lord of the rings minis
- Thread starter Medved
- Start date
Valander
Member
Not entirely sure on this one, but I think it may have to do with two things:
1. There\'s not really much \"creative scope\" available, as you put it. By this, I mean that because of the movies, everyone has a certain expectation of what things are \"supposed\" to look like. Anyone that doesn\'t paint the figures like the movies, even if it\'s a very interesting and appropriate color scheme, gets knocked down. This is a double-edge, though, because everyone paints exactly like the movies, and so they all look pretty much the same.
2. A majority of these figures, I think, are done by people who are primarily interested in gaming with them. Of course, I\'m sure there are those who paint these for display/collector purposes, too, but most look to be gaming-oriented. What I\'ve seen on this site, the things that get the highest ranks are definitely the \"showpiece\" level models, typically with a fancy display base. Units and well-done (but with simplistic bases for gaming) character models don\'t get as high a score.
I also think that, as an extension of #1 above, since there\'s so little variation on color schemes and so forth, people are forced to judge more on technical merits alone, and therefore become more critical.
Of course, I could just be on crack, and it could be as simple as \"people hate GW LotR stuff.\"
1. There\'s not really much \"creative scope\" available, as you put it. By this, I mean that because of the movies, everyone has a certain expectation of what things are \"supposed\" to look like. Anyone that doesn\'t paint the figures like the movies, even if it\'s a very interesting and appropriate color scheme, gets knocked down. This is a double-edge, though, because everyone paints exactly like the movies, and so they all look pretty much the same.
2. A majority of these figures, I think, are done by people who are primarily interested in gaming with them. Of course, I\'m sure there are those who paint these for display/collector purposes, too, but most look to be gaming-oriented. What I\'ve seen on this site, the things that get the highest ranks are definitely the \"showpiece\" level models, typically with a fancy display base. Units and well-done (but with simplistic bases for gaming) character models don\'t get as high a score.
I also think that, as an extension of #1 above, since there\'s so little variation on color schemes and so forth, people are forced to judge more on technical merits alone, and therefore become more critical.
Of course, I could just be on crack, and it could be as simple as \"people hate GW LotR stuff.\"
E
E-Arkham
Guest
I think it\'s the lack of creative scope. Even with the guidelines for painting, say, a nurgle hero, you still have a lot of room for interpretation while retaining the miniature\'s identity. There\'s only so many ways you can paint Gandalf before he simply stops being Gandalf.
Kep
Kep
M
Molebrain
Guest
LOTR minis
I\'ve done quite a few of them, and they\'re very difficult to do well for a couple of reasons. They\'re much smaller than the average GW mini and positively tiny compared to Confrontation. Many of them don\'t have eyes sculted in and many of the new line are poorly cast and require ages to clean them up well enough to paint to a display standard.
That said, they can be done quite nicely with a little more effort.
Molebrain
I\'ve done quite a few of them, and they\'re very difficult to do well for a couple of reasons. They\'re much smaller than the average GW mini and positively tiny compared to Confrontation. Many of them don\'t have eyes sculted in and many of the new line are poorly cast and require ages to clean them up well enough to paint to a display standard.
That said, they can be done quite nicely with a little more effort.
Molebrain
It\'s because there is little creative scope on these mini\'s.
In the majority the people who post them here will be people who\'ve watched the movies, therefore there will be a subconcious restriction to copy the movies colour schemes.
That is in itself a discipline in that some people will find very hard to work to. (It\'s also why there seem to be fewer Historical painters of figures on here).
In the majority the people who post them here will be people who\'ve watched the movies, therefore there will be a subconcious restriction to copy the movies colour schemes.
That is in itself a discipline in that some people will find very hard to work to. (It\'s also why there seem to be fewer Historical painters of figures on here).
I quite like the LOTR minis. Some arn\'t too interesting but the vast majority of them are quite nice to paint - seem quick to do to. I think it seems quicker to paint them cos they are a slight bit smaller than GW\'s \'normal\' scale. I know the little bit difference in scale should not make alot of differece but it does seem to somehow...
The problem I find with the LOTR minis are that alot of them are not cast as well as they should be. A lot of the figures tend to have bad moldings right in awkward places that destroy the detail on the mini - such as the face or across intricately sculpted armour etc.
