KTravlos | 24 Feb 2014 3:38 p.m. PST |
While painting some of my greatcoat Perry French for Napoleonic Gaming I started becoming irritated at some of the detail I simply found unneeded for the war-gaming table. For example, detailed backpacks, and water bottles, and bayonet scabbards and so on. Which led me to ask this question: "How fiddly do you want your 28mm minaitures? Let us define fiddly as amount of detail". Just as a background, I do not hate detailed miniatures as such, and have a background in painting 54mm and over-painting 28mm, 15mm, and 6mm, but as I am getting older and more into the war-gaming as opposed to painting part of the hobby (partly due to the influence of board-wargames) it is true that I have started to find it irritating that my 20th Frenchman has a water bottle, and pan etc on him/her, that I have to paint. i am willing to put the extra work in the first 5-10 miniatures, but after that I have increasingly gone down the "get them painted fast" path. I cross -posted this to those forum areas that apply to the periods that interest me. Your thoughts? Preferences? With Respect KTravlos |
Garand | 24 Feb 2014 3:44 p.m. PST |
If the detail reasonably would exist on the actual soldier, I would expect it on the model. I picked up a bunch of BTD Germans a few years ago, and was bothered that many did not have the distinctive German breadbags. So they sit languishing as I look at other manufacturers. Damon. |
Carausius | 24 Feb 2014 3:47 p.m. PST |
I actually found those models annoying because of the lack of literal physical "fiddly" parts, I prefer my models with lots of options in terms of pieces. In terms of painting though I have to agree that such details though nice can be annoying. |
wrgmr1 | 24 Feb 2014 3:50 p.m. PST |
I agree with you regarding large armies, I'm painting Calpe Napoleonic Prussians. While I like them to look good, I find extra detail to paint. I get a little annoyed at the time, but am happy with the final result. I'm kind of in both camps actually. |
Brian Smaller | 24 Feb 2014 3:50 p.m. PST |
I think that the internet has added a lot of fiddly detail. We are now used to seeing models somewhat larger than actual size. Saying that, the detail is, by necessity, abstracted to a large degree because of scale. I really don't want to have to use a single brush hair and a jewellers eyeglass to paint. I am happy enough with the way things are nowadays, but still like painting models from the 80s that had somewhat less detail than their modern equivalents. |
45thdiv | 24 Feb 2014 4:04 p.m. PST |
Just paint it black. When they are all based and on the table, no one will notice that the small bits are not painted. |
snodipous | 24 Feb 2014 4:29 p.m. PST |
Better that someone be stuck with more detail on their figures than they need, rather than less. It's easier for you to just block-paint details a single colour and forget them than it is for somebody who appreciates the extra detail to paint it on when it doesn't exist. |
Dave Crowell | 24 Feb 2014 4:33 p.m. PST |
I am definitely in the old school "smooth figure" camp. They are toy soldiers, not models. I need to paint them fast, and I need to paint lots of them. I am not interested in molded shoe laces, buckles etc. |
79thPA | 24 Feb 2014 4:50 p.m. PST |
While we may be in the minority I, too, find that figs have more detail than I need. My old Spencer Smith plastics did Yeoman's service and they were almost devoid of detail. While I appreciate great sculpting and great painting, neither one is something I need to enjoy my wargaming experience. |
John the OFM | 24 Feb 2014 5:12 p.m. PST |
Too many packs and bags and straps ane epaulettes irritate me. 40K is worse, with the snuff bags and "What a Good Boy I am!" scrolls. |
Ragbones | 24 Feb 2014 5:43 p.m. PST |
I'm with the 'less is more' group. In many periods it was common for the soldiers to march into battle with just what was needed on the day of battle, not with everything they owned (cooking kit, bed roll, etc). I'd love to see 'simplified' figures. They could still have canteens and a haversack or whatever's suitable to carry ammo but leave the marching order kit off. I love Calpe and Elite Napoleonics but I'd sure like to see figures without all the extraneous equipment. |
Esquire | 24 Feb 2014 6:07 p.m. PST |
Well, I will be different. While our units are 1:20 and the battalions thus pretty large, I like the detail. While not necessarily "visible" at three feet, the overall look provides the realism. I've often considered how the human eye sees lots of things that the mind does not necessarily focus on. |
IGWARG1 | 24 Feb 2014 7:46 p.m. PST |
