Scale figures

[J C Fenton]

The general criticism, of 4mm (1/76) scale model railway figures is well made.  The availability of HO figures, and the limitations of using figures to a much smaller scale, have been noted.  I think that 4mm modellers will need to become skilled in conversion and sculpting in order to produce the figures that they want to the standard they desire.

 

In 1/72 (closer to 4mm scale than 1/87 (HO)), there are many wargames figures in both plastic and metal.  In 1/76 (4mm) there are a number of good whitemetal ranges.  I mention them both to show the excellent standards that can be achieved in this scale and medium and also because some of the figures may prove useful as a basis for conversion. 

 

http://www.abfigures.co.uk/  These are WW2 whitemetal 1/76 scale and are some of the best. 

Given what we've been used to, it's hard to accept this is a 4mm scale metal figure. 

[cary hill]

The general criticism, of 4mm (1/76) scale model railway figures is well made.  The availability of HO figures, and the limitations of using figures to a much smaller scale, have been noted.  I think that 4mm modellers will need to become skilled in conversion and sculpting in order to produce the figures that they want to the standard they desire.

 

In 1/72 (closer to 4mm scale than 1/87 (HO)), there are many wargames figures in both plastic and metal.  In 1/76 (4mm) there are a number of good whitemetal ranges.  I mention them both to show the excellent standards that can be achieved in this scale and medium and also because some of the figures may prove useful as a basis for conversion. 

 

http://www.abfigures.co.uk/  These are WW2 whitemetal 1/76 scale and are some of the best. 

Given what we've been used to, it's hard to accept this is a 4mm scale metal figure. 

That soldier looks a lot stockier than my dad and his Welsh mates were in WW2, so I'm guessing he had better rations.

 

I'd still take him though,as he is several stepchanges better than the apparent Langley lepers in Edwardian costume illustrated in post # 26 of this thread.

[BernardTPM]

Prieser do a number of 1:72 figure sets, including unpainted, though they are not as widely available as the H0 range. Another good range of military figures is W^D Models http://www.wdmodels.com/

Unfortunately I want 1972 holidaymakers!

[J C Fenton]

Prieser do a number of 1:72 figure sets, including unpainted, though they are not as widely available as the H0 range. Another good range of military figures is W^D Models http://www.wdmodels.com/

Unfortunately I want 1972 holidaymakers!

 

The Preiser 1/72 figures are not a bad compromise and the, mainly, military range includes many combatants in non-combat poses, which might offer better conversion prospects. The sets can be seen in detail on the PSR site.

 

Still, many of the sets are unsuitable or of limited potential as model railway figures. A platoon of Heer stood to attention in your station forecourt would suggest a rather worrying "might have been" scenario (http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=1705).  Still, at least your trains would run on time.

 

The Home Leave set gets you a nurse, but otherwise you still have the challenge of adapting 1940s German soldiery (http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=789).  Aside from the Nurse, conversions would have to be heavy, though as a list of parts (arms holding a document to read, a bundle under an arm and arm carrying a rather lovely suitcase tied up with string), it may have its uses. 

 

More promising, perhaps, are the Refugees; http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=1703

 

The 1920s civilian pilots and passengers set is one I have used.  Some poses are workable OOB, others provide a good basis for conversion.  The female figures are strongly indicative of the 1920s period, otherwise the figures are quite adaptable, http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=793   PSR are fairly critical of these figures (my judgement is more forgiving), and this shows the standard and expectations that obtain in the world of "toy" soldiers.  Yes, we must try harder!

 

Interestingly, there is also a "modern image" pilots and passenger set in 1/72: http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=1700

 

Turning from Preiser, there is a lovely Edwardian/WW1 period Lady in this set - http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=539 - though what you'd do with most of the rest of the set I do not know.  I have this set.  The figures paint up very well and have bags of character, but, with the exception of the very elegant female, are a little chunky.  A quality set, nonetheless.  

 

Finally, one of the best plastic 1/72nd ranges is Caesar Miniatures. They are remarkable in managing to mould the sort of complex 3D poses that would traditionally require a format with separate limbs, and this is also done with all the detail undercut and no flash.  I  do not know how it is done.  Caesar do a couple of resistance sets.  Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of figures are pretty useless, due to clothing, pose, or both.  There are a couple of Gestapo-types with long coats and Trilbys, which might be adapted, a girl with a sentry-distractingly short skirt, a great trawlerman (if you need a trawlerman in the act of surrendering, that is), and, for fans of The Sound of Music, a rather good model of a Nun.  For anyone modelling a Convent, this set is a must.

