"Late Queen: "Good News for the 100,000+ SCW Gamers"" Topic

Excllent. There is always more room for SCW figures, regardless of scale.

That's a really neat line of models.

Are there really 100,000+ SCW gamers, though? (I know, that was meant to be provocative, so I've taken the bait!)

Very nice, always room for more SCW figures, and they look like they will match very nicely with the Peter Pig SCW range.

Chuck in a Requetes fighting priest with that Cristforo, and you've got an unstoppable force ;-]

viva el cristo rey

Nigel H

Nice.

I wonder what's attached to the banner pole?

Crucifix, I believe….

Dom. No mate, the name refers to the bearer not the object.

BTW I agree more SCW manufacturers the better.

John FOA

Villageidiot wrote: "Chuck in a Requetes fighting priest with that Cristforo, and you've got an unstoppable force ;-]"

I'll chuck two:
link, one for the requetes and one for the Basques. Both of these should be good for a +1 bonus. BUT: Basing one og these priests WITH the Cristóforo gives you a +3 Synergy bogus.

KAPOW!

Peter

Bogus should offcourse read bonus.

Peter

Larry Dunn wrote: "Are there really 100,000+ SCW gamers, though?"

I seriosly hope so.

Peter

Perhaps a typo: should read 10 +

Dom. No mate, the name refers to the bearer not the object.

Agreed on the normal use of the name, but looking at the photo it looks like that *is* a crucifix on the pole.

Dom.

Very nice work Peter, congratulations. I will have to remember to save some of my 2008 budget to order some of these as well as a whole C.T.V.'s worth of the earlier Italians!

Non Pasaran!!

Graham

(Enough of this reactionary "viva el cri"….nonsense)

Anyone have any of the CTV? I would like to know how they mix with the Peter Pig line…

Kewl….these look great. What is the expected date/timeline for a full production run of these figs? I'm impressed. I'd be willing to sink $500 USD or so if you are looking for a sales threshold.

Some of the figures look very much like Peter Pig figures pirated and converted. Could the manufacturer comment on this?

Martin at Peter Pig (trying to make a living)

dell john b at hot mail dot com.

"Some of the figures look very much like Peter Pig figures pirated and converted."

any specifics? which? I'd be interested to know. Presumably more "Peter Pig Like" than just the boots….the faces seem to be similar and are metal in the dollies. Which PP figures have this face?

What a beautiful picture! Viva el Rey!

Dear Martin

I sent you a private message.

I think you should answer this one publicly. When this range was last discussed a friend of yours did post that your figures were based on Peter Pig conversions.
So , yes many of the figures pictured are plainly copied from Peter Pig figures and I would like you to stop doing this. I think this is asking nicely?

Martin at peter Pig

Here we go again…..we have been down this route before…

"yes many of the figures pictured are plainly copied from Peter Pig figures"

This is a pretty serious accusation. If they are a copy (stolen likeness) then proof that you feel that they are stolen should be posted, not simply stated that "a frined in the past posted this."

If the unlicensed dollies from another manufacturer are used, then all members should know about this. However, I also feel that the burden of proof is STRONGLY on the accuser. If he is correct, then I applaud his tenacity. However, in my humble opinion, non-FACT based finger-pointing shouls be discouraged.

Martin, if you are correct in your statement, then Late Queen Mini's should "face the music", however up to this point I have only seen unsubstantiated accusations. Basically, it looks like you, as a competitor, to provide proof of your statements.

This is an important issue to all gamers.

I am VERY supportative of new companies and try to give them as much business as possible. BUT… their products must be THEIRS and not stolen copies. BUT…they should not be accused by the "big companies" of theft without proof….this is just bullyish.

Am I "off" thinking that an accusation like this should be supported by fact?

And yes…a cease and desist posted here, but not in the court system IS acting nicely if correct.

Wow! This is interesting…

I love the Peter Pig SCW range, very much as it happens. My opinion is that these Late Queen figures look very compatible with said range, which is great news… or is it?

So what is going to happen?

The Carlists shall decide the issue at dawn….

Youch … Xacto blades and casting ladles on the field of honor might settle the matter

Dave

Dear Martin

I PM'ed to be civil.
So here we go – sigh!

Martin Goddard wrote:
"I think you should answer this one publicly. When this range was last discussed a friend of yours did post that your figures were based on Peter Pig conversions."

It is correct that Thomas Theis (My good friend and webmaster on The Late Queen) stated: " And all of it is actually based on PP figures, but if you dont know you would never notice."
TMP link

I don't se were "conversions" comes in in this sentence. But this is still a very ***ppy sentence and I can see it could be used to support your accusation. If you take this statement at face value, I too would read it as you do. Thomas did not do the figures, I did. It has never been a secret that these figures were ment to be compatible with yours – meaning that they are of the same height (15mm) and general volume.

