FIW Artillery, matte or glossy? (1 Viewer)

[kogu]

Hello everybody,
there was another post or poll about glossy or matte and I would like to bring that question up again. I do believe that the only option was to pick either one. I am going for both and have some pictures here to show why. As an FIW collector I got the Britains set of the British Artillery (glossy) as well as the John Jenkins British Artillery (matte).
I don't want to be the one with the only choice to keep one as both of them are quite beautiful.
Britains took the "traditional" glossy finish to a totally new level of detail and finish and for the matte collector's everybody knows by now that John Jenkins has its very own distinctive style which is very well done.
I would like to hear the opinions of fellow collectors what they think about either one?
Here is a photo that shows both sets side by side.
Konrad

 

[kogu]

Here are two closeups of both sets.

 

[Saber]

Great sets, but gotta say that glossy set catches my eye!

 

[thebritfarmer]

I'd have to agree with you Saber. The glossy set captures the charm of toy soldiers I think

 

[OzDigger]

Bugger, I have to agree as well, I guess glossy aren't dead yet

 

[wadepat]

Hi Konrad,

My choice is the Britains Glossy set. Both sets have great merit, but the Britains set is my favorite of the two.

Warmest personal regards,

Pat

 

[Harrytheheid]

I'd have to agree with you Saber. The glossy set captures the charm of toy soldiers I think

I agree BF. And that's coming from a Matte only collector.
It was Randy who first took the time to point out to me that the new glossies aren't the same as the old stuff with the blob of red paint on each cheek. This new glossy stuff looks like it needs to be investigated big-time. I think that arty piece would look wonderful just displayed on its own say, in a bookcase.
We have quite a varied collection time-scale wise (as you've noted), but I'm getting the urge to diversify even more. At least some of the new Britains offerings are definitely on the radar screen for the 2nd half of this year.
Cheers
H

 

[Saber]

Interesting, I started as a Glossy only collector until K&C WWII got me into mattes. Then had to get some matte Nap Cav and some..., good grief, lets hope noboby starts making semi-gloss !

 

[Harrytheheid]

Interesting, I started as a Glossy only collector until K&C WWII got me into mattes. Then had to get some matte Nap Cav and some..., good grief, lets hope noboby starts making semi-gloss !

....Semi-Gloss....
Nice one Saber.

 

[VIRIATO]

Both sets are great, and you could also add Frontline's or Tradition's. But I would prefer the glossy one. For now I am not into artillery though, I am going for individual or mounted figures: easier to find displaying room for these.

 

[aujj65]

Hello everybody,
there was another post or poll about glossy or matte and I would like to bring that question up again. I do believe that the only option was to pick either one. I am going for both and have some pictures here to show why. As an FIW collector I got the Britains set of the British Artillery (glossy) as well as the John Jenkins British Artillery (matte).
I don't want to be the one with the only choice to keep one as both of them are quite beautiful.
Britains took the "traditional" glossy finish to a totally new level of detail and finish and for the matte collector's everybody knows by now that John Jenkins has its very own distinctive style which is very well done.
I would like to hear the opinions of fellow collectors what they think about either one?
Here is a photo that shows both sets side by side.
Konrad

Konrad,

Nice sets you have there.......I only collect matt figures now but I also paint gloss sets for others/sale, I am just about to start another 'How-To-Paint' project......so a very difficult decision........whilst they are both excellent sets I have to go with the majority so far - Gloss.

Jeff