What's important in a Toy Soldier (Please read before voting) (2 Viewers)

[thebritfarmer]

Just a question I was wondering.

Basically I have broken down a toy soldier into 3 parts

Sculpt

Material (metal, plastic, polystone etc...)

Paint (gloss, matte)

I am just wondering how popular a K&C (for example) would be in plastic, if everything else remained the same.

Or if one of their vehicles was made in metal (would they be even more popular ??? )

So in essence I am interested in what is the most important part of the toy soldier.

 

[Wraith]

I've gone for the sculpt, although I could break that down further in to pose and detail. Whilst the detailing is nice and may give the figure / piece a bit of 'wow' factor, I find the poses more appealing. For example, the new Big Red 1 figures are amongst the best yet from K&C, because you get a real feel for the figures peering around a building line, or taking cover.

This is one thing Conte have been consistently good at, whereas other manufacturers have in the past done fairly standard, safe poses; standing firing rifle, kneeling firing rifle, standing firing SMG from hip etc.

I collect both plastic and metal, so this isn't a huge issue for me, and my tank collection has poystone and metal in the mix - again, no issues with this.

Paint wise, well, if I don't like it, I can always repaint it.

Anyhoo, where was I going with this.....oh yep, Sculpt.

Simon

 

[OzDigger]

I can't see that it can be anything else other than the sculpt, but no doubt there will be someone that will disagree with me - but they'd be so wrong

 

[sceic2]

I agree with Simon. His comments say it for me.

 

[Njja]

I really can't answer. Of course the sculpt gets your attention, but I only

collect metal figures, do to childhood experience with the bagged plastics.

I love metal vehicles, and realize polystone allow a greater variety of items

at much more reasonable prices.

Matt finished figures have really become popular, and are my favorite, but

some of the gloss sets are pretty cool.


Njja

 

[Saber]

Probably depends on why you collect. History buffs for accuracy then sculpts&paint, nostalgia types probably whatever they remember having or seeing, funyons probably plastic? For me it's sculpts as well as the unmentioned Pose category.

 

[sv288]

It depends on detail for me. Thats what it mainly matters to me.

 

[vandilay]

For me I guess ,its subject matter or overall charm or interest in a particular regiment etc regardless of material or painting style that is most important to me.

 

[Eazy]

I guess the whole package, sculpt, painting...basically how cool and must own does it look?

 

[Spitfrnd]

I've gone for the sculpt, although I could break that down further in to pose and detail. Whilst the detailing is nice and may give the figure / piece a bit of 'wow' factor, I find the poses more appealing. For example, the new Big Red 1 figures are amongst the best yet from K&C, because you get a real feel for the figures peering around a building line, or taking cover.

This is one thing Conte have been consistently good at, whereas other manufacturers have in the past done fairly standard, safe poses; standing firing rifle, kneeling firing rifle, standing firing SMG from hip etc.

I collect both plastic and metal, so this isn't a huge issue for me, and my tank collection has poystone and metal in the mix - again, no issues with this.

Paint wise, well, if I don't like it, I can always repaint it.

Anyhoo, where was I going with this.....oh yep, Sculpt.

Simon

Could say it better; maybe pose should be a choice but for now I will take that as part of sculpt.

 

[thebritfarmer]

I had intended that the poses, detail etc all to be part of the sculpt.

 

[UKReb]

As long as he is wearing the blue or the gray does it for me

Reb

 

[Spitfrnd]

Could say it better; maybe pose should be a choice but for now I will take that as part of sculpt.

BTW, that was meant to be "could NOT say it better", in case it was not obvious. Must check what I type more often.

 

[Molloy]

I've gone for sculpt - purely because I suppose that's essentially what makes a particular figure what it is, good or bad. If the basic figure itself is disproportionate, badly posed, or just plain unrealistic looking, then no ammount of subsequent factors like paint, etc. will make up for that.

