"photos of minis for rulebook" Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Game Design Message Board Back to the Photography of Miniatures Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleHow to store and transport an army of giant apes?
Featured Workbench ArticleThese are not the seasonal figures that you might give your mother to put on the shelf!
Featured Profile ArticleOur newest staff editor introduces herself.
Current Poll
|
doc mcb | 31 Dec 2013 5:29 p.m. PST |
I'm taking photos to include in BLOODY DAWN (Alamo). As a matter of aesthetics versus recognition of reality (i.e. these are toys on a tabletop, not real soldiers in battle) do folks prefer: 1) as far as possible, conceal the bases and movement trays. using flocking etc to hide straight lines, try to make the photo look like the real thing; OR 2) take a nice photo of a GAME being played, without worrying about the fact that the miniatures are mounted on bases with lots of unrealistic straight lines visible? I own hundreds of old WARGAMES ILLUSTRATED and, while I am no professional photographer, I can work towards that standard. On the other hand, no wargame actually played ever looks like one of their covers, even if we DO remove the dice and the coffee cups. So what's a reasonable standard for photos illustrating a game in progress, to be included in the rules book? |
KnightTemplarr | 31 Dec 2013 5:42 p.m. PST |
Can you do both without it being a problem? You can do some eye candy shots to make the book look good. You can do some more unobstructed shots for illustration for mechanics. Doc Happy New Year to you and David and families. I hope Splintered Light makes it back to Hurrioon or Recon soon. |
Pictors Studio | 31 Dec 2013 5:55 p.m. PST |
I agree with Knighttemplarr. A mix of both would be nice. I do like the shots of the figures with the bases blurred into the back ground but then for some shots it would be nice to see that they are figures. If they are big battle scenes blurring would be best though. |
doc mcb | 31 Dec 2013 6:20 p.m. PST |
Thanks, KT. Which cons we do is up to David, and primarily a function of his day job and limited number of days off. Yes, I can do some of both. I agree that eye candy is dandy (but liquor is quicker). |
Rudi the german | 31 Dec 2013 7:30 p.m. PST |
2 for sure
. I want to see the game played by the desinger.. Meaning it is playtested
No faked photos for me please. |
doc mcb | 31 Dec 2013 8:12 p.m. PST |
Yes, that is a good point. Best way to take pics is during a game. |
Griefbringer | 01 Jan 2014 4:09 a.m. PST |
For a game rulebook, I would prefer the pictures to look like they have been taken from actual game situations. That said, for photos in particularly central locations (like in the cover) you might want to do a few "diorama" style shots where the bases are less visible and maybe the setting is more dramatic looking than you could expect from a usual game. |
etotheipi | 01 Jan 2014 6:06 a.m. PST |
Definitely decide the type of pic by function. Consider either an drawing (possibly as abstract as a sport X's and O's diagram) or a pic from play to illustrate important rules points. Nice pics should function as filler to help you with pagination and alignment. |
doc mcb | 01 Jan 2014 6:27 a.m. PST |
Everyone seems to agree that a case-by-case mixture is best. Makes a lot of sense. Thanks. |
|