And let it be that way. My english is not so good to go into the discussion.
But i surely hope that Gary will contribute here, and that Alan also made his nice figures, and let them show here.
That's the only thing that matters to me.

marc

Triviality

Quoting Paul Kernan: "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."

Yes, it was an unsolicited critique. Supported by objective reference to sources and by someone competent on the subject. There were also some wholesale positive comments, also unsolicited, some of them by Gary himself. Unsolicited as these were too (and some certainly subjective), nobody has complained.

The triviality or not of the discussed point is a matter of high relativity. Objectively speaking, the criticism looks right on target - no contrary reference has been forwarded, which would have ended the discussion instantly. Another matter altogether is how much can this prove a problem to a potential buyer. For some it would be trivial, even VERY trivial, for some it would be important. Everyone is free to vote with his wallet.

I certainly do not agree with the suggestion that those interested should do whatever adjustments needed, to this or to whatever figure. Surely any figure sold as a historical figure should come accurate, besides being correct in proportions, anatomy, etc, isnt' it? So would not be the sculptor/manufacturer those with the paramount obligation of doing whatever is needed to this end? After all we are talking of a historical personality in a specific period of time, as stated by the figure designation.

Anyway, if you really believe that particular point of detail, the number of buttons, is trivial, as several people have stated, or even not really founded, as has also been mentioned, then why all of this fuss? I'm absolutely sure this kind of discussion will not affect appreciably sales, nor the sculptor's standing, as shown by John immediate support of Alan. This kind of discussion will nor make converts to any field.

As a ending thought, I would find lamentable that the conclusion of the whole discussion is that the better solution is not to post pre-production works (although I do not still understand where is the benefit in publishing only production work instead) and not to intervene in discussions such as this one.

Regards,

Dani

deleted

Alan, I think you're now being needlessly combative; I can understand at this point why you feel you need to defend yourself but the initial comment by Gary, it is obvious to me, was not in any way patronising. Being called upon to defend his post more than once since then - not just for the accuracy issue but his 'right' to say it in the first place - might make his subsequent posts read that way but that is inevitable; many of us who have been placed in similar positions in the past are well aware of how posting to support our opinions is seen by others.

I'm not even going to touch on the issue of accuracy one way or another, you're as familiar with where I stand on the issue as anyone and it's now become beside the point. But the last time we talked about sculpting at Euro you might recall that you said to me that you're well aware of your own areas of weakness as a sculptor (I think this was in relation to talking about judging critique although I can't remember for sure). Surely someone as introspective as you then can appreciate that nothing any of us sculpt is beyond critical review by our peer group; for me I can't think of a single commercial piece produced for our hobby, ever, where I wouldn't have something I think could be have been done better (to be clear: not differently) even by the sculptors whose work I like and admire the most.

In all fairness why would you expect any different given his unstinting help and support here, for years? It's no different on any forum, including the one you moderate I'm certain.

A picture posted here on pF is open to comment, good or bad. Just as we know people won't all like our work we can't expect that we will like everything they might have to say about it; two sides of the same coin.

...

For anyone that hasn't spotted it, please have a look at the thread I started, Critique, accuracy issues and you and post your opinions... agreeing or disagreeing.

Einion

Only one opinion (and I am sorry for my bad english language). I followed some similar discussions in some forum here at PF. I think probably the better way for avoiding that problems can be making two different folders. One for showing results (no critic wanted) and other or others forums open to critic. Then when somebody post in the first one is waiting the critic. I do not know if it is good idea but can avoid the "fight" between people. I personally love the Alan pieces and also love the POVs of Gary. Two big masters!!

Rafa

deleted .

Rafa:

Excellent suggestion, mate. In fact this very same format runs successfully on the Timelines site. Of course it does rely on the members abiding by the rules.

My two cents.....

Since my name has been taken in vain here.....

Historical accuracy is something i take seriously. I believe Gary does too. I have not entered this discussion because it quickly devolved into tit for tat.

