This isn't really that tricky, once you grasp that everything basically follows the same principle; just work to a given scale, plug in the size of the thing you're representing and do some simple division - that's the size it needs to be.
All you need is a basic calculator, no need for anything more sophisticated than the standard one built into Windows for example. Enter the dimensions and you're good to go.
A bowstave is 31" long and you're working in 1/24 scale? Just divide 31" by 24.
Say you're doing a two-figure vignette and one you decide represents someone 5'2" tall and the other is 5'6", simply dividing 62" and 66" by the scale number and there's the size the models should be.
The problem I think you're running into is sculpting by the seat of the pants and then wanting to figure out what scale you just worked to. In this case you have to decide what size the thing you just made should be IRL and that gives you the scale - say a sculpted figure is 6.2" tall heel to crown and you think they look like they're five-four, 64 divided by 6.2 = 10.3 so you just worked at around 1/10 scale.
Not really. Think of it this way: imagine you're looking at a person's eye from across the room, all the detail is of course present in that eye it's only that you can't see it. You can paint in something like that manner.
If you can pick out all the details in an eye from 'scale distance' that's a different matter, the contrast is probably too high or the details are larger than they should be.
FWIW the pupil is often not painted, especially at 1/32 and smaller, as you can see in photos of completed models here on pF.
Einion
Thanks for the input and the numbers info, but I don't agree at all with the other responses.
I'm still not going to notice eye color and optic detail if a person is somewhere down the road walking towards me and is about 2 1/4 " high in my field of vision, even if I obviously know the person has eye color. This sounds like "if a tree falls in the forest" thing a bit. But of course--- I'll paint it.
It's all a matter of opinion anyway, and it's all abstract , like Bonehead wrote.
When I started painting miniatures, I loved Lasset figures, because they had a huge range of ancients. Even though they all kind of had an "Easter Island" monolith look to them. The Soldier Shop Express for me every Saturday to NYC to buy them.
When John Tassel did a shirtless warrior, like a Gaul, etc., he sculpted them with closed pectoral muscles.
Now, back then, I don't think it's possible to get that closed pec look without modern training equipment...not that closed, anyway.
But they looked great I thought.
To me, there's absolutely nothing wrong with certain "artisic license"; it's what artists do all the time anyway...and it goes on with figures, just as well.
