New Release - Russian Grenadier Battle of Borodino- Full Figure 230mm

[malc]

Still a lovely piece regardless: )

 

[svt]

I don’t want to be drawn into any argument about the correct equipment for a Pavlovsky Grenadier but, unless the Russian Army was equipped throughout with the latest specified kit (and I know the Pavlovsky Grenadiers were an elite unit), isn’t it possible that some were still using items which had been superseded? I know that the French – and probably many other nations in the Grande Armée – were outfitted in a whole range of standard and non-standard uniform oddments and looked quite rag-tag. Incidentally, the mitre could do with a musket ball hole or two; in recognition of their bravery, the Pavlovsky Grenadiers were encouraged to sport this outmoded piece of headwear with any battle damage to prove their undoubted courage.

Jeff

Not certainly in that way. It is difficult for me to explain all the nuances, what and how it was in each particular case, but here we should understand that the main changes in the uniform and equipment of the Russian army, before the war of 1812, took place in 1807-1809 years, and that the equipment had been established by orders term of use and replaced as required. Yes, there were exceptions, but it is impossible that by 1812 among the field infantry some regiments would use knapsacks of 1802, and even with straps from knapsacks of 1808. In any case, on the sculpture we see a knapsacks completely different from that of 1808, and very little resembling the specimen of 1802, which was unacceptable in 1812. This is for only one piece of equipment.

Regarding the mitres of the Pavlovsky Grenadier Regiment, it was as regimental award. Some mitres did have bullet marks, but not all. The mitres eventually became useless, so new ones were made, in which holes were specially made to imitate bullet holes. Also, the names of the soldiers were minted on the brass plates from the bottom, they also remained in the remake of the mitre and if the mitre was transferred to another soldier. Without names, the caps of the newly arrived soldiers, who received new caps, were not inherited from heroes who had previously served in the regiment.

The shape of the mitre is of course different on the sculpture than it should be, and the tassel on it is not in the form of a pompom, but a tassel.

 

[malc]

I am totally amazed that this has turned it to a full blown descusion..I am sure it would have been more suited to another part of PF.

For all its mistakes which I would not have a clue about it looks to be a great painter's figure.

 

[Jimbo]

Here we go again!.....It never ceases to amaze me how here on PF a person's post, in this case Bonaparte's miniatures, can get so easily hijacked!
If you don't like a new model that's on the market then don't buy it...why rip it apart here on PF...If you do like a new model that's on offer then buy it, paint it and enjoy it for what it's worth, if there's some piece of kit on the figure you don't like or you believe to be historically incorrect then remove it and make your own to fit..... or just don't buy the model if the alterations are too much for you to do.
I have seen plenty of mistakes on other busts/figures from"very well known" model producers , in particular WW1 figures which is my main period of interest ..but so what...if I like the kit enough I will still buy it and then I just re-model the bit I think is wrong, I would never come onto this forum and run down, nit pick and assassinate new figures/busts before they have had chance to get onto their feet like these two little guys are trying to do from Bonapartes!
I'm getting drawn in here so I'm now walking away to let the rivet counter's do their counting!

 

[svt]

Here we go again!.....It never ceases to amaze me how here on PF a person's post, in this case Bonaparte's miniatures, can get so easily hijacked!
If you don't like a new model that's on the market then don't buy it...why rip it apart here on PF...If you do like a new model that's on offer then buy it, paint it and enjoy it for what it's worth, if there's some piece of kit on the figure you don't like or you believe to be historically incorrect then remove it and make your own to fit..... or just don't buy the model if the alterations are too much for you to do.
I have seen plenty of mistakes on other busts/figures from"very well known" model producers , in particular WW1 figures which is my main period of interest ..but so what...if I like the kit enough I will still buy it and then I just re-model the bit I think is wrong, I would never come onto this forum and run down, nit pick and assassinate new figures/busts before they have had chance to get onto their feet like these two little guys from Bonapartes!
I'm getting drawn in here so I'm now walking away to let the rivet counter's do their counting!

If this is a historical miniature, then it should correspond to its name, but not in such a way that the sculptor imagined what the Russians look like on the Borodino field, and, without even bothering to search for at least a minimum of information about subj, blinded what he had invented, the manufacturer accepted it, released circulation, people bought, many believing that this is the Russian in 1812. This is how a false story is born, a misconception about other people, stereotypes, etc.

