| Tango01 | 25 Feb 2017 10:25 p.m. PST |
Cool!
From here
link Amicalement
Armand |
| dibble | 26 Feb 2017 2:30 a.m. PST |
Be honest! They are bloody awful. Mind you, there paint was excellent. Paul :) |
| GarrisonMiniatures | 26 Feb 2017 2:52 a.m. PST |
Well, how 'good' were GW when these figures first came out? In case you are wondering, most of these figures appeared in Rose's 1958 catalogue, some came ouit a couple of years earlier. It is probable that they predate the earliest Scrubie figures. If these figures had been 54mm 'toy soldiers' then originals would sell for a fortune and many wargamers would sing their praises. Sadly, for a hobby that is historically based, we have very little interest in the history of our own hobby.
|
 deadhead  | 26 Feb 2017 3:10 a.m. PST |
Do I understand correctly? Two bob, in 1958, for that Duke of Wellington figure? The date is everything and it was not clear that these are of such historic interest. I had never heard of them. I suspect, en masse and painted, they would have been as good as anything else around at the time. Inconsistent figures, some very poor, but many better proportioned than Minifigs! |
| Three Armies | 26 Feb 2017 4:08 a.m. PST |
I grew up on some of this stuff, dated now, but still more in human proportions than some of the 20mm of today! |
| Reactionary | 26 Feb 2017 4:41 a.m. PST |
|
| Timbo W | 26 Feb 2017 4:43 a.m. PST |
I agree the proportions are far better than most current manufacturers, the horses look good. There's a certain lack of detailing on the figures but really not bad for over 50 years ago. |
| dibble | 26 Feb 2017 2:12 p.m. PST |
I see there's no getting around the Emperor's new clothes syndrome, even if they do look sand blasted, no reins, hardly a bit o' lace to be seen anywhere and equus features that flatter cheap rocking-horse looks. Minifigs and Hinchliffe were streets ahead. Even Airfix could knock out better. Paul :D |
| Three Armies | 26 Feb 2017 3:00 p.m. PST |
yes they were ahead, but Minifigs Hinchliffe and Airfix did not exist in 1958…… |
| Tango01 | 26 Feb 2017 3:16 p.m. PST |
Glad you like them my friend!. (smile)
Amicalement
Armand
|
| GarrisonMiniatures | 26 Feb 2017 4:51 p.m. PST |
'I see there's no getting around the Emperor's new clothes syndrome,' I agree. Romans, Assyrians, Greeks, Mongols… all rubbish. Non of them had tanks or machine guns, never mind jet bombers. And no army in WW2 was worth anything until the US got it's act together and started using atom bombs. |
| dibble | 26 Feb 2017 5:57 p.m. PST |
Three Armies yes they were ahead, but Minifigs Hinchliffe and Airfix did not exist in 1958…… It doesn't matter when those Rose figures were produced, they are still awful. Perhaps Zinnfiguren(flats) would have been a better proposition. Paul :) |
| dibble | 26 Feb 2017 6:29 p.m. PST |
Three Armies yes they were ahead, but Minifigs Hinchliffe and Airfix did not exist in 1958…… It doesn't matter when those Rose figures were produced, they are still awful. Perhaps Zinnfiguren(flats) would have been a better proposition or even Greenwood & Ball if you could afford them in 1958. Paul :) |
| Green Tiger | 27 Feb 2017 2:40 a.m. PST |
I disagree – they are basic and lightly detailed but the proprortions – especially of the horses look pretty good – I bet they would look fine en masse with a lick of paint. |
| Tango01 | 27 Feb 2017 10:41 a.m. PST |
Glad you like them too my friend!. (smile)
Amicalement
Armand
|
| Marc the plastics fan | 27 Feb 2017 12:30 p.m. PST |
Actually, I think some of them look very fine. Period pieces yes, but no less deserving for it. Sorry Paul – our opinions will differ on these Mind you, even Peter Laings look good on the table, so I guess I am old school |
paints the Dogman from the Flintloque starter set.
