Update to Posing a figure

[Dan Morton]

Ray,

I think Quang's solution to posing your figure is one of several possible ones, not the ONLY answer. I don't know for sure, but I doubt that he meant to imply that. Now that you point it out, I agree with you about the head sticking out some earlier. The last photos with the right leg straighter (or it looks straighter anyway) look like all the weight is on that leg and I don't see anything wrong with the pose. Is he bending at the waist more or is it just my fuzzy eyeballs? Anyways that looks right to me also, since he's leaning on the rifle.

All the best
Dan

 

[Ray]

Dan,
Thanks for coming back and having another look at the figure. This is the same as in the earlier pictures, excepting that I did move the head back a little as I still think it was too far forward and was looking for someone to point it out before I moved it as assurance that I wasn't seeing something that wasn't there. Two things I would change if I were to do this over again. First with the pose I'd not have him bent at all at the waist (the idea was to make him look inquisitive, but in photo's it seems to give the impression that his weight is forward more than it is). Second I'd make $@# certain that the posted pictures were more carefully posed so as to not distort the figures pose anymore than even good photo's are apt to do.

Ray

 

[quang]

Hello Ray,

Now that you've clarified your intent and placed the figure on a more stable base, the mistake becomes more apparent especially on the side views.

Look how most of the bulk of the figure is positioned AFT the vertical line instead of being distributed evenly AFT and FORE the line to achieve a correct balance.

The fact that his arms are resting on the rifle doesn't change anything to the basic posture. Of course, it would be different if the arms are SUPPORTED by the rifle in which case we would have a 'tripod' pose like on square one.

HTH
Quang

 

[garyjd]

Quang, GREAT STUFF! It's fantastic to see this section being used to the fullest. It's become it's own classroom. Sorry for my excitement this far from beats a night of sorting mail. ~Gary

 

[Dani A.]

Hello,

I actually am working on a figure in a similar pose to that Quang is commenting upon; this figure I began several months ago, but had to postpone because of other requirements. At the time, I prepared some Photoshop images to show how I planned the pose, is is a CGI mock-up.

At present, the figure is in a more advanced stage, but I believe these early photos may be more useful for the discussion. This is intended to provide more stuff to the exchange. Please feel free to make any critic.

HTH,

Dani

 

[Ray]

Dani,
Thanks for the post, this is exactly the pose that Quang mistakenly continues to refer to and not the one portrayed here.

Gary,
You still haven't said anything, other than to applaud other people’s mistaken critiques.

Quang,
Perhaps the simplest way to dispel the mistake concerning the figures center of gravity is for anyone under this wrong impression to do the following;
stand up, place the right foot under the groin (or nearly so)(which will cause the right hip to thrust out), with the left leg relaxed slightly bent at the knee, now if you bend slightly at the waist you'll find that both buttock will be thrust to the rear (balancing the forward thrust of the upper torso) and the center of the upper torso ends up over the right foot. Remaining in this relaxed position, extend the head and arms forward, this is best done if you have a broom stick or some other thing to rest your arms on at the same time, but NOT, any of the body's actual weight, as would be the case with the tripod pose, at this point the shoulders should have created a sort of very shallow V with the chest, and the shoulders are arched across the back. You'll notice that you are now standing in the same position as my figure and that all of the muscles, excepting those of the right leg, are in fact relaxed (it might also be that the muscles of the lower back are under some tension, but I do not note the effect when holding this pose myself, but then I didn't try to maintian it for the length of the sculpt either :lol: ).

Do consider also that a sculptures pose is really only a single moment in time, captured and made rigid, while with real people poses are rarely maintained for more than a second, if that long. Real life humans, even in apparent repose, are nearly always in motion, though this motion is frequently imperceptible, the change being so slight. If not for my own vanity I would help out here and save everyone the effort of having to take these simple steps themselves by posting the photo's of myself, in said pose, that I used when creating this (previously applauded) figures pose.

The one lesson here that I think it worth mentioning is that it might be best to create only poses that are obvious, even in 2d, and avoid anything too artistic unless willing to give a complete explanation, which seems to detract from a figures overall merit, and is, apparently, of questionable value.


Best Regards,

Ray

 

[quang]

Ray,
Keep in mind that it takes time and energy to post the remarks as we've done. We didn't do it to show we're smart but we sincerely hoped they would help you improve your technique.

It's up to you to draw the conclusion.

Dani,
I'd suggest we discuss your tripod figure in a new thread.

