THE TAPROOM 3

This topic has 2,403 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 4 months ago by Barliman.

Viewing 20 posts - 1,221 through 1,240 (of 2,404 total)

← 1 2 3 … 61 62 63 … 119 120 121 →

Author

Posts
August 5, 2015 at 7:44 am #32809
Milo
Participant
I do prefer heavy minis for handling while painting.
Considering Phateon vignette being plastic, I feel casting quality is minimum as good as current Mithril metalic casting.

So I would buy, and would expect prices being lower also.
August 5, 2015 at 7:52 am #32811
Barliman
Participant
It depends what you mean by “plastic”. The brittle stuff that GW use seems to hold a lot of detail, but the castings are often “warped”, and the stuff is so brittle there’s no way they can be twisted back into shape without something breaking; also, two (or more) part figures very rarely fit together well. Soft plastic, of course, is utterly useless. So all in all I think I’d be very reluctant to spend a lot of money of a plastic model!
August 5, 2015 at 8:36 am #32812
Theobald
Participant
huooomm … as for figures casted in plastic/resin, I definitely prefer metal castings … huom … Master Barliman just pointed out the most important aspects … hoooooom
August 5, 2015 at 9:42 am #32813
Barliman
Participant
Metal is definitely best – just look at the eBay prices people are prepared to pay for GW metal figures, even when the same figures are available in resin.
August 5, 2015 at 10:01 am #32814
Maenas
Participant
Well I think about the materials and what other brands do and I will resume it as:
Metal; Nice resin (like forgeworld); Plastic; Resin (Finecast) —>Ordered from the most liked to the least one.

I will buy mithril made of whatever material if it is a good cast and if the prices went down (I am waiting for a sale at mithril to buy some minis), moreover the other day I payed 42 euro for a 75mm metal miniature and it is completely awesome, comparing the former with mithril and with my heart aching the last one falls in: cast quality, undercoat quality, pose and price. So now I am left alone, with a sentimental link to the brand and to the aura that emanates from Chris’s sculpts. I even changed my mind about the grey coating and now I feel it is so thick that it hides major parts of detail (on some references more than others) so I would prefer now uncoated mithrils if they are meant for painting (at least my final purpose is that).
August 5, 2015 at 6:22 pm #32817
Gildor
MMP Elder
when I see that GW plastic “finecast” are AS expensive (if not more) than their metal counterparts but with “bugs” in the castings, (warps, not fitting parts, bent or breakable parts, holes or bubbles in the cast) I definitly prefer metal

I’d tolerate RESIN for BIG parts that would cost too much to make in metal for big vignettes or boxed sets, but not for figurines themselves, not in 32mm, nor in 54mm… “The Destroyer” was fine but would have been better in metal…, on the other hand a mumak would have been better in resin, not in metal…

Plastic does not necessarily means less expensive, and does not guarantee quality…. the conclusion is that whatever the medium, the quality must be there, and if for single figurines, I doubt resin/plastic casting would be better or easier to cast… for Prince August who specialise and are equipped in their factory, for METAL casting….. plastic casting would require an investment for them which does not guarantee income/success and would mean more expensive costs for us at the beginning…

ad thus would be at best “the same price” for us customers, at worst, MORE expensive…

Mithril is a METAL…. casting mithril figurines in plastic would be an antithesis of its original meaning
August 5, 2015 at 6:30 pm #32818
Barliman
Participant
Metal is also a more satisfying medium for wargamers – there’s something reassuring about hefting a unit of nice, heavy metal figures, whereas a strong draught can blow plastic figures off the table (I’ve seen it happen). And as the Elf says, there is no reduction in price – GW’s so-called Finecast figures are a case in point — especially since their excuse for swapping from metal was to reduce the price of figures!
August 5, 2015 at 7:05 pm #32819
Gildor
MMP Elder
not to mention it is FAR more easy to “recycle” a painted metal figurine than it is with plastic

when I say recycle, I mean scrap paint off the figurine.

there are some very strong products which will remove all the acrylic paint off a metal figurine without touching metal, but if it was plastic… the figurine itself would be “dissolved”….
August 5, 2015 at 8:32 pm #32820
Barliman
Participant
Another excellent point.
August 5, 2015 at 10:36 pm #32821
Theobald
Participant
huoommm … yes indeed, I can just completely agree to what Master Barliman und Master Gildor both pointed out concerning resin or metal castings … huom … concerning a limited size for metal figures being casted I think that’s just a matter of price for the material by now I’m afraid … rhuôm … just remember MB279 (Lord of the Nazgûl with metal base), MB422 (Smaug triumphant), MB397 (Cold Drake) or especially MB358 (Scatha) … huomm … if you don’t understand what I mean, just lift those pieces up and then you’ll know … hoooôm … all wonderful and huge castings all in metal … hmm … but times seem to have changed for producing such marvels … hom?
August 5, 2015 at 11:07 pm #32823
Turambar
Participant
What can I add- after too many drinks this summer night . . .
Well- mithril is metal. I agree totally.
I remember the time I hold the first mithril miniature in my hand. That was somewhere in 1992 or so.
I was impressed with its heaviness. And I am still.
I have painted some miniatures from the spanish brand “Origen Art”. Master Pedro Fernandez is the sculptor.
For my taste the best miniatures EVER! Casted in resin!
I have to add, that the parts do not really fit togethet that well. But you can manage everything using milliput . . . Sometimes more, sometimes less.

