on the subject of scale

[tom q vaxy]

interesting threads regarding the vehicle scales most suitably compatible for 28mm figures. but it invoked another question which I have not seen discussed.

part of the allure of gaming for me is the shackles of scale authenticity can be somewhat relaxed. seems to be a pleasant absence of "rivet-counting" in this aspect of the model-builder's creativity.

Q: where is the threshold between "gaming" and "scale modeling"?


and, I guess the follow up question would be


Q: does too much realistic detail detract from the "gaming" models?


inquiring minds want to know!

[mcfonz]

The issue is that, despite the great number of people that argue otherwise, most miniatures do not follow a 'scale'.

In fact, there isn't even an industry standard in most cases.

Take 28mm for example. Just as is there are two measurements for 28mm, to the eye and to the top of the head.

If you suggested that 1:72 could be interpreted as 'to the eye' to a scale modeler they'd likely have a fit.

That's before you introduce additions like 'heroic' to equation.

It's a massive bane of mine, in the age of the internet it can be a massive issue for people looking to order from different ranges to mix and match and give their armies variety. I have recently challenged a couple of Kickstarters to be more honest when claiming their models were 'heroic 28mm' when in reality they are 35mm 'to the eye' at least.

To me this actually breaks the boundaries set about describing your products by many EU nations. It is also really unfair on the consumers.

Reichbusters was the latest one to do this, claiming their models were 28mm heroic. Yet when they eventually shared their models they were larger than Dust Tactics miniatures which means cross use with other ranges was going to be minimal at best.

[robh]

The whole "to the eye" measurement thing is just bullshit, you don't measure real people that way nor should you toy people. It is now used to deliberately mislead (as already said) or as a way of disguising poor model making or sculpting.
The epithet "heroic" was coined to describe the bulky pumpkin head, over muscled anatomic style that dominated the gaming industry for a while, but is thankfully now on the decline. It's use to allow extra height on already oversized models is further misleading or disguise.

Q: where is the threshold between "gaming" and "scale modeling"?

You can "game" with scale models, you cannot "scale model" with games figures/vehicles.

Q: does too much realistic detail detract from the "gaming" models?

No.
The only caveat being how delicate some true scale details could be in some materials and the likelihood of breakages.

[mcfonz]

On the 2nd point Rob addresses - beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Most weapons are oversized, heads typically are a bit as well with wargaming mini's. Very few moderns have accurately scaled weapons - Spectre Miniatures are the exception and if you compare those to others and sci fi minis as well then you'll see the likes of assault rifles are often larger to be more easily identifiable on the table top and perhaps more robust.

Spears and swords can be guilty of this too.

The best advice I can give is to look at the proportions artists try to work to, normally somewhere 7-8 heads tall which means the head should fit into the height of the figure 7 to 8 times including the head itself. I think the majority of miniatures are more probably around 6 heads at best.

[tin shed gamer]

 Oh Tom ,Tom, Tom .
Your opening a can of worms thats been burried many a time. Infact any attempt at threadromancey is likely to cause you computer to explode.

True scale is a myth .There's always compromise . Be it the limitations of the product process. Or the reach of your arms. Once you represent any thing in any scale there is a point where scale becomes an issue once its applied to a 3D object or environment.
Gamers simply pick the bits that suit there personal sense of proportion.Blindly ignoring the bits that don't fit the idea they've constructed.
For example the demand for true 28mm ww2 figures and vehicles. When the rules that use them have rim fire ranges that are actually the range of air rifles.(even in scale).let alone mentioning artillery.
As I've mentioned before you can trace this argument in military modeling magazines back to the Eighties..
Even scale model manufacturers fudge scale with everything from kit on the deck plates of vehicles to the actual scale of the crew that goes with the vehicle.That's why you can spot one manufacturer from another. If they didn't every kit would be identical and they are simply not.

While I understand it's frustrating that some manufacturers ( especially crowd funded projects) can be vague on the actual height of the figure .
They're artistic interpretations not scale representations so it remains subjective ranther than an absolute. Unless the product is being marketed as compatible with another companies product.
In short . If its to be picked up for play then its off in some way. If its not off in some way its just for display.

