Option for supporting Mithril

This topic has 92 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by Tolwen.

Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 93 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →

Author

Posts
December 7, 2010 at 2:36 pm #13846
Gildor
MMP Elder
I suggested this VERY book master Milo, to Chris Tubb himself, because THIS book has ALL the heraldries drawn by Tolkien himself and this could help a lot in the design process of the future figurines (for shields and armor design) I hope he’ll get it (if he does not have it already)
Indeed this book is a must have, especially if you plan to solve all the riddles of master Theobald hehehe (last year ones )
December 7, 2010 at 2:42 pm #13853
Gildor
MMP Elder
I move the thread in the Angrenost section as I think it is more suitable…

next, I receive authorisation from Chris to publish his email see my next post.
December 7, 2010 at 2:56 pm #13865
Gildor
MMP Elder
Here is the mail from Chris

Chris Tubb wrote:

I read your email concerning the “design ” of Mithril and will attempt to address all the aspects that you have raised. To sum up the points
that you made , there are three main items on your agenda.

Firstly the physical appearance of the range in terms of costume ,cultural analogues, styles of clothing and the heights of various figure types etc.
Secondly you raise the issue of the design itself, facial detailing etc.
Thirdly there is the issue or heraldry, shield symbols etc.

As for the first matter , the Mithril range is my own “take” on the world of Tolkien. Taking my cue from the somewhat scant information in the texts themselves , the historical analogues which I chose for the various races of Middle-earth are all cultures from the Europe and near-east of the Dark ages. In this I was largely in accord with the various middle-earth artists and with ICE with whom I worked closely in the early years of Mithril. The only exceptions to this are the Elves
who are, and should be in my opinion, somewhat different. I have used plate armour on occasion, but always for the period of Numenorean
ascendancy or its remnants, like the ringwraiths in their true form, and Sauron at Gorgoroth. I think it important to give the different ages of
Middle-earth distinctive appearances if only for the sake of variety and interest. Of course some of the design aspects have come about
entirely by accident, but I think it important to use “accident” in any artistic enterprise.

An example of this are the different helmets that the Angmar orcs have from those of Mordor.
While designing the early orc helmets I came up with a design that comprised three triangles of metal riveted together. I wanted something
that looked ugly and mass produced yet distinctive. Angus MacBride had a similar idea for the illustrations that he produced for ICE but his
mass produced helmets were beaten pot-helmets. ICE opted to go for his look, but I decided to use my design for the Angmar armies and his for
those of Mordor. It achieves its purpose by differentiating the orcs at a glance.

Also bear in mind that much of the visual material that is accepted nowadays as canonical , is not from Tolkien himself but from various artists who work on what is now a consensus view of what Tolkien’s world should look like. They have every right to have their own view on the how Middle-earth should appear but on that basis but so do I.

I have put much thought behind the “look” of my miniatures over the years, and nothing has been included without a reason that I considered justified. As for the heights of the various figures, again I decided to opt for those which I have chosen for considered reasons. I think it important, again partly for visual reasons to make Dwarves considerably shorter than men ( just below shoulder height) while Hobbits should be smaller still. Mine are usually around three feet high but occasionally a little taller. This accords with Tolkien’s description in the prologue to the LotR where he says that they are between 2 and 4 feet high ( 60 and 120 cm). After all, surely one of the
attractions of hiring Bilbo as a burglar was not just his stealth but his small size.
Again with the taller figures I have tended to underplay the height somewhat and make them more human size. My Sindarin elves and Istari are taller as a rule than humans but not by very much. I thought very early on in the Mithril project that very tall figures just did not relate visually very well to other figures in vignettes etc, but looked out of proportion. I must admit that as a designer , if I have to choose between something being 100% right according to the sources or looking right visually , I tend to opt for the latter. I suppose if I made figures of Merry and Pippin after the long term effects of the Ent-draft I should make them taller!

As for the design style and the comments about more detail, I can only reply that my design style is just what it is.
I always describe myself as a 54mm designer scaling down in size. I am always reluctant to add too much detail as inevitably the smaller detail does not remain in scale ; it has to be exagerated somewhat in size or it probably would not cast. If this is done with the face particularly, it gives the figure somewhat of a caricature appearance. I have always avoided this and would rather give an impression of an expression that I wish to portray. The same situation obtains with the fur. I know that painters like the more detailed textured stuff but again I am always afraid of tipping over into caricature; having said that,I will however see if I can enrich the fur in some way in future designs without too much exaggeration.
I must note also that this is not to denigrate the figure that you sent me a picture of . It is a superb piece of work by a fantastic designer, but just not my style.