Cheers,

Quang

 

[Jeff]

Ray,

Ok from what you just posted about the pose I have this to add. I think every one is trying to make your figure look better. Some times photos make a figure look like something is wrong but it is more the photo then the figure. Ok that being said here is what I think. If your figure is supposed to be in a more or less relaxed pose then the arms should come closer to the body. I know this would mean making new arms or re working the old ones but I think it would convey the realaxed pose your are after.

Stand with a stick the same length as your figures rifle and you will see what I mean Stand the way you have your figure posed and you will se that it is a bit awkward. If the arms are suposed to be lightly resting on the gun the gun and arms should be in closer to the body. Buy having his arms out so far it makes it look like he should be more like a tripod. That is my two cents.


Best
Jeff

 

[Ray]

Quang,
Of course I understand the effort taken by you guys, and in fact, even if in my frustration I neglected to mention it, I do appreciate it. Sorry for the neglect, I'll be more attentive the next time, promise. Also sorry if my response was anything more or less than matter of fact as it was intended.

Jeff,
Thank you for the advice, however, as I will illustrate below, though an alternative is not requisite to this pose, mmm, thinking about it though. I think (still thinking) it might have been a better choice but as my arms went where they would when creating (creating instead of discovering is another problem) the pose I accepted their placement as natural, (ever try watching how your body parts do all those mysterious and automatic things without influencing what would happen were you to remain unconscious of them?) I'm afraid that any pose not 'discoverred' is bound to be a little bit contrived.

The following photos, not the original bare chest-ed versions (which I'd be too embarrassed to post if I hadn't deleted them after printing for use anyway) are basically the same pose I sculpted though probably a little more realistic and accurate than that of my figure. Not to flog the argument any further it is probably useful at this point to make the necessary comparisons between the two figures, or sets of photo's. I'll be doing the same again myself, as I have been doing repeatedly, in my lack of total confidence, over the last two days.

A word of warning about the following photo's, if anyone laughs at the realism of the figure, or accuracy of his renderring it'll probably make an old woman cry, (maybe a middle aged man too), so please refrain from doing either. :lol:

Ray

P.S. That's not my gut sticking out either, it's the shirt, I swear, it's the shirt.

 

[Sambaman]

Ray,
I hope you don't mind, I have been following this thread and I have rotated your images so we might get a better idea of what your trying to explain.

Jay H.
OKC

 

[Ray]

Jay,
Not at all thank you, should have done it myself. What's really unfortunate is the unflattering, appearance of the photo's, for the poor old guy in them.

Jeff,
I've been thinking about your suggested placement of the arms and have concluded that it is, or would have a more relaxed appearance as you've said. In fact if it wouldn't necessitate a change in the position of the shoulders I'd change this guys to match your suggestion. The problem here is that the shoulders, as noted already, are forward from their normal placement, and if the arms were moved to the rear the shoulders would have to as well, bummer. Thanks again for the input just the same.


Ray

 

[Jeff]

Ok Ray, We have all fallen in love with something we have done only to find that it might not be the best way we could have done it. I think my involvement in SCAHMS and the really great sculptors in that Culb as well as the guys in LA miniaturists club which I also belong to have really helped my sculpting this site has also done a whole lot for that.

Years ago I brought this piece in to a SCAHMS meeting I had finished painting it and I thought it was done and every one really liked it but they said the arm was to long. Well after taking it home I kept looking at it and thinking they are right it is too long so a wraped as much of the figure in plastic as I could and got out my dremmel and cut off part of the arm and then resculped the areas I needed to and repainted. I think it looks much better now. But it was a hard lesson but a good one all the same. Ray I like your work and I think am going to PM about an Idea I have for you regarding this guy.

Best
Jeff

 

[Ray]

Jeff,
Thanks, I'll be eagerly looking forward to reading your PM.

Ray

 

[Automata]

Ray,

I could be wrong, but I don't necessarily think you would have to do anything to the shoulders to get it close to your photo. Your arms are obviously angled downward much more in the photos of you. If you really want that pose, I think you would come close by dropping the arms down into a more relaxed angle.

Barry

 

[Ray]

Barry,
I think you're right, looking at these photo's again, this time focusing on the arms I also noticed that I modeled the arms in raised position, (why/how, I don't know). About the movement of the shoulders, again I agree, the change would only be necessary to model the figure in the pose that Jeff suggested as the arms wouldn't be forward, the shoulders wouldn't either. Thanks for the pointer, now all we can do is hope I have the energy (I'm kind of lazy at this point in a figures life) to make this needed alteration, shouldn't be difficult as the arms are separate items anyway.


