Eastern Front Studio
New member
Dedwrekka since we need some sort of slotta bases for our BattleScar line I figured why not expand on it to suit them and the others.
a new base design
- Thread starter Eastern Front Studio
- Start date
Yes, that looks good. I think the straight edge would be better that the diamond one.
Also how about doing a two part base? You have a base like the top pic, except it has a bevelled edge, broccolli bases just sit inside it, if you want a slotta base, then there is a insert kind of like the bottom image (but it would be round to fit in the top base and wouldn\'t have the recess). More complicated and more effort, but then you get the bevel. This is a bit like what Illyad do (except they don\'t have the slotta insert...)
Also how about doing a two part base? You have a base like the top pic, except it has a bevelled edge, broccolli bases just sit inside it, if you want a slotta base, then there is a insert kind of like the bottom image (but it would be round to fit in the top base and wouldn\'t have the recess). More complicated and more effort, but then you get the bevel. This is a bit like what Illyad do (except they don\'t have the slotta insert...)
Ebonbuddha
Active member
I still think Dark Age bases (whether they make them or not) still fit the bill.
The design looks ok though I would go for a square cutout on top. That gives more freedom in how to place a figure. Metal magic had a base like that (without the slot) which made they could only be used for their own figures and their figure design was limited by having to fit that round base.
Since it\'s fairly basic in design I\'d suggest making up a couple using plastic sheet so you can test them. For one thing, you should check if the slot is deep enough to keep a figures straigth up.
One more remark. I saw you using the word \"slotta\". You have to be carefull with that in a commercial sense. \"Slotted base\" and \"figures with slot tabs\" are descriptive and can be used by everybody. \"slottabase\" is a GW word which is actually trademarked. So only GW is allowed to use it in a commercial sense. Don\'t make the mistake of calling your bases this way.
Since it\'s fairly basic in design I\'d suggest making up a couple using plastic sheet so you can test them. For one thing, you should check if the slot is deep enough to keep a figures straigth up.
One more remark. I saw you using the word \"slotta\". You have to be carefull with that in a commercial sense. \"Slotted base\" and \"figures with slot tabs\" are descriptive and can be used by everybody. \"slottabase\" is a GW word which is actually trademarked. So only GW is allowed to use it in a commercial sense. Don\'t make the mistake of calling your bases this way.
Ming good call pal i didnt know that..always great having people on the look out ..yeah the base design is for sure in the plans in metal but plastic would be a ungodly amount of a investment..yeah i always liked metal magic ..and youre right would be similar but theirs was made specifically for their round bases..some modifying usually works on say reaper minis..but lets see what happens..thanks again
I just went through a drawer with bases and found these three:
The left one is a metal magic one. I\'m not sure of the other two. Does anybody recognise them?
The one in the middle (top and bottom view) is actually very close to your design. The only difference is that this one has a slot with raised edges for stabilty and the sides are angled. The other two have sides with a minimal slope.
By the way, a little misunderstanding. \"Slotta\"is trademarked, not copyrighted. Copyright is only used for \"works of art\" while words can be trademarked in certain situations if they refer to a product. The type of copy/use protection depends on what something is.
Just wondering, For those beter versed in law than I am. Mike has now shown a design of the base here. What keeps people from using it themselves? The picture is protected by copyright but the design is not. Nor are any ideas expressed here. Would this normally be through a design patent?
The left one is a metal magic one. I\'m not sure of the other two. Does anybody recognise them?
The one in the middle (top and bottom view) is actually very close to your design. The only difference is that this one has a slot with raised edges for stabilty and the sides are angled. The other two have sides with a minimal slope.
By the way, a little misunderstanding. \"Slotta\"is trademarked, not copyrighted. Copyright is only used for \"works of art\" while words can be trademarked in certain situations if they refer to a product. The type of copy/use protection depends on what something is.
Just wondering, For those beter versed in law than I am. Mike has now shown a design of the base here. What keeps people from using it themselves? The picture is protected by copyright but the design is not. Nor are any ideas expressed here. Would this normally be through a design patent?