So this leads you to the following statement:

"So , yes many of the figures pictured are plainly copied from Peter Pig figures and I would like you to stop doing this. I think this is asking nicely?

Martin at peter Pig"

This Is a pretty grave accusation based on a third partys statement.
I thought the picture was rather blurred, I can assure you that the figures look mych nicer in real life :-)
In the good nature off this conversation could you, when you write "copied", please be more specific:

Are they recaste?
Are they converted and recast?
Are they sculpted and then converted with bits and pieces from Peter Pig figures?
Could you please point out wich of your figures I have supposedly used?

And the most important for last:
What would you consider proof that i haven't "copied" your figures?

I appreciate your concern.

Cheers,

Peter

I would like throw in my two cents here. I have seen the greens and the dollies, I know for a fact that they are not copies of peter pig figures.

William Keyser

I think the discussion of the provenance of the figures should have been sorted off-line, but as it hasn't been, and now I'm interested, I'll chip in!

Surely the question boils down to a set of simple yes/no questions?

1) Are the figures a direct copy i.e. using an existing PP figure to produce a mould to make your own figures. This is, I understand from my legal friends, a big no no!

2) Assuming no to (1), are the figures made by chopping up bits of exisiting figures, putting them back together again in a different order (Dr Frankenstein) and then producing a mould? This is also not on.

3) Assuming no to (1) and (2), did the sculptor place an existing figure on the table and copy it, producing a green and then a mould etc. This is also not on.

4) Assuming etc…or did the sculptor place an existing figure on the table and produce figures unique but in the style of the existing range. That's where things get interesting!

SirG

Hi again

Just to make everything clear.
No part, externat or internal, of The Late Queens miniatures are taken from other manufacturers figures. I sculpted every single miniature. All armatures, dollies, heads and equipment were made by me.

Cheers,

Peter

- and thanks wKeyser (who is also a friend of mine)

"I sculpted every single miniature. All armatures, dollies, heads and equipment were made by me."

Unfortunately mud sticks – whether its thrown at the right person or not. Best way I could see to clear this up once and for all is just post some photos of the greens of the equipment, heads and weapons that you sculpted – argument over.

Ok
Try this.
Why are many of the figures conversions of figures that feature no where else in Oeter's range.
I say it again in another way……Look at thefigures, many are conversions. Whay are they conversion sof figures that Peter has never produced? It is not likely that Peter has produced a figure, never put it in to production but produced a conversion. What was wrong with the original figure? Why was it not put in to production when it had a face, rifle, trousers etc.

I don't seem to bre getting much support here. I do know what I have sculpted and whatr they look like. What figure ranges has Peter sculpted before.

WKeyser..do you put your "word"/honour that these are not copies??

Martin at peter Pig

Hi delljohnb

Figures are being run and will be out in February.

Cheers,

Peter

If the Late Queen figures have been made to fit in with the existing range from Peter Pig, then I can't see a problem, in fact its better for 15mm SCW gamers who already have Peter Pig figures, as the new figures will match perfectly.
Both companies can profit from this, and gamers will also profit as their choice is increased.

Peter Frost has stated that he made all the dollies and sculpted the models himself in a style to match the figures already released by Peter Pig, and I for one believe that there was no malice intended, and no copying has taken place.

Good luck with your range Peter, and Martin I hope that these new figures will increase interest in your own Peter Pig range of miniatures for the SCW.

Nigel H
Anglian Miniatures

Hi Again

Martin Goddard wrote:

"Why are many of the figures conversions of figures that feature no where else in Oeter's range…"

Because I did the smart thing and sculpted 16 pair of legs and had them cast. Same thing with heads and guns. Go to link and have a look at how it's done. I just needed the pants since the upper bodies would be different.

This is pure speculation on your behalf!
Please answer my questions in the above message.

Crusaderminis wrote:
"Unfortunately mud sticks – whether its thrown at the right person or not. Best way I could see to clear this up once and for all is just post some photos of the greens of the equipment, heads and weapons that you sculpted – argument over"

Quite right. But for many reasons I won't be able to do this for the next couple of days. (wich makes me lok a bit dodgy I know)

Peter

Although I have quite a large number of PP figures I haven't any of the SCW range so I'm not able to comment on familiarity, etc. However, as the sculptor of the range I cannot see anyone having more knowledge of poses, equipment or style, etc than Martin. In my experience he is not a guy who is easily excited so I'm certain his concern ss genuine. From what I have read, if some pics of the greens are produced then the problem should be solved(?)to everyone's satisfaction.

