120mm Samurai - Mitches Military Models

[Oda]

Rewrote this post (look below)

 

[Babelfish]

As usual ..... "if ya likes it, ya buyz it and ya paints it".

If you're not happy with issues (real or perceived) about clothing, equipment or whatever .... ya givez it a swerve.

The hobby is a broad church. Room for all.

- Steve

 

[Oda]

Dave mate,couldn't have said it better myself (the thought has crossed my mind but after seeing that the general trend is more towards "it looks great so what if it's inaccurate" I absconded.So happy though that you took the time needed to post one of your highly informative comments).If someone likes the figure,is inspired by it and ends up having enormous fun with it then it's fine.It's just that I happen to be one of those modellers who find historical accuracy to be one of the most rewarding,recreational and creative aspects of our hobby.A very experienced member drew my attention to some anatomical faults of the figure as well although commenting on them now would be like "shaking the hornets' nest" (as you cleverly put it in a previous thread) even more vigorously and, honestly, I don't have the stomach for it.I am a mediocre painter end even worse sculptor and certainly no match for the extremely talented and prolific Carl Reid but I have always found well intentioned critique ( even if a little harsh) to be highly helpful in bettering myself as a modeller.I see absolutely no point in becoming hostile,distasteful or outright insulting towards anyone especially over something that's meant to be fun and Iam kind of disappointed when I see it happening.I would love to continue this conversation with you in private though for I always coming out having learned something more.

Oda.
PS:sorry for the repetition I am experiencing hardware trouble.

 

[Oda]

Right again Steve,sorry for loosing it for a moment.We can all go away smiling.

Oda.

 

[Gellso]

Aside from all the argie bargie and getting back to the actual figure..................

I quite like it.

Gells

 

[Martin64]

"The critical comment
or
there and back again" by John Bilbo Doe...
If I like a figure - I buy it. If I like a comment - praising or critical - I think about the information contained or new aspects highlighted and otherwise I give it a swerve. PF is a broad forum and should have room for all kind of hobby related feedback.
Won`t comment on historical issues with this figure because others obviously know better and won`t say anything about anatomy because there are good pictures taken showing the figure from different angles. They speak for themselves.
Without doubt a nice sculpt but more attention to some issues raised would have made it even nicer IMHO.
No offence meant - if it still offends give it a swerve.
Cheers, Martin

 

[kagemusha]

I have only one rule....if I like it....I will paint it
As for 'informed' observations....I for one welcome them....and learn from them....
We are a mixed bunch on PF....but...in the end...it all comes down to personal taste....
We are lucky to have so many talented people...to bounce ideas off.....to learn from....and to share with
One thing stands out...all of us are sensitive to comment/criticism in one form or another.....that's just the way we are

 

[Helm]

F*****g hell Its like watching Dave ja vu....

BYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Told ya you should do a nice medieval figure no dramas there mi mon
Steve

 

[Mark S]

It is a medieval figure, Steve...

 

[Alex]

I feel the need to voice my opinion.
I am not a rivet counter by any means and have and will always paint a figure in any color / pattern that I have in mind... Be it colorful or drab looking. It depends on my feelings at the time and me wanting to experiment something different.
However, when researching a figure in my book library, trying to understand how to paint this or that, I hate it when I can't find any suitable material, or any reference.
I agree with all the points made previously (too long of a sword, not the proper hair cut, anachronistic clothing and armour parts, etc.) but ultimately, I do not really care. As long as the figure captures my eyes and heart, it will be a winner. This one, I like it but do not love it as shown in the preview pictures. So I won't buy it but I am pretty sure a lot of people will push the button.
My artistic feelings always come first before any hitorical accuracy. Other people like David are different and have the opposite view. And that's perfectly fine !

Alex

 

[Ferris]

Wow, samurai seem to be the Tiger I panzers of armour modelling!
I never dared to build one because it is so hard to get them historically correct...

 

[Babelfish]

Wow, samurai seem to be the Tiger I panzers of armour modelling!
I never dared to build one because it is so hard to get them historically correct...

Indeed, a common cause of some serious 'handbags' over on the armour forums they are Adrian!

- Steve

 

[Forté]

Wow, samurai seem to be the Tiger I panzers of armour modelling!
I never dared to build one because it is so hard to get them historically correct...

Wish I hadn't read that. I'm seriously sweating now about the one I'll be painting soon.

 

[Huw63]

I'm basically ignorant of the samurai and Japanese history but this sculpt is what a samurai the should look like in my opinion. I like it a lot.