Check this short clip from "War and Peace". At about 1:58 the order was given to remove backpacks: YouTube link Perry miniatures are over-detailed, I agree. Not only every piece of equipment sculpted, every belt belonging to that equipment is visible. Their American 18th century militia were nightmare to paint, with 5 belts each. Not to mention all that stringy flash coming out all over from all those belts, bags, bottles and scabbards. I painted Front Rank at the same time I did Perry and difference was tremendous. Most belts were covered by one or two cross-belts with equipment only visible here and there. Also, not every figure had all possible equipment or at least I didn't notice when painting. Much better sculpting philosophy. Same can be said about new King Mountain figures. |
Long Valley Gamer | 24 Feb 2014 8:41 p.m. PST |
I'll take the detail
I marvel at the way the Perrys manage to sculpt it all in. I like to paint so I have no problem spending the few extra minutes on the figure. If all figures were like the old scrubys you would have lots of people complaining the other way. Personally, if all figures were like the old scrubiys I wouldn't be painting figures
|
Jlundberg | 24 Feb 2014 9:14 p.m. PST |
Since I do skirmish gaming, I want detail |
Lion in the Stars | 24 Feb 2014 9:16 p.m. PST |
I buy AB Napoleonics and run battalions of 32-36 plus skirmishers. I think that answers the question! Oh, oops, just saw that this was specifying 28mm minis. I play Infinity, so lots of details, but not necessarily a lot of kit on the models (not many backpacks, water bottles, etc). I honestly prefer 'battle kit' rather than 'marching kit'. |
KaweWeissiZadeh | 24 Feb 2014 10:01 p.m. PST |
Interesting discussion. I was always assuming that historically accurate equipment with crisp detail and great casting would be the big selling-point. I guess it's like with cars; Some feel that they need a Family car some a sports car. |
JezEger | 24 Feb 2014 10:24 p.m. PST |
Second the Front Rank praise. Just finished some French lancers and they were a joy to paint. Detail is there, but well defined and easy to paint. Renegade are good as well. I enjoy painting the odd showcase mini, but for an army of several hundred it becomes daunting. I think too many of us try to emulate some of the best out there and the result is that we get disheartened with lack of progress and the lead mountain grows instead.. The object should be to get units on the table, not produce masterpieces. |
bandit86 | 24 Feb 2014 10:36 p.m. PST |
I like a lot of detail because I am a painter, I don't do a lot of Historical more on the Fantasy/Sci fi side but I would like to know just what the hell the item is suppose to be. |
Elenderil | 25 Feb 2014 12:26 a.m. PST |
Not that I paint 28s anymore but when I did I liked the detail. My all time favourite figure is an early Perry sculpt of a guy in Carolingian style armour with a blanket roll and a few assorted bags and pouches. It looks about right for the amount of detail. Mind you I now paint mostly 6mm so that probably puts me in the less is more camp nowadays! |
Sparker | 25 Feb 2014 12:46 a.m. PST |
Mate don't diss the Perrys!!! Actually I'm in the exact same place as you, painting up a Waterloo French army for the 200th! (but I have a year to go and lots of mates all helping out!) But I think criticising a figure for having too much detail is a bit OTT frankly! Especially when you think what a boon the Perrys are to 28mm Naps tragics like us! As I do, and recommended above, just leave it the pans undercoated black – my rationale is that the pots and fannys were probably black from soot anyway! (Not the British ones of course – they would have been highly polished! :-) |
Musketier | 25 Feb 2014 3:18 a.m. PST |
Well I got fed up with "too much detail" for a slightly different reason. I do like the -option- of extra equipment on the backpack etc, but when you're setting up big battalions it gets a bit repetitve: How many men among 60 would have their spare pair of boots tied to their pack in exactly the same way? With the advent of plastics, it would have been possible to offer these extra items as separate bits, rather than sculpting them onto the figure or its pack, so people could get creative as to how many to place, and where. The WH and 40K plastic sets are better in this respect. |
HarryB1961 | 25 Feb 2014 3:31 a.m. PST |
I know it's a different period, but if 'over detail' is not to your liking i would advise never to purchase Warlord games ECW dragoons. The mounted ones are weighted down with bags,blankets, various dead animals and lanterns ! Total nightmare to paint. |
Mac1638 | 25 Feb 2014 3:44 a.m. PST |
I agree with Sparker, Don't diss the Perrys!, If you do not won't detail play at a smaller scale or paint then all one colour Red- British, Blue- French etc, or just have coloured blocks of wood, or cardboard counters, O thats a board game! You do 28mm for the look of them! PS-Sparker what the kcuf are "fannys" when there at home? |
