I agree that if comments just focus on things that can be improved (maybe even in a rude way) and leave out all other nice aspects of a piece on display they don`t help at all.
Helpful information and hints to improve an aspect are not meant to destroy confidence - and if the reply is "no thank`s I like it the way I built it" - where is the problem?
Is it honest to praise each and everything just because it was put on display?
When I put pieces on display I am glad if somebody else might notice an error or has an idea to make it better. A selfconfidence that is built up on false praise is nothing I would strive for. It can end up like this

- And let me suggest to take another look at your recent posts in this particular thread if your goal is to contribute always to this forum in a positive way.

The solution to avoid hurt feelings in respect to feedback on this forum in general might be the option to tag a thread as "NOFD" = "not open for discussion" or "JFD" = "just for display" so that everybody else knows that the person that opened it is not interested in critical comments.
But this thread was started about the importance of historical accuracy....

even if your thoughts 're not considered 't 'll .

Just as long as the mud on his boots is the right colour for Waterloo ......

We did have a right couple of pain in the arse people on here,I won't mention names but the forum seems a lot better place without them now

You should scroll back and look at your posts Mr Smudger. I only pointed out a thoat lash should be loose, something that I know about as I ride horses. You complained at me and about me and demanded my removal from this forum. Note at no point did I criticise the quality of your work or technique which is something I would not do to any person. I now no longer look at or vote for your work as a result of your reaction.

I make aircraft models on another forum and wellcome accuracy tips and I thank people and often make corrections.

I like forums where people do point out mistakes at an early stage. It's very helpful.

Move on. Let it go. Enjoy the hobby. Stop getting bitter and angry.

In my opinion, historical accuracy is one of the basic things you have to get right...

As an artist I can handle constructive criticism, if you can't you are definitely in the wrong occupation. There is nothing wrong with some that is an experienced horse handler/rider making a suggestion to loosen the throat lash.

Andy

I fall between the first two categories, but probably closer to the second. After all, hobbies should be fun. I should add that I paint for myself, and for gifts to family and friends. I do try to be as accurate as possible, but, sometimes, you can't find information on the odd detail and you have to make a "best estimate" to finish the figure.

Having been a reenactor for 27 years, I know that even existing primary sources often don't have the information one needs, so one applies "period logic": what were other, similar units wearing and how?

Basically, I just strive to get better with each figure I paint.

There are some superbly posed and sculpted figures being posted on this site. However some of them suffer from obvious inaccuracies. I wonder why - there is now so much reference material available from books, re-enactment groups as well as the web, that there is no reason for not producing an historically accurate, well researched and beautifully sculpted figure.

Mike

Surely it has a lot to do with the constraints placed on the sculptor....time....money....and the original brief from the client.
A sculptor cannot be expected to have every resource at his finger tips....and will work to the supplied refs from the client.
Another aspect to consider....customer appeal....sometimes...a little 'artistic' license makes for a more 'attractive piece...which will increase sales potential.
With so many variations on a theme...it is very difficult to capture the exact details of any piece with so many conflicting references....and the wrong choice will always be picked out.

Ron

I like mostly Sci-Fi or fantasy but some people do get really uptight when it comes to canon, then again I am pretty casual about it. As long as it looks like an Xwing within reason I'm good.

Honestly, I'm not that uptight about historical accuracy. I don't go into too much details but I still stick close to the historical reference. I realized not many people really care if it's historically accurate to a point.

