The eyes have it ...

[Blind Pew]

... He likes to drag you into argument. .

...no he doesn't!

Yep. Never argue with an idiot. He'll always beat you with experience. The biggest shame is a thought-provoking, interesting thread's been hijacked.

 

[myouchin]

Oh dear. You just don't get it do you?!

*Defamation* and *expressing an opinion* (or scepticism) are NOT the same thing.

I have expressed my opinion in pF threads about the micro-eyes-painting thing. The clue is in phraseology such as "I don't buy it", "I suspect", "I am convinced" and "it looks". All of these are indicative of an opinion - which people are (or should be) free to express, change or indeed change back as they see fit.

Here's another example: Poster A uploads a photo of a strange, shadowy shape in an old castle and says "Look at this photo that I took of a ghost". Poster B then responds with "Wow! Great ghost photo!" while Poster C says "Nah, it can't be. I'm not buying it. I don't believe in ghosts, that must be some special effect of the camera". Poster C is expressing an opinion, but his comments aren't defamatory. And if Poster A wants to prove it's a genuine photo, then it's up to Poster A to provide evidence that it's genuine. It's not up to Poster C to prove that his own opinion is correct.

The micro-eyes thing is on the same level. Statements of opinion cannot be regarded as defamation, and you calling it such is just plain old silly.

What is potentially defamatory however is someone posting up on a public forum someone else's actual name and a part of their address, and accusing them (without providing proof) of what is essentially property rights theft.

You're welcome!

- Steve

PS: And if you want to play the "thread archaeology" game, here are your very words from the 2017 thread that you link to above (page 2, second-to-bottom post):

"Hello Steve, I welcome your candid opinion ....... I am never angry about your opinion"

Thank you for your reply. That's a very interesting opinion. I welcome your candid opinion.


First of all, I need to clarify so that there are no misunderstandings.I believe everyone has the right to express their opinion freely, and of course I respect your right to express your opinion.But your opinion that ``defamation'' and ``expression of opinion'' are not the same thing is half right and half wrong.Depending on the content, the expression of an opinion may fall under defamation.

Here is the definition of defamation. That's not my personal interpretation.

↓
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defamation


: the act of communicating false statements about a person that injure the reputation of that person :

Your opinion applies to this.
↓

I’ve said this before on here: I am convinced that some of the eye detail we see in enlarged images online and in books is digitally manipulated.

You don't name me here, but you're clearly rehashing the topic of the 2017 thread. In other words, you are criticizing me.

In 2017, I digitally adjusted the contrast of light and dark on the figure.At the time I thought it was acceptable, but now I think it's inappropriate.But I have never falsified my brush skills by digitally processing eye detail.It's a clear fraud and a scam to fool people. Of course I didn't use decals either.


That means you are telling false facts about me. This falls under defamation.No, I'm not the only one. You seem to think that you can't do micro eye painting on 54mm, 75mm, or even 90mm figures.However, I have seen several works in this community that have achieved this. Are you convinced that they are also cheating?


In this case, I am the poster A and you are the poster C.You say I should fulfill my responsibility by providing evidence, but I have already fulfilled my responsibility by posting additional photos in the 2017 thread.And you must have been satisfied with that at the time.If you're going to talk about this topic again, isn't it your turn as poster C to fulfill your responsibility?It's not fair to unilaterally demand responsibility from me. What do you think?

 

[sd0324]

Thank you for your reply. That's a very interesting opinion. I welcome your candid opinion.


First of all, I need to clarify so that there are no misunderstandings.I believe everyone has the right to express their opinion freely, and of course I respect your right to express your opinion.But your opinion that ``defamation'' and ``expression of opinion'' are not the same thing is half right and half wrong.Depending on the content, the expression of an opinion may fall under defamation.

Here is the definition of defamation. That's not my personal interpretation.

↓
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defamation


: the act of communicating false statements about a person that injure the reputation of that person :

Your opinion applies to this.
↓

I’ve said this before on here: I am convinced that some of the eye detail we see in enlarged images online and in books is digitally manipulated.

You don't name me here, but you're clearly rehashing the topic of the 2017 thread. In other words, you are criticizing me.

