Wolfy confusion!

K

kittykat23uk

New member
Hi all,

well, my updated pics have been on the system for some time now, so I have a question about the scores.

This is a link to the old pic of Syriak who is currently sitting at an 8.1 (one of the highest scores I\'ve had!) :

http://www.coolminiornot.com/?id=20241

This is the new pic of the same painted model:

http://www.coolminiornot.com/?id=27376

I think Pic 2 is better than pic 1 but pic 2 is only at 7.5 so whats gone wrong? ??????

Does it show up some flaws that the old pic doesn\'t? Is it the back shot thats letting him down? Please help!!

Thanks

Kat
 
U

U4-Welcome

Guest
For me, it\'s the background. The previous one went really well with the pic. Also, the newer pics are less contrasted than the first.
Actually, it brings up the question of backgrounds : how much do they contribute to the general aspect of the pic ?
 
K

kittykat23uk

New member
Hmm.. I felt that the bright blue was too overpowering as compared to the newer one. So just out of interest, what did you score them as? ???

Thanks,

Kat
 
C

calabdark

New member
i think the first background adds a sense of the dramatic with the wolfen holding the crescent thing up to the sun and the second doesent have this, imo it is down to the background, which does kinda make you think about the overall presentation of the mini, and what a difference that can make
 
F

finn17

New member
It\'s possibly the number of votes

You are right, the second photo is definitely better than the first. I think the reason you have a difference is simply that 170 people have voted on the first and only 63 on the second. That\'s 2.7 more votes. It would only really be fair to compare the scores if they had the same number of votes.

Also, I detect that some folk are becoming \'Rackhamed out\'. Figures that drew \'Ooohs and Ahhhs\' six months ago are more familiar now and may well score slightly less.

I\'d bet on the first explanation though:bouncy:
 
U

U4-Welcome

Guest
Message original : kittykat23uk
So just out of interest, what did you score them as? ???
Click to expand...
I gave 8 and 8... erm, does that defeat my point ? :D Actually, It was more like 8 and 7.5, but hey, my weekend starts tomorrow so I\'m in a good mood.
Still, *technically*, the second photo is better. I just feel it\'s less artistic (for lack of a better word).
 
S

supervike

Super Moderator
I didn\'t help your cause....

I had voted on the first quite a while ago....I gave it a nine. I gave the second one an eight.

I agree with the sentiments stated above. The 2nd is a much better photo of the mini itself, I don\'t know why I voted that way....
:(
 
O

Ovus The Peon

New member
Simple answer....

The first photo is actually the better of the two.

Why? Well, the lighting sheen on the background really causes that mutated brazil nut he\'s hold to stand out. It makes the pose more dramatic because it looks like he\'s actually presenting it to the lighting effect on the background. Very cool IMHO.

Further, the lighting in the first pic accentuates the top/skull on his head. The lighting on the second pic accentuates the mouth/snout/face...which isn\'t sculpted as good. This is due to the shadow that the mutated brazil nut is casting in the 2nd photo.

Finally, the lighting in the first pic really sets of the fig\'s midriff. Intercostals and abdominals really stand out because the shading is amplified by lighting shadows. Compare the two midriffs...in the 2nd photo, it looks good but more \'flat\'.

So the corallary is: the first pic is, in fact, the better of the two.

Don\'t fight the market! ;)
 
K

kittykat23uk

New member
Oh ok. Hmm, Terry is using one of my moon puppies (Syriak again I think) in his clippings at some point. I wonder what that one will get. :rolleyes: Maybe I\'ll experiment with different backgrounds. For the most part these new pics have done a lot better than the old ones, this was one exception.

Thanks,

Kat
 
D

dauber22

New member
Actually, I voted the first one an 8 and the second one an 8.5, so any answer I give is just specualtion I guess.

