|
Post by kiladecus on Feb 1, 2013 4:22:13 GMT -9
NEW GODS of MANKIND and ANOINTED: Mantle of the Gods sampler pack! It is with great pride and respects to the gaming community that Dark Skull Studios offers a sample of our Cardstock Miniature B series. Our B series miniatures are based on our New Gods of Mankind product line and will tie directly into our new tabletop role-playing game Anointed: Mantle of the Gods. The B series comes directly from our Video Game project New Gods of Raanon, also based in the same world. These miniatures should be printed out using the instructions listed in the PDF. Check out our product lines on RPGnow and Indie Press Revolution! You can find it HERE, and it is only $.99! www.rpgnow.com/product/110818/Cardstock-Miniature-Sample-PackThis includes artwork by some of the best artists in the industry like Eric Lofgren and Joe Slucher! There will be more sets released, but take a look at these beautiful figures! Thank you for your attention! David Wears (Oh, did I mention that I did the lay-out on this?) Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by kiladecus on Feb 1, 2013 4:26:11 GMT -9
Here is a picture I took of the figures a couple weeks ago. Yes, the Lashon is REALLY that big! These are just a small sampler of the hundreds of figures that wil be released in the next few months. ;D Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Feb 1, 2013 5:43:10 GMT -9
I have bought this sampler Dave. My opinion is very high about the artworks.
But it is not so high about the product.
In 2013 there are still some producers and artists who offer "paper minis" without back artwork.
This is not a free product that the artist makes for his personal use and then generously shares with everyone. It is a commercial product that must be, rightly, paid.
Imho in a commercial product professional quality must be much, and more, considered.
There are many examples, even here, without leaving this forum, of commercial quality ( and it is all to the advantage of buyers ), the Ebbles' vehicles, fantasy housesby Graffam, darkmook's paper minis, those by okumarts, the products of Permes, F&T models ... and maby many others, here.
SJG produced figures (standies) with front and back arts more than 20 years ago. And today back art is no more.
What is the problem? Too hard to do it? too much time? Or just laziness? ... So much so buyers buy it anyway ...
These figures are artistically beautiful, very visually beautiful and this makes me angry (if they were ugly ... would not affect for anyone. So it is a real missed opportunity imho ).
The only thing that is nice and usable in this set are your bases.
A real shame. Seen all the new planned sets.
One answer like "the back doesn't need" is good if the figures are designed for personal use not for a commercial product. I buy the product and then I use it for what it needs to me. In a wargame the back is necessary for a long time.
Why two different backs? A black silhouette and a dark gray mirror image ? All random?
I have my own personal vision about paper miniatures. They are a product different from traditional miniatures. But in this way, these products will remain always plast and metal's minor and illegitimate children.
|
|
|
Post by bravesirkevin on Feb 1, 2013 8:05:31 GMT -9
What is the problem? Too hard to do it? too much time? Or just laziness? ... So much so buyers buy it anyway ... Backs are nice to have, but as someone who has actually created high end paper minis with front and back artwork, I have to say that it makes things dramatically more difficult for the designer. Logically, you'd assume that it's just double the work, but it's actually quite a bit more complicated than that. Double sided art that actually lines up is a really tricky thing, and requires a ton of planning in the rough stage that can add hours to the whole process. I think i actually spend at least 3 times as much time going back and forth roughing out the fronts and backs as I do on the clean pencils and colours. Honestly, if I was doing paper minis without backs, I'd be able to put out a new set every 3 days or so, instead of taking weeks and weeks between releases. You also have a lot of limitations on how you can draw things when you're planning a double sided miniature. The biggest one is that you can't do dynamic perspective so you have to be very clever in how you design the pose so that it still looks interesting without it. This guy's art style relies very heavily on that kind of dynamic perspective, so I'd honestly have been surprised if there had been unique artwork for the backs. The way I see it, he's sacrificed having a cool back in order to have a much cooler front, and there are some people who will see that as a good thing, even as others see it as a disappointment I have my own personal vision about