But, assuming that the sculpt is fine, then the painting aspect has to come as a very close second. Even with the best sculpt and model in the world, a poor paint job will greatly detract from it's appeal. Take one of those lovely 1:35 armour kits that Dragon produces, for example - absolutely superb, realistic detail, every tiny feature and aspect of a tank rendered perfectly (if you can't guess, yes, I'm always extremely tempted every time I find myself in the local hobby shop). I have very basic painting skills though, so sit me down to "colourise" one of those beauties , and the finished product, no matter the excellence of the basic model, will look extremely ham-fisted and amateur - at best!

As regards the actual material used, I'm not that bothered either way to be honest. Thinking about now, I suppose metal toy soldiers are instinctively what you take for granted in this hobby, but I don't think I'd be too perturbed if a favoured manufacturer like K&C started producing plastic or resin figures, as long as they had the same exterior finish and quality. In fact, come to think of it, using materials like plastic might result in a decreased overall cost per figure, so that's probably a good incentive towards the latter!

Cheers,

Molloy.

 

[thebritfarmer]

I've gone for sculpt - purely because I suppose that's essentially what makes a particular figure what it is, good or bad. If the basic figure itself is disproportionate, badly posed, or just plain unrealistic looking, then no ammount of subsequent factors like paint, etc. will make up for that.

But, assuming that the sculpt is fine, then the painting aspect has to come as a very close second. Even with the best sculpt and model in the world, a poor paint job will greatly detract from it's appeal. Take one of those lovely 1:35 armour kits that Dragon produces, for example - absolutely superb, realistic detail, every tiny feature and aspect of a tank rendered perfectly (if you can't guess, yes, I'm always extremely tempted every time I find myself in the local hobby shop). I have very basic painting skills though, so sit me down to "colourise" one of those beauties , and the finished product, no matter the excellence of the basic model, will look extremely ham-fisted and amateur - at best!

As regards the actual material used, I'm not that bothered either way to be honest. Thinking about now, I suppose metal toy soldiers are instinctively what you take for granted in this hobby, but I don't think I'd be too perturbed if a favoured manufacturer like K&C started producing plastic or resin figures, as long as they had the same exterior finish and quality. In fact, come to think of it, using materials like plastic might result in a decreased overall cost per figure, so that's probably a good incentive towards the latter!

Cheers,

Molloy.

That was my exact reason for creating this thread Molloy. I too wonder how many people would collect if the material was changed. I see that the sculpt seems to be the priority but when I comes down to it I really do wonder?

My particular preference is

sculpt
paint
material

In today's economy a well sculpted and painted figure I think should be cheaper to produce and also to ship. I wonder if packaging would also be reduced as the figures wouldn't have to be protected as much (which in turn would also reduce costs and possibly be better for the environment.

 

[jac28]

My first inclination was to vote for sculpt as my most important factor in collecting. But the fact is - I concentrate on plastic... then comes sculpt and a few other factors..... as an example - if a company comes out with new plastic in an era I collect.. I won't purchase it IF I don't like the sculpts or price...but that's just me.

Jim

 

[binder001]

I also chose "Sculpt" as first choice. Simon (Wraith) said it quite well in his post.

I do value a good paint job - that's what first attracted me to King & Country, but I can paint my own if need be.

Material is of little importamnce. I have worked on figures in lead alloy back in the 70s, the current "pewter" castings, soft plastic and resin, but my favorite is hard plastic. I prefer plastic for my vehicles as I can customize it easier.

Gary

 

[theBaron]

Tough choice, I had to think about it for a while.

Of the three choices, I agree with a lot of the previous posts, a well-sculpted figure is usually the starting point for me. Hence my most frequent choices for toy soldier figure kits: Tradition, Imrie-Risley, Rose, Puchala.

Prost!
Brad

 

[eborris]

I voted for sculpt, it's the pose that does it for me.

I collect both metal and plastic, but mainly plastic as the poses seem more fluid and many of the metal poses seem too stiff. Not all of course, the Conte figures while not always painted the best seem to have that fluidity in movement that I gravitate towards.

 

[Cardigan600]

Yo Troopers, dont know if I mentioned this before, dont like horses on plates lol, Diorama type excluded for obvious reasons. But being a British Cavaly collector my vote goes for the painting ie; correct uniforms for the Regiments, and any makers reading this, its always that bit special if the officer in a set has a Shabraque on his mount.
Bernard.