Lastly the heraldry and weapons. In this matter I can only hold up my hands and say “Mea culpa”. Sometimes I just make mistakes. I will note the comments that have been made and try to avoid such errors in future!

To sum up , I am not willing to change radically the historical analogues that I use or the proportions of the figures.This is not due to stubbornness but to the fact that the Mithril range from the very first figure should be seen as a whole. Ms500 should live in exactly the same universe as M1. There is a unity in the series that would be
destroyed by some radical changes and I think that would make many of the collectors very unhappy.

well this is his mail, word for word… as for myself, I agree 200% with what he says
December 7, 2010 at 3:10 pm #13872
hsf62
Participant
Stay with what is great! I would say! 😎
December 7, 2010 at 3:13 pm #13875
Turambar
Participant
Thank you for providing this, Master Elf. Very interesting aspects from The Man!
And a huge thank you also to The Man for taking time to let us know all these aspects!

PS: oh- I agree also 200%, absolutely!
December 7, 2010 at 3:24 pm #13877
Barliman
Participant
I agree pretty much with everything Mr T says, though I’d point our that the Prologue ref to Hobbits’ sizes admits that this refers to their latter days, and thet they had been taller in the past, the implication being that this would probably have been at least 3ft. It also says elsewhere that they’re “less stout and stocky” than Dwarves, but “not actually much shorter”, which again suggests at least 3ft.
December 7, 2010 at 4:46 pm #13879
Milo
Participant
Thanks again Gildor. Can you forward many thanks to CT from me also please.

Being a hobbit and having one or two real hobbit kinds in my family, I can tell that CT’s hobbits are to me the exact size I imagined.
You have average 80-100 cm ones (M227,…), higher 120 cm ones like M58, small 60cm ones like M61. (Don’t know what it become in ft though :rolleyes:)
I love each of them (though I still miss 1 or 2).
I agree 100% with what he says. more would be a lie.
December 7, 2010 at 5:50 pm #13880
Theobald
Participant
“Open Letter”
First:
Gildor, let me thank you for your enthusiasm we witness in many different ways. This includes your successful attempts to keep ‘in touch’ with Chris in order to achieve some communication between Chris and us.
Second:
Chris, thank you very much for responding (though indirectly – which I do understand) in public to some basic questions that came up here. I think with the arguments you provided in your mail to Gildor (or us?) you pointed out your point of view very well.
Yes, there’s no-one here reading this who can say that he never did a mistake. So I do not understand you calling “mea culpa” because of some heraldry-designs.
Third:
(again to Chris)
As for your summary, you’re more than right.
“The Mithril range from the very first figure (M1) should be seen as a whole.” – And it is. Today I received the Ms500 – a masterpiece.
Forth:
Right, Milo, a 100% is the maximum. But even 98% each year for more than two decades would be a lot, wouldn’t it?
Fifth:
finished
December 7, 2010 at 9:27 pm #13887
Thingol
Participant
I have seen this book Master forest warden.. great book indeed…. and yes Master Gildor I’ve forgot to mentioned bears precisely Beorn in bear form…. and yes… thanks for this letter written by our great sculptor…. it is always good to see what are the observation points for many comments directed toward to father of our miniatures….

I also share my thoughts with Master Ent…. all figures for me are great example of great talent and I’m happy that those are for me and for all of you guys great examples of middle earth visions…. Only figure that did not pleased to me is unfortunate Haldir… but thats maybe I’ve imagine him in something completely different form and clothes… but this discussion belongs to past….

100% or 200% does not important… important is that we LOVE THIS FIGURES…..
December 7, 2010 at 11:34 pm #13891
Gavin
Participant
Lovely letter.

I will, however, reiterate, that to me, there’s a pantheon of Tolkien illustrators: Alan Lee, Angus McBride, Ted Naismith and Chris Tubb.

There’s something about these artist’s works that capture a lot of the attitude of the books. Of windswept places, cloaked figures, bitter fighters and poetic hobbits. They all have their faults, and they all have elements I disagree with. But together, in aggregate that reflects, to me, the books.

