AinuLainour
New member
I was wondering if anyone who had White Dwarf UK #324 could post/scan pictures about Golden Demon.
GD UK WD Coverage
- Thread starter AinuLainour
- Start date
Dammekkos2
New member
Are you sure that pics are in that one? Seems awfully early to me, I hope they\'re not in there as I stopped buying WD a while back, I just buy the GD edition now. I\'ll be upset if I\'ve missed it (even considering the terrible quality of last year\'s booklet).
Orb
procrastinator
nothing in GD this month......there is a thing about Slayer sword winners at GDs across the world this year, but no UK GD coverage yet.
I think next month is a show report, and probably february for the toilet paper edition of the miniatures.
And isn\'t scanning/posting scans of it kind of illegal?
I think next month is a show report, and probably february for the toilet paper edition of the miniatures.
And isn\'t scanning/posting scans of it kind of illegal?
War Griffon
New member
The coverage of the UK 2006 GD is in White Dwarf 325 not 324 the booklet will probably be another month or two away as that covers everything across the globe usually.
AinuLainour
New member
My White Dwarf Online newsletter arrived today, announcing that the Winners Booklet will be included with this month\'s WD. About time, I say!
Although I couldn\'t buy it, the new WD and demon winners booklet arrived at my local GW yesterday, the quality seemed to be better than last years print wise, but they have done bare minimum content wise. They have just showed the winners, no highly commended entries that nearly won or entries from other countries which they have had in the past.
Dammekkos2
New member
That\'s ok by me. Last years was really atrocious, if they\'ve gone back to the former paper quality I will be very pleased.
Much as I hate to say it I think the new book is awful. A complete waste of time.
I\'m not sure if the problem lies with the photos, the printing, or the designer, but something isn\'t right. It is incredibly badly colour balanced with dark images that make the minis look drained and lifeless in every picture, except for the ones that are overexposed!
Also, GW need to realise that showcase miniatures printed at actual size (and some less than actual size for no obvious reason) do not look good unless you use the quality of printing Cry Havok does. If you must do it at actual size then at least give detail shots too. Personally, I think 200% for the single minis at least, especially as there is more than enough space to do so.
No flavour/interview text is fine... if you make sure that the photos substitute the need for words. These don\'t.
All in all it isn\'t worth keeping. A shoddy waste of tree.
Very disappointing.
I\'m not sure if the problem lies with the photos, the printing, or the designer, but something isn\'t right. It is incredibly badly colour balanced with dark images that make the minis look drained and lifeless in every picture, except for the ones that are overexposed!
Also, GW need to realise that showcase miniatures printed at actual size (and some less than actual size for no obvious reason) do not look good unless you use the quality of printing Cry Havok does. If you must do it at actual size then at least give detail shots too. Personally, I think 200% for the single minis at least, especially as there is more than enough space to do so.
No flavour/interview text is fine... if you make sure that the photos substitute the need for words. These don\'t.
All in all it isn\'t worth keeping. A shoddy waste of tree.
Very disappointing.
Avelorn
Sven Jonsson
If I\'ll send them an email on what to do for images/post processing and printing.. do you think they\'ll listen? I will of course sound arrogant.. but I think many of us could produce much better images with that equipment they use.
I saw some of their mistakes on spot.. the position of the lamps etc. They couldn\'t have paided attention to post processing either last time as some had a yellow cast etc. But also last time those taken at the studio were pretty good.. like the ones of Martin Footitts and Joe Hills.
Shame.. I\'m not sure why they are doing it wrong, it\'s not like it\'s rocket science. I saw the pictures of my Frodo miniature in the last WD.. and those were absolute crap. I wrote and email back in october to the Owen Rees and said (as I couldn\'t make it) that I could send him pictures of it taken by a professional photographer in a studio.. but he never responded.
Not sure how they think when they aren\'t focusing on communicating the creativity put in each piece there.
I saw some of their mistakes on spot.. the position of the lamps etc. They couldn\'t have paided attention to post processing either last time as some had a yellow cast etc. But also last time those taken at the studio were pretty good.. like the ones of Martin Footitts and Joe Hills.
Shame.. I\'m not sure why they are doing it wrong, it\'s not like it\'s rocket science. I saw the pictures of my Frodo miniature in the last WD.. and those were absolute crap. I wrote and email back in october to the Owen Rees and said (as I couldn\'t make it) that I could send him pictures of it taken by a professional photographer in a studio.. but he never responded.
Not sure how they think when they aren\'t focusing on communicating the creativity put in each piece there.
What exactly was wrong with the setup of the lighting out of interest? I\'m not exactly an expert, but that all seemed fine to me, and the camera was decent quality too.
Yeah, I think that yours probably suffers the most. You can\'t even tell that there is a glow to the sword in it in their picture and it is really small and because of the printing it looks grainy.
And the email idea, no, I honestly don\'t think that they would listen.
Avelorn
Sven Jonsson
They didn\'t have enough light coming from the front and slightly above.. (in proportion that is) which is the natural way of lighting a miniature if you want it to look good. I think they might have used a white background as well.. which will with that amount of light they used over power and confuse the camera. Even more so if they use automatic settings which I almost suspect they do. If you check the images on the GD coverage online you can see the halo of light around the edges of the mini and still grainy finish on the mini itself which will show up even more in print.
About Frodo.. I had been more happy if they had offered a 200% or even 300% enlargment of it.. better to see the mistakes then nothing at all. But I guess the quality of the pictures won\'t hold either..
I played around in photoshop with one of their images and well.. it\'s hard to do much about it really you have to more or less redraw each picture and try to recaputre the colours. And the despeckle tool comes in handy too
About Frodo.. I had been more happy if they had offered a 200% or even 300% enlargment of it.. better to see the mistakes then nothing at all. But I guess the quality of the pictures won\'t hold either..
I played around in photoshop with one of their images and well.. it\'s hard to do much about it really you have to more or less redraw each picture and try to recaputre the colours. And the despeckle tool comes in handy too
Albert Moreto Font
Member
damn.... i wonder how does my one look then
