Just an observation: What keeps a sculptor from displaying in progress work and leveraging feedback while working in progress before a finished pattern goes into the silicone?

It seems alot of issues could be curtailed by dipping into the well of the members knowledge and create the best figures possible..

-gordy

Alan,
I know this is not the correct forum for this, but if you dont mind (or in another forum), could you explain how you go about sculpting the hat to be hollow? It looks like you are using a couple of different mediums there. Thanks Sean

Hi All

I feel gary's been done a small dis service here he offered a critique on a figure which was wholly shot down, it was in the style of all his comments straight forward and I fail to see what it has provoked such a reaction, being no expert on the Mex war I can't comment on the number of buttons but I see his argument, why if there is evidence of the coat like that post the image or picture which spawned the sculpt and that number of buttons in that pattern and that should settle any disagreement.

My biggest problem with the figure is the sheer size of the buttons, they must be about 2mm across, so at that scale makes them 40 mms or so across, ever seen that?

Robin

deleted

Suppose thats your choice, but the buttons still appear too big, maybe you could at least explain that?

Robin

Hi again Gary,

FYI, for the fun of it, I checked on the validity of my statement regarding how critical you are of other sculptor's works. Perhaps my initial reaction of saying "uh-oh" to myself when I saw you made a posting of this Lee figure was unfounded...perhaps it was not.

During the past month or so, you have commented on 16 separate posts related to sculpting. 7 of those 16 were negative. The pattern I detect is more negative posts from you when the subject is early American history. I suppose you'll retract this statement, but 7 of 16 is 44%! Numbers dont lie.

Another "perhaps"......maybe a good thing you made the original post. This flurry of comments has gotten a disproportionate amount of views. Look at the "News" section and see the amount of views by pf members for new releases, and this particular release has a disproportionate amount, which means many members have seen the new Lee figure.

I'm sorry if you think I'm out of line by stating you have too many negative comments, and that many (to me) seem trivial. It is just an opinion.

After all is said & done, I still believe Alan has done an excellent job in sculpting this master. Hopefully, these negative posts wont turn this project into a financial disaster for me. You have commented that they should not, but then again, you have zero experience with selling figures and how negative comments on any of these sites can affect sales. I've been selling figures since 1999, and have lived this experience.

I am proud of this figure and recognize I took a risk by posting a photo of the master. I'll have to think twice in the future before making such posts, since I can't afford to make such a large financial investment that is put at risk by negativity. My bad. Also, as a figure dealer, I think it can be risky for me to make posts, since my opinions can have a negative impact on my overall sales. Three of my esteemed competitors have told me to stay away.

I'll be posting a picture of an upcoming (former Cromwell Model) release of a Civil War figure. I will do my best to refrain from rebuttal comments from your anticipated negative critique. There is a 44% chance this will happen.

John

deleted

Some comments

Hello,

I would like to make some contribution, mainly in relation to the latest posts.

John, it should come as no surprise Gary has more criticisms posted when early American history is concerned - we are aware that's the period he's more familiar with, and I believe his comments are perceived as knowledgeable and solid by everyone.

In fact, this is a positive thing; a lot of people makes casual criticisms on subjects they are NOT familiar with; too often this results in unfair and unfounded criticism which may be harmful. So, it is more probable Gary will appear when, for instance, an ACW release is unveiled, than when, say, it is a Viking. He also makes comments on other areas, like pose, anatomy, and the like. I believe we can also expect these will be sound.

Also, I think it is normal that commercial releases are more often subject to criticism than non-professional ones. Precisely because public pays for them, it is to be expected the money is well spent, in quality pieces in every sense.

Some mention has been made of the presumed fact that any criticism would be more damaging now, because of it being based on a photo of an in-progress figure; if I have understood it well, the figure has been shown practically as finished (in fact, it is surely more faithful to the real thing now than it would be once paint has been applied, isn't it?) For instance, and I do not want to flog a dead horse and will not address the number of buttons question, but to me is clear than if the figure had been presented in his box-art form, painted by whoever the master, the number of buttons would have remained the same. So, the same criticisms which have appeared so far would have appeared once the figure was in production, too late to apply any corrections if these need be.