Ming id say the legalities of such things would take a lawyer to understand I have a copy of a contract Tom mason sent me another sculptor let him base ours on basically for sculpting terms..id say one a bit more complicated would be a headache just decyphering..the more people involved seems the more it grows..party of the first part etc etc..he tells me this one is pretty cut and dry compared to others...
..party of the first part etc etc..he tells me this one is pretty cut and dry compared to others...Ming i dont know if you remember John Dennett who did the dragons of the month..Giants etc etc for Grenadier but he told me alot of what youre saying about the artwork..most people who do stuff dont realize ..they still own the artwork..unless you do a buyout price ..so say you do us a concept and we pay you we can only make the miniature in that form..and you still retain ownnership of the art..unless we do a full purchase to reuse the pics in other mediums lets say for publishing..so there are alot of things people dont know if they just jump headlong into something as it may screw you later on.pretty much people who are beginning just want the exposure for other things so it varies i guess..I know Frank at Grimey was telling me about paying for art just by placing the artists names in the credits..we are working a deal with someone now in the artworld((i cant say who yet)) for a exclusive line and i would say it will take several goings over with our contacts at mayfair before we sign anything..
No Such Agency
New member
minimaker - the two on the right are Ilyad (square with square depression) and Rackham (square with slot). Rackham bases seem to be made of some cheap vinyl-y plastic, for some reason
no such agency sounds like a vote for better ones to me..metal for stability like warlord..the one thing that really annoys me about plastic bases is if you arent really careful with a x-acto you bite right into the plastic trying to remove that darn little fleck thing where they are attached..unless you sand em smooth
NSA: Illyad - DOH! You\'re right, than one came with the enchantress I have of them. As to the other one, I don\'t think it\'s rackham as it\'s very different from the other Rackham bases I have. Also Rackham bases are polystyrene like the GW ones. The only vinyl like base I have is by Fortress miniatures. It came with the packrat (great figure) and is cast in a similar resin to the one used for their plastic fantasy figures like the space orcs and Eqyptian duck figures.
Mick, yeah - sculptor\'s contract are a bit of a bother but they are the best way to set down agreements so there are no future misunderstanding on payment arrangements, production and publicity rights, deadline, project boundaries, etc.
Grenadier dragons of the month? Yeah, I actually have one of them. The white dragon I believe. Not sure what you mean with the story though since I asked about protection of the design of the base. What you say is also true about master figures though. The copyright of a green belongs to the sculptor unless his contract states otherwise or he\'s working as an employee (not freelance).
Mick, yeah - sculptor\'s contract are a bit of a bother but they are the best way to set down agreements so there are no future misunderstanding on payment arrangements, production and publicity rights, deadline, project boundaries, etc.
Grenadier dragons of the month? Yeah, I actually have one of them. The white dragon I believe. Not sure what you mean with the story though since I asked about protection of the design of the base. What you say is also true about master figures though. The copyright of a green belongs to the sculptor unless his contract states otherwise or he\'s working as an employee (not freelance).
Ming just agreeing with the fact you pointed out theres alot more to the design then meets the eye..yeah with all the sculptors we have dealt with so far the greens we still have but alot of times the sculptor requires them back..Sandra Garrity comes to mind of the people who do this
Ming right the copyright would remain with the sculptor unless he was supplied with a image to go by..like he completely designed the image start to finish..green and all ..and if you wanted to alter the made miniature or another based on the orginal you have to get their consent
Actually this may be the best place to ask for legal advice on this subjectlol The whole site is swarming with lawyers!
Also, from all I\'ve seen your design has not been done before. I\'m not passing this off as absolute fact, but from my understanding as soon as you create the base it\'s your intellectual property. Considering that your making it yourself you would therefore be free from another groups legal advances against the base itself, provided that you make it yourself. The only legal problems I see you coming into is with the wording on the commercial description of the base, such as calling it \"slotta\" instead of \"slotted\".
Also, from all I\'ve seen your design has not been done before. I\'m not passing this off as absolute fact, but from my understanding as soon as you create the base it\'s your intellectual property. Considering that your making it yourself you would therefore be free from another groups legal advances against the base itself, provided that you make it yourself. The only legal problems I see you coming into is with the wording on the commercial description of the base, such as calling it \"slotta\" instead of \"slotted\".