Okay, here's my "two cents". First of all this is a HOBBY ( and hobbies are things you do for fun ). Just a few days ago me and a fellow modeller talked about this and the conclusion was.... "all we do is put paint on some plastic so not really something that would save the world". Having said that I do agree it COULD be nice to be as accurat as possible but then again...what is accurate if one does not have the 100% genuine, in mint condition (so not faded) items at hand when starting to paint a model.
Since no one has ( and those who were on the right place in the right time has died a long time ago ) we can only let (discolored) pictures, (artist impressed) paintings and (old and discolored) museum stuff help out.
So let's say we studied all that and went to the painstacking proces of "getting it right". Our model is finished and proudly we present it to our family and friends or......let's go all the way...enter a contest. Well, 99,9% of those who will take a look and admire your work don't have a clue if colors etc. are accurate or not which leaves us to the one remaining conclusion..... you try to be as accurate as possible only for......yourself.....
So you are satisfied and you decide to expose it to the world and you put it on some forum......... Now the fun is really starting since this is thé place some self-pronounced specialists, experts and people with the real knowledge might hang out who love to judge your work, point out that there's a lot to be improved, the red is red but not the right red, as is the blue, the yellow and the grey since...in those days blablabla.
Nów you look at your 1/9 scale pride and joy and......at once all the joy is gone, you make the conclusion you will never ever reach "their level of knowledge and skill" so all there is left to do is find another hobby......
I've seen it happen many times, in many hobbies and on (almost all) forums.
As said, this is a HOBBY and feedback is the art of positive critisism GIVEN ONLY WHEN ASKED FOR and not to give others a "leqture" so they know who's the expert here not
So......let's conclude that accuracy is what YOU think is the best you can do. For me I'm, always much more interested in used techniques so skills I can improve. Let's call it LEARING BY LOOKING.
As for PF I think there's a very positive vibe amongst the members and I like it. There's much worse places for scale modellers, places dominated by tiny group of 'knowers' that gun down everything made accept their own so PF KEEP UP THE GOOD WORKc and PF-members enjoy the hobby because that's why you choose it.

Sorr, turned out a dollar instead of two cents..

Addressing only clothing, uniforms, equipment, accoutrements and such rather than anatomy, which is mostly standard, I lean toward "accuracy."
"Historical" as represented by the written word (who wrote it and when?) or an engraved print ought (horrible word --ought) to be considered in a different light than a contemporaneous photograph. When a photo exists as a source, I want to examine that as a foundation for a piece. So stating, photos have only been around since the mid 19th century and there is now Photoshop...
Many details can be gleaned from a picture that a narrator may have never considered mentioning.
Thanks for having a platform for stating the case.

This post has been seen now, more than 12000 time, 84 only answered the poll . Does it means that 99% of the "viewers" don't care ?
Or perhaps at least 11000 lost "garden gnomes" collectors visited us ...

Perhaps they are "collecting" interesting points of view?

As a hobby, part of the enjoyment for me is the learning. The folks posting here have taught me some grand new things about painting, color mixing, light and shadow, sculpting (which I do not do much) and more. Thank you, All. When taking up a project, or the inspiration for a project, I will dig into it to know more about what I am undertaking to my own level of satisfaction.

In the plastic modeling realm, where I returned after many years' absence in the 1990s, there is a phrase "a rivet counter." This implies someone who is quite concerned about accuracy. It can lead to a condition jokingly called "advanced modeler syndrome." AMS can cause obsessive collecting of add on after market details kits, and general paralysis by analysis. If that gives them joy, go for it. But, don't impose that on those who pursue the hobby in their own manner, otherwise.

Here I repeat my appreciation for the knowledge I have gleaned from fellow PF hobbyists of many skill levels.

Keep smiling.
N

No, I think it's more a matter of Internet behavior. People see this thread come up in their feed when they land in the forum, and respond to the thread title as a question, instead of taking the time to click a poll selection.

We that, too, when people react to the latest reply in a thread, without checking to see if what they're saying is still relevant-if they're repeating a comment someone else already made, for example, or asking a question someone else already asked. Same thing happens on Facebook, and probably more frequently, given the way that application is designed (it's crap, in my opinion as someone who works in software development).

In either case, it takes more effort to read a whole thread (or expand every reply post on FB, or follow the links and read the articles), than it does to just read the thread title and post a quick reply.

That, is the effect of digital technology, my friends.

Or as Homer Simpson once lamented, "Ohnnnhhh, forty seconds?! I want it now!!!!"

Prost!
Brad

An alert to one of my earlier replies brought me here again this morning, and I re-read Oda's post, I think it was, talking about historical accuracy and painters in the past. Specifically, the example was the heroic painting of Napoleon crossing the Alps. The point was made that that painting is probably a romanticized, fictional version of the event.

That made me think about something else besides historical accuracy in a figure. And that is how well a figure that is based on a painting, or a sculpture, depicts that original work of art. So if someone came out with a figure of Napoleon crossing the Alps, based on David's painting, then for me, it's a question of how well that figure portrays the painting, regardless of how accurate the painting is, and as I said in my earlier post, sensitivity to such accuracy rises with the prices of the figure. The more expensive it is, the more I expect it to be an accurate depiction, the less tolerant I would be of deviations or omissions.

Prost!
Brad