von Winterfeldt | 25 Feb 2014 4:15 a.m. PST |
The new "multi" pose Perrys, that's it, it is just great as for the new AWI plastic box to have interchangable arms and headdress – for example. |
Cerdic | 25 Feb 2014 4:48 a.m. PST |
Sparker
you are so right, I have spent many an hour polishing my wife's fanny
. |
rabbit | 25 Feb 2014 4:52 a.m. PST |
Try this TMP link at the end of the day it is horses for courses, I like to see the bits, but use the arms length test, if you cannot see it at arms length, don't bother to paint it, unless you are doing skirmish or have more time than I do. rabbit |
deadhead | 25 Feb 2014 5:38 a.m. PST |
Fascinating. Never thought I'd see manufacturers criticised for modern detailing standards. Mind you, I must agree that there is much (almost an increasing?) need for filing for some "brands". Every Perry figure always has a little spike, a moulding remnant, sticking out of his cartridge pouch for example. But where would we be without Perry, Westfalia, Calpe modern standards
back to toy soldiers, which is fine, if they are genuine antiques
.. Modern washes or dips and then drybrushing of raised detail can be done in seconds. At any distance, moulded on detail need not painted with anything more than a "splodge" of paint, washed and highlighted. Line them up, conveyor belt stuff. Kawe et al are surely right. Let's have crisp mouldings, lots of detail and paint them to our own personal preferred standard |
Dentatus | 25 Feb 2014 6:30 a.m. PST |
Of course I want crisp details, but not extraneous ones. Or unnecessary gear. Fiddly bits = breakage, in my experience. Guess I'm in the 'less is more' crowd. |
uglyfatbloke | 25 Feb 2014 6:54 a.m. PST |
All for crisp, and the extra detail is lovely if you have the skill time and inclination, but the latter two are pointless if you don't have the skill
.which I don't. |
79thPA | 25 Feb 2014 7:02 a.m. PST |
I see we have devolved into the "if you don't like detailed figs, use blocks of wood" argument. Thanks for letting everyone know how to enjoy their gaming experience. Afterall, how is the hobby to grow if we don't tell people why they are wrong and what the solution is? My memory is a little hazzy, but I believe it was Charles Grant, Sr. in an interview with the Courier who stated that his figure collection did not give him years of pleasure as he had pretended and that he preferred to game with wooden blocks. Unfortunately, there was a critical shortage of wood in England and he could not make his wooden block armies. He then went on to relay a funny story about how he wanted to build a wooden block Dutch army and snuck over to a neighbor's shed to liberate some wood when he was confronted by a fresh faced young constable making his rounds! Being a man of some regard, Mr. Grant was able to convince the constable nothing was amiss and they went their own ways. This encounter had a profound effect on Mr. Grant, which forced him into a life of little men lacking distinct crossbelts and officers without sword knots! One must wonder how things would be different were it not for a critical wood shortage and a diligent young constable whose name has been lost to history. |
IronMike | 25 Feb 2014 8:21 a.m. PST |
If given the choice, I'll take lack of fiddle over fiddle. my current project is what I've come to refer to as 'Chivalrous fantasy', with lots of emphasis on heraldry, blazons, and all that fun medieval stuff. I've had to pass up more than one model line because they had raised designs on their shields, which would either be a pain to paint of inappropriate for what I'm trying to do
|
KTravlos | 25 Feb 2014 9:08 a.m. PST |
Ok, let me be clear. I am not dissing the Perry's or any 28mm manufacturer. I have spend much money on them and intend to spend much more. I just stated an opinion, and asked for other peoples opinion. Opinions are neither fact nor law, nothing really much than prejudice expressed. So no attempt to a) Tell people how to game (a silly proposition if there ever was one) b) Tell the Perrys or Front Rank, or Calpe or whatever you suck. They most certainty do not suck. Indeed their plastic revolution is the reason I got into historical 28mm gaming. As I said I have enjoyed painting over-detailed miniatures in the past, but I simply find that now-days if it is not a 1 off, or small group (5-20), I get tired of it. I just wanted to see what other people thought. The perfect for me would be the plastic kits with the fiddly bits optional (canteens, backpacks, scabbards etc) . |
Patrice | 25 Feb 2014 9:12 a.m. PST |
I have started to find it irritating that my 20th Frenchman has a water bottle Don't expect your French soldiers to fight for you if you don't let them have a bottle for red wine on campaign! ;-) |
Musketier | 25 Feb 2014 9:35 a.m. PST |
