K&C..to mix or not to mix (1 Viewer)

[Currahee Chris]

Rob,,,,im feelin for you mate. My take was this was a black and white question but for whatever reason it seems to have sparked into more.

Here's my take-

I agree with Iron Brigade's comment- a lot of it has to do with diorama size. I have some large dios myself and feel that some of the size concerns melts away with more space which typically includes much more troopers and vehicles.

Here's a couple points I always think of when this discussion pops up--

1.) As many people know, I do enjoy collecting modern warfare troopers. I have all the KC and most of the figarti releases and the couple Britains has thrown in there. Given that this historical niche is somewhat small, should I be such a line purist as to refuse to purchase another manufacturer's line should they release new modern figures in the nexxt couple years (AND FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I CORDIALLY INVITE ALL MANUFACTURERS TO PUT A GOOD FOOT FORWARD TO MAKE MORE MODERN!! {sm4}{sm4} I WILL BUY IT!!). Anyway, it would seem silly to me to either refuse to buy the new releases because they dont go with the older figures I have or to sell my current collection, which I have become attached to, because they wont go with the new stuff.

2.) I have collected ancient toy soldiers since I was a boy. It has been fun watching this niche of the hobby over the years and it's fun to talk to people who know ancient toy soldiers and reminisce about all the collectors and lines and companies and good times associated with collecting that era. Its fun because the breadth of ranges allow you to become pretty knowledgeable about the history of the particular era of toy soldiers you are into. Im sure there are many collectors who can relate to this.

3.) I collect Romans from all the companies and have them all displayed together. It's fun because I literally have St. Pete Centurions ordering around a squad of Conte Legionaires and it all works. What I have found is I have essentially created company "zones" amongst my larger dioramas. Some particular manufacturers make groupings of heros and antagonists that i like. I buy them and then meld them into one of these "zones" (or they create their own) and it really brings the diorama to life.

lastly;

4.) Variety is the spice of life. Myself, Mestell, Sahara and Joesgis are all big collectors and fans of FL romans. If we all stuck to just collecting FL Romans, then we would essentially be looking at pictures here on the forum of another dude taking pictures or setting up displays with our own collections. By venturing out across other companies lines, we can mix things up and enjoy the variety.

Hang in there buddy!!!! Your aces in my book!! :wink2:

 

[Jack]

Re: K&C..no mix no way!

Rob,

I totaly see your point, and, with the exception of Thomas Gunn, I tend not to mix figures with K&C figures. However, if you don't mind me highjacking your thread just a bit, your point leads me to another related point: the futile argument constantly reiterated on this forum about who makes the best figures, vehicles, planes, dioramas, etc.

To me, the argument will always be futile, because these toys are really tiny sculptures, little works of art, and each manufacturer (and each sculptor, master painter, modeler and diorama builder within each manufacturer) has his or her own artistic style. I actually had a discussion with Andy at the OTSN about how I enjoyed equally his brother Gordon's magnificent dioramas and Ken Osen's completely different but equally magnificent dioramas, because each of these two diorama artists had mastered the style they preferred: Gordon was the master of what I would call the "Baroque" or "Hellenistic" theatrical diorama, with the most possible action and eye candy packed into every possible cubic inch of his 3-D masterpieces. Ken, on the other hand, is the master of the high renaissance diorama, simple, beautiful, stunningly accurate (you ever watch Dragnet as a kid - "just the facts, ma'am").

To me, the figures and vehicles are also reflective of the stylistic preference and artistry of the manufacturer. Andy's vision guides King & Country, John Jenkins' own style adds a different flavor to his figures, as does Matt's vision for First Legion, etc. Arguing the comparative merits of each artist's approach is like arguing whether Michelangelo, or Leonardo, or Bernini, or Picasso is the greatest artist who ever lived. They were all virtuosos of their own medium, be it sculpture or painting, and their own style from the high renaissance to the baroque to cubism. Different art historians will argue as passionately about the merits of each of these artists as we tend to argue about the merits of our favorite manufacturer(s). In the end, few passionately held opinions - and that's what these arguments all boil down to, the opinions of the beholders - are going to be swayed by the arguments of any supporters of a different camp.