Dave
The problem I find with the LOTR minis are that alot of them are not cast as well as they should be. A lot of the figures tend to have bad moldings right in awkward places that destroy the detail on the mini - such as the face or across intricately sculpted armour etc.
Dave
CtanSupportGroup
New member
As someone who started out painting the LOTR figures, I sort of know what you mean.
Remember that, as they are based on the movie, they have to appeal to their fan base, first and foremost, that\'s why they are already in a dynamic pose, that\'s why they have little creative scope- who\'d convert a charging Aragorn from the HoHD? There\'s simply no need as it\'s already got that feel. This, however, hampers the model- it loses out on the conversion aspect- people look at it, acknowledge it, score it, next mini please.
In addition, on a picture you cannot appreciate the scale of the piece as in the discussion in another thread about the Hobbits, which again hampers scoring.
As DR said, people tend to stick to the movie colour scheme- I stick to it- which again rules out another area for creativity. With exceptions being Goatman\'s freehand work on Arwen\'s cloakmor Peter\'s shield on Boromir.
*Forgive me if I got your names wrong*
Basically, in order to get the top marks, you have to do a flawless paint job on the mini, or something extra in the examples above.
The conversions that I do see tend to be small ones, weapon swaps etc; small, but effective.
I do, however, partly agree on the casting comment; I have an Elrond that had a mould line straight through his face, armour and between the scabbard and cloak which obscurred most of the detail. However, I believe this to be an exceptional case...
The LOTR figures are beautifully sculpted, yet need to be appreciated more.
Remember that, as they are based on the movie, they have to appeal to their fan base, first and foremost, that\'s why they are already in a dynamic pose, that\'s why they have little creative scope- who\'d convert a charging Aragorn from the HoHD? There\'s simply no need as it\'s already got that feel. This, however, hampers the model- it loses out on the conversion aspect- people look at it, acknowledge it, score it, next mini please.
In addition, on a picture you cannot appreciate the scale of the piece as in the discussion in another thread about the Hobbits, which again hampers scoring.
As DR said, people tend to stick to the movie colour scheme- I stick to it- which again rules out another area for creativity. With exceptions being Goatman\'s freehand work on Arwen\'s cloakmor Peter\'s shield on Boromir.
*Forgive me if I got your names wrong*
Basically, in order to get the top marks, you have to do a flawless paint job on the mini, or something extra in the examples above.
The conversions that I do see tend to be small ones, weapon swaps etc; small, but effective.
I do, however, partly agree on the casting comment; I have an Elrond that had a mould line straight through his face, armour and between the scabbard and cloak which obscurred most of the detail. However, I believe this to be an exceptional case...
The LOTR figures are beautifully sculpted, yet need to be appreciated more.
Padawan716
New member
I\'ve mainly painted LOTR figures, and I can say that the plastic miniatures, which make the bulk of an army, are not very well detailed, IMO. The plastic Warriors of Minas Tirith are particularly bad, with awkward shaped pauldrons, scabbards turning into quivers, helmets that do not have symmetrical wings embossed on them...
When you have to paint a miniature like that... you just really want to get it over with.
However, I\'ve been taking special care with my uruk army, which will hopefully be done... sometime soon. Requires *alot* of cutting away, sanding, greenstuffing....
I\'ve also had some problems with casting, but really only on one Knight of Minas Tirith, and a *horrible* one on Brother Captain Stern\'s sword (not LOTR, of course). His sword seemed to be... misaligned or something. No mold line, but.. like the two halves of the mold were not aligned properly... it was definitely noticable, and required a ton of filing down. I\'ve never had anything like that with any other mini.
When you have to paint a miniature like that... you just really want to get it over with.
However, I\'ve been taking special care with my uruk army, which will hopefully be done... sometime soon. Requires *alot* of cutting away, sanding, greenstuffing....
I\'ve also had some problems with casting, but really only on one Knight of Minas Tirith, and a *horrible* one on Brother Captain Stern\'s sword (not LOTR, of course
). His sword seemed to be... misaligned or something. No mold line, but.. like the two halves of the mold were not aligned properly... it was definitely noticable, and required a ton of filing down. I\'ve never had anything like that with any other mini.Legacy Account
Active member
Smaller scale....
