.

On the whole I think realism would be much more popular for historicals than caricature, all things being equal, but of course all things aren't.

T. Meier: …so then you think it's a cost matter? Manufactures may think that every single figure's selling price (the "accuarate" ones) would not be accepted by painters/modellers/gamers? But why then is there a market for fantasy figures, which look a bit more "better detailed and finished" and indeed are more expensive than their historicals?

Cardinal Hackwood: The matter is that the smallest size/scale that you can find of real "realistic" historical figures is 1/35. Of course in a hipotetical (or not so as you can see in the pictures I attached) realistic 28mm figure, you can't paint as much detail as in a 1/35. But that doesn't seem to be a problem for fantasy figures. You can really find real works of art in 28mm fantasy figures…

"…you think it's a cost matter?"

It comes down to that.

There is market resistance as I said and there are additional difficulties to manufacture but it's all essentially reduceable to cost.

As you point out though, I don't think it's a matter, as some seem to believe, of price resistance so much. Even if you only spend an hour painting a figure it doesn't make much sense to save a relatively small sum buying a less valued product. The value of your painting time is too much greater than the cost of the figure.

The problem is history. If you already have hundreds of cartoony figures you aren't going to want to dump all that work and it's is even more subtle than that, most people would tend to convince themselves they don't want to, that the new product isn't more valuable. I'm sure everyone has seen this trick of human psychology it's akin to making a virtue of necessity.

In my opinion if you could wipe the slate clean and offer realistic figures versus cartoony ones to an unprejudiced buyer, the realistic would trump hands down and command a premium, at least for historicals, but that is not to be.

I think that once some of the "realistic" figure ranges now on the market offer the complete goods that one needs to make up a pair of armies (i.e. infantry, artillery, cavalry and command figures)then those ranges will start to see their sales grow. Gamers are resistant to investing in a new product (especially one that isn't compatible with what they already have)unless they have some assurance that they will have a full range to work with.

I have started redoing my entire SYW sets of armies because Minden Miniatures offer a nearly full range of Austrians and Prussians (and the likelihood of offering full lines of French versus British and Hanoverians). I like the newer slimmer figures better than my older cartoonish figures. The "shiny new toy" syndrome is in effect here too.

Once Alban provides all of the Napoleonic basics, I would consider starting all over with my Napoleonic armies as well. But until they do, I am holding off on purchasing their figures.

Not sure who makes these but I think they may qualify!

link

Will check out his web site for any further details

Garry

.yes, I know Javiko, and I've already painted his Handamack vigentte. As for the other figures, that's what I'm talking about. Check the prussian soldier, that's an awoseme sculpt, and that's how most of figures should be.I don't think the manufacturing cost would be drasticlly inecreased. Regarding the sculting tim, I don't really but I don't think some more time spnet in a figure can be asumed in a relative selling ptice amount

I checked and, unfortunately, the SYW grenadier and Marian legionary on Javiko's site are not for commercial release. Shame as their quality is very high.

At the same time have a look at say Aventine and Gorgon Miniatures, I would say that their commercial ancient figures come close to this standard.

link

gorgon-studios.com

So all is not quite lost!

Quite a lot of the old Stadden 30mm ranges were "realistic" in their proportions

"…the old Stadden 30mm ranges were "realistic" in their proportions"

Yes they were, it's a pity at the time they were made wax or solder were the only sculpting materials available and so the detail isn't very sharp.

The proportions on many of the other examples above are not so realistic. A 1/6.5 head is pretty extreme and a hand measured across the knuckles larger than 1/15 of overall height is not very normal.

People tend not to realize how narrow the range of normal proportions is because our perceptions in real life are so sensitive to it. Make a fist and measure your hand across the knuckles with a ruler, it will almost certainly measure 3 -1/4" to 4 -1/4" unless you are an extremely big or small person. Now holding the ruler there, imagine a hand 5" across. That's a 1/12 hand on a man of average height.

So to be inside the normal range you have to make the hand no larger than 2mm and no smaller than 1.5mm on a 30mm ‘28mm' figure and the hand is more variable than most proportions. The head on such a figure should be 1/7 to 1/8 or 3.75mm to 4.25mm, though you could make a case for 18th century and previous people being shorter with proportionately larger heads say 1/6.75 to 1/7.75.

You can see what I mean by the tolerances being very tight and demanding.

I do produce figures that look human with all correct human measurements to scale,usually there are tall soldiers and not so tall,so my scale is 1/48 varying sizes from 30 to 40mm.
wargames48.blogspot.com

"all correct human measurements"

You have the arm, leg, foot and hand proportions about right and the head size and volume is about right but the position of the eyes in the head is generally off. The average midpoint of the head for European males is about the lower lid of the eye. It does not vary much, about 1.5 cm +/- . If you want to look at two extremes call up a picture of the Emperor Trajan and one of Augustus, they are good examples of an extremely long and somewhat short face respectively.

30mm at 1/48 = 4'8.5" or 144cm. 40mm at 1/48 = 6'3.5" or 193cm. Given an average height of about 5'9"(175cm) for WWII soldiers it would make sense to try and keep within two standard deviations of that, which would cover 99% of people, this would be between 34mm and 39.5mm overall height in 1/48 scale.

I flicked through the latest issue of Wargames Illustrated in a newsagent and had a look at their Moments in History article, particularly the pics of the Miyamoto/Sasaki diorama that the sculptor had 'brought to life'. I near wept hot, manly tears of grief when I saw how much 'life' it had in it, and thought of this topic.

link

Maybe historical gamers think uber-details and hyper-dynamism aren't necessary for a bunch of rank 'n' file minis lost in the crowd, but these special character dioramas are barely better – if that – than bog-standard rank 'n' file.
Coming from a sci-fi/fantasy perspective, we're being spoiled by character minis from the likes of Hasslefree, Red Box Games, Studio McVey and many more. I sincerely have trouble understanding why the standards for good- or top-quality historical miniatures (with a few exceptions listed in the top post) seem to be so much lower.

-----
Warren B.
minisculpture.co.uk

Because for a fantasy gamer, one or two minis is enough, for a historical wargame, you need hundreds and the cost simply doesn't stack up?

So you're saying there are no rules or minis for fantasy warband/skirmish games, let alone mass combat?

Do you notice what's wrong about that?

Which is beside the point, anyway. I mentioned rank 'n' file minis, and it'd be nice if more historical sculptors stopped viewing that crude, ugly style as 'good' (and there's possibly a matter of sculptor's costs and individual price vs. volume of sales and the amount of currency that'd be dropped on armies anyway, particularly at the kind of Larry-Leadhead numbers you imply; but I don't know enough facts and figures to make an informed statement); but here I'm concentrating on characters and dioramas. The WI ones don't stand up, even against other historical minis and sculptors, in my opinion.

-----
Warren B.
minisculpture.co.uk