Historically correct.

[Uruk-Hai]

Hmm, horned viking is not historically correct but Ill bet a horny viking is?

To be serious, it makes me wonder if such a thing as a historically correct figure exist?

Should other things than dress and equipment be weihgted in? I mean many of us are aware of haristyle but what about average height and weight or perhaps even portraying real persons in facial likeness?

During my short interest in history and miniatures Ive seen knowledge and historians change more than once, which makes it impossible to be 100% correct.

And remember that also an educated guess is wrong at least 10% of the cases.

Another question that goes with the subject is whether they should look at historically correctness in shows and who is qualified to judge this.

Having experience in allowing pure historians judge models I cant say Im in favour.

Also important is to open up what is considered historical miniatures when it comes to the community like for example Planet Figure? I think all the different aspects should be able to exist in harmony with each other although every one of us should be allowed to have his own view.

Cheers

 

[quang]

Originally posted by Uruk-Hai@Sep 11 2006, 05:49 AM
During my short interest in history and miniatures Ive seen knowledge and historians change more than once, which makes it impossible to be 100% correct.

You missed the point.

The issue is not to make 100% historically accurate figures. The issue is to TRY.

I've spent my 2 cents worth. Back to the bench.

Q.

 

[Frank-Holger]

What IS historically correct?? The choice of colour depends on so many things that I may say, it is never possible to be absolutely historically correct! Watch a hundred pics of a plane, and it will look different on each of them So it is mostly with figures. We have no colour pics of, let´s say Napoleonic Soldiers, Wild West Figures or Samurais or what else... Even in the fantasy field so many collectors have trouble finding the "right" colours and discuss with other collectors a lot...

I think, to paint a figure "historically" correct can only mean to be as lifelike as possible, have the right ammount of sun tan on the face (or make it pale), the best possible weathering, good made Equipment and an eye-catching base. This is, what I think, is the most important (for me): To be as lifelike as I can make it!

Frank

 

[Sambaman]

Well, I just can't keep my big mouth shut! :lol:
I have to say this, and will likely get harrased for it, but here goes. I paint miniatures because it's art. I paint, I mix colors, I design, layout and reshape if necessary. I may also learn a bit of history as I go along through research and reading which honestly amounts to a bonus for me. I have to be honest, I depend on the sculptor/manufacturer to have provided the best historical acuracy they can. Based on that, if the figure interests me enough in either period, or form I'll buy it. I am much more influenced buy a good sculpt than a particular period, or accuracy. Now, with that said, I definitely don't want to see a WWII GI toting an M16, or a viking driving a tank as Janne said. What I do want is interesting, well proportioned figures with great poses and expressions.

What I think we sometimes forget in this hobby is who we are painting for. I paint for myself, not buyers, not contests, not this site (the exception would of course be if someone was asking for something specific, but beyond my basic point). If I see a figure that looks like a challenge, or presents a color sceme or situation that piques my interest, that is what motivates me. A great facial expression, a dynamic pose, that excites me! If I decide to paint plaid on my viking , I'm gonna do it. If I want to make Dante's cloak dark purple and green (Luca you'll see him soon enough!), I'm gonna paint it that way! I'm not condoning poka-dots on a napy, or colors that are so garish as to not be acceptable on any figure. I'm just in this for a creative and fun outlet, and if 100% historical accuracy was the most important influence in this hobby, - look around, no one would ever paint a single figure!

Jay H.
OKC

 

[AJLaFleche]

If I'm painting a Uniion soldier of the American Civil War, I try to get as close as possible to the colors of the Union uniform. For a Confederate, I have a lot more leeway as their "uniforms" became very non-uniform pretty quickly. If I'm doing a cowboy, I'll play with the palette a lot more, trying to harmonize colors for a pleasing image. When buying a figure, if it's from a specific historical period, I want the equipment right. I don't want a pot bellied Confederate soldier. When doing Indians, I will do some research to determine waht colors would have been likely for any beadwork and for any bodypainting, hair style, roaches, feathers and "jewelry." For example, while I quickly bought the Senca and Compagnie frnache from La Meridiana, I can't make myself get their fellow in the half canoe scene since his clothing looks all wrong for the period.

 

[DaveCox]

It depends on the figure. Mostly I will try to be accurate in my painting, and look for the same in the casting; however sometimes a not-so-accurate figure just jumps out at you and crys "paint me"!.

 

[garyjd]

A subject after my own heart. While it is impossible to do most subjects that are 100% accurate it, I believe it's possible with some, providing one has all the documentation. What is a turnoff for me is when someone is just sloppy in their homework and having a "it's good enough" attitude. There are also some that feel that they are creating "art" and accuracy is secondary. Sorry folks, to me that's nothing more than a poor excuse for either sloppy research or no research at all. A piece can be both artistic and accurate. Though figure painting and sculpting is a hobby for most that is done for personal enjoyment, it's great to see that many folks feel accuracy is important.~Gary

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I might not be getting the point.