LOTR minis are 25mm as opposed to 28mm. Who said size doesn\'t matter??! I find them irritatingly fiddly and not worth the effort. I also think that the game itself has attracted more of an entry level gaming market due to the popularity of the movies. Combining these factors means very few well painted LOTR minis (why bother when there are so many great sculpts around??).
LOTR minis are 25mm as opposed to 28mm. Who said size doesn\'t matter??! I find them irritatingly fiddly and not worth the effort. I also think that the game itself has attracted more of an entry level gaming market due to the popularity of the movies. Combining these factors means very few well painted LOTR minis (why bother when there are so many great sculpts around??).
Ebonbuddha
Active member
I think they are badly made. If you look at the Mithril line of Lord of the Ring miniatures as opposed to GW, you \'ll see what I mean. The Mithril sculpts are just better all around.
Can\'t agree with you there, Finn. I quite like them. I\'m particularly impressed with how well they\'ve managed to capture the likenesses of the actors on such tiny figures. I do wish they were a bit larger, though - these old eyes just can\'t handle those tiny details anymore!!
On a minor tangent: The scale frustrates me because they\'re so much smaller than other minis I have. I like to use all my minis for tabletop purposes and it bugs me when they\'re not to scale with each other. But I suppose that\'s a ridiculous nitpick as minis by different sculptors for the same line have a different scale. I bought 3 Reapers last week, and Jade Tiger is enormous by comparison to Brother Bertrand!!
But real people aren\'t the same size either, so I don\'t know why it bothers me.
On a minor tangent: The scale frustrates me because they\'re so much smaller than other minis I have. I like to use all my minis for tabletop purposes and it bugs me when they\'re not to scale with each other. But I suppose that\'s a ridiculous nitpick as minis by different sculptors for the same line have a different scale. I bought 3 Reapers last week, and Jade Tiger is enormous by comparison to Brother Bertrand!!
But real people aren\'t the same size either, so I don\'t know why it bothers me.
It could be um... well... d?
I think it is creative scope, but I don\'t think it is GW\'s fault. It is Peter Jackson\'s fault. Don\'t get me wrong, I loved the movie. I thought it was beautiful and about as comprehensive as anyone could have hoped. But whenever you take a piece of literature (not just a simple book) and reduce it to a film, you have stolen from the imaginations of the long time fans. I do not see trolls the way Mr. Jackson does. I do not see goblins the way he does. I do not see elves the way he does. I have a different image in my head from his. I\'m not saying my imagination is better (it is) I\'m just saying it\'s different.
All GW is guilty of is making money off of his vision. But they are not to blame for the lack of creative scope. When Jackson showed his version of a troll, he sealed it in the minds of movie goers for years to come. Ask anyone who saw the movie what a troll looks like and 9 times out of 10 they will draw (if they can draw) a Peter Jackson troll.
barkel
that said, I think I\'ll watch the trilogy again this weekend. Great flick.
I think it is creative scope, but I don\'t think it is GW\'s fault. It is Peter Jackson\'s fault. Don\'t get me wrong, I loved the movie. I thought it was beautiful and about as comprehensive as anyone could have hoped. But whenever you take a piece of literature (not just a simple book) and reduce it to a film, you have stolen from the imaginations of the long time fans. I do not see trolls the way Mr. Jackson does. I do not see goblins the way he does. I do not see elves the way he does. I have a different image in my head from his. I\'m not saying my imagination is better (it is) I\'m just saying it\'s different.
All GW is guilty of is making money off of his vision. But they are not to blame for the lack of creative scope. When Jackson showed his version of a troll, he sealed it in the minds of movie goers for years to come. Ask anyone who saw the movie what a troll looks like and 9 times out of 10 they will draw (if they can draw) a Peter Jackson troll.
barkel
that said, I think I\'ll watch the trilogy again this weekend. Great flick.
The problem I have...
is that people do feel the \"need\" to stick to the accepted color schemes from the movies. If you paint something differently, it\'s not Legolas anymore, and you\'ve butchered the mini.