paper miniatures. They are a product different from traditional miniatures. But in this way, these products will remain always plast and metal's minor and illegitimate children. The thing that makes plastic and metal miniatures awesome is that they have weight and tactile properties, and paper miniatures will never have those qualities. The downside of plastic and metal miniatures is that they require hundreds of hours of preparation and painting using hundreds of dollars worth of glue and paint and tools to get the most out of them, and it takes a whole heap of skill to do it well. I've got a Warhammer Empire Army that i've been working on for over a decade and barely half the figures are painted... Half the ones that are painted could actually use a re-paint. On the other hand, I made a whole regiment of paper skeletons in a single afternoon, ready to use in game that same evening. Apart from that, there's the storage. Storing my hundreds of miniatures takes up an unbelievable amount of space, and storing the scenery takes up even more. Could easily fill 4 large bookshelves with it all, while an equivalent amount of paper stuff would take up a couple photo albums and a few shoe boxes. I think for a lot of people, paper miniatures are a better option than the metal and plastic ones because they don't have the skill to paint them nicely or don't have the space to store 10kg of pewter, and they will use them without thinking twice. For other folks, metal and plastic are good for some situations, and paper is better for others and those people will just use whichever the situation calls for. The main reason for the stigma is the "cheapness", but that's the fault of the fans and designers of paper stuff for highlighting that one advantage, instead of focusing on the others.
|
|
|
Post by kiladecus on Feb 1, 2013 8:31:52 GMT -9
The artwork on this set is phenomenal. I won't dispute that.
I was invited to join the party, and this is a great opportunity. I was asked to lay things out in a certain way, and I did it.
The sets are amazing and quite exciting.
The greyed double-front was a test to see which format was more accepted by the customers. It was a choice made by someone other than me. I for one prefer the greyed double-front as in lieu of the silhouette back.
I stand by the product, and feel that it is a great set of figures.
|
|
|
Post by old squirmydad on Feb 1, 2013 10:15:29 GMT -9
No one's faulting you for your participation in this project Dave. The figures look great, grey backs are better than black silhouettes, but without a real back, it's a no sale for me. Which is a shame, because the front art is really nice.
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Feb 1, 2013 12:24:27 GMT -9
bravesirkevinThank you very much Kevin for comprehensible technical explanation. I don't have amy specific skills so some steps can escape to me. And I'm happy to know them. My previous post, as well as introducing my own vision of the paper's world, was forced on my part. In Italian this is called a "vent" or "blurt" but I don't know if this is the correct english translation ( ... and Dave didn't help me ). I'm not against in advance to figures with only front art (or mirrored art or other ... ) I like a lot many products that have only art front. Of some of these I'm really a fan. ( Ashton Sperry's artworks, really artworksr all paizo pathfinder paper minis and now Paizo pathfinders pawns ... and many hoters, really ) I like,now, old Bhoritz's paper minis and I'm still looking for some of them that I lost. I am very grateful to scarecow for all his excellent figures. Those mirrored and those with dual art. And sooner or later I will ask him permission for a modification of his work to be commissioned to someone and then give it to him to distribute as he likes. I understand that, as a dear friend said to me, "These are designed for RPG and not for (war)gaming" .... I have no problem with figures to a single front art. I have problems with a trend. And however really in different types of games (wargames, boardgames but also some rpgs) the back and the LOS are actually important. Of course of my problem I do not blame Dark Skull Studios and my little buyer comment on RPGNow will be based mainly on the beauty of the artworks. But as I have a general problem and not a specific problem about these figures, so generally I have to say that, compared to my personal view, this is a missed opportunity. At least for me. The discussion about differences between minis ( plastic, metal, cardboard ... ) ... I agree with you ( I have a big WH40000 inquisitor army ) ... but I continued it another time ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2013 12:54:46 GMT -9
