Historically Accurate Dioramas or.... ?? (1 Viewer)

[Larry Allen]

Hello all;
I am starting to plan out my diorama's for construction during the upcoming winter months. One will be WWII Desert War AK's vs EA's. The other American Rev with AR's vs BR's (with some Conte's and Britain's included). But my question, to the far more experienced is,.. should they be "historically accurate" dioramas or is "content and presentation" more important. This question can obviously reference any series or any time frame.

For example I "could" build a desert dio with Erwin surrendering to Monty (or being captured). Maybe, have Rommel arriving in to Monty's HQ camp in his HORCH while Monty stands besides his Crusaders and Vickers along side Stirling (EA017) and F.M Alexander (EA011). Add in a couple "Best of Enemies" (EA012) and off you go. I know it never happened but you get the idea.

Or maybe a something a little more subtle in the AWI dio, show the K&C British Highlanders and the Hessians fighting together at the battle of "Lexington & Concord" bridge. (Britain's piece).

Any way I would greatly appreciate any thoughts on what you guys think is the best way to go. I hope to post the construction progress on this Fourm.

Thanks!

 

[Louis Badolato]

I guess when it comes to men in camp, a column of men or vehicles advancing on a strip of roadway, or pre-modern era warfare I would go for a historically accurate display. These subjects lend themselves to a reasonable sized diorama. Vehicles moving in column on a roadway tended to get bunched together so several vehicles could be displayed in a relatively small strip of roadway. Men and vehicles in bivuac can also be displayed in managable scene. In old fashioned warfare, men tended to fight in line, or advance in column, so a lot of figures can be accurately displayed in a relatively small space.

This is not the case with modern battlefield dioramas. Unless you have unlimited space for a diorama the size of a football field or intend to make a vignette involving only one or two vehicles or a handful of figures, you really aren't going to be able to do a truly historically accurate diorama of a modern subject like WWII. Battles were fought over a large area, and in modern warfare troops and vehicles do not bunch together when advancing or manuvering. To put a large quantity of tanks and figures in a diorama in a historically accurate way requires more space than I have access to in my home. Accordingly, I either avoid this type of scene, or just stuff it all together in an inaccurate, but fun to look at, crowded display.

However, even when I do something I know is incorrect, I try to at least keep the story line historically accurate.

 

[mestell]

I try to go with a combination of historical accuracy + content and presentation. I am currently working on a large diorama (72"x30") of the fall of Acre in 1191. Obviously to try to duplicate the entire city of Acre was out of the question. So I decided to "represent" the final days of Acre. I choose to do the northeast corner being stormed by English, French and German Crusaders. After 2 years of Seige, the garrison of Acre was lightly defended so I am not putting too many Saracens "on the wall" as defenders. Richard I (Lionheart) of England and Phillip II of France had an encampment near the city so at one end of my diorama I am creating a small Crusader camp to again "represent" that aspect. Saladin had an army outside of Acre trying to break the siege. HIs army was too large to be driven off the field by the Crusaders but not large enough to break the siege. At the other end of my diorama I have a high terrain feature again "representing" a vantage point from which Saladin could view the seige and direct his attempts at breaking it. Trying to put all of that into a 72"x30" diorama is a lot so I am trying to create a "feel" of history by creating several representative scenarios within the diorma area. If interested, check out my 2 threads on "The Fall of Acre . . . "
and "Acre Update" to see my progress.

Mike

 

[nasirkasmani]

Hi Larry,

welcome to this great forum.

I think this question varies per individual, it bogges down to what you prefer, as they are your items and no one can say you are wrong.

Even if you put a display of the Afrika Corps against the Saracens, as long as you are happy, no one else's comments matter.

As a general rule, most of these guys here have displays with at least a semblance of accuracy. For eg, no SS units in Afrika, or no Rommel in Egypt.

But creative freedom is also much lauded, as it gave a fresh outlook of display dioramas.

 

[Louis Badolato]

As a general rule, most of these guys here have displays with at least a semblance of accuracy. For eg, no SS units in Afrika, or no Rommel in Egypt.

Nasir,

Thanks to Andy and Gordon's idea of a joke, when I asked for an Axis airfield in North Afrika, I got the Tanis scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark, so I ended up with Rommel in Egypt, at least "secretly":
https://www.kingandcountry.com/diorama05.htm

 

[Spitfrnd]

Well I expect I may be in the minority but to me, dioramas are your own personal art medium. You are the producer/director so you get to decide what story to tell. You obtain the actors, create the sets and edit the shooting, so it is really up to you to decide the content, and that includes how historically accurate to be.

I sense in your post a desire to be creative in your stories and not to be confined to the limits of historical perfection. I think that is exciting and encourage you to follow your instincts and imbue your creations with all the artistic license you can muster. There is no right answer to this question so if you want to experiment with alternate time lines, you should definitely feel free to do so. If it could have happened, it should be fun to depict if you do it well. I would refer you to the Duke's approach to strict historical accuracy in film making: "well if it didn't happen that way, it dam*ed sure ought to have" So my advise would be to follow the Duke.

 

[Capitolron]

Depends on the display for me - Larry

Sometimes - I just set up a diorama for the look of it - with no particular Battle in mind.

Other times - I work hard to get the Battle scene right. On my Antietam display - I went to Sharpesburg and saw Burnsides Bridge and picked up rocks from the river next to the bridge and rocks from the Confederate heights and put them in my diorama to give it a more special feel !

 

[nasirkasmani]

Nasir,

Thanks to Andy and Gordon's idea of a joke, when I asked for an Axis airfield in North Afrika, I got the Tanis scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark, so I ended up with Rommel in Egypt, at least "secretly":
https://www.kingandcountry.com/diorama05.htm

well Louis, it wasn't accurate for sure.

