Poll: How important is historical accuracy to you?

[Babelfish]

Purely out of interest and not intended to open up the "accuracy vs. artistic license" can of worms. So keep it civil please because there's no right or wrong approach to the hobby, and the highest score doesn't "win".

I'd just be interested (and I'd wager I'm not the only one ) to get some idea of what level of importance guys attach to historical accuracy generally. A broad picture, if you like.

I'll leave it running for 28 days and then see where we are with it.

- Steve

 

[Dan Morton]

Ideally I'd vote somewhere in between the first two categories. I enjoy historical accuracy and using the history of an incident or situation to create a figure is very important to me. But historical accuracy without pizazz, originality and quality makes any figure less appealing.

All the best,
Dan

 

[Nap]

For me I would also go between the first 2 but voted the 2nd as without the piece being of interest to me research is a bit of a struggle .

Nap

 

[Gellso]

Id rather try and utilise my time improving my painting than my reading!

Gells

 

[billyturnip]

I'm like Dan and Kev and probably between the first two but have voted It's Important etc.

There have been times when I have left a piece because I couldn't find the required uniform info for me to paint it, however other times I've thought that's near enough and just blindly carried on without a care in the world.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest that some people don't worry at all about accuracy, it's a hobby to be enjoyed after all and if that's how they wish to enjoy their hobby why not. I like my reading and researching time but you can reach a point when, as Grant says, your time is better utilised with the brushes.

 

[Nap]

Id rather try and utilise my time improving my painting than my reading!

Gells

I can't read so it's just pictures for me !


I think also Grant is right you do reach a certain point when it's time to get those brushes out!

Nap

 

[billyturnip]

you do reach a certain point when it's time to get those brushes out......

..... and paint the garage door when you can't find out the colour of the feathers in a 17th Century Polish musicians hat,

 

[mick3272]

I go along with Dan. I like my figures to be correct or as near as correct that is humanly possible. If a figure is IMO wrong then no matter how good it looks I wont by it.
So Q 1 1/2 please, We wouldn't want to see the Duke of Wellington directing ops from the turret of a Scout car would we ??
Mick

 

[Babelfish]

Hmmmh - in view of some of the above comments above, I think I might have phrased Option 1 too narrowly. So with that in mind, I've tweaked that first option to give guys a clearer choice between 1 and 2.

Hopefully we're still early enough in (Day 1) that it won't skew the overall results too much!

- Steve

 

[Richie]

Oi,
Couldn't give a humans,............ not - couldn't give a monkey's.....really

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Im with the main bulk of guys here it seems.

Cheers
Janne Nilsson

 

[Metal Extremo]

Voted for the option two. I like my miniatures with historical accuracy, but sometimes a great facial expression, or the pose, impacts me and i bought one out of my "historical ages" unknowing the accuracy of the figure. For example i love Pegaso's samurais sculpted by Konnov, but i have not knowledges about them. Painted a couple. With more time to paint (one samurai 90 mm cost me about 6 months of painting) and more money to spend i would buy all. At the other side, sometimes i sacrifice the "correct" tone of the uniform or the dirty of the figure for a more aestetic painting

 

[DaddyO]

Quite clear 2 for me.

Historical accuracy is important, but I'd much rather see an emotive and beautiful figure with an extra button or row of lace than a mannequin with an 'accurate' uniform (In fact given supply difficulties and human nature I doubt whether what we consider 'accurate' is anything like - Am I allowed to make such a heretical comment without incurring the wrath of the moderators?)

Retiring to his secret bunker
Paul

 

[Oda]

Studying history and then going to the bench and try to make it come alive is immensely satisfying for me.I share my time and money equally between historical and period reference books and miniatures/materials.There are mistakes that can be forgiven (e.g. an extra/missing button on a cuff, the"correct" "blueness" of a specific historical blue uniform) and mistakes that -at least in my eyes- are unforgivable (usually mistakes that take the figure out of historical context,e.g.brocade fabrics in eras when they did not exist,weapons and armour that never existed or carried/worn by people that were never even near to their place of origin/era.There are so many fantasy figures out there and pretty good ones too that one does not need to "falsify" an historical one in order to have fun and be creative.