As a gamer, I love the detail and they are some of the better halflings in the biz, but try using any of those in an RPG. \"This is my elf, his name is Gurgleplatz.\" \"Nuh-UH! That\'s LEGOLAS!\"
is that people do feel the \"need\" to stick to the accepted color schemes from the movies. If you paint something differently, it\'s not Legolas anymore, and you\'ve butchered the mini.
As a gamer, I love the detail and they are some of the better halflings in the biz, but try using any of those in an RPG. \"This is my elf, his name is Gurgleplatz.\" \"Nuh-UH! That\'s LEGOLAS!\"
tidoco2222
Active member
Ok LOTR minis are definately IMO very hard to paint because of the slightly smaller scale and finecast details. Also the mounted figures come with the rider moulded to the mount which can also make the job that bit more awkward.
So when I see a LOTR mini that is painted well I will give it a good score whatever the colour scheme a painter chooses.
However the films did put instant images in peoples minds of how things should look and if you stray from this you get mullered for it.
Tolkien to was quite descriptive in the way the denizens of Middle Earth looked.
So when I see a LOTR mini that is painted well I will give it a good score whatever the colour scheme a painter chooses.
However the films did put instant images in peoples minds of how things should look and if you stray from this you get mullered for it.
Tolkien to was quite descriptive in the way the denizens of Middle Earth looked.
Bugger you lot Im going to paint another one to show you what can be done.
And I promise it will be a damn site better than my older LOTR minis.
Now to find one without a mould line on the face.I could swear Gandalf was having a stroke.Not that sort.
Actually Ive still got a load of these if anyones interested.The plastics make great test pieces.
And I promise it will be a damn site better than my older LOTR minis.
Now to find one without a mould line on the face.I could swear Gandalf was having a stroke.Not that sort.
Actually Ive still got a load of these if anyones interested.The plastics make great test pieces.
this is my latest one.............well i\'ve only painted two lotr minis.........ever!, as everyone kinda ignored it in the discuss submissions part of the forums. this is an experiment for a golden demon entry, never entered before.
http://www.coolminiornot.com/67531
to be honest i can\'t wait untill games workshop opens up the proposed casting plant in the US, i imagine the quality of the castings should go up again as i believe that good ol blighty supplies the world at the moment. tips on finding a good cast.........get one of the unpopular minis (i.e ones with little gaming worth) not so many are made and they seem to have kept the detail level.
http://www.coolminiornot.com/67531
to be honest i can\'t wait untill games workshop opens up the proposed casting plant in the US, i imagine the quality of the castings should go up again as i believe that good ol blighty supplies the world at the moment. tips on finding a good cast.........get one of the unpopular minis (i.e ones with little gaming worth) not so many are made and they seem to have kept the detail level.
Braveheart712
New member
This quote speaks volumes...
While I strongly disagree, I believe that many people here harbor this same feeling and purposely vote lower whenever thet see a GW LOTR posting. I have paited several of these pieces and I have found that they are very difficult since the scaling is smaller than most figures. I admit I feel \"locked into\" the color schemes of the movie, which is OK for me, since I truly enjoyed the movie and would like to capture that look and feel when I paint.
While I strongly disagree, I believe that many people here harbor this same feeling and purposely vote lower whenever thet see a GW LOTR posting. I have paited several of these pieces and I have found that they are very difficult since the scaling is smaller than most figures. I admit I feel \"locked into\" the color schemes of the movie, which is OK for me, since I truly enjoyed the movie and would like to capture that look and feel when I paint.
W
Warworks
Guest
When I vote, I think that a 9 or 10 requires more than just skill with a brush, but also a bit of an artistic \'spark\' to give it life. This often means that the artist has re-interpreted the model in a new way, either by paint or pose or background.
I think it\'s harder to do this with a LOTR mini. It *is* possible, and I have seen it done , but going that extra step with a cast that is so ubiquitous becomes harder and harder each time its achieved.
@medved - that paintjob just rocks, nuff said
I think it\'s harder to do this with a LOTR mini. It *is* possible, and I have seen it done , but going that extra step with a cast that is so ubiquitous becomes harder and harder each time its achieved.
@medved - that paintjob just rocks, nuff said