 

Caesar have recently embarked upon non-military subjects in the form of modern sportsmen. The quality is excellent, but this odd choice is not immediately the most useful from our perspective, unless you want to model a post-war football match in progress (to my mind the shorts are too short for pre-war footer-bags).  Set 1 seems to concentrate on the "beautiful game", whereas Sets 2 and 3 have chaps (strangely) playing netball and rounders. 

 

These figures also violate Rice's First Law of Movement, i.e. that you should never depict frozen motion.  Still, Caesar shows just what can be achieved in plastics in these small scales.  Caesar Links below.

 

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=798

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=1387

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=2040

[theoldmansminion]

all thoses figures, you mentioned JC, are 100% better than the railway junk we're a offered...ggggrrrr

 

 

i know i'm gonna need a 100's of figures, its what gives the layout, its lived in feel.....so many i see, have far too figures....which is obvious considering, considering the garbage, at extortionate prices we're offered.

 

 

i can do it, the converting buisness, but its the time involved, its gonna take twice as long to sculpt them, than to paint them, which takes long enough.....no wonder so many layouts appear as unfinished (i fully understand, that in reality they are never finished, lol) and people sadly give up.

 

 

i do like the preiser, and more than heading that way.

 

 

i've been looking on ebay, and you get 100 OO figures, painted (ha!) for £7.99,

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/P75W-100pcs-Model-Trains-1-75-Painted-Figures-OO-SCALE-/161022207409?pt=UK_Trains_Railway_Models&hash=item257dabe5b1

 

apart from the paint, lol....they do look quite a good proportioned figure, and at this price, great for hacking into differnt poses....

 

 

as is, they're STILL better than the Hornby stuff

 

addionally onebay toy can get some ridiculous deals like a 1000 unpainted for 25 quid, but only about 12 poses, but these are HO, BUT they do them sittind down as well, time to fill up those carriages me thinks:)

[allan downes]

All my layouts are photographed on an imaginary sunday morning - everyone's still in bed.

 

And all the tress have been chopped down for firewood...

 

And the grass has been concreted over...

 

And all the....

[allan downes]

Here's some railway workers from `1975, I've no idea where they came from so has anyone any ideas ?

 

[Mikkel]

The Preiser 1/72 figures are not a bad compromise and the, mainly, military range includes many combatants in non-combat poses, which might offer better conversion prospects. The sets can be seen in detail on the PSR site.

 

 

What a superb post, JC. Many thanks for taking the trouble. There are definetely some interesting items in there, although as you say it requires a selective approach and much conversion. The separate heads in one of the sets are very interesting (a slightly scary statement!).

[PhilJ W]

There was also a set of 1/72 figures on e-bay a few months ago of 1930's Airline passengers. They were a bit 'American' in style, the few uniformed figures in particular. IIRC they may even have been by Preiser.

[allan downes]

I think we ought to hold a competition to see who can put up the worst model figure in any scale.

 

The points sytem could be:-

 

2 points for the ugliest head.

 

4 points for no head at all, just a distorted splodge of either metal or plastic.

 

6 points for the longest arms that drag along the ground even when airborne.

 

8 points for pretending to climb a ladder when there's no ladder there.

 

10 points for refusing to photograph it in the first place and putting it in the cab of a super detailed A4 Pacific.

 

12 points for ignoring this competition altogether.

[alfsboy]

Thanks for that alfsboy, very interesting info.

 

With your expert background, would you say that overscale head size is necessarily a problem for model railway layouts? Is the trick of Warhammer maybe that they are done so well that you don't notice the overscale head, only the very good facial features?  (I am asking sincerely and out of interest, not arguing).

 

This shot of the bloke who lives in the water tank at Farthing is getting a bit tired, but just to illustrate what I'm getting at (ie that the overscale head is not necessairly obvious?).

 

The trouble is everyone wants a great facial feature and character when in reality the" face " should be  a few  mm at most  in 4 mm scale .A good face can be painted in .The overall anatomy is more important IMHO  as it will match the rest of the layout .Pose is more important and the right clothing and feel .These are the rules I stick by .its the buyers choice

 Charlie Stadden  was my great inspiration .Great anatomy and they looked right ,He did the Subuteo figures and thousands of military models .He was also a great military painter and I have one of his original signed watercolours .its my proudest possesion  along with a very early Tradition diorama which bears the hallmarks of his painting though they were not signed.

I have been waiting since 1995 for RP to take over my sculpting work .i am still making figures the old way and still making the odd racing car pattern and my eyeballs must drop out soon ,sanity long gone, so am past caring ..