Ray

 

[garyjd]

Originally posted by Ray@Jun 11 2006, 03:12 PM
Gary,
You still haven't said anything, other than to applaud other people’s mistaken critiques.


Ray

Well Ray all I can say is I guess I'm not the only one that missed the boat in understanding your figure's pose. It's not the end of the world...really.~Gary

 

[Ray]

Gary,
Of course not, thanks for saying so though. I was surprised that you didn't catch on, so disappointed at your lack of critical comment. If I stick with my resolve and not attempt to imagineer anymore poses this sort of confusion shouldn't occur again, not unless I make poor choices as I'm apt to do. Hey, what about your Major Rogers, have you made the Brown Bess for him yet?


Ray

 

[Dani A.]

Hello,

My intention on posting the photos was contributing to illustrate Quang's point on how to improve the pose, because I also (mistakenly as it has transpired) believed that was the object of discussion.

Ray, you may have missed that the question in discussion, at least as we understood it, is not if the figure your pose adopts is anatomically possible; this may well be, but this does not necessarily mean the pose is the most successful, or the most natural, one to choose.

Of course, if you are satisfied with it, then there's no need for more discussion.

I would appreciate any comments on my own figure's pose, so I will post the photos again in a new thread now that it has been made clear I placed them inapproppiately here.

Regards,

Daniel

 

[garyjd]

Originally posted by Ray@Jun 12 2006, 12:55 PM
I was surprised that you didn't catch on, so disappointed at your lack of critical comment.

Hey, what about your Major Rogers, have you made the Brown Bess for him yet?

Ray

Ray, I guess I should have read the thread closer instead of glossing over it. Better luck next time.

No, Brown Bess for Rogers yet. STILL trying to wrap up the sbs figure and my 2nd (Iron Brigade) figure, which has a ways to go yet. Then I have a commission from a collector I need to get moving on.~Gary

 

[Ray]

Dani,
If the point of the discussion was in fact only to illustrate a better pose I would have had to immediately agree that such was possible, even desirable in this case. But as it was more about showing how the pose was incorrectly modeled it seemed necessary, and interesting, to show that the pose in fact modeled is not that which would have needed correcting. It is unfortunate, and surprising I think, that the pose could not be easily illustrated in language (for the English speakers anyway, and I sincerely regret not being fluent in any second language, sorry about that). So in addition to learning that made up poses are not always the best for easy comprehension, I think I've also learned that, pictures speak louder than words, odd I should learn it this late in life.

As far as being satisfied with this figure, well I'm not, nor was I before, it is not the masterpiece I crave (doubtful I'll ever achieve this state of excellence, but the desire does keep me trying). :lol: Still it is a fair representation, in my view, of the type of person I wanted to model.

The most important thing to me concerning this thread is that it was informative, interesting, and fun, even if a little frustrating at times, (most because of my struggle with trying to explain the thing without the necessary photo's).

I like your pose, it is actually the one I originally considered for this figure, but I found that I didn't like it so much when physically trying it, and didn't think it conveyed the message I wanted (but apparently failed to portray with mine). I really wanted the guy in a kind of semi-relaxed posture, kind of between alertness and repose. My vision was of him standing on a rock ledge overlooking a valley, his posture more upright just before the moment when my snap shot would be take, then he sees something, interesting, not startling or threatening, across the valley and leans forward slightly in an unconscious attempt to get a better view, SNAP!-the picture is taken and we end up with, well you've seen it, or my attempt anyway. I wonder if a base would help give the story more clarity, or if it would just end up being more work without clarifying anything.

The tripod pose is still very interesting, and there are several different ways it can be done, the one I like the most is with both hands on the rifles muzzle arms down, the figure leaning forward, only about as much as mine, but with his chin resting on his hands where they rest on the rifle barrel. I'm not sure but, to me, this pose seems to say the figure is being thoughtful and attentive, maybe to a conversation, or perhaps some natural activity going on in front of him.

If there is anything left for me to contribute, I'll certainly be happy to post in your new thread. Can you print your figure since it is a CGI?

Gary,
No worries, and I'll take all the luck I can get! :lol:

Sorry, but I'm really very eager to see your Maj. Roger, the figure is fascinating to me, as is the whole era, and your figure is such a great start.


Ray