As for scaling sculpting .For 28mm I roughly aim for 5mm to a foot. I've finished a couple of 28mm figures that are actually 37mm and 36mm tall.According to the brief.
One's seven foot tall with raised hair the other six two an in a top hat. Still technically 28mm figures But then some would argue they're not.
Again it's personal taste.

[Cubs]

… won't … get ... drawn … in … again ...

[tin shed gamer]

Well Mr Paul.
Your will power is stronger than mine

[Hobgoblin]

Lots of interesting points on this thread!

The best advice I can give is to look at the proportions artists try to work to, normally somewhere 7-8 heads tall which means the head should fit into the height of the figure 7 to 8 times including the head itself. I think the majority of miniatures are more probably around 6 heads at best.

I think you're right about six heads - but aren't those more 'realistic' proportions for most people rather than the ideal seven to eight? If I remember aright, most people are about six heads tall.

To me, the contemporary fashion for taller, thinner miniatures results in figures that 'read' less well on the tabletop than your classic Perrys and Morrisons and Goodwins and Copplestones. And it also leads to miniatures that are much less fun to paint. (I think it's the same principle that makes goblins and dwarves more fun to paint than people!).

I also think (and I may be an outlier here) that worries about miniatures not matching in scale are overblown - unless you're actually basing them as part of the same element. I never look at RPG floorplans during a game and think "Hmm, that Tom Meier elf doesn't work with that Nick Lund orc". And nor do I worry about mixing GW with Perry or Warlord plastics.

Part of this is because miniature ranges often understate human variety. I played in lots of terrifically varied rugby forward packs over the years, all of which consisted of men who were stronger and heavier than the average. But their heights ranged from 5'4" (front rows in Japan can scrummage terrifyingly low!) to 6'7" or so. So I see no reason why a medieval or pseudo-medieval warband couldn't include the same range in height and build, even though you won't generally get that from any one miniature company.

Now, if you want real variety in scale, take a look at these orcs, all sculpted by Nick Lund in the space of a decade!

[mcfonz]

the other six two an in a top hat. Still technically 28mm figures But then some would argue they're not.

What?! The height/scale/whatever is the human, if they are wearing a top hat, of course it increases  their overall height but the size of the human isn't any different.

Even scale model manufacturers fudge scale with everything from kit on the deck plates of vehicles to the actual scale of the crew that goes with the vehicle.That's why you can spot one manufacturer from another. If they didn't every kit would be identical and they are simply not.

There is a difference between 'tweaking' the odd detail to make your kit different to others out there and blatantly lying about the size/scale of your miniatures IMHO.

As a kid I was encouraged by my dad to collect 1:72, as I guess many would. I still have a load of them in a box somewhere. There is difference between manufacturer but it is a scale so they can't be wildly off because you can't sell something as being a 500ml flask when in fact it's a 250ml flask. Trading standards would have a field day. They do sometimes play around with proportions a bit, and you find that more in the stockiness of the figure or sometimes they'll go for a preferred body shape within the normal range.

While I understand it's frustrating that some manufacturers ( especially crowd funded projects) can be vague on the actual height of the figure .
They're artistic interpretations not scale representations so it remains subjective ranther than an absolute. Unless the product is being marketed as compatible with another companies product.
In short . If its to be picked up for play then its off in some way. If its not off in some way its just for display.

I understand it more with boardgames that are not necessarily scale/size specific but some of them do claim to be.

The 'artistic interpretations not scale representations' doesn't cut the mustard. You can't create something and then say, well yeah, it's 28mm, and then give a 75mm over to the customer. There are some great sculptors out there and they are able to sculpt to a brief, if that brief is a 28mm model to the top of the head and as a client I got a 40mm sculpt I would be sending it straight back. The same as if I asked for a portrait no bigger than A3 in size and got a mural painted onto a large sheet of hardboard I'd be a bit narked, with no where to fit it.

The artistic style and interpretations comes into play with proportions and the way the mini is sculpted.

For example you can identify a Kev White sculpt whether it's in 28mm or 75mm. The same with Bob Olley and Kev Adams and a whole host of other sculptors.

Artistic interpretation doesn't mean ignoring the brief and creating something larger than what was wanted. Don't get me wrong, a mm either side and no one is going to go nuts about it, but that's the tolerance level.

[Norm]

I always thought that 'to the eye' was to deal with the difference between bare head and say shako.

Do manufacturers use a standard size dolly, so that their figures across their range are equally tall / proportioned?