In 2017, I digitally adjusted the contrast of light and dark on the figure.At the time I thought it was acceptable, but now I think it's inappropriate.But I have never falsified my brush skills by digitally processing eye detail.It's a clear fraud and a scam to fool people. Of course I didn't use decals either.


That means you are telling false facts about me. This falls under defamation.No, I'm not the only one. You seem to think that you can't do micro eye painting on 54mm, 75mm, or even 90mm figures.However, I have seen several works in this community that have achieved this. Are you convinced that they are also cheating?


In this case, I am the poster A and you are the poster C.You say I should fulfill my responsibility by providing evidence, but I have already fulfilled my responsibility by posting additional photos in the 2017 thread.And you must have been satisfied with that at the time.If you're going to talk about this topic again, isn't it your turn as poster C to fulfill your responsibility?It's not fair to unilaterally demand responsibility from me. What do you think?

Jesus H Christ. Let it go. Just stop.


Steve

 

[Babelfish]

What do you think?

I think you’re making yourself look dafter with each post you make in this thread.

But if you want to keep on digging a hole for yourself and being silly, then by all means carry on!

Meantime, I’m off to paint some figures.

- Steve

 

[Ned Ricks]

Eyes are the test for my shaky hands. Very small brush and calming music in the background...

There is an acrylic glue, intended I think for fabric, called "Fusion" that makes clear eyes. This stuff is also handy for miniature figures lenses in eye glasses, telescopes, cameras.
N

 

[myouchin]

I think you’re making yourself look dafter with each post you make in this thread.

But if you want to keep on digging a hole for yourself and being silly, then by all means carry on!

Meantime, I’m off to paint some figures.

- Steve

I'm an Asian who can't speak English. It's not easy for me to have a discussion with you in English.I tried to convey my opinion to you logically, without using harsh or insulting words.But you seem to have given up on presenting logical counterarguments to foreigners. So I can't tell you anything more.
I've already seen some insulting comments. I wonder why they chose to chant, even though I, who can't speak English, calmly argue. I hope this thread does not get locked.

Thank you & Goodnight

 

[Ferris]

Myouchin, you are a great modeller and indeed have the language disadvantage, but in my opinion Steve’s remark was not aimed at you in particular and I don’t think you have reason to feel insulted. Steve only made a generic comment. And if you, like me, have seen counter-examples, that basically closes the matter. Except we haven’t convinced Steve yet that iris detail at 1:35 scale IS possible.. ;-)

I once bought a 1:35 figure painted by another Japanese painter and wow...! I don’t know how it was done, but they are there, both iris and pupil!
In the nineties there also was German painter that could paint 1:35 scale eyes and swastikas on figures (Stefan Muller-Herdemertens(?)). Would love to know their technique.

Cheers
Adrian

 

[bigtodd]

Oh man I just caught up and forgot to put the kettle on to sit back and watch and wonder which time lord is fighting which?

 

[myouchin]

Myouchin, you are a great modeller and indeed have the language disadvantage, but in my opinion Steve’s remark was not aimed at you in particular and I don’t think you have reason to feel insulted. Steve only made a generic comment. And if you, like me, have seen counter-examples, that basically closes the matter. Except we haven’t convinced Steve yet that iris detail at 1:35 scale IS possible.. ;-)

I once bought a 1:35 figure painted by another Japanese painter and wow...! I don’t know how it was done, but they are there, both iris and pupil!
In the nineties there also was German painter that could paint 1:35 scale eyes and swastikas on figures (Stefan Muller-Herdemertens(?)). Would love to know their technique.

Cheers
Adrian

I wasn't going to comment on this thread anymore since Steve, my only discussion partner, got up and went somewhere else.I'm not going to wait for him to come back any longer.But I want to say something to you, so I'll comment again.

Thank you Adrian, your words are full of reason and decency.

 

[Tommy Brown]

…He likes to drag you into argument..

...no he doesn't!

Yep. Never argue with an idiot. He'll always beat you with experience. The biggest shame is a thought-provoking, interesting thread's been hijacked.

I guess you have never dealt with myouchin before. Here is a quote from myouchin after I stopped response to his previous thread because he tried to drag me into arguments. It is ludicrous and silly. Have a nice day!