Cheers

Huw

P.s I do armour too and Adrian is absolutely right about Tigers due to production changes, field modifications etc. The one advantage is you can always base a model on a picture

 

[Gellso]

Here we go again.
Yes Katana did vary in length, but just because modern martial arts practitioners use an item does not mean it is accurate contemporaneously with period use.

Katana size generally still fell between 2ft and 3ft; a practical length. The sword depicted just looks too long to me, more like the length used in the Nambokucho period (1333-91) when longer swords became fashionable (It looks more like a Katana/Tanto combination than Katana Wakizashi) In this period however, the sword would be a Tachi not a Katana. The sword in the model also has the Ishizuki sword furniture at the tip which was more common on Tachi and rare on Katana; this may have caused some confusion.

Kenshin does make a valid point about the tang, but generally the Tachi scabbard had fittings attached to it (similar to the Napoleonic Sabre scabbard) so that it could be hung (blade down) on horseback.
The use of Daisho (twinned swords - literally big/little) did not arise until the Muromachi period in the early 15th century. The use of Uchigatana (swords carried blade-up) which include the Katana and Wakizashi (companion sword) were also adopted in this era.

I would be interesed to see the reference used for this configuration of gear.

Why is he wearing the Wakidate on it's own? It would be useless in a battle and would probably draw scorn from other Samurai if worn in the street or for a duel (the use of a separate back-plate on later styles of armour was nicknamed "the coward plate" as only a coward would turn his back to the enemy). Touchy lot these samurai

The suspending cordage also seems to go under the Wakidate, rather than to the attachment points which would be on the outside.

Why does he appear to have half a Kyubi-No-ita sewn to his left sleeve? The left sleeve would be reinforced, but if armour was attached, it would fitted seperately at the top of the arm to protect the shoulder and body-armour cording and it would be laced on.

The Suneate (shin guards) at the time of the armour shown (Heian period 8th-12th cent) would be of three plate, wrap-around construction and Ox-hide "shoes" would be worn rather than straw/grass sandals.

As Oda said, what we have seem to have here is a 16th century Samurai wearing anachronistic Heian armour. No I can't say it never happened, but it's highly unlikely. We are talking about a 400 year old difference in a country where humidity would probably have taken a great toll on the preservation of such items. Would Sir Francis Drake have put on Crusader armour as first choice to go to fight club? The lack of shaved forehead also suggests that the model is even later than the 16th century - more likely the Edo period (17th cent) which makes things even worse.

But of course, I forgot. So many of you out there don't care, do You?

To be perfectly frank, no I don't really care!
But many thanks for the 42 line reply about the length of a sword or katana or tango or whatever the hell it is.

Gells

 

[Gaudin]

To be perfectly frank, no I don't really care!
But many thanks for the 42 line reply about the length of a sword or katana or tango or whatever the hell it is.

Gells

But you do care when the matter concerns subjects you are passionate about. In the past I benefited greatly from your input that was probably as detailed.

 

[Gellso]

Cheers Gaudin, but that was personally for you because you asked and was not publically broadcast to everyone purely to show off my mighty omnipotence!

 

[Gaudin]

We are all different and do things differently. Otherwise North Korea is a place to be

I dont think motivation is to show off though ( or cause aggro for that matter).

 

[Gellso]

And on that note.....

 

[Martin64]

To be perfectly frank, no I don't really care!
But many thanks for the 42 line reply about the length of a sword or katana or tango or whatever the hell it is.
Gells

Obviously you take offence that somebody dared to share his information without being asked via PM and does not like this kit out of the box??
- For me Oda`s and Tadatsugu`s contributions were helpful - not just about the length of the sword which could be adapted if I wish to build that model:

As Oda said, what we have seem to have here is a 16th century Samurai wearing anachronistic Heian armour. No I can't say it never happened, but it's highly unlikely. We are talking about a 400 year old difference ....
But of course, I forgot. So many of you out there don't care, do You?

Using the example of the Tiger tank while staying in line with the critiques provided about this samurai the "feared Tiger-model" should have a Gribeauval 12pounder-cannon in it`s turret (out of the box) and when a "nitpicker" comes and tells something about historical armament of this tank your reply might be: "Where`s your proof that it never happened?" - or you might consider to replace the Gribeauval with an 88mm - or just say: "No, I don`t really care!" - and count the lines of a comment you don`t like. It`s a free world.

I like informative comments better that the plain"I quite like it" - comments because sharing information requires much more effort but both have their right to be posted I guess.
Cheers, Martin