Optional fiddly bits are exactly my pointas well, KTravlos – and I don't think your/our contructive criticism can be construed as "dissing" (whatever that means exactly). |
Mserafin | 25 Feb 2014 9:37 a.m. PST |
Given that I have managed to limited my tendency towards obsessive-complusive behavior to Napoleonics, I definitely want details. Even though I grouch about them when I'm painting them, I'm always pleased by the end result. More Perry, Front Rank, Calpe and Paul Hicks figures, please! |
Jeff Ewing | 25 Feb 2014 11:12 a.m. PST |
Garand: You know about these right?: link Also: the breadbags are pretty easy to add using putty -- I know, I added a bunch of them, plus gasmask cases and canteens to BTD figures! |
Inkpaduta | 25 Feb 2014 11:48 a.m. PST |
|
xenophon | 25 Feb 2014 12:12 p.m. PST |
It does not mean that I paint all of it but I certainly like the detail. I have had my fair share of figures without much detail in the last thirty years or so. The Mike's Models Vikings come to mind here! |
Sparker | 25 Feb 2014 2:06 p.m. PST |
Fanny: Etymology 2[edit]The British naval slang sense derives from Fanny Adams. Tins of mutton introduced as rations were not liked by the sailors and were taken by them to contain the butchered remains of Fanny Adams who had been brutally murdered and dismembered. The tins were re-used for eating from and cooking with. [1] Noun[edit]fanny (plural fannies) 1.(UK, naval slang) Mess kettle or cooking pot. |
Ragbones | 25 Feb 2014 2:58 p.m. PST |
I like the detail on my figures to be crisp and since I drybrush I like nice folds in the uniforms over which to paint but what I don't want to paint is every little piece of campaign equipage that a soldier could have carried. Fewer pieces of 'extraneous' equipment doesn't mean less detail. It's a shame that more figures aren't offered to satisfy both desires but that might not be fiscally prudent from the manufacturer's perspective. It's a neat topic to talk about. |
Bandolier | 25 Feb 2014 3:11 p.m. PST |
I like the detail in general. Only the Perry AWI Hessians make me take a deep breath before starting them. They have a lot of fine detail. I am not a 'dip' painter, but even a basic, neat block paintjob and a dip brings out so much detail. |
Garand | 25 Feb 2014 6:17 p.m. PST |
Hi Jeff, no I did not know about those. But I have moved on to different figures since then
Damon. |
KTravlos | 25 Feb 2014 6:33 p.m. PST |
One clarification, when I mean fiddly I do not mean things like cloak folds etc, but I mean extraneous stuff |
Bohdan Khmelnytskij | 25 Feb 2014 8:08 p.m. PST |
25mm Minifigs – all the same (marching) – and usually painted in 2 or 3 colors. SImple detail. |
Great War Ace | 25 Feb 2014 9:46 p.m. PST |
Nothing gets around "fiddly bits" like a good wash. Medievals with too many studs or leg wraps or trim on tunics or decorative armor flourishes, etc., get the wash treatment, then, if I have a yen to, I go back and just lightly touch the fiddly bits with a bit more color. But I will play with the figures as-is washed, first, considering them "done" if not actually finished. I'm lazy that way
. |
solosam | 26 Feb 2014 12:52 a.m. PST |
"over-painting 28mm" This. |
Mac1638 | 26 Feb 2014 5:44 a.m. PST |
Sparker, Thanks for that, I did not know(Fannies), you learn something new every day! Mac |
M C MonkeyDew | 26 Feb 2014 6:56 a.m. PST |
Not at all fiddly. Single piece casting for me whenever possible. Bob |
Recovered 1AO | 26 Feb 2014 10:04 a.m. PST |
"The object should be to get units on the table, not produce masterpieces." The above exactly. "Fewer pieces of 'extraneous' equipment doesn't mean less detail." And this is a valid point. "The perfect for me would be the plastic kits with the fiddly bits optional (canteens, backpacks, scabbards etc) " Ah, the Holy Grail which I seek also! Metal or plastic works for me. "I guess it's like with cars; Some feel that they need a Family car some a sports car." I would say it is more like some need a half-ton truck, some want it when they need a simple SUV, and some only need/want a Mini-Cooper. That is why I plan to do my replacement Napoleonic figures in 3 mm
Maybe 6 mm
If you are a painter of the first water then I will praise your figures and work ethic but I have no hope to plan to achieve such heights. Caveat: I do not buy 25+ mm figures anymore. I have them in droves, but where possible I am switching to 3/6/15 mm for all periods/genres/levels (mass battle to skirmish) and, yes, I truly find the painting part of the hobby the least satisfying. And yes, I have skirmished in 6 mm. It requires creative basing to "ID" elements/characters but it is a blast. As for the Perry – Sorry but no one is above criticism. Too many details (whether Perry or GHQ) is a matter of taste but a valid criticism at that level. |