When I saw Rhannon's post ( EDIT: Rhannon's post #1, as he replied Kevin while I was writing mine - once more proved fastest mouse on forums!) - even if I fully agreed with him regarding "modern" papercraft standards and trends - I thought that I should reply regarding B-side drawing process and some technical issues. But then after a while I saw Bravesirkevin post. Ad. Bi-side and technical issuesWhat is the problem? Too hard to do it? too much time? Or just laziness? ... So much so buyers buy it anyway ... Backs are nice to have, but as someone who has actually created high end paper minis with front and back artwork, I have to say that it makes things dramatically more difficult for the designer. Logically, you'd assume that it's just double the work, but it's actually quite a bit more complicated than that. Double sided art that actually lines up is a really tricky thing, and requires a ton of planning in the rough stage that can add hours to the whole process. I think i actually spend at least 3 times as much time going back and forth roughing out the fronts and backs as I do on the clean pencils and colours. Honestly, if I was doing paper minis without backs, I'd be able to put out a new set every 3 days or so, instead of taking weeks and weeks between releases. You also have a lot of limitations on how you can draw things when you're planning a double sided miniature. The biggest one is that you can't do dynamic perspective so you have to be very clever in how you design the pose so that it still looks interesting without it. [/quote] ...what can I say... TOUCHE!Youp! B-sides are very often kinda pain... you know very well where... Basically - yes, you already have to have in mind B-side when designing /sketching figurine and there is a lot(!) of limitations. One of these is mentioned perspective / dynamic posing - I for the one am using "grounds" to achieve more realistic looking / dynamic poses and come over some problems with perspective at the same time. But major issue is that not every one can properly draw B-side. I don't know why but some absolute amazing artists just fails when it comes to figurine's back?! When I was publishing on a regular basis my printed magazine I had from time to time to collaborate (deadlines!!! with some commisioned artists - and guess what? ONLY few ot these people were able to draw proper back! Some of these were absolutely stunning, amazing artists when it comes to ILLUSTRATIONS - but when it comes to B-side drawing - problems started - and I wasn't looking for kinda cheap solutions - I was offering 25-40$ for just one figurine AB-side line-art! (depending on type/difficulty of figurine - mounted knight with lot of details, shield, banner, etc. is by far more time-consuming and demanding that WWII soldier). Dunno, probably it's some special ability needed to see figurine in 3D in your mind? There are also some "designing decisions" which makes drawing B-side much easier or in opposite much more difficult - among these are usually accessories which are kinda PARTIALLY placed/visible on BOTH sides (hmmm... perhaps some sample picture would be helpful here - but I hope that you know what I mean?) really, a lot of fun with these! Well, I have to confess that even having a lot of experience (sorry for not being modest, I know! supported by developed tools, techniques and some trick's I've developed during all those years - there are still some poses / figurines that seemed to difficult or not appealing for me. Then from the other (30mm) side:drawing B-sides in 30mm scale is... both a way (WAY!) easier and faster than for 60+mm scale. It's mostly because of this particular thick black border - c'mon! - it's a LOT of space to hide/cover even really sound mistakes!!! Plus in 30mm (not even mentioning 15mm) scale there is usually much less details so less problems with drawing/matching A and B side. But in fact, even if comapred to other/higher scales pure 30mm it's realy easier and fun to do, I'm still designing figurines as for min. 60mm - you will never know when you will need good quality - hi-res figurine, and shrinking is kinda no problem. Actually for my printed papersoldiers - there is not less than 100% matching in max magnification is Photoshop - which means that these are... yes! pixel-to-pixel accurate! ;D Ad. Quality Vs. PricingThe main reason for the stigma is the "cheapness", but that's the fault of the fans and designers of paper stuff for highlighting that one advantage, instead of focusing on the others. Youp! Agreed again. I feel (but that's just my 2 cents!) that here, at CW Forums, in order to make our paper hobby more visible and attractive to others we should always be focused on 2 major goals: - helping newcomers and forum users to make better figurines, share our experience, useful tips and techniques
- promoting on a regular basis hi-quality standards for figurines as an alternative for plastic/resin/metals <<<!!!