As I have mentioned in other posts, I am one of the odd collectors who enjoy equally realistic matt figures and vehicles and traditional, toyish, glossy toy soldiers and tinplate vehicles and aircraft. My two favorite manufacturers are King & Country, the fathers of the mat revolution in the hobby, and Heco Tinplate Models, a mom and pop cottage manufacturer of very traditional, glossy, tinplate vehicles, aircraft and soldiers. My collection also includes figures, vehicles and aircraft by John Jenkins Designs, Figarti, Thomas Gunn Miniatures, and First Legion among the matt manufacturers, and Trophy, Imperial, Frontline, Britains, Tommy Atkins, Lezinski, and Edmunds Toy Soldiers among the glossy manufacturers. I have 18 of Gordon's K&C dioramas, 8 dioramas from Ken Osen, and a few others of materials from Build-a-Rama, JG Miniatures, and other diorama manufacturers.

I love them all. Who is the best among them? I refuse to beat my head against that brick wall, and leave that to the "true believers." To me every one of them is fine art, and despite stylistic differences, they are all excellent in my book.

So when I see fellow members posting "fact: this" and "fact: that" as I have on a few threads concerning the comparative merits of the wonderful selection of eastern front vehicles recently, I just want to say: "fact: not too long ago we were all grousing about the fact that no manufacturer was making Eastern front vehicles, now we are spoiled for choice, lets just enjoy it, and if you must vote for your favorite, do it with your wallet. Oh, and vote early and often . . . :wink2:

Louis

Great post...but seriously...Picasso? Now there is someone who is over-rated. I spent three of the longest hours of my life in the Picasso Museum in Paris. Michelangelo wins that competition hands down!

Jack

 

[Warbuff26]

When you only own K&C this is an easy thread.......I dont mix!

 

[TomNT]

Rob,

I wouldn't worry what naysayers may say. Must come from people who worry about too many things instead of enjoying the hobby. Too many negative vibes, man :smile2: It was pretty obvious you were just trying to get some good discussion going. Keep up the good work mate.



Thanks Brad,

Maybe I should have worded it differently, but just trying to get some chat going:smile2:

Rob

Rob

Brad pretty well much sums it up, this is a good thread and there is no need to pull it or should you have worded it differently. Keep up the good discussions mate and don't let it worry you.

Tom

 

[Louis Badolato]

Re: K&C..no mix no way!

Louis

Great post...but seriously...Picasso? Now there is someone who is over-rated. I spent three of the longest hours of my life in the Picasso Museum in Paris. Michelangelo wins that competition hands down!

Jack

Jack,

I happen to agree with you concerning Picasso. I included him to make my point: there are a bunch of art historians who will argue Picasso is the greatest artist of all time. While I don't happen to appreciate his artistic vision, my telling those art historians that I just don't see it is unlikely to sway their opinion of anything but me.

In this hobby, there are many different artistic approaches using several different media. K&C chooses a very dramatic presentation, with brighter colors and theatrical poses, and for vehicles Andy prefers to work in a single medium: polystone. Figarti chooses a gritty, weathered, more subdued color palette, and prefers to mix media in its vehicles, with polystone, metal, resin and a god deal of photo-etching. John Jenkins and First Legion go for a modelling approach, with resin as the medium of choice for vehicles. I happen to enjoy them all, and have different favorites for different items.

Everyone is entitled to their favorites, but when "opinion" is mislabeled as "fact", things can get pretty ugly on discussions which boil down to individual taste and appreciation. The old adage "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" holds true, and if we can accept that, the discussions on this forum will be alot more cordial.