Sometimes in post like this, some posters claim that either its correct or its not. Others that you at least should try to get it correct.
In this case I must give the first view right. How important the incorrectness can only the hobbyist himself decide upon what he wants from the hobby.

To me it doesnt matter if you do it artistically, historically etc as long you are aware of that it what youre doing.

Also I dont think a good sculpted figure should not be bannished for not being 100% historically correct whether it comes to sculpting or painting. Neither should the people sculpting and/or painting be.

Its also concerns me if that should be the case that only 100% serious historically should be the norm in a community like Planet Figure. Elitism might scare some people away, I think theres room for every side.

Couldnt a "Tweak-list" be made for figures, that point out inaccuries and how to fix them?

Cheers

 

[Blind Pew]

It's a great question this, and one which I don't reckon will ever truely go away.

If you ask me, it's all about the figure. You can get all the details correct etc etc. But of the figure doesn't do it, then all that effort to make the piece 'correct' is wasted. I think you can get bogged down in 'button counting' as well.

As long as what you're looking at could have happened, then for most painters, that's enough. I mean a Napoleonic carrying an M16 is ridiculous, but having said that, I've reference books myself that conflict each other......

 

[Dan Morton]

This is an old, old argument not centered so much around figure making or model making as whether art needs to be accurate to be beautiful, whether a piece must necessarily be representative of some "real" face or form. Or whether it may be something straight from the imagination, the abstract. There, quite obviously, are no absolutely "right" or "wrong" answers. It is within the judgement and decision-making powers of the artist to determine the course they will take and the form and substance of their works.

Picasso or Frederick Jackson Turner? Remington or Cezanne? Klee or Van Gogh? Who can say?

As for me, if one of the young men I try so hard to make little models of could somehow come forward in time and see what I'm doing - I'd like them to be able to recognize and enjoy looking at what I've made.

What a delight that would be.

All the best,
Dan

 

[Patrick Kirk]

I think we need keep the perspective that a field soldier isn't perfect; so therefor, neither is his uniform or this "artform". The elements have a huge vote in the shade, tone and texture of uniformology, let alone the affect it has on fleshtones...we can take this to the extreme that instead of looking at the figure from an artistic perspective we scrutinze it beyond common sense.

I guess what I am really getting at is that nothing in life is perfect, nor 100% accurate, so why must we place a criterion on our artform that isn't in it's truest form 100% in and of itself?

 

[Patrick Kirk]

Originally posted by thegoodsgt@Sep 10 2006, 02:18 PM
I don't allow an obsession with 100 percent accuracy to keep me from painting a good looking figure.

I agree with you, Steven!

 

[Langenberg]

Those who have worn a uniform are aware that there is finite uniformity. Surely the more modern the subject the more available direct (pictoral) evidence is readily available. In the absence of these typs of reference there is only interpretation. Just exactly who in this hobby is expert enouph to remove any shadow of doubt about subtle deviations in dress 200-2000 years ago? Whoever they are I'm sure they would be welcomed as the new Oracle of Delphi at the Smithsonian or similar institution.

 

[garyjd]

There is definitely nothing left of this dead horse to beat.~Gary

PS, To those of you that are horse lovers, please accept my apolgy in advance.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

May I have a reference that flogging of dead horses actually occured, Gary? :lol:

Cheers

 

[garyjd]

Originally posted by Uruk-Hai@Sep 14 2006, 01:30 AM
May I have a reference that flogging of dead horses actually occured, Gary? :lol:

Cheers

Janne, There is very little in the way of documentation in regards to the flogging of deceased horse flesh. Unfortunately I would not be able describe the process with 100% accuracy. There goes my chance at being worshipped as the Oracle of Delphi at the Smithsonian. ~Gary

 

[Uruk-Hai]

You can always rest assured that we here at the Planet worship you for your great SBS´s and the help you so willingly give toother Figureteers. And thats not so bad.

Cheers

 

[Patrick Kirk]

I think we will continue to "beat this dead horse" as long as we have donkey's out there who look with distain the work of others because of a perceived or actual inaccuracy as a lesser form of our artwork…It's really as simple as that.

 

[Patrick Kirk]

Originally posted by garyjd@Sep 14 2006, 03:21 AM
Janne, There is very little in the way of documentation in regards to the flogging of deceased horse flesh. Unfortunately I would not be able describe the process with 100% accuracy. There goes my chance at being worshipped as the Oracle of Delphi at the Smithsonian. ~Gary

I guess you're just like all the rest of us...an ordinary kinda guy...

 

[garyjd]

Originally posted by Patrick Kirk@Sep 14 2006, 04:59 AM
I guess you're just like all the rest of us...an ordinary kinda guy...

Patrick, Yeah I am. Thanks.~Gary