Some more thoughts in the next posting.

Dani

John,

If most or all of the "negative" posts that come from me deal with early American History it's because that's where my interests lie. So if the subject were not early American would that give you a 56% chance I would not reply negatively to a post? If so your odds would be slightly better.

As to replying to the Cromwell piece you plan to re-release, I'm sure regardless of the quality or lack thereof, which ever it may be, the piece will get the critique/review it deserves. If not by me, by someone else, if they choose to post one. Then they will have to live with the burden of knowing they ruined your business because of their comment(s). That sure is a new one.~Gary

Some more

Now, regarding Alan's statements about his perceived lack of response when making requests of information in forums.

The fact that someone thinks diligent research usually brings results, or that there are periods where the wealth of information really allows for perfectly accurate figures, does not mean these same people can give help whenever requested, by any number of reasons.

I, for one, think as in the above paragraph, but do not reply to every request of information. Maybe I do not have the time at that moment, or the period they are asking for is not one of those I am familiar with; or the demand is unreasonable (it is surprising how many people simply ask for "everything" on any particular subject, without having done the least effort themselves, which is like asking for someone to do their homework for them ); or the person has previously demostrated a tendency to misuse the information provided, hence causing a sensation of wasted effort on the part of the contributor... etc etc.

As said, a variety of reasons. Even then, I often contribute to research tasks, either in public (like in a forum) or privately, because I think sharing knowledge is important, and may be rewarding too.

That's all for now,

Dani

I actually think, John that you have done more harm to your business that Gary has, using statistics for critiques intrigued me, how many of Gary's total posts are critique? The fact that Gary is very interested if not fanatical about that period of history maybe if hes commenting the sensible thing would be to listen and then make a informed decision and move forward from there.

You have to think surely that alot of the membership here will trust what he says, asking the sculptor to revisit the piece and/or show you the info he has used would I think have been a sensible thing. You could then have posted the answer saying look this is where the info has come from and this is why teh figure was done as it was, everyone then would have been able to make their own mind up over it. Instead now it looks like you and the sculptor are on the back foot defending what is to all intents and purposes a very promising figure with a few minor hitches according to people in the know, which makes it look alot worse than it actually is. The pose is good, face is quite nice etc just like what has been said by other sculptors here Roy Hunt for example.

As for that comment by Alan it makes it look like the manufacturer I used to be involved with was at Fault and thats not necessarily the case is it Alan , The buttons still remain oversize no matter what you say, i my opinion.

Oh Alan to save you the trouble I have already reread the post

Robin

deleted

Alan

This debate/argument is not for this thread and a thing of the past brought up I might add by yourself, the whys and wherefores of what happened are open to debate, but you had as much input into it as the company, a fact you seem to conviniently ignore.

so ....whats the phrase

Thats all I have to say in the matter

Robin

deleted

Hi Robin,

You bring up a good point about my doing more harm than good, and thanks for that observation. To a fault, I am usually very blunt, and knowing this about myself has usually kept me from participation with these types of forums.

Also, to a fault, (perhaps because I was a math major?), I usually quantitate things that do not require quantification, hence the 44% posting (did you see the "Rainman"?). I see things (always) in terms of digital...1's & 0's...black & white. And the world does not work that way.

As a figure painter myself, I enjoy these forums, but as a figure dealer, allowing for the aforementioned flaws in my personality, I really should refrain from participation in any posts & follow the advice of my esteemed competitors.

If any members are interested, this new release will be available in a few weeks, as is.

And I also plan future collaboration with Alan Ball. His work is (in my opinion!), excellent.

Regards,
John

Hi John

These places are difficult to deal with sometimes because the visual element is missing, theres no body language for your eyes to add that bit of information to whats been said that may or may not show in what context a comment is made. Which I think is what has happened here a slight over reaction to a person no matter who it may be asking for qualification on something.