Louis

 

[braddinpa]

For me there is no hard set rule or fact. I like what I like. I mix the figures that I think look good. For example. I have the great King Tiger done by CS mixed with the Kubelwagen by K & C and some Figures by TG and K & C. To me they look great together. IN the end. There is no right or wrong. Just what makes you happy. Brad

 

[Rob]

Rob
I only collect K&C and TGM and they mix very well together . Here you have some proof
guy
View attachment 107264

View attachment 107265

Don't be silly mate . I love toy soldiers as you do. First legion do great stuff and so do K&C . Mate enjoy this thread you started and the reply's will come. You no PM'S are snake like at times. Don't pull this thread if you no you started it for just as you stated it. Simmo.

Rob,,,,im feelin for you mate. My take was this was a black and white question but for whatever reason it seems to have sparked into more.

Here's my take-

I agree with Iron Brigade's comment- a lot of it has to do with diorama size. I have some large dios myself and feel that some of the size concerns melts away with more space which typically includes much more troopers and vehicles.

Here's a couple points I always think of when this discussion pops up--

1.) As many people know, I do enjoy collecting modern warfare troopers. I have all the KC and most of the figarti releases and the couple Britains has thrown in there. Given that this historical niche is somewhat small, should I be such a line purist as to refuse to purchase another manufacturer's line should they release new modern figures in the nexxt couple years (AND FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I CORDIALLY INVITE ALL MANUFACTURERS TO PUT A GOOD FOOT FORWARD TO MAKE MORE MODERN!! {sm4}{sm4} I WILL BUY IT!!). Anyway, it would seem silly to me to either refuse to buy the new releases because they dont go with the older figures I have or to sell my current collection, which I have become attached to, because they wont go with the new stuff.

2.) I have collected ancient toy soldiers since I was a boy. It has been fun watching this niche of the hobby over the years and it's fun to talk to people who know ancient toy soldiers and reminisce about all the collectors and lines and companies and good times associated with collecting that era. Its fun because the breadth of ranges allow you to become pretty knowledgeable about the history of the particular era of toy soldiers you are into. Im sure there are many collectors who can relate to this.

3.) I collect Romans from all the companies and have them all displayed together. It's fun because I literally have St. Pete Centurions ordering around a squad of Conte Legionaires and it all works. What I have found is I have essentially created company "zones" amongst my larger dioramas. Some particular manufacturers make groupings of heros and antagonists that i like. I buy them and then meld them into one of these "zones" (or they create their own) and it really brings the diorama to life.

lastly;

4.) Variety is the spice of life. Myself, Mestell, Sahara and Joesgis are all big collectors and fans of FL romans. If we all stuck to just collecting FL Romans, then we would essentially be looking at pictures here on the forum of another dude taking pictures or setting up displays with our own collections. By venturing out across other companies lines, we can mix things up and enjoy the variety.

Hang in there buddy!!!! Your aces in my book!! :wink2:

Rob

Brad pretty well much sums it up, this is a good thread and there is no need to pull it or should you have worded it differently. Keep up the good discussions mate and don't let it worry you.

Tom

For me there is no hard set rule or fact. I like what I like. I mix the figures that I think look good. For example. I have the great King Tiger done by CS mixed with the Kubelwagen by K & C and some Figures by TG and K & C. To me they look great together. IN the end. There is no right or wrong. Just what makes you happy. Brad

Thanks guys (and thanks to all who've posted so far) its good to get your views and how you approach your own collecting and displaying. The sharing of views, ideas, dioramas and the hobby in general is what makes this forum so enjoyable.

I've also seen how well some figures and vehicles can work with others, as Brad says there is no right or wrong only what works for your collection. Thanks again chaps and keep your comments coming.

Rob

 

[bradleyl30]

Hey folks,
I am new to this forum, but have been collecting for several years now. Mostly WW2, European Theater stuff, but also have some Crimean War and Napoleonic War stuff as well.

As for mixing and matching, I mix and match TGM, K&C and Figarti vehicles. Have never liked the way CS figures and vehicles match, or Figarti figures. That does kill me since I wish their were more Sd Kfz 251s out their for Panzergrenadiers.

Like others, I don't really think the First Legion stuff goes well with the manufacturers above, but have displayed some of the K&C grey troops and some W Britain grey troops with my First Legion Stalingrad soldiers.