Here is an example of the historical period that interests you.

In this picture is a historical miniature, and you know who it is? This is a Scottish infantryman to the First World War, and try to just tell me that it is not so - see, he has a kilt, it means it is a Scottish infantryman. You do not like? Well, then you can not buy it, but you can buy and remake with rasp this miniature to make it a Scottish infantryman, who will be historically reliable in your understanding.

Well, or as an option, the sculptor made a bust of the character, very similar to Hitler, and this bust was released into circulation under the name of Jeanne d'Arc. How do you like that? Who does not like, I can not buy, who believes that you can buy and modify for remake with rasp, welcome. )))

PS: But the funny thing is that to create a more or less competent historical miniatures on this topic, it was enough to enter a simple request in Google "uniform of pavlovsky regiment in 1812", and select the picture tab - the very first picture will be for the years 1813-1816, when the regiment already received guard status, but the second picture is just for the desired period. The process takes a few seconds, and there would not be such a mass of errors in the end. Direct link on request - https://www.google.com/search?q=uniform+of+pavlovsky+regiment+in+1812&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjsyb_wh-TfAhWEk4sKHVbQByAQ_AUIDigB&biw=1680&bih=917#imgrc=4G7uta34qlYIdM: And here is this very picture.

I wish you all good, and more quality, historically accurate miniatures.

 

[badger]

lets just call him ivan and leave it at that/badger

 

[Jimbo]

LOL!

 

[malc]

buy it, paint it, show it, move on.

 

[Martin64]

Surely a dramatic sculpt by Bonaparte Miniatures - interesting and somewhat contradicting historical background information provided by SVT - the usual positive reactions about a new release on a forum about historical miniatures by regular commenters - and one person that criticizes and backs his critique with valid information - and so the usual comments about nitpickers and personal attacks finally blaming this guy as the culprit for tearing the kit apart by defending his opinion against the said attacks that never needed any backup...
For a while this has n`t happened but maybe because many "nitpickers" simply gave up and keep their mouth shut. So far there is nothing in the rules of this forum that tells what qualifications need to be met by a member so that someone can dare to criticize a new release. Maybe we leave it at that.
I would appreciate the information provided by SVT when buying this miniature and then consider necessary changes according to the the historical background because I am not so much after fantasy pieces... and surely as a customer I appreciate if proper research on a subject by the sculptor saves me from doing a major conversion. So for me its research it, buy it, maybe convert it, paint it, and appreciate helpful information. - Now moving on.
Cheers, Martin

 

[malc]

But what do you think of the figure.

 

[Tonton]

I hope my comments were seen as positive and conciliatory. That’s how they were intended, anyway.

Jeff

 

[Babelfish]

I don't think anyone really has a problem with constructive criticism of a sculpt - as in pointing out the positives as well as the negatives (real or perceived). What gets people's backs up is when guys come on here with a "this figure's so **** that I don't even know where to start" attitude and then proceed to tear into it (as here).

And as for the Hitler / Joan of Arc comparison, that's just daft. There's a world of difference between that and pointing out design differences between an 1802 knapsack and one from 1808 (or whenever). And by the way, that's not a kilt either .

- Steve

 

[svt]

I don't think anyone really has a problem with constructive criticism of a sculpt - as in pointing out the positives as well as the negatives (real or perceived). What gets people's backs up is when guys come on here with a "this figure's so **** that I don't even know where to start" attitude and then proceed to tear into it (as here).

If you disassemble the sculptural part, namely the anatomy of the figures, then there are also some minor flaws that, in principle, everyone, if they wish, will see for himself, because this does not require special knowledge - because each of us encounters other people every day , and everyone can look at themselves in the mirror or look at their hands / legs. Among the wrinkles of clothes, not everything is perfect either, but a certain observation and knowledge of how and where wrinkles are formed, how a certain volume of clothes is formed is required. But I will refrain from commenting on this issue - here, for the most part, it is a matter of taste for everyone.

And as for the Hitler / Joan of Arc comparison, that's just daft. There's a world of difference between that and pointing out design differences between an 1802 knapsack and one from 1808 (or whenever). And by the way, that's not a kilt either.

And this is not the Russian grenadier at the Battle of Borodino. The difference between what should be and what is provided here is as great as Hitler is not Jeanne, and the caftan is not a kilt.