But only a Banjo Cow would say it is not nice.

 

[thebritfarmer]

I agree with the other memebers. It's your dio so it's up to you.

I also think that what is available plays a factor, especially if you only collect from one manufaturer.

For example I only collect Britains. In the Trooping the Colour set up HRH the Duke of Edinburgh rides in the Ivory Phaeton with the Queen. They never made him as part of the set so HM QEII has to ride alone.

 

[Larry Allen]

Wow, a lot of great answers, Thanks!

Like Louis said the Battle field was over a huge area, so accurate is a little difficult. (I can see trying to explain to my wife why there is 10,000 yards of sand in the living room and dining room .

Like (Sammy719's table) I have roughly a 10' X 4' area. I have divided that up into 4 sections, (2 1/2' X 4') each with a different focus but all with the same theme. Each section will be on its own piece of wood so I can work on them separately but will blend the sides to match the adjoining sections. As Spitfrnd said "tell a story". So the left section might be the AK HQ; the two middle sections show some sort of interaction and the right section will be EA HQ.

Thanks again. Any suggestion will ALWAYS be welcomed.

 

[nasirkasmani]

sounds like a great project Larry.

 

[wadepat]

Hi Larry,

As your project progresses, is it possible for you to take and post some pictures so me might follow along? I would love to see your diorama coming to life, bit by bit.

Warmest personal regards,

Pat

 

[trooper]

To me a diorama should tell a story. A battle has as many incidents as participants and it is impossible to depict them all at once. I would suggest picking on one and try to reproduce it as accurately as possible. Half the fun is in the research. Just think, one lone soldier striding off over the desert holding an entrenching tool and a toilet roll tells a story!

 

[jazzeum]

Larry,

Looks like others beat me to it but it's whatever makes you happy. When you look at it, let's say after returning from a day in the saltmines, it should give you some satisfactions. For example, the attached is hardly historically accurate but I like it. It uses a Burnside bridge meant for the Civil War, but it's a good bridge nonetheless.

 

[Warrior]

Larry,
Regarding your question, to echo what others have said, in the end, it is your display in your house for you to enjoy, so it should suit you most importantly.

Having fun is what this hobby is all about, I wish you the best of luck with your display; creating it is half the fun, viewing it is the other half of the fun.

I'm just a phone call away (or a trip to Westwood if need be) to assist you............

 

[fmethorst]

As already noted there is no right or wrong answer. This is art and it's up to the artist to decide what appeals to him or her.

To give some idea of WWII scale let's convert a tank engagemnt between tanks 1200m apart. 1200/30 = 40m (~130ft).

I don't think 100% authenticity is realistic. I break it down into these categories:

• Historically Accurate: Scenario being depicted has written and photographic evidence to support it.
• Historically Plausible: Scenario being depicted is entirely plausible based on extrapolation of known informtion.
• Fantasy: Anything goes here and is only limited by the imagination of the artist.

It's quite difficult to get scenes to fall into the first category especially as you travel back in time.

My personal preference is to strive for some semblance of accuracy but that doesn't mean others have to.

 

[mestell]

Well I expect I may be in the minority but to me, dioramas are your own personal art medium. You are the producer/director so you get to decide what story to tell. You obtain the actors, create the sets and edit the shooting, so it is really up to you to decide the content, and that includes how historically accurate to be.

I sense in your post a desire to be creative in your stories and not to be confined to the limits of historical perfection. I think that is exciting and encourage you to follow your instincts and imbue your creations with all the artistic license you can muster. There is no right answer to this question so if you want to experiment with alternate time lines, you should definitely feel free to do so. If it could have happened, it should be fun to depict if you do it well. I would refer you to the Duke's approach to strict historical accuracy in film making: "well if it didn't happen that way, it dam*ed sure ought to have" So my advise would be to follow the Duke.

Well said!

Mike

 

[nasirkasmani]

Well said!

Mike

Hi Larry,

you could take a leaf out of Mike's Crusaders diorama approach.

His diorama is getting along very smoothly.

 

[HistoryfortheAges]

It's interesting to read all the posts for this question. I am on the other side of the camp on this issue. I prefer "historically accurate" displays no matter how small they are. Of course, "historically accurate" is somewhat of a loose term. You can be creative to some respect because so much of history has not been recorded which gives you leeway to assume events that may have happened but, not ones that were highly unlikely to have occurred. Substituting figures from "another era" for what is not available on the market today is not something that I do but saying that, I may substitute "same era" figures for regiments that may not be available as long as the uniforms were pretty much the same in style. Shrinking distances in dioramas is also, something I try to avoid but I think this is acceptable as long as the postioning of the elements is correct. This is my biggest dilemma. I built a huge Pickett's Charge diorama (16ft x 10ft) and I couldn't justify putting General Pickett in it because according to historical accounts he was nowhere near the Angle during the final moments of the Charge that I tried to depict in my diorama. This is only my opinion, on this subject. Cheers!

 

[pnadworny]

For example I "could" build a desert dio with Erwin surrendering to Monty (or being captured). Maybe, have Rommel arriving in to Monty's HQ camp in his HORCH

I'm not sure if my diorama displayed below is historically accurate but I think it looks pretty cool. As previously stated it is very hard to make a diorama 100% historically accurate. But your diorama can represent a bigger meaning. For instance my diorama represents Rommel and Monty having diplomatic talks on the brink of battle. Might not be 100% historically accurate but the diorama makes your mind wander. There is also 2 Rommels in my diorama. Whats up with that??????? I would conclude it is totally up to you what you want to do with your diorama. After all it is your diorama.

Good luck with your diorama,
Patrick