[mcfonz]

I think you're right about six heads - but aren't those more 'realistic' proportions for most people rather than the ideal seven to eight? If I remember aright, most people are about six heads tall.

The human body can range a fair bit in proportions, the ideal is 8 heads I believe. The range from 7-8 is probably more realistic, no sense in having an ideal that doesn't exist. But it also depends a lot on how someone is standing and posture.

Edit: Found a better image that explains it from http://webcomicalliance.com/featured-news/anatomy-101/

I always thought that 'to the eye' was to deal with the difference between bare head and say shako.

Do manufacturers use a standard size dolly, so that their figures across their range are equally tall / proportioned?

You see, the shako story is probably an excuse churned out. I say that because in theory they have sculpted the head before putting the Shako on it . . . And still, if a miniature is 28mm why do they then measure 28mm to the eye? It sounds much more like a reason given for their miniatures being larger than others.

[tin shed gamer]

Where do you get the idea that the sculptor ignored the brief? You don't follow the brief you don't get paid. I've more than enough clay pushing under my belt. To have put three of my five kids through university so far and more than enough work for the other two. Let alone the corporate and museum commissions.
It is not a straight line and never will be. I can't comment on the relationship of 75mm figure to 28mm scale .Its not my work and its not my contract to trouble shoot.But no manufacturer would accept a figure thats supposed to be a 6ft and turns up at 15ft. Unless they want it too look 15ft. You've every right to be annoyed if you've had a product sold as being a 6ft(ish) 28mm figure and ended up with a 15ft 28mm figure.
The reality is no major manufacturer gives a flying fig. if their product is the same height as their competitors They want you to buy everything you need from them.

My point on my own work is simple although the figures are to scale the assumption made by others is that they are too big. Simply because people don't visualize tall people. Most peoples built in preconception of the average height is 5ft 8ins to 5ft 10 ins. So once you build a figure tall than this it looks over sized .It doesn't immediately occur to people that it may be someone well over 6ft.
The point you raise about the height of a figure in a hat is answered by Normsiths question. Thats why figure heights, are taken at eye height. If take a figure height at the top head then hair and hats become an issue.
There's many reasons why scale creep is an issue . Firstly the increase from 25 -28 is simply time fashion and economics. ( by changing scale you make old products obsolete and create a new market and demand GW didn't rescale by accident)
Plus more importantly this gradually becoming a norm. Which most gamers a acutely aware of because the growth and expansion of the hobby is in our living memories. most of us have figures more than twenty years old and from multiple manufacturers.
Newer and younger gamers tend to stick to one manufacturer for a product line.
I've seen a marked rise in the number of people who will drop a collection. In order to restart the same period using a different manufacturers product simply because it h
As more options.For these people there's no issues with it they'd rather start a fresh than mix and match manufacturers.
For others it's half the fun mixing and matching to produce something more ecliptic and reflective of themselves.
And to answer the second question yes most companies use their own company standard dollies.



 I'm going to follow Paul's example and bow out as this threads wheels are beginning spin in the ruts of all the that have travelled down this road before it.

[robh]

The issue between figures by different sculptors is not about height.
Claiming buyers cannot see beyond an "built in preconception of average height" is insulting and since when have hairstyles or hats ever been included in a persons height? If a figure is well sculpted and in proportion the location of the top of the head will be obvious, irrespective of hairstyle or headgear. In just the same way as you don't use different measurements if teh figure is crouched, or kneeling or prone.

The issue is body proportion.  Some sculptors can create exquisite facial character and detail on a true proportion model head for a figure designed to be between 25 and 30mm tall, others cannot. Some sculptors model human hands with fingers that are in proportion to body, others find it necessary to make stubby fingers that are as wide as the figures wrist. Those that cannot will bloat proportions until they can create the required level of detail in the space available.
That is fine and a matter of personal style which some customers like and find desirable, but for a manufacturer or sculptor  to say those figures are "compatible with x,y or z ranges" just because they are within a mm or so of the same height is misleading (whether that is deliberate is a matter of opinion).

I would not say that a 28mm AEG Samurai figure is compatible with a 28mm Dixon or a Chiltern Samurai, or a 20mm Britannia Vietnam US Marine with a 20mm Platoon 20 version of the same.......and many other examples exist.
They are all good figures and have people who like and support them, but despite being the same height and therefore implied scale they are not compatible.