Being told you have a style means that people recgnise your work, which is a good thing, its of a quality that means people want to and do recognise , in fact as painters and as sculptors too we are all aiming to have that style that shows what we can do. I personally think that the figure is good, infact i said as much I also think it has one minor fault which i think that should be addressed but i do not think that will put people off buying it because its really that, a minor fault, whether its historically correct or ntr re the number of buttons I cannot comment on , though the size of them does concern me, as stated above.

maths major eh, well i deal direct with 1 and 0's I'm a geek, techie call me what you will so I know about absolutes and sometimes they area great thing other times well, I am sure you have seen both.

the thing with all these places I ahve kearnt is taht its always best to justw ait 2 minutes reread what you were going to putjust in case, still feel happy then bang get it sent and devil take the result.

I am sure the figure will be a success, I wish you luck with it and your futher dealings with Alan.

Robin

Calm Down Ladies !! As Michael Winner would say

I have just read the whole of this post from beginning to end. A lot of the arguments here are absurd . If you post a figure pre or post production then you leave yourself open for criticism , If you don't like criticism then don't post .

But there seems another agenda going on here and i don't think this posting or forum is the place to air dirty laundry in public. This surely should be done by email between the parties involved.

I have no interest what so ever in this period of history and cannot possibly comment on the accuracy of the piece and i am not convinced that the argument that criticism on here will kill the piece. Surely if the piece is presented well to the people who have an interest in this subject then they will quickly add it to their loft insulating grey army !

Good luck with the project , love and peace to all

Ian

I make it a habit to stay out of political or religious discussions and most definitely a flame war on a HOBBY. However, having said this, a number of points have piqued my interest.

As I see it, the initial posting was purely done as a 'coming soon' topic for the enjoyment of us, the unwashed masses. Yet it resulted not in a casual observation but rather as an unsolicited critique on a VERY trivial point (well said John). If someone is so bent out of shape because there is one less button, then make the necessary adjustment.

Giving Gary the benefit of the doubt that his comments are indeed well intended, I still feel his delivery now and in the past, tends to come across as somewhat judgemental and negative. And when a heated discussion does ensue, the usual suspects tend to come out of the woodwork to enflame the issue even more. By posting these comments, I may be as guilty as the rest but it is a part of the hobby that I do not subscribe to.

By saying that if you don't want a critique then don't post, is a cop-out and a disservice to the majority of us. Alan and John have every right to be concerned about this type of negativity. They are both in a business that relies on a small market and any disparaging comment could have a serious negative impact on their livelihood. Whether I decide to buy this piece is not an issue but regardless of such, I have always found Alan to produce a very well sculpted and researched topic. I for one am glad that he is willing and able to bring forth more imaginitive topics such as this rather than the usual parade of Romans and Germans. Can the rest of you claim the same? It's sure easier to be the armchair quarterback. Here endeth my sermon.

And I'd say there's an better-than-average chance that virtually every one was right on the money.

Gary standards for accuracy (in the period he's most familiar and passionate about) are high and showing this by posting about issues of accuracy is his choice; if that doesn't sit well with someone else that is that person's problem. He has been, and continues to be, one of the most helpful posters on the site, it should be quite clear if you examine his contributions in toto (as opposed to looking at things in isolation) that the desire is to help, not to disparage or to tear down, despite how critique may feel when received.

The real issue here should be the motivation behind any negative comments. The same 'disparaging' comment can obviously have two entirely different complexions given the way that it is worded and how it comes across as intended.

It's quite clear to me reading it that the original post by him in this thread, #3, was balanced and in no way intended to be mean-spirited: "It's interesting to see a figure of Lee that shows him during his Mexican war service." and "Again, this is a version of Lee we're not used to seeing. It should paint up nicely." Hardly the words of someone wanting to be negative IMO.

Einion

Amen to that.

Gary Dombrowski is the American David Grieve.

I have said that in the past also on this forum, by the way.

He's one of the best sculptors in the USA, with Mike Good and John Rosengrant.
Gary and Mike Good are both actively participating on this forum, and for that we should be grateful. I recall some very good SBS articles by Gary on Planetfigure, in which he gives tons of good tips and tricks. His contribution overhere is on the whole very POSITIVE.