I can relate to Gary though. I am a harsh critic, especially of my own work. It is just the result of being a perfectionist. Of course, we never live up to our desire for perfection! But it becomes very hard to turn off judgment just because you are looking at work that is not your own. Blatant errors scream out at you regardless of any attempts to hold them back. This happens to me constantly. However, I would hold that my extreme criticalness is also a huge part of my success. If I did not have this critical faculty, my stuff would not be as good as it is. Period.

I realize that many people do not welcome criticisms, good intentioned or not. Because of this, I generally hold my tongue (sometimes unsuccessfully!). I know Alan personally and know him to be a good fellow. I am sure Gary never intended to step on any toes here either. He was just speaking on a subject about which he is knowledgable. Perhaps his criticism was unwelcome, maybe a touch insensitive. But I am sure it was not , nor is not an attack on Alan or his work.

I have found over time, that it is often a good thing to see your work through the eyes of somebody else. Even if it might not be complimentary. You can only improve through learning from your mistakes. I have certainly made enough of those in my time, and continue to do so to this very moment! The day I make a "perfect' figure is the day to take up knitting or stamp collecting......

Alan, keep up the good work!! But keep a citical eye on those reference sources. They can sometimes be a tough task-master.....

Mike

deleted

re:artichokes!

HHHHHMMMMM!!!!
MY o MY!!!!
It certainly makes sense as to why I chose to drop out of this business! for a while!
I have a big store of(Resin, white metal, ,Vynal dummys(Soothers) that all can throw in the dust.!)
Guys!!!!!
I have a question:
Did:
Mike, John, Maurice, ad finitum sculpt 'The dying celt/gaul'
maybe in a different life!!!!!!
Our hobby/ business is really 'under the cosh', at the moment.
Guys-
Get out more!!!
NO DISRESPECT INTENDED!!!!!!
Gary-You have your opinion
John- It's a good figure
Alan- you sculpt nice figures
I'm more concernd that they have increased the price of Milliput!!!!
God bless everyone, except.......................

Ok, can we please get back to posting regular thoughts now? Please? This has gone wayyyyy overboard. Once upon a time (about 49 replies and a wopping 3,123 views!) there was this really nice looking figure coming out sculpted by Alan Ball and released by Military Miniatures Warehouse. Anyone remember that? OK, I'm sure we do.....points have been made as well as counter points. The prverbial "dead horse" is almost rubber guys (if that offends you, my e mail is listed here, complain there!). I honestly can see both sides of the coin so........let's see if I can start something towards getting us back on track...........eh hummmm.........

I really like the figure and, as Dave mentioned wayyyyy back on page 2, the likeness is fantastic. Unless John start casting white metal (which I doubt), the button issue should be a relatively easy fix. I hear and understand Dani, some people expect more from a historical figure. That's ok with me, I just don't mind fixing it....sides, then I made it "my" figure more so than any others out there. This figure also should be a nice time for us painters to work on those blues, a tough color for a lot of us here to paint. Another item "lost" in the process is it's 75mm. This will really allow me to put that much more detail in.....my quickly becoming favorite scale. It's also from a VERY overlooked era of U.S. History as well as the figure industry. Now if John would only do a figure from the Regiment of Mounted Rifleman for all us "Brave Rifles" out there. Seriously (just in case my previous comments were lost), with the way the likeness of 'ole Bobby Lee came out, I would really like to see Alan sculpt a during and after Civil War figure. Or what about T.J. Jackson? I'd be willing to give up my next born for that one in 75mm! (just kidding)

Jim Patrick

Amen Brother Jim!
It is indeed a 75mm piece. That is a big plus for these tired old eyes.
I too would love to see more releases in 75mm and TJ Jackson would be
high on my list.
G9

Leaving aside the previous talk on accuracy and the rest , i would like to say that in my knowledge (at least from some manufacturers) the 75mm in the coming years will be veryvery popular as they combine per4fect size for detailing and pretty mnuch lower price than a 90mm. So the size is a big advantage here

John,

The figure looks great!

Alan,

As usual, you do fantastic work!