None of these visions are perfect, but they are rich, apt and beautiful.
December 8, 2010 at 12:19 am #13892
ddaines
Participant
Good of Chris to take the time to respond in such lengthy terms and address the points put. 100% agree with the reason for not making Numenorians scaled to 7′ or whatever as visually it would be very hard for the eye not to be fooled into thinking that something was amiss with the scale when compared to lesser men alongside a Numenorian.

I don’t fully agree about the point of details not reducing in scale necessarily, but that is not the point, I like Chris’s style which as he says is his style, and that is why I collect MM’s.

I’ve never really understood ‘complaints’ about facial characteristics of Mithril figures as I have always thought the faces are the life of Chris’s mini-masterpieces and he achieves subtle expressions like no other designer on his figures.

I would like to see a little more texture around horses fetlocks just to separate the hoof from the leg.

An interesting point about fur texture in general, I think there is room for manoeuvre here on larger surfaces, but an interesting example of ‘tipping’ over into cariacture are the wolves sculpted by Tom Meir which are very nice, but the fur imho is a bit over done and stylised in certain areas.

The rest I pretty much agree with like others
December 8, 2010 at 10:26 am #13893
Gildor
MMP Elder
well now we all seem to agree on almost everything, but the principal interested person here , Arthadan, has not yet commented this reply. As I am sure master Phaeton (namely Chris) will appreciate any feedback on his reply, I’d like to have Arthadan point of view
December 8, 2010 at 11:58 am #13894
imisel
Participant
Thanks a lot, Gildor, for your efforts in get Chris’ point of view. Your are great!

And thank, thank, thank a lot, Chris, for take your very precious part of your time to give us a feedback to us about your work and what you think of our opinion as costumers. You have a loyal fan from here in Spain, not only for your talent as sculptor. You’re an exceptional guy.
December 8, 2010 at 5:44 pm #13898
Arthadan
Participant
Here I am, Master Gildor. First, thank you very much for tansmiting my concerns to Mr. Tubb, and thanks to him too for taking the time to give such a detailed answer.

I agree Mr. Tubb has a special sensibility to sculpt Middle-earth characters and I think that’s what we all love about Mithril.

But getting straight to the point, I cannot support an artist’s vision which is in openly contradiction in some points with what Professor Tolkien himself wrote. In the example given about Númenóeans being taller than the rest of Men, I don’t think they would look “strange”, they would look right and exactly as they are supposed to look. Any other way, what you have is a short Númenóran and that’s the fact. Then, you can call it creativity, or “visual reasons” or whatever you want, but it doesn’t change the fact that is inaccurate and that’s what counts for me.

Of course, I do respect Mr. Tubb opinion but I do not share it. I’ll go on supporting Mithril, but being ‘picky’ and only buying miniatures which do not contradict the books.

Nowadays, ‘official’ means that you have paid to get the right to use a brand. We all have seen ‘official’ Middle-earth games and merchanising products inaccurate to say the least. But for me Middle-earth deseves far more, if you love that world and you are trying to represent it… then why don’t you follow the descriptions you have? Creativity is fine and there is plenty of room for it, but for me it shoud be imited to the detaills Tolkien never wrote about. I just don’t see the neccesity to contradict the Professor when depicting his world. A continuity within the ranges it’s fine as lons as it doesn’t mean to carry on some flawed visual interpretations.

However, it seems that I am the only one thinking that way, which is fine since is good for Mithril. And I wish all the best for the brand.

Anyway, I’m happy to hear furs may look better in the future and at least heraldry may get more accurate
December 8, 2010 at 5:55 pm #13900
Gildor
MMP Elder
well there is accuracy opposed to “continuity”… as mister Tubb said, M1 should be from the same range as M500 or M600
M1 was made in 1988, when many works were not published… Accidents happened, generating “creative artistic design”…

In order to preserve continuity I can only agree to Chris Tubb point of view… besides he is certainly right, changing his style may generate more upset collectors than happier ones… the reactions in this thread being but a little example of that…

Besides, I remind you that the rights and content of the LOTR and the Hobbit… except the writing itself… is no more property of Tolkien heirs at all.. The Tolkien Estate has strictly nothing to say about “the artistic creativity” that would go against professor tolkien writings if 1) the contradiction comes from other writings than LOTR / Hobbit 2) Tolkien Enterprise (ME Enterprise now) validated such contradiction…
well that’s just the legal part…

as you said yourself, we are VERY far from contradictions and artistic adaptation such as replacing Glorfindel with Arwen or making the elves a faction of the Helm’s Deep battle… and these were validated…
December 8, 2010 at 7:58 pm #13904
Tolwen
Participant
Gildor Inglorion wrote:

In order to preserve continuity I can only agree to Chris Tubb point of view…

The point of continuity is an interesting one, as it springs up in other Tolkien-related questions as well. I remember many controversial discussions whether sticking to the MERP canon should be a priority for fan-made RPG works (adventures, places etc.) or not. The advantage is of course continuity (obviously) and consistency within the line, but since Tolkien scholarship has evolved and developed further, we have now much more original information than in the 1980s or 90s. According to this “new” knowledge, quite a few MERP assumptions were rubbish (some were even with the knowledge back then). Don’t get me wrong – I love MERP for what it gave to us and what it spawned (RPG gaming interests in Middle-earth) and I own all their publications which have a place of honour on my shelf.
I have long given up though to stick to continuity to the “MERP universe” as an end in itself. Everything written there I now double-check with original info on the topic (if available) and original thoughts (e.g. real-worl comparisons – an approach similar to the one claimed by Pete Fenlon as well). Only if the MERP idea passes this test, I deem it worth for further use in RPG designs. If not, it was a good time, but it’s now outdated. I still like it for the memories and the ideas it gave me, but not more.

For all this, all of what I have contributed to OM so far (to name a concrete example) has been based on these principles. Now I feel really relieved (compared to the ‘old days’ when I believed every word in the MERP series) not being burdened anymore by MERP’s shortcomings, but inspired by the ideas it gave (and still gives!) to me.

That said, I am convinced that all the areas inspired by Tolkien (be it painting, movies, games etc.) are constantly developing as is the Middle-earth lore itself. Therefore I deem it refreshing to follow this development, gaining new insights that I have not thought of earlier.

MERP is good example to highlight my thoughts: For the RPG sector (which I know much better than the minis) I doubt that MERP could be a commercial/economic success now (e.g. attracting current customers), due to its very old-fashioned style and massive inaccuracies compared to the sources. Would it be still afloat now (in the MERP I or II incarnations), I am sure it would still have its core fans from the old days (heck – it still has them now!), plus a handful new, but I doubt it would be able to attract considerable numbers of new customers due its problems with current gaming expectations (e.g. rule design) and the problems concerning its view on the sources. Thus it would probably live off the ‘Old Guard’ alone (as it does now in its officially defunct state).

Thus MERP, while being highly successful economically in the 1980s and 90s (more or less), would (in its old incarnation) be in dire economic straits now IMHO. Other factors would surely play a role as well, but those mentioned above are IMO important ones. The expectations in the broader audience simply have changed (and risen in some respects).

Hope this helps to highlight the thoughts of those who do not view continuity within a given line or license as a conditio sine qua non or end in itself.

Cheers
Tolwen
December 8, 2010 at 9:22 pm #13907
Gildor
MMP Elder
still, artistic decision can’t be contested… this is a choice of design, and a RPG has rules … figurines are not a game they are objects, that you can use the way you want…

I don’t think all that you said does apply to figurines… as figurines are not only for roleplayers or wargamers but mainly painters (as shown by last poll on official board)

if Mithril desires continuity, I think many of the core collectors will stick to this idea… at the moment what would be worst for Mithril ? risk loosing the core collectors who keep buying figurines? or upset them with the “eventuality” to gain new customers without any level of certainty…
December 8, 2010 at 10:52 pm #13911
Arthadan
Participant
Quote:

still, artistic decision can’t be contested… this is a choice of design, and a RPG has rules … figurines are not a game they are objects, that you can use the way you want…

I respectfully disagree, Master Elf. I think the same priciples apply to both, since both are ways or representing with accuracy Middle-earth. RPGs have a lot of background information and is there where a careful research of the source is needed unless you want to end playing some generic fantasy game that may resemble Middle-earth in some aspects, but is not the real thing. Exactly the same applies to figures. A figure may resemble in some aspect how that race/character could look like, but the miniature cannot be that race/character if its in contradiction with the canon. It can be nice and well-done and have artistic value in itself and everyhing, but as a matter of fact is something different from what Tolkien wrote, thus it doesn’t fulfill the purpose of being a plausible rendition.