Oda.

 

[Richie]

Hi Steve,
An interesting poll considering some of the "debates" on here. At the end of the day, we are mainly all amateurs and strive to do our best. I especially like to think of myself as an impressionistic modeller, so the last bolt and nut is unimportant to me. I have purchased many a model that have not been 100% and I could not care less.
If a figure has the come and get me factor, then anything can be changed or tweaked if so desired.
On the other side of the coin I do enjoy historical research and try to be 100% as accurate as possible if supporting someone else, a sculptor or a company. Anything pre photographs is always open to more interpretation depending on the sources.

I'm with Grant and would like to up my painting skills above all and with Dan.... "historical accuracy without pizazz, originality and quality makes any figure less appealing". Sculptors are the bravest of the brave and are constantly sticking their heads above the parapet's and in the line of fire, they all have my full admiration as it's a hard task.

This should really be the sculptors motto;
“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”



Now then down to the most important issue.......discrimination against Monkey's, Chimps and the general simian population. But there again could I really give a human's!
cheers
Richie

 

[Mark S]

Hi Steve, the poll is a nice idea but with all respect I have to say the questions you have devised are ridiculously suggestive and apparently designed to inspire a particular response.
I'm sure most members, if not all members , and indeed myself ,would be interested in a "quality piece with overall appeal." without being so dogmatic as to suggest it's "the single most important thing for me"
It's simply the same way any political poll is devised with leading questions.
If the historical accuracy of historical figure modelling has really become such a piss weak consideration I don't get why people do it at all.

 

[Babelfish]

Well Mark, the 40+ people who have voted and/or commented so far appear not to agree with you. Feel free to ignore it if you don't like it, as I'm sure "most members if not all members" who feel the same as you will do or have already done. Plenty of other stuff going on on pF, and it's not compulsory!

Bottom line is this mate: It's just an informal poll on a niche hobby forum in an obscure corner of the internet. We're not voting on taking our country to war or bringing back the death penalty. The world will still carry on in its own merry way whatever the result. More important than that even: guys will still carry on painting with the same approach that they had before. In other words, it's just a bit of fun. There is no ulterior motive, and no-one is trying to "lead" anyone. Try to look at it from that angle, and you'll feel better.

- Steve

 

[Forté]

I do have one question which does seem to fit in with this poll.

Which companies are know to hit both the historical accuracy and make high quality miniatures too?

There's so many out there that for painters new to historical painting it would be nice to have a little steering.

Cheers.

 

[akaryu]

Being quite a stickler for detail, I voted for option 2. However the great Lucien Rousselot, having devoted a lifetime of study and drawing the French Napoleonic armies once said " We might be in for a great surprise if we could see what they really wore!" As for Forté's question, tricky to answer that, but I bet the makers specializing in a narrow field are the more accurate, two of them that spring to mind are Steve Warrilow's The Fusilier and Jon Smith Modelbau, both in WW1. For the older chaps Poste Militaire did its homework too!
Cheers

 

[akaryu]

On second thought, most of the smaller ventures offer good and historical correct figures and busts, an occasional slip up can always occur. It gets a lot trickier in eras that border on the fantastic like early medieval figures or anything representing a Hollywood take on history, some big Italian and Spanish firms, not to name them. That said it doesn't hurt to read and do some research by yourself, getting a feel for the period depicted will certainly reflect on your work. Personally I always try to approach the hobby from two wise sayings (not mine) that any job worth doing is worth do be done as correctly as possible and the late Jean Hoyos' dictum "La figurine, il faut la faire avec du sérieux, sans se prendre au sérieux" (Figure painting has to be done seriously without taking yourself serious.) Happy painting!