Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Colonial Adventures => Topic started by: Romark on October 23, 2017, 02:50:21 PM
-
Loads more minis over on their Facebook site before they are off to the casters,Sikh Sepoys,shown below, and Gwalior command are my favourites,hopeless at linking photos,perhaps other members are more adept :)
-
Lovely figures, anything to stop me using them as Khalsa for my Sikh Wars collection?
-
Hi Jeff
I’m sure if you asked Mike S the question, either on his FB page or the ID website, he’d give you a very detailed reply on how the uniforms differed but, at the end of the day, if they fit your vision of how the Khalsa looked, then just do it!
They’re certainly much more animated/exciting figures than the Studio Miniatures range.
-
They’re certainly much more animated/exciting figures than the Studio Miniatures range.
That's true :)
-
Hi Jeff
I’m sure if you asked Mike S the question, either on his FB page or the ID website, he’d give you a very detailed reply on how the uniforms differed but, at the end of the day, if they fit your vision of how the Khalsa looked, then just do it!
They’re certainly much more animated/exciting figures than the Studio Miniatures range.
Hi Simon,
I can't see much difference between them and the Perrys Khalsa other than these are more characterful.
But why replace an existing collection when I can just add to a new collection lol.
The stuff from ID just keeps getting better, I hope there's a lot more to come :)
-
Did the Khalsa rank-and-file have epaulettes and the little bits of strap across the shoulder that connects to them? (sorry, don't know the name for that thing.)
In illustrations they always seem to have completely bare shoulders. So a tiny bit of fixing might be in order if you are stickler for such things.
Also, in depictions the smaller kind of turban with a "bun" on the top (similar to, or possibly the same thing as the modern patka that is worn by Sikhs when the play sport, and by young boys) seems much more prevalent than this style. But that's probably being over-fussy.
-
I think you are right on both counts Plynkes, I keep having these ideas of updating my Sikh War stuff with more modern figures but it s to much of a pain.
So I'll stick to expanding the Mutiny stuff and maybe one day if I'm a good boy someone will do another range for the Sikh Wars :)
-
Did the Khalsa rank-and-file have epaulettes and the little bits of strap across the shoulder that connects to them? (sorry, don't know the name for that thing.)
In illustrations they always seem to have completely bare shoulders. So a tiny bit of fixing might be in order if you are stickler for such things.
Also, in depictions the smaller kind of turban with a "bun" on the top (similar to, or possibly the same thing as the modern patka that is worn by Sikhs when the play sport, and by young boys) seems much more prevalent than this style. But that's probably being over-fussy.
Who gives a shit? Reeeealy big turbans are what gets us off in the end, eh?
I have occasionally wondered what made the sikhs wrap their heads tighter over time. By WWII their turbans where but a a shadow of their former selves.
-
Who gives a shit?
Lots of people. Jeff965 for one. Can never understand the section of LAF that derides providing knowledge and the exchange of information, and sniffs at it as "button-counting." If someone asks a question on LAF, providing them with the information is helpful. Telling them they don't need the information is, in my opinion, unhelpful, and I would like to discourage it on the Colonial Adventures board. Let them have the information, and decide want they want to do with it themselves.
No one is saying we all have to be button-counters, but that gate swings both ways. I'd appreciate it if those that hate to know how many buttons they have would refrain from discouraging others from counting them, if counting them is something they enjoy.
In summary, whether you are a button-counter or a button-ignorer, the encouraged behaviour is to not be a dick about it, either way. :)
-
Incidentally, H, I'm not all that sure about them getting continuously smaller. The ones from the era of the Sikh wars seem much smaller than ones from the late C19th, and you see all sorts these days, big and small. I think they have just grown and shrunk as fashions changed.
-
Lots of people. Jeff965 for one. Can never understand the section of LAF that derides providing knowledge and the exchange of information, and sniffs at it as "button-counting." If someone asks a question on LAF, providing them with the information is helpful. Telling them they don't need the information is, in my opinion, unhelpful, and I would like to discourage it on the Colonial Adventures board. Let them have the information, and decide want they want to do with it themselves.