Quote:

what would be worst for Mithril ? risk loosing the core collectors who keep buying figurines? or upset them with the “eventuality” to gain new customers without any level of certainty…

Well, I think his whole topic was started because Mithril is not in agood financial situation (“it wouldn’t surive to a boicot of the MS seies”, I think it was said). So I guess the devote base of customers is not wide enough to assure the continuity of Mithril.

Would a greater accuracy with the books upset collectors to the point of stop buying the miniatures? Honestly, I don’t think so. Anyway, it’s just a matter of how it is handled. You can make Númenóreans in chainmail and call them “light infantry”. Or Númenóreans with the true height and call them “personal retinue of the King”. With a bit care, I think you can both introduce accurate figures and avoid direct conlict within the ranges.

Anyway, don’t we have two different versions of Radagast? One with beard, other without, anpher one on horse with bow and arrows… Has anyone stopped buying Mihril because that?
December 8, 2010 at 11:55 pm #13912
Gildor
MMP Elder
you fail to understand my point Arthadan… My turn to respectfully disagree… a figurine has no “rule” to play with…
it is a mere object… it is up to the customer/painter/collector to do what he wants out of a static thing, not a set of given “things to do or not to do”… for me, a Glorfindel can become a Finrod or a Finwë why not? once out of blister… the figurine is… a figurine, you are not even forced to respect the name on the label… it is hardly achieved when you have rules of conduct…

as for your second point : i would not take that risk… I know MANY collectors who would stop buying Mithril if what YOU suggest would come true…
and since THESE collectors are currently the only way for Mithril to survive…. yes, risking “new style” NOW , would be suicidal completly…

I know people who stopped buying EVERY mithril because of such changes of styles … and they are now only buying some… quite the same that you suggest for yourself…

anyway, you have your point of view I respect that… I have to respectfully disagree with all your last statements alas…

anyway² , the Man has spoken his thoughts… and the discussion is closed, as I understood the mail, there was no opening for debate on these matters, either you like the style… or you don’t, either ways you are not forced to buy indeed but Mithril won’t change…

At the moment I think that IF Lars would agree with you and force Chris to change his style, Chris would resign…

I am a bit subjective on this topic but you defend your point, I defend mine…

I discovered Tolkien books at the very same time I discovered Mithril and even though the texts say that people in Tolkien did not wear plate, there is nothing I love better than painting Elendil or Sauron in full plate mail… because of the style… no matter how respectful it is… I even think it was I who suggested Elendil and Gil-Galad in full plate with Sauron (after all it was my winning suggestion)… in order to match the references of Elendil and Gil-Galad we already had because we are several here, apparently at least, to support full “continuity”… don’t take me wrong, I was happy with the plate…. but upset with the shield of Gil-Galad for example…
as I am also a bit upset about Beorn in bear form or wolves… in that I agree with you
December 9, 2010 at 7:07 am #13915
Tolwen
Participant
Gildor Inglorion wrote:

… a figurine has no “rule” to play with…
it is a mere object… it is up to the customer/painter/collector to do what he wants out of a static thing, not a set of given “things to do or not to do”… for me, a Glorfindel can become a Finrod or a Finwë why not? once out of blister… the figurine is… a figurine, you are not even forced to respect the name on the label…

Indeed. In that we agree for sure. It doesn’t matter what is written on the label, only whether the figure fits the “user’s” ideas for a given scene/character. That way you don’t have to care the least for the “official” labelling. For me personally (I know I’m in the minority faction here), Mithril unfortunately has no other figures that fit my vision (or Tolkien’s descriptions – scarce as they are) of the characters that were sculpted with the plate (e.g. fitting substitutes for Gil-galad etc.) for example. For these, I have to look at other companies unfortunately or skip the characters entirely if no good substitutes are around.
We simply have differing preferences in what we see as important. I’m primarily interested in figures that fit the descriptions found in the primary sources (or fitting interpretations beyond that) – which IMO Mithril does for the vast majority – and not in a specific artist’s interpretation of the whole theme (as a primary goal).
That is not so bad as it might sound, since for the great majority of Mithril figures I totally agree with the style they are made (otherwise I wouldn’t be here). For those I disagree with, it’s as Arthadan said – there’s no obligation to buy anything I cannot agree with. In these few cases (compared to the whole range) other companies might offer – for me – better solutions.

If the hard core can keep Mithril afloat and over time more customers come – all the better. I’d be pleased to be proven untrue with my skepticism voiced earlier.

Cheers
Tolwen
Author

Posts