One thing that should be stressed is that good designed and executed quality paper figurines are worthy replacement / alternatives for metal/plastic ones, being far less expensive and troublesome at the same time (vide assembling/gluing process, no coloring, storage etc). But, like it or not, quality which could be /to some extent/ comparable to metal/plastic figurines COSTS - at least time - and there is some kind of expectations and demand(?) from fans and even this forums users - basically it's going like this: "well, if I can draw somtin' and I'm willing to share it for free - so why the heck others want some real bucks for it?!?" So the choice is: affordable, but with lower quality alternative or quality one but adequate more expensive. There are already some posts around here regarding this topic(looong thread about economics of production or something like this - don't remember exactly at the moment - is one of these), but I have some citations: " So the price I want to pay and the price that I've paid for a outstanding set are roughly: Figures 2,5US$ - 5US$ Scenery 5US$ - 18US$ Vehicles 3US$ - 8US$ Tiles 3US$ - 8US$
The things that make me pay more for a model are quality of the drawing and design, exclusivity of subject matter (there are few werewolfes and astronauts, for example, I would pay more for a set of them.), size of the set (big number of figures or a set of many buildings) and ease of building in that order. ... For sets of figs, I will pay $2 or $2.50 but $3.95 just "feels" like its too high. For 3D vehicles and such, I would pay more, up to about $10 if the design was really cool looking to me. For terrain, it sort of depends on what you get for the money. I've paid up to $10 for large sets of terrain tiles." Nah! I'm not going to start any serious discussion regarding pricing issues here - but that's the factor that just have(!) to be considered when designing hi-quality set - the one with couple of unique posed figurines + couple of advanced mods + accessories + a lot of color modifications (and I'm obviously not talking here about easy-to-made color layers;). Actually I don't remember who wrote that "I will pay $2 or $2.50 but $3.95 just *feels* like it's too high"... but c'mon?!OT:Speaking of devil (price-wide) I don't quite understood why scenery/vehicles and especially buildings are "rated" higher / more worthy compared to quality figurine set (disclaimer again - I'm not talking here about set of 2 basic figurines /with some color layers/ I saw for 2$ recently - that's not the case obviously). Actually (I might be mistaken - so it's very subjective) I found it way easier to design buildings and vehicles (with all the respect for designers, no pun intended!!!) - they have special tools kinda Google SketchUp, many free add-ons or relatively low-priced unfolding software vide Papecura and many others, then ready-made free textures etc. Hmm... perhaps I should switch from figurines to tiles, scenery and buildings? OK, just joking - "me like figurines!" --- Well, sorry for such a long post - but it's ALL ABOUT OUR HOBBY so it does matter for me; yeah, nowadays, when Twitter popularity with max 160 chars is spreading, nobody's willing to read - but... within time needed for this reply I'd be able to roughly sketch only one or two A-sides or perhaps just inking some parts of finished line-art, so perhaps I got some different sense of time/effort?