 

[Ratty]

Thanks for all the positive comments and support for Bonaparte's. As for certain people they may want to look at their own sculptures, which I’m sure are 100% factually correct just boring ! And 58 plus comments that are all pretty much just criticism! Try smiling once in a while!

 

[NeilW]

I think this is all getting a bit silly.

Svt clearly knows his stuff and based on my quick Googling seems right about (at least) the incorrect knapsack and suspension system, the shape of the mitre and, as others have agreed, the size of the flag. As Jeff suggests, it's unlikely but not totally impossible to be a 1812 Grenadier (at Borodino or anywhere else) but he's probably not typical. I've given a few links below.

HOWEVER, as others have stated, it is an impressive and dynamic sculpt (though there are some things I'm not that keen on) and no doubt will paint up superbly (anyone done one yet?).

I wonder what the reaction would have been if this were a 1815 Waterloo line infantryman similarly mis-attired or with the wrong number of bands/buttons on his coat and armed with a Baker rifle and sword bayonet?

Perhaps the solution is, as with PMS to consider historical accuracy, pose, sculpting and mould quality separately, eg: http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=194 where the knapsack issue is also raised)



Refs for those as want 'em:
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/525021269036516506/
https://www.alamy.com/a-cap-for-a-g...onal-rights-clearances-na-image281206812.html
https://www.cowanauctions.com/lot/i...vlovski-life-guard-grenadier-mitre-cap-146195
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/525021269034072089/
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/525021269034072092/
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/175992297916307248/

 

[Martin64]

But what do you think of the figure.

As I said - a dramatic sculpt. For me the pose resembles more a statue or an exaggerated contemporary painting than anything I would expect from a real action pose of soldiers in battle. That said I respect the job the two sculptor`s (Richard Bailey for the bust - Jim Evans for the full body) have done. I personally prefer more real life poses and tend to avoid major corrections/conversions at this size as long as the piece is not very close to my heart. But that`s just me.

But what do you think about the additional information provided by SVT and Neil? SVT acted upon an initial request by one of the mods btw. Will it be helpful for bringing the kit to another level? Should the designers have put a bit more effort into research before producing this kit? Should a "new-release"-posting on this forum just exist for the reason of marketing and therefore the subject not be discussed or should critique be welcomed as long as it is based on facts and as long as these are provided?
Cheers, Martin

 

[Nap]

Hi Guys

For me it's a dramatic and interesting sculpt ...bags to do on it

It's nice to get uniform information from all but this is a release and the purpose of PF is to promote the hobby both sculpting and painting

....so if you buy this or others use your knowledge or shared information and skill to produce a figure you are happy with

All are entitled to comment but let's not go silly , personally I don't think that after a certain date older items were never used

It's nice to have Ratty at Bonapartes share his releases and I hope they will continue to do so ....

Particularly unusual subjects

Happy benchtime

Nap

 

[svt]

As for certain people they may want to look at their own sculptures, which I’m sure are 100% factually correct just boring ! And 58 plus comments that are all pretty much just criticism! Try smiling once in a while!

I have previously written in this topic that the viewer in the cinema does not have to be a director to make critical remarks about the film that he watched, the listener does not have to be a composer in order to have the right to criticize a musical work, the user of a water tap does not have to be a plumber to say that this water tap is leaking.
I try to make my sculptures as authentic as possible, as far as my knowledge, hands and eyesight allow.
You should not worry about the number of comments in this topic - this is your product, and the hotter the topic, the more it attracts attention, therefore more people will see it, will be interested, and who will want to buy a kit, will buy it, despite the fact that there are historical misunderstandings.
I am very pleased that the subject of the Russian army is interesting abroad, which is why I published my comments on some (not all) errors here - it was not just criticism, but valid criticism, designed to show how it really should have been, so that in the future, if you return again to the subject of the Russian army, everything will be much better.

SVT acted upon an initial request by one of the mods btw. Will it be helpful for bringing the kit to another level? Should the designers have put a bit more effort into research before producing this kit?

It is unlikely that this set will change, I understand that the figures have already been molded and released. For now, I will refrain from further comment on errors here. But I hope that the information will be useful to those who purchase this kit and wish to correct something a little.

 

[Nap]

Hi Guys

As svt said :

" I hope that the information will be useful to those who purchase this kit and wish to correct something a little."

That's what's good about PF .....information and lots of interesting releases

Happy painting

Nap

 

[malc]

I'll let you know when I get one : )