Okay, you must have some opinion, but if you won't reveal it then there is no argument between us.It may be a pointless act, as no argument can be made, but I will summarize my opinion and make it easy to understand.

 

[Babelfish]

I guess you have never dealt with myouchin before. It is ludicrous and silly.

And posts this ... after kicking off an argument about the content of a 6 year-old thread .....

"I'm an Asian who can't speak English. It's not easy for me to have a discussion with you in English."



- Steve

 

[Babelfish]

Myouchin, you are a great modeller

As said above, to be fair he definitely is.

but in my opinion Steve’s remark was not aimed at you in particular and I don’t think you have reason to feel insulted. Steve only made a generic comment.

Correct on all counts. But to dig up the corpse of a 6 year-old thread and start an argument about it in this thread (when he wasn't even involved in the discussion in a completely different third thread that apparently triggered him) strikes me as utterly bizarre, and suggests to me that I struck a nerve back then and he's been harbouring a grudge for all that time. Speculation on my part, but maybe it's an East Asian "face" thing? Although he did say back then that he "welcomed" my opinion and that he could "never be angry" at it - so who knows?!

And if you, like me, have seen counter-examples, that basically closes the matter ... Except we haven’t convinced Steve yet that iris detail at 1:35 scale IS possible..

I think I would have to actually sit down next to the painter and watch it being done. Otherwise I remain convinced that some sort of jiggery-pokery must be afoot. Either photoshopping, decals or some such.

Unfortunately I didn't save links, but I've seen claims by painters (not myouchiun as far as I recall) that they've painted blood vessels in 1/35 or 54mm eyes, and I simply do not see how that is possible with the human hand & eye combination. Imagine the literally microscopic amount of paint involved, and the equally microscopic surface area it would cover, and the infinitely fine hand movement that would take to achieve. I think it's a preposterous claim. Obviously the larger the scale, the greater the detail that can be achieved. But in those small scales - nah, not freehand.

- Steve

 

[Ferris]

As said above, to be fair he definitely is.

Unfortunately I didn't save links, but I've seen claims by painters (not myouchiun as far as I recall) that they've painted blood vessels in 1/35 or 54mm eyes, and I simply do not see how that is possible with the human hand & eye combination. Imagine the literally microscopic amount of paint involved, and the equally microscopic surface area it would cover, and the infinitely fine hand movement that would take to achieve. I think it's a preposterous claim. Obviously the larger the scale, the greater the detail that can be achieved. But in those small scales - nah, not freehand.

- Steve

With blood vessels in 1/35 I’d be sceptical as well Steve. Iris and pupil however are ‘just’ two tiny dots of paint, which in my opinion is achievable in principle. It will require clear vision, excellent brush, steady hand, good aim, and the right consistency of paint. And probably persistance as well, as first-time-right will not be achievable I expect.
I’ve seen examples of painters using jewelers microscopes. What I’d really like to know is how to prevent the tiny amount of paint at the tip of the brush not to evaporate or dry before placing the dot. My problem is that my eyes require some focus adjustment time, even when using magnification. The 5-10 seconds this takes is enough for the paint to dry.
Having seen examples (using optivisor, I have to say) I know it CAN be done, but I’m with you in wishing to witness the process!

Cheers

 

[Rob]

I have seen a lot of 28mm figures (Warhammer "Golden Demon" competition type stuff) where figures eyes have been painted with clearly visible rim and highlights in coloured iris, pupils and catchlights. Given the odd proportions of most such figures the faces are about 1/35th scale size, although on the best the details are far more pronounced.
Unsurprisingly the top painters of those are also the same top painters of 54mm and such. You will recognise a lot of names if you scan a list of Golden Demon/Slayer Sword winners. It is all about the skill and talent.

There was also an old magazine article of an interview with one of the micro painters, (The entire Last Supper painting reproduced on the head of a thumbtack etc), he used cats whiskers as his finest "brush" and painted with retarded, extreme high pigment inks.

 

[Babelfish]

.... he used cats whiskers as his finest "brush" and painted with retarded, extreme high pigment inks.

Good luck to anyone trying to "borrow" a whisker from one of our cats .

- Steve