No one is saying we all have to be button-counters, but that gate swings both ways. I'd appreciate it if those that hate to know how many buttons they have would refrain from discouraging others from counting them, if counting them is something they enjoy.
In summary, whether you are a button-counter or a button-ignorer, the encouraged behaviour is to not be a dick about it, either way. :)
I was not all that serious, Dylan. Having painted oodles of sikhs I've come to the conclusion that it is all about the turbans for me.
-
Incidentally, H, I'm not all that sure about them getting continuously smaller. The ones from the era of the Sikh wars seem much smaller than ones from the late C19th, and you see all sorts these days, big and small. I think they have just grown and shrunk as fashions changed.
That may be so. In that case I meant that I wonder made them decrese in girth and hight from late 19th century and onward. The afghans seem to have given up on them to completely in favor of the pakol to a rather large degree.
When I was in Morrocco the very manly berber guide who showed us around the kasbah Ait Ben Haddou told me he had 10 meters of cotton batiste in his turban which made for quite a pile up. It made me feel quite inadequate having a mere 4 meters in mine.
-
Apologies, H. I was a bit snappy there. I think annoyance at that issue has been building up slowly inside me and you merely happened to be the unfortunate one in the way when it came out.
I still love you really. :)
-
Apologies, H. I was a bit snappy there. I think annoyance at that issue has been building up slowly inside me and you merely happened to be the unfortunate one in the way when it came out.
I still love you really. :)
Well, I was admitedly a bit dismissive in my remark. I am all for button counting, really. Sooner than you'll know, you will need it.
-
Did the Khalsa rank-and-file have epaulettes and the little bits of strap across the shoulder that connects to them? (sorry, don't know the name for that thing.)
In illustrations they always seem to have completely bare shoulders. So a tiny bit of fixing might be in order if you are stickler for such things.
Also, in depictions the smaller kind of turban with a "bun" on the top (similar to, or possibly the same thing as the modern patka that is worn by Sikhs when the play sport, and by young boys) seems much more prevalent than this style. But that's probably being over-fussy.
Don't worry. The pictures shown are from the second (small) set to be released, namely the flank companies which had 'wings' The first set which will be out soonish, has the plain uniforms. The 'regular' sepoys are already out, the Sikh ones will follow next month. And then the regulars and Sikh flank companies will be added.
-
Yeah, but I imagine they still would have shoulder straps, right? Which would have to go to make them look like Khalsa (if one cares about such niceties). Still a little bit of a pain.
-
Yeah, but I imagine they still would have shoulder straps, right? Which would have to go to make them look like Khalsa (if one cares about such niceties). Still a little bit of a pain.
Yes, they all have shoulder straps. And most, if not all of them, have the more modern, single cross-belt.
-
Well sorry to rain on the parade but there are a mass of differences between the Sikhs in the 1840s and those in the 1850s in terms of appearance of uniform. I would suggest you take a look at Michael Perry's artwork in his Osprey Sikh Army book to get an idea of things.
All that said, if you want to use them for both the Sikh Wars and IM then who is stopping you...I am sure Mike at Iron Duke will happily take your money...but whatever you do, don't waste your time with the Studio Minis Sikh War range, as for the most part it is not good at all....uniforms are fairly accurate but the figures aren't that great, riders don't fit properly on any horses, etc.
The two best sources for actual Sikh War figs remains Foundry and Old Glory. The OG Sikh Wars range (which was never completed) is actually pretty good, and the figures are very compatible with the Foundry ones. I should know, I have loads of Foundry and some OG in my collection. All good stuff.
Hope this info helps.
-
I entirely agree about the figures as it happens. I wouldn't use them myself. I was merely trying to point out the differences I found the most noticeable, for the benefit of anyone planning to go ahead with it anyway. I'm sure some people would accept them as "close enough." We all different visions of what is acceptable, after all.
There is some lovely artwork by Mr. Perry in that Osprey. I would second the suggestion of taking a look if you are interested in this period.