I\'d say it\'s probably a combination of what\'s already been said. FInn\'s point about the number of votes is probably a strong factor. I also think the first photo was way too contrasty. While some people like that, I think it detracts from the mini. I just think it looks better in the second photo.

Finn\'s point about people getting \"rackham-ed out\" is also valid. The first few times you see a new figure, you definately get more of a \"wow\" factor just based on the new sculpt. After you\'ve seen several versions, though. Some of that is lost. It doesn\'t detract from the value of the paint job really, but it is an underlying psychological factor.

PS - if I haven\'t said this before, you do the BEST snow bases I\'ve seen. I just love \'em.:wow:
 
F

finn17

New member
Kat, re-open this thread when it hits 170 votes

Technically the first photo doesn\'t hold a candle to the second one. The edge of the card base is clearly visible and distracting. It looks like he has been speared by that black line that transfixes him and the definition is poorer. However, the lighting effect in the first one does have a certain graphic quality. I\'d still bet they equal out eventually. The second one has already gone up to 7.6 whilst we have been having this conversation. So there is only half a point in it and well over a hundred votes difference. On that evidence I don\'t really think you can make a call one way or the other.
 
Arjay

Arjay

Member
I would certainly rate the 2nd picture more highly (heading toward 9). The 1st pic looks dramatic because of the background and the lighting but individual details are harder to see

I think the 2nd pic is scoring lower in part because the head is difficult to pick out, seeing it without the snout in profile makes it look like a mess of detail. Turning the miniature more to the left could help. I generally take more notice of the face than any other part of the miniature when voting, could be that it\'s bringing down the score here somewhat.

That said, I do like the miniature a lot, it\'s certainly a unique spin on how wolfen should look.
 
T

the bearded snot

New member
Well, my first post CMON forums. While technically better than the first pic, the second one looks much less impressive. I even think that the second picture is slightly under-exposed. It\'s all about the way people generally perceive pictures. A bright one (your first try) is generally prefered. I would say have a try with a +1/3 overexposure and another background. Eg a dark blue A3+ sheet that you put against a wall so you have a curved background and avoid the black line we can see on photos.

Oh yes I have to apologize for my french flavored english...
 
F

finn17

New member
Welcome to the forums Mr Snot!

And you are quite right. I have just had the opportunity to study these piccies on a proper monitor, rather than on my lap top and I would say you are spot on.

I will see if I can do something with them for you kat. PM your email:flip:
 
M

Mengu

New member
I\'ve given them an 8 and an 8. Guess the picture isn\'t that big a difference to me so long as it\'s not blurry, pitch black, or too tiny. As to why they\'re different, that\'s just what I call the plus-minus one variance of CMoN. Scores for the exact same picture can vary up to around 1 point, especially in the 7-8 range, depending on who posted it, what the comments say, if it was an auction, temparature that day, etc. This variance is perfectly normal, since voting for miniatures is not an exact science.
 
S

supervike

Super Moderator
yup yup yup

Originally posted by dauber22

PS - if I haven\'t said this before, you do the BEST snow bases I\'ve seen. I just love \'em.:wow:
Click to expand...

I HAVE said this before, but I still wholeheartedly agree!!:bouncy::bouncy:
 
T

the bearded snot

New member
Ahem, I have forgotten a little thing in my post. Photographying a mini on a dark background generally induces overexposure by itself. It\'s always a good idea to \"bracket\" when you make pictures. Bracketing is taking the same picture with different setups.
I have to say that I am a professionnal photographer which explains my interest in mini pictures. If you are interested in I have made a DIY article on this subject which appears on the last issue of the french magazine Ravage. It\'s also available for free on several websites, BUT, sorry again, in french...
 
U

U4-Welcome

Guest
!!
You\'re the guy who wrote the article ? Well damn, congrats, it\'s just about the only thing I read with undivided attention in the issue (I especially liked the part about how to center the mini, angles, and force points, or whatever they\'re caled in english).
Ah, meeting celebrities at last... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back To Top
Top