I agree with the comments set out by Sir G and also an earlier comment on interest in the SCW benefitting as I have now decided to have a close look at the range at Penarth next week as a possible future project…after completing my ACW and ECW stuff. I think the period could hold much more character than WWII.

Dear Riddcowler you wrote:

"However, as the sculptor of the range I cannot see anyone having more knowledge of poses, equipment or style, etc than Martin. In my experience he is not a guy who is easily excited so I'm certain his concern ss genuine."

This is just your private opinion – it's not an argument and it's not proof. It just muddy up things. Allready this is spreading to other forums and my reputation is at stake.

Please keep private opinions out of this discussion.

Cheers,

Peter

I think I can go no further. It looks to me that they are PP dollies, shaved down, built up and kitbashed. I do know well the poses of our dollies and would recognise them anywhere.
I could give pictures of the P Pig dollies to show the congruence but I will wait to see the Horses and artillery pieces from this talented sculptor. Maybe a side by side comparison would be useful. We will not send any more orders of SCW stuff to Peter.

Martin

I will strongly support (and have done) any other manufacturer who has their work copied.

Hi Martin

Could you please verify your accusations?

"I do know well the poses of our dollies and would recognise them anywhere."

Apparantly not.
And you don't hold the copyright to the human form in motion.

Also it doesn't suit you being sarcastic in a serious debate laik this one.

Cheers,

Peter

Because I did the smart thing and sculpted 16 pair of legs and had them cast. Same thing with heads and guns.

If you go to the main website, thelatequeen.com/products.html you can see what appear to be 'conversions'. However, looking at them I'd say Peter has done what he says here. He's cast armless/headless dollies, which he has then modified with heads, weapons, arms etc – I do the same thing myself, so there isn't always a single complete original green. i have here a set of 'bare legs' in a wide variety of poses, separate heads (in differing headgear) and separate weapons I've prepared for that one day I find time to put the postwar British range together… I'll be doing much the same, assembling them from component parts and sculpting on the arms and other detail.

If you look at the following two items:
picture
picture
you can see what appear to be the same base dolly (legs) with a different head position and upper torso details. Actually, the head looks the same, but at a different angle and with the addition of a hat.

Same with this figure and the priest:
picture
picture
Looks like the same base legs, with a different head dropped in and greened over the top.

Peter, I'd suggest if you have the original greens for these bare legs it may be worth photographing them and putting them up somewhere with a link back here, to put people's minds at rest that they are not Peter Pig figures cut down to work on.

Martin, if you have a genuine concern, I think you need to be very specific to Peter as to which figures you think he has copied and in what way.

Geoff

I should add, based on Martin's comments above: PP dollies, shaved down, built up and kitbashed I think his concern is that the base figures are carved down Peter Pig figures.

Seeing photos of the original putty legs with an original putty base and no white metal bits at all would be VERY helpful Geoff.
The thing I really recognise is that I sculpt the sole of the shoe so that there is a sole between the shoe and the figure base. I can see it in the figure charging(green/white metal).
The man(green/white metal) advancing toward the camera is a classic PP pose not seen in any other manufacturers range (until now). The same leg is lifted.The feet are tight together. Does that man have the open mouth that PP critics hate? Which other makers have open mouths? Do they look like the same bulk and height of PP figures? Which other manufacturers have the same pose/bulk and height as P Pig?
Are there any other companies in 15/28mm that have 6 or so poses the same?( ie distance between feet, bend of leg, which foot forward etc?)

The poses seen, only match the dollies in use for the SCW range (and ranges of that time)and none of the newer dollies built and in use since Peter's last order.

Do other designers think that they would recognise their own work or is it easy to be confused?(ie "I am not sure how I sculpt or the techniques/poses I use but i definately made some soldiers..I think…no, hang on, maybe I didn't make any figures, can't remember what i did now, only in cotact with each figure for a week or so?(sarcasm)"

Martin

Does that man have the open mouth that PP critics hate? Which other makers have open mouths?

None that I'm aware of, but that in itself is not conclusive. I have green stuff here and could copy that style, if need be. In the same way, I could originate a pose that mimics a Peter Pig pose, but it would be my own work and I would own the copyright for it. However I would have the original green for that to show (but see last paragraph)

Are there any other companies in 15/28mm that have 6 or so poses the same?

Again, none that I'm aware of, but not in itself conclusive. There is nothing to prevent a company from producing a range of figures with 1, 5, 10 or even 20 different base poses (my range, referred to above, has something like 8 different base poses)

Do other designers think that they would recognise their own work or is it easy to be confused?

