| Tango01 | 15 Mar 2014 9:08 p.m. PST |
Another good work from our friend Vampifan.
And don't miss the schoolgirls.
From main page
link Hope you enjoy!. Amicalement
Armand |
| Covert Walrus | 15 Mar 2014 9:56 p.m. PST |
|
| The Shadow | 15 Mar 2014 11:01 p.m. PST |
Can't decide what's worse. The crappy sculpts or the horrible paint jobs. |
| Mako11 | 16 Mar 2014 2:20 a.m. PST |
The Angelina Jolie-pose clone looks pretty good to me. |
| BigNickR | 16 Mar 2014 7:45 a.m. PST |
The paintjobs are serviceable. Nothing great, but certainly not "Horrible".. The sculpts are hit and miss, but even the worst "miss" is still a sculpt I'd use as a background or NPC character. So, while I wouldn't COMMISSION a job like that, I wouldn't shun them from my table either. Besides Vampifan's strength by FAR is assembling those foamcore buildings! |
| The Shadow | 16 Mar 2014 7:55 a.m. PST |
BigNick and Mako A picture is worth a thousand words:
|
| shadow king | 16 Mar 2014 12:56 p.m. PST |
shadow perhaps one should not comment if one has nothing nice to say there painted and time taken to take pics and show. were not frothers |
| The Shadow | 16 Mar 2014 5:59 p.m. PST |
Wellll…look. This is a discussion group for the pulp era. It's also a review group. Which means that anyone that posts a photo or an opinion is asking for a comment on same. I don't think that it's necessary to reply with nothing but glowing compliments. I'm sure that everyone doesn't agree with everything that I post, and that's fine. If they'd like to post a disagreeing opinion that's OK with me too. But you can bet your snap brim fedora that whatever i post will have something to do with the pulp era. Now, as for Tango, he posts whatever he feels like posting with no regard for the topic of this discussion group. He doesn't know anything about the pulp era and apparently doesn't care to know. The latest "St. Trinians" film is nowhere *near* a pulp era film. Even the originals; "The Belles of St. Trinians" and "Pure Hell of St. Trinians", were produced at the very end of the pulp era and really aren't part of the pulp genre and anachronistic for this group. What's more, I stand by my opinion that the sculpts and paint job are way below standard. |
 Legion 4   | 17 Mar 2014 8:18 a.m. PST |
Oh ! I like "Morticia" !!!!  |
| Andy ONeill | 17 Mar 2014 8:52 a.m. PST |
I would call those paint jobs tabletop quality. Thing I would like to point out though is that he didn't post here and ask for opinions on his work.
I think if you're going to trawl the web and post other people's stuff( and I'm looking at you Armand ) then you have some sort of responsibility for what you post.
If it's obviously bang on topic and superb or just plain commercial then I doubt the owner is going to be upset.
If it's not quite on topic and open to criticism then I think it's unfair on the owner.
He didn't post his pictures.
Someone came along, grabbed the links and posted them. I think there's a middle ground between the two extremes of calling something crappy || only posting "great/super" no matter what you actually think.
Constructive criticism is much more productive than either. Quite how one can be truly constructive if the painter is unaware of the discussion kind of brings be back round to my first point. |
| The Shadow | 17 Mar 2014 9:12 a.m. PST |
AONeill >>Constructive criticism is much more productive than either. Quite how one can be truly constructive if the painter is unaware of the discussion kind of brings be back round to my first point.<< I'm with you 100%. >>I think if you're going to trawl the web and post other people's stuff( and I'm looking at you Armand ) then you have some sort of responsibility for what you post.
If it's obviously bang on topic and superb or just plain commercial then I doubt the owner is going to be upset.
If it's not quite on topic and open to criticism then I think it's unfair on the owner. He didn't post his pictures. Someone came along, grabbed the links and posted them.<< Now i'm with you 101% Armand (Tango) needs to show some responsibility for his posts. >>Thing I would like to point out though is that he didn't post here and ask for opinions on his work.<< Good point. However, do we ignore every post of someone else's work? Especially if we feel that it's not very good? I realize that it's *my* opinion, but we don't want to stifle opinions do we? |
| Andy ONeill | 18 Mar 2014 2:22 a.m. PST |
I don't think we should only post positive things.
BUT.
I don't see the need for criticism to be downright rude.
What's the use in criticism that adds nothing?
The painter doesn't even know what you don't like. I would like an explanation of what's wrong and what you think could be done better.
You want neater, subtler with three layers ( or whatever ) then you're expressing your opinion and offering the guy some advice on how he can improve.
Maybe he'll learn something and be grateful.
Maybe someone else reading the thread will see your words of wisdom and benefit.
I see that as useful and positive. If I post something and you can offer advice on how you'd get better results in similar time then I'd appreciate your advice.
Maybe vampifan would also.
If he ever realises his pictures were jacked. Posting opinions is good.
A little more consideration would be better. Please. |
| The Shadow | 18 Mar 2014 6:03 p.m. PST |
>>What's the use in criticism that adds nothing?
The painter doesn't even know what you don't like.<< (shrug) You addressed that problem in your first post. Here's the quote. >>Quite how one can be truly constructive if the painter is unaware of the discussion kind of brings be back round to my first point.<< I knew that the artist(?) didn't post those photos himself and that I wouldn't be criticizing him directly. My comment was a shot across Tango's bow, not the artist's. If the artist(?) was a regular contributor to this page I wouldn't have been that rough. In fact, I probably wouldn't have commented at all. |
paints a machinegun emplacement, and realizes he needs more...