Martin

 

pS .if you have muppets instead of figures  on your layout dont ever call it a scale model .It aint.

[allan downes]

 

pS .if you have muppets instead of figures  on your layout dont ever call it a scale model .It aint.

 

Now that is a very interesting statement.

 

I have always considered scale to be what looks right as opposed to definate geometrical ratio's

 

Take for example a door.

 

So what scale woud that be, and compared to what ? well here by example are two extremes and a point worth considering -

 

A small cottage door  6ft high in the 4mm scale equals 24mm.

 

A  cathedral door standing at an a grand and impressive 15ft high - and I've seen 'em even bigger ! - even in N guage it will overpower you at 30mm high and higher than an average cottage ! 

 

But they're both doors !

[PhilJ W]

I think we ought to hold a competition to see who can put up the worst model figure in any scale.

 

The points sytem could be:-

 

2 points for the ugliest head.

 

4 points for no head at all, just a distorted splodge of either metal or plastic.

 

6 points for the longest arms that drag along the ground even when airborne.

 

8 points for pretending to climb a ladder when there's no ladder there.

 

10 points for refusing to photograph it in the first place and putting it in the cab of a super detailed A4 Pacific.

 

12 points for ignoring this competition altogether.

I claim my 12 points.

[theoldmansminion]

I think we ought to hold a competition to see who can put up the worst model figure in any scale.

 

The points sytem could be:-

 

2 points for the ugliest head.

 

4 points for no head at all, just a distorted splodge of either metal or plastic.

 

6 points for the longest arms that drag along the ground even when airborne.

 

8 points for pretending to climb a ladder when there's no ladder there.

 

10 points for refusing to photograph it in the first place and putting it in the cab of a super detailed A4 Pacific.

 

12 points for ignoring this competition altogether.

 apart from points awarded in the 10 and 12 flavours...

 

 

this happens to sound just like littlehampton

[alfsboy]

Now that is a very interesting statement.

 

I have always considered scale to be what looks right as opposed to definate geometrical ratio's

 

Take for example a door.

 

So what scale woud that be, and compared to what ? well here by example are two extremes and a point worth considering -

 

A small cottage door  6ft high in the 4mm scale equals 24mm.

 

A  cathedral door standing at an a grand and impressive 15ft high - and I've seen 'em even bigger ! - even in N guage it will overpower you at 30mm high and higher than an average cottage ! 

 

But they're both doors !

Doors are made by man ,not nature .Humans differ in size but follow  a set of basic genetic  guidelines  far stricter than the pencil of an architect.Once  a man and women have  done the deed by what any means at their disposal or inclination it all down to mother nature who has no imagination or pencil. :-)

[Mikkel]

The trouble is everyone wants a great facial feature and character when in reality the" face " should be  a few  mm at most  in 4 mm scale .A good face can be painted in .The overall anatomy is more important IMHO  as it will match the rest of the layout .Pose is more important and the right clothing and feel .

 

I agree very much that pose and feel are critical. But the way we view layouts is changing, and faces are becoming more important, I think. We used to mostly see layouts like this, above and from a distance, and here faces don't matter that much:

 

 

 

But with digital photography we are getting closer and closer, and layouts built for up-close and/or eye-level height viewing also seems to be more common. In the photo below, I think the poses are generally good for all the figures, but only the stationmaster (a modified Monty's figure) really works for me. The rest have lots of character and I like them for that, but their faces are a complete give-away.

 

 

 

I hasten to add that there are millions of reasons why this photo doesn't look real (my modelling being the main reason!), and that I modified all of the figures to fit the period, so the manufacturer is not necessarily to blame in this case. My point is just that I think good and bad faces do increasingly make a difference in today's modelling and layout presentation.

[alfsboy]

I didnt say a bad face was OK . .Just that it has to be in proportion .I wish all figures had beards and moustaches,even the ladies .A great way to get a face expression  quickly .

[J C Fenton]

What a superb post, JC. Many thanks for taking the trouble. There are definetely some interesting items in there, although as you say it requires a selective approach and much conversion. The separate heads in one of the sets are very interesting (a slightly scary statement!).

 

Thank you.  I confess I have been secretly following Farthing and very much enjoy the glimpses into that world.  I also thought your posts concerning figures were very helpful and persuasive, especially re the importance of facial hair.  

 

There are doubtless many other useful sources of figures for conversion out there, and you have certainly encouraged me to think laterally and more inventively about what might be done.

[PhilJ W]

You see very few figures wearing spectacles though, despite one third of the population wearing them on a regular basis.