I want to say: NOBODY does see of which material the figure is casted as it is presented inside a glasscabinet or whatever.
That “Origen art”minis are real treasures for me. Highly detailed and of excellent proportion.
And they are “3-dimensional! That means they have a side view and – believe t or not: a back view!
The minis from Mr. Tubb seems more and more 2-dimensional without side view and with that standart cloak on the back.
(is that really necessary to give nearly EVERY figure a cloak??????????)
Remembering that poll concerning “Necromancer´s Tower-range” I answered “resin”. And I will do so still.
If it is the ONLY opportunity having miniatures from that irish company in the future . . .
Imagine: there is a m-range of “Easterlings” of “Wilderland” the third “Helm´d Deep” range a fourth Helm´s Deep range – all released. But in resin . . .
What would you do?
I will buy them.
August 6, 2015 at 6:28 am #32824
Milo
Participant
I did not thought about mithril cloaks that way before. You are damned right Christoph, l agree mithrils are front side designed. Thanks for this highlight Master archer.
I think I need a breakfast now, would you share one at my table?
Master Barliman! Where is Nob again ?.
August 6, 2015 at 6:49 am #32825
Arthadan
Participant
That was my point, Master Archer. Exploring alternatives, even if they are unlikely to happen.

About materials, I think there are some missinformation here. Resin has better detail and higher price than metal (GW is not a valid example of this, as they tried to reuse metal moulds for resin casting hence the many problems and bad reputation Finecast has). For a more down-to-Earth approach regarding prices, you may check Hasslefree for example (GW is completely over the top).

Then, regarding plastic quality, it is improving vastly. Check out this French Dragons by Perry Miniatures for example.

I understand metal has to do with nostalgia, but I think as Master Archer, that as long as the detail is good I rather see new release no matter the material than no releases at all.
August 6, 2015 at 7:29 am #32826
Barliman
Participant
It’s not just nostalgia, Master Arthadan – I meant what I said about the satisfying weight of metal figures compared to resin or plastic. I shall always prefer metal.
August 6, 2015 at 7:55 am #32827
Maenas
Participant
Arthadan wrote:

as long as the detail is good I rather see new release no matter the material than no releases at all.

Completely agreed.
August 6, 2015 at 8:15 am #32828
Gildor
MMP Elder
well the first criteria is the quality of cast…. I for once, possess the resin base version of MB279 (and this piece is not heavy at all), and this base in resin is GREAT and very very detailed, I am completly FOR this kind of thing!

about those cloaks in the back master Turambar, you are very very right indeed… I had not given it a lot of thought but it’s true that only the front of the figurines seem “worked” lately… not the back… (that has nothing to do with the medium used indeed)

Those French dragons you linked master Arthadan are great indeed, and I would like no less in terms of quality, if Mithril had to go “plastic”… but my point about metal is the same as master Barliman, metal can be worked in a way plastic cannot

you can bend metal, slightly deform it, you can scrap painting easily, have a sensation of weight when you paint (sometimes it is a problem, for big pieces I admit… a big problem more than an advantage, mainly for fixing gluing, and having it in hand to paint it…)

Plastic is far more fragile, and you can’t correct mistakes the same way as metal… (you can’t bend back something that’s clean broken, can you?)
August 6, 2015 at 3:57 pm #32829
Turambar
Participant
Milo wrote:

I did not thought about mithril cloaks that way before. You are damned right Christoph, l agree mithrils are front side designed. Thanks for this highlight Master archer. . .

Well, Master Milo, such things simply happen if you visit Master Theobald and have enlightened discussions . . .
And mithrils are not only “front side designed”:
Try to count the minis which have a “movement” from left to right . . . (from the spectators view)
August 6, 2015 at 6:55 pm #32830
Milo
Participant
Very interresting again Master archer…Let’s play this funny game.
How many movements are to be considered ?
1 – none (sitting, standing for instance)
2 – from left to right like M1
3 – form right to left
4 – from back to front
5 – from front to back
6 – from down to up
7 – from up to down
8 – any others like bilbo on barrel

Now I will have a look & start counting.
August 6, 2015 at 7:13 pm #32831
Milo
Participant
I checked for M1 to M120.
Here is what I observed (to be consolidated with all remaining, but another day :lol:)
1 – 20
2 – 50
3 – 39
4 – 7
5 – 3
6 – 3
7 – 3
8 – 4

It is obvious that “non-side moves” are rare. It is a good way to ask for new improvments I think.
August 6, 2015 at 8:15 pm #32832
Barliman
Participant
You obviously have a lot of time on your hands, Master Milo!

Have a drink, as a reward.
Author

Posts