[tin shed gamer]

It's not insulting at all .
Everyone has built preconceptions . Illusionist play on this all . you all know what a bicycle looks if you were asked to draw one in under thirty seconds you'd find only one in ten actually draw a functional bicycle.There's more half a dozen common incorrectly drawn bicycle image's .To the point its quite a staple example used in psychology .
Proportion is not related to scale .
My example was of my work and simply the 7ft figure is proportioned correctly and in scale. The mis conception held by the observer is too big not because of its proportions but because of its height. At no point did anyone consider it may just be a taller man. Because it is proportioned and has no other figures to reference it against on my thread. No one has mentioned it being over sized

The majority of skilled sculptor do play with the proportions of a prone , seated , kneeling figure.Its how a figure remains visually comfortable.To the majority of people.

The whole idea of realism is a myth. You simply can not distinguish the face at 200m you can just about guess at a smile a 80mm. By 400m you can see hand and arm movement by 600m you don't even have a head by 1000m you look like a triangle that pretty much covers the reality gaming scales.
We spend hours painting realistic splinter cammo and pea cammo. When in reality it looks more like Dennison at that distance if anything at all.
There's nothing wrong with striving for it . Its just the oxymoron of the hobby . the more you try for the perception of it. The further you travel from the reality.
As for hair and hats changing perceived height of course they do . its been a main stay of stage and television for years . Let alone the humble disguise of spooks.
Now I am off to the pub. Where I shall drink you health and wish you a Merry Christmas.

Mark.

[mcfonz]

As much as I may find it difficult, I agree with both of you on certain points.

When it comes to equipment, weapons and perhaps even facial expressions there is nearly always some 'exaggeration' in miniatures. Either an increase in size proportionally or some aspects are tweaked. That is what I was alluding to before when I said I believe there to be many miniatures that sit in the 6-7 heads body proportion range.

That said, I think the comparison to everyone having a go at drawing a bike is poor. You don't just get anyone to make a miniature. You pay a professional to do so. As it is a product you expect a level of professionalism and quality that comes with the price you are paying and their experience as a sculptor.

This is where I agree with rob. I don't expect someone to sculpt what is 'perceived' to be 28mm, I expect someone to sculpt what 'is' 28mm. The shako reasoning before is a con.

As has already been said, a number of companies use dollies. Do they use slightly taller dollies for miniatures they intend to have headgear or larger hair? No. They use the same dollies and stick them on top.

I'm not even sure how one would explain that perception-ally because the entire point of tall hats, see the old British bobbies hat for example, was to give a greater perception of height than the officer perhaps had. So to both increase the size of the miniature AND use the same perception bending one a model would surely not make people feel they were in fact much bigger than the 28mm to the top of bare head counterparts?

And where did that conversation happen?

"Bert, how are we going to convince people these are 28mm when they have a shako on their heads?"
"Hmmm, tough one Ernie. I tell you what, I'll sculpt them a bit taller so 28mm is to their eyes."

Erm, what?

Now, I do agree with what you are also saying which is that there should be flexibility within a range to express the vast range of body shapes, forms and the proportions that go with them. Some people have longer trunks to their bodies than they do legs, some people the other way around and then you have everything in between, and that's just for starters. But I believe the example you give of a 7ft tall character isn't one of perception. If you were to sell it as 28mm and not tell them that the background for that character is that they are 7ft tall then you can easily justify why some people may be a bit confused.

Then there is your point about the 'main' manufacturers. How many out there truly have the range and/or investment to be able to dictate the market in the way you are suggesting? Perhaps if they have a very niche range then yes. But how many truly own their corner of the market in that way? GW, Privateer Press, Wyrd, maybe Warlord, maybe Perry (although those two are relatively compatible across some ranges). The majority of other companies are smaller and are trying to be one of the above or introduce miniatures at the set size to compete with other companies.

My dark ages stuff comes from Black Tree, Tanatus, Gripping Beast and Bad Squiddo, varying styles, and proportions even, but they all manage to fit in well with each other because none are claiming to be 28mm and are 35mm. All of those manufacturers are not fool hardy enough to believe that people will think their range of miniatures sits in a vacuum.

And I am still where I was, which is there is no justifiable reason to call your range 28mm if they are not even close to it.