|
|
|
Post by kiladecus on Feb 1, 2013 16:05:35 GMT -9
Wow. Why is it everything I post generates huge discussions (except for my work which I ask for feedback on). @ Rhannon: "Vent" is the PERFFECT word. I might want to point out something that was over-looked... These beautiful images were done for the rulebooks and the video games, and weren't designed as papercraft images as their sole purpose. When Mesper, Kevin, myself and the 100 other people here that can do this better than me, design a figure (or set of figures), they design them as such. I am glad that Borhitz was mentioned. His work is among some of my favorites. I have never been a fan of double-fronted figures, with the exception of his. I guess I told myself if his are double-fronted, then that is fine... His work is worth it. I remember Dragnoz started out with double-fronted, and his stuff was great... still is! The images here are nothing less than spectacular. I can say this because I have seen the ENTIRE line and there is stuff out there that is mind-blowing. The "future" sets will have a double-fronted greyed images (like the Woodsman and the Wildman). Because they are intended as an inexpensive alternative to plastic and metal figures, and as Rhannon mentioned, they are intended primarily for RPG games, the backs were a non-issue. The greyed back simply shows facing for gaming purposes. Many games allow for figures to have a 360o firing arc any way, so once again, the back is just that, a back. I hope that people will see this set for what it is, and will look beyond preferences, and see the figures as individual works of art. I will leave this with you, but I can honestly say that images are highly professional. I don't feel like I need to defend this set, or the line. It is a quality product that I am proud to be a part of... if even in some small way. BTW, Rhannon, I know what you mean about the bases. I was particularly proud of how the stone bases turned out. ;D
|
|
|
Post by stevelortz on Feb 1, 2013 17:34:47 GMT -9
I am an old geezer. I was playing with 25mm toy soldiers before there WERE fantasy games (I played Napoleonics and English Civil War). I played my first game of D&D in February of 1975 (38 years ago). By the fall of 1977 I was sculpting original pieces in 3-D for Archive Miniatures, and I continued to sculpt professionally off and on for the next thirty years. I can't do it anymore because my acuity of vision and steadiness of hand are not what they used to be. I have tried doing digital minis, but my neuron pathways were set up in the days of manual typewriters and analog slide rules, and I can't breeze my way through software the way you young pups can.
Jim Hartman set out with the goal of making cardstock figures that look just as good on the tabletop as painted plastic or metal figures, and succeeded superbly. He set the standards for artists who want to follow in his steps. However, Jim realized when a figure has a normal degree of foreshortening from the front, it cannot be properly foreshortened from the back. That's why Jim insisted on certain restrictions on poses.
The Dark Skull Studios artwork was not intended to mimic painted plastic or metal figures. It was originally intended to be 2-D artwork on a page or screen, and images were foreshortened appropriately. I have lots of different kinds of figures in my collection, and I've trained my eyes to see them for what they are intended to be. I just picked up Emily Bongiorno's set of Fey. The figures have mirrored backs, stand about 20mm tall, and are on a white background. Would I swap them out for one monk or Sanity Studios orcs? NO! But neither would I swap one monk or Sanity Studios figures for Bongiorno's!
The more good cardstock figures there are, the better, I say. It makes for greater flexibility in coming up with good stories to game.
I like the gray shadowed backs better than the plain black backs!
Have fun! and again I say... Have fun! Steve
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Feb 1, 2013 19:41:25 GMT -9
I usually find putting backs on other peoples stuff easy and fun. If anyone ever wants a hand with putting a back on, just shoot me a line. Oh, and forshortening is a pain but I am willing to cheat.