[jon_1066]

These produce some great white metal Victorians in a more cartoon style.  Slightly overscale but bags of character

 

http://www.wargamesfoundry.com/our-ranges/castingroomminiatures/victorians

[theoldmansminion]

i know i have mentioned it before, but i do this sort of thing as a living

yep, Tim prowes victorians are very good, i've painted a few, BUT the thing that makes them, IS the Face, its been pointed out by Allan and Mikkel several times.

 

in my circles the rule is:

 

faces and bases     

 

its what you look at first when you pick up a figure, if these 2 aspects are good, then you could get away with any old roller brushing on the rest of it!

[alfsboy]

The trouble is  many of you are all quoting 28 mm wargame figures as examples .They are not even in scale for S .They are distorted in a way no one would approve of  in an 00 locomotive or coach .The heads are 0 scale in proportion .Its easy to get a great face in an 0 scale figure and far more relevant due to size  .Its huge compared to an proper 4 mm figure .Anatomy isnt just about height .Its about proportion .Scale proportion .Some minor variation sure but not much .I have made and painted many  28 mm wargame figures and turned down a job at Games Workshop .(wrong location )They are a different genre and blow all anatomical theories to the wind .Thats fine for wargamers but we are talking about model railways where  any regard for authenticity  seems to stop at figures,which for some seems to mean that as long as it has a great face its OK ,never mind its not in scale on any railway known to man except the Hobbit and Ohio.

:-)

[theoldmansminion]

The trouble is  many of you are all quoting 28 mm wargame figures as examples .They are not even in scale for S .They are distorted in a way no one would approve of  in an 00 locomotive or coach .The heads are 0 scale in proportion .Its easy to get a great face in an 0 scale figure and far more relevant due to size  .Its huge compared to an proper 4 mm figure .Anatomy isnt just about height .Its about proportion .Scale proportion .Some minor variation sure but not much .I have made and painted many  28 mm wargame figures and turned down a job at Games Workshop .(wrong location )They are a different genre and blow all anatomical theories to the wind .Thats fine for wargamers but we are talking about model railways where  any regard for authenticity  seems to stop at figures,which for some seems to mean that as long as it has a great face its OK ,never mind its not in scale on any railway known to man except the Hobbit and Ohio.

:-)

 

the point thats being made, is that they are BETTER figures, so WhyTF should we have to put up with the unacceptable bits of twisted garbage thats offered to us.

you'll be well aware of epic scale....even this is leaps ahead of the main boxed and painted mainstream manufactures.

 

distorted torsos, and oversized heads, wrong scale, blah blah blah,  doesn't really come into the equation...you are not gonna put a two headed troll , with a grey skinned dark elf mage, with huge jugs, skimpy armour, a staff spouting fire, at the end of the platform waiting for 1.15 to paddington..?

[allan downes]

the point thats being made, is that they are BETTER figures, so WhyTF should we have to put up with the unacceptable bits of twisted garbage thats offered to us.

you'll be well aware of epic scale....even this is leaps ahead of the main boxed and painted mainstream manufactures.

 

 

But isn't it the same with everything in life ? if there's no big bucks in it, why invest big bucks in the first place.

 

Take Preiser for example.

 

Her's a company that really does put some serious effort behindtheir product, their only product, figures and accessories - they NEED  to be good, it's all they have to offer but -  no one really wants to pay their prices - sure, they'll spend hundreds on loco's, rolling stock, trackwork, electronics, scenery, buildings then go and FU the whole illusion with hundreds of what looks like corpses that have just been dug up.

 

Ok, let's get realistic about this and let's not go cheap.

 

Youv'e just finished a beautifull scratchbuilt model of a station, it's exsquisite, it's taken monthe to build, so you mount it on a superbly built platform, then what ? do you screw the whole thing up by populating it with white metal Zombi's and plastic Muppets, or do your finish it off the way you started out by forking out for the best figures available ? - forget about bxxxxdy HO don't look right cos it does - that's just an arguement for going cheap, and Prieser are about the best you're gonna get, ready painted, and ready to plonk! 

 

The way to go, but if there's another way that doesnt include gloss painted Zombi's and powder blue Muppets, then I'd like to hear about it. 

[allan downes]

I'm not sure if I've put this picture up before, although it'll suprise me if I haven't !

 

Anyway, and be honest Guys, those figures on the platform, all Prieser, all HO - but do they seriously look out of scale and enough to replace them with aforementioned Zombi's ?

 

Well I didn't think so, and I'm no expert.

 

Cheers.

Allan.