I'd possibly recognise general similarities, but it's the fine details, like separate soles, that I would tend to recognise.

Geoff

Hi Martin

You wrote:
"Seeing photos of the original putty legs with an original putty base and no white metal bits at all would be VERY helpful."

But would it be conclusive?

I'll throw in the heads and the rifles as well. I'll take a photograph, where you can see the brass rod coming out of the pytty base, and I'll try to peel one of them so you can se the wire inside. I'll even take a photo of the 9 legposes i have on my desk made in brownstuff and procreate.

If I do that, will you stop calling me a thief and give me a public apology?

You will have to give me some time. Wife will be home in 3-4 hours with the car, have to get a camera from a friend, take pictures and upload to a site. So could we bury the hatchet for now and take up this conversation when the pictures are there?

Cheers,

Peter

"I don't seem to bre getting much support here."

That's probably because you have provided ZERO proof to support a very serious accusation. The burden is upon you to provide a factual basis for your statements.

Ok Peter.That sounds excellent. We can get this cleared up!
The ONLY one you need to show is the
BOTTOM ROW 3rd FROM LEFT
FIGURE CHARGING RIGHT LEG RAISED LEFT LEG BENDING
(with bayonet fixed and wearing a putty beret)
Just show the original PUTTY base and LEGS (no white metal).

That would be really excellent to see that pair of legs in putty! Thank for doing this . Only that pair of legs and base is needed, please don't go to any extra effort. taht would do just fine!

Martin at Peter Pig
PS Whar did your friend mean when he said the

Yep – they are indeed a perfect mix with PP. I am of course biased as i have known Peter for many years and have played many games using other peoples figures. But finally we are using his figures as well. What i did was to take some of his SCW italians in adrian helmets and use them for RCW poles. It works like a charm. Also, the italians have been used as stand in for the greeks for the RCW Odessa campaign. And all of it is actually based on PP figures, but if you dont know you would never notice.

- that is of course except for the very high quality of The Late Queens products

I too would be most interested to see greens of the legs and lower torsos.

I know you designed the role to complement PP range of SCW. I'm not calling you a liar Peter but I am very familiar, as are many of the members here, with PP figures and personally I find the Late Queen castings disturbingly similar to some of Martin's castings.

I will sound in on this one as well. I have to admit to being a little perturbed at the start when I first saw these, as the similarity to PP figs gnawed at me, but I was going to wait until I saw the actual figs etc. I understand Martin's concerns completely, having been a manufacturer myself (True North Productions), and yes, Martin, I would recognize my sculptors works anywhere (and have, when they have done work in other scales for other companies!!). I would like to see the two of you (Martin/Peter) work this out amicably, and I think it is too bad it went public as it did. Peter, funnily enough, you are doing what I had planned to do with my own SCW range, after having done a bit of research and confronted with the sheer variety of clothing etc worn….well done.

Anyway, now that this is open like this, I think you need to put up the photos and make every effort to clarify the situation, and Martin, you have stated your concerns now, and if Peter proves his point I would expect a public make-up.

Geoff, nicely chimed in to mediate.

This is just your private opinion – it's not an argument and it's not proof. It just muddy up things. Allready this is spreading to other forums and my reputation is at stake.

Please keep private opinions out of this discussion.

Cheers,

Peter

Actually this is a public forum where people are entitled to express their opinions. If you don't like that then the argument should have been carried out elsewhere. Considering how many others have expressed much stronger 'personal opinions' than I, it strikes me as strange that I should be singled out for your attention???

Having said that, I have no axe to grind with anyone. I stand by what I said in that I believe the sculptor of a range would know more about it that anyone else and I also don't believe Martin to be the type of person to idly make such comments as he has made without genuinely feeling concerned. As to whether his concerns have foundation or not I have absolutely no idea – I stated I am not familiar with the range – and as I have not made any accusations against anyone it escapes me how I am being accused of muddying the waters.

don't believe Martin to be the type of person to idly make such comments as he has made without genuinely feeling concerned

Martin has been the victim of copying before, so he is (quite rightly) sensitive to items that may appear to be unpermitted derivative works :-)

Geoff, nicely chimed in to mediate

Ta

Geoff
(who makes SCW figures nothing like these)

"Martin has been the victim of copying before, so he is (quite rightly) sensitive to items that may appear to be unpermitted derivative works :-)"

Does that mean that if Peter is the victim of an unsubstantiated accusation he can be "sensitive" about that in the future too? Geoff, I don't think that being the victim of copying in the past gives Martin the right to make unsubstantiated accusations. In fact, Martin, having been through this before, should know what it takes to prove that Peter is wrong for his actions.