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Feb 1, 2013 23:33:38 GMT -9
I am an old geezer. I was playing with 25mm toy soldiers before there WERE fantasy games (I played Napoleonics and English Civil War). I played my first game of D&D in February of 1975 (38 years ago). By the fall of 1977 I was sculpting original pieces in 3-D for Archive Miniatures, and I continued to sculpt professionally off and on for the next thirty years. I can't do it anymore because my acuity of vision and steadiness of hand are not what they used to be. I have tried doing digital minis, but my neuron pathways were set up in the days of manual typewriters and analog slide rules, and I can't breeze my way through software the way you young pups can. Jim Hartman set out with the goal of making cardstock figures that look just as good on the tabletop as painted plastic or metal figures, and succeeded superbly. He set the standards for artists who want to follow in his steps. However, Jim realized when a figure has a normal degree of foreshortening from the front, it cannot be properly foreshortened from the back. That's why Jim insisted on certain restrictions on poses. The Dark Skull Studios artwork was not intended to mimic painted plastic or metal figures. It was originally intended to be 2-D artwork on a page or screen, and images were foreshortened appropriately. I have lots of different kinds of figures in my collection, and I've trained my eyes to see them for what they are intended to be. I just picked up Emily Bongiorno's set of Fey. The figures have mirrored backs, stand about 20mm tall, and are on a white background. Would I swap them out for one monk or Sanity Studios orcs? NO! But neither would I swap one monk or Sanity Studios figures for Bongiorno's! The more good cardstock figures there are, the better, I say. It makes for greater flexibility in coming up with good stories to game. I like the gray shadowed backs better than the plain black backs! Have fun! and again I say... Have fun! Steve Thank you Steve. You are absolutely right and have taught something new to another old player. Not so old though. my initiation as a player coincided with the early '80s. All products were in English and there were very few amateur translations that circulated (there was no internet, only landlines and fax) ;D Yes, more good cardstock figures ( minis, standies ... ) there are, and the better it is. And fun, with anything, there is always the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Feb 2, 2013 0:05:44 GMT -9
Wow. Why is it everything I post generates huge discussions (except for my work which I ask for feedback on). @ Rhannon: "Vent" is the PERFFECT word. I might want to point out something that was over-looked... These beautiful images were done for the rulebooks and the video games, and weren't designed as papercraft images as their sole purpose. When Mesper, Kevin, myself and the 100 other people here that can do this better than me, design a figure (or set of figures), they design them as such. I am glad that Borhitz was mentioned. His work is among some of my favorites. I have never been a fan of double-fronted figures, with the exception of his. I guess I told myself if his are double-fronted, then that is fine... His work is worth it. I remember Dragnoz started out with double-fronted, and his stuff was great... still is! The images here are nothing less than spectacular. I can say this because I have seen the ENTIRE line and there is stuff out there that is mind-blowing. The "future" sets will have a double-fronted greyed images (like the Woodsman and the Wildman). Because they are intended as an inexpensive alternative to plastic and metal figures, and as Rhannon mentioned, they are intended primarily for RPG games, the backs were a non-issue. The greyed back simply shows facing for gaming purposes. Many games allow for figures to have a 360o firing arc any way, so once again, the back is just that, a back. I hope that people will see this set for what it is, and will look beyond preferences, and see the figures as individual works of art. I will leave this with you, but I can honestly say that images are highly professional. I don't feel like I need to defend this set, or the line. It is a quality product that I am proud to be a part of... if even in some small way. BTW, Rhannon, I know what you mean about the bases. I was particularly proud of how the stone bases turned out. ;D Dave if you can, say a few more words on the final product. Now that it is established that there is no back art ... OK ( Kevin and Steve have told me things that I didn't know and things that I had not considered ) ... The dark gray back is better ( and cool ) but an extra option with the mirrored figure would allow appreciate the artwork from other sides and views from the gaming table. So ... dark grey and all mirrored. If it is possible. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Feb 2, 2013 0:08:44 GMT -9
I usually find putting backs on other peoples stuff easy and fun. If anyone ever wants a hand with putting a back on, just shoot me a line. Oh, and forshortening is a pain but I am willing to cheat. You will receive PM. I hope I'm not bother you too much. ;D
|
|
|
Post by kiladecus on Feb 2, 2013 1:32:49 GMT -9
The future sets WILL have the grey mirrored backs. This was a trick I learned from KANE. He did some amazing work a while ago, and I was fortunate enough to stumble on it.
I am glad that you can appreciate these for the figures they are. I for one, am glad the Centaurs have their arms in the air. I can mount a projection rifle on them and replace mine for Eow! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Rhannon on Feb 2, 2013 1:41:47 GMT -9
The future sets WILL have the grey mirrored backs. This was a trick I learned from KANE. He did some amazing work a while ago, and I was fortunate enough to stumble on it. I am glad that you can appreciate these for the figures they are. I for one, am glad the Centaurs have their arms in the air. I can mount a projection rifle on them and replace mine for Eow! ;D So are there no chances even for a mirrored back? ;D
|
|