Just my two cents. I love it all and would have 2 to 3 dioramas per room if I could, and each room a different theme. Doubt the fiancee will go for that, though.

Larry

 

[em_linney]

I've enjoyed reading these posts....been collecting for about 10 yrs. now and my collection covers several different historical time periods, toy soldier time periods, and manufacturers. My collection is not very large and I don't have a tremendous amount of display space, so I mix manufacturers within historical period. This helps me to give volume to time periods that I am still developing. I try to avoid mixing glossy with matte and given the manufacturers that I have collected works out pretty well. Part of my collection consists of KC, TG, & CS WWII (primarily Normandy and Bulge/Winter), I find that they work together well in terms of size and painting. I happen to have a couple of Honour Bound sets as well, and they fit in pretty well, even though the figures are slightly smaller. I also have some East of India and Monarch Samurai the paint schemes are different as is the size, but for me they fit thematically. Same with my small Napoleonic collection, it's a mix of First Legion and Frontline Figures. For display, this works for me. When I finally get around to putting figures into dioramas, I will mix based on need and whether they work well enough together to not distract from the scene. For example, I most likely will not use the Honour Bound sets in a scene with TG/CS/KC unless it is to force perspective.

If I had a larger collection of each manufacturer I might try to separate them, but that's years down the road unless the lottery is very good to me!

 

[Jamo]

Probably 95% of my collection is King & Country but every now and then Something grabs my attention - like this JJD German hangar. I received it this week and was impressed with the sculpting, painting and weathering. Good value too. It comes with optional numbers 1-3 and I'm tempted to get another and make a 2 hangar diorama.... I have 5 K&C WW1 warbirds now so would need a fair sized dio!

Anyone who is considering this hangar to go with your K&C collection, I would highly recommend it....

 

[Mitch]

Does the door slide on the model?
Mitch

 

[Jamo]

Does the door slide on the model?
Mitch

Hi Mitch
Afraid not. But there is some depth to it and it is partly open on the far right with detail inside. I'll try and post a better picture soon.
Thanks

 

[Firebat]

Mix them up...Why not

K&C - Figarti - Conte - Britains here

 

[OzDigger]

I collect K & C WWI and WWII Aussies and don't mix other products with those displays, thanks for making those Andy.

However I recently got back into 'Normandy' and have found Collectors Showcase to have the best range regarding consistent camo schemes and size match, and their extra features such as opening doors etc really adds to displays. I mix in some K & C vehicles and figures but find that TMG blends best as far as figures are concerned as I like their camo uniforms and finer weapons, but I still haven't purchased any TMG vehicles as they are too under sized imo, I hope they fix that asap.

Figarti and First Legion seem to concentrate on the Eastern Front, and K & C have also got back into the Russians, I have no interest in that front at all but I may buy one of the new FL Waffen SS sets to see for myself the size issue (if there is one).

 

[Firebat]

I collect K & C WWI and WWII Aussies and don't mix other products with those displays, thanks for making those Andy.

However I recently got back into 'Normandy' and have found Collectors Showcase to have the best range regarding consistent camo schemes and size match, and their extra features such as opening doors etc really adds to displays. I mix in some K & C vehicles and figures but find that TMG blends best as far as figures are concerned as I like their camo uniforms and finer weapons, but I still haven't purchased any TMG vehicles as they are too under sized imo, I hope they fix that asap.

Figarti and First Legion seem to concentrate on the Eastern Front, and K & C have also got back into the Russians, I have no interest in that front at all but I may buy one of the new FL Waffen SS sets to see for myself the size issue (if there is one).

OZ when you buy your first FL set you will open a can of worms and maybe you WILL see what many of us are talking about. They are excellent, but smaller. Guess what.... you can use them with some TGM, and then the can of worms gets bigger, and you will find they match with some Figarti, the can of worms gets bigger still. Jenkins Panzers seem to fit Bigger yet, I am finding certain K&C pieces fitting with FL.

THEN................

To add insult to injury CS is making their stuff Bigger to fit with main stream 1/30.

So when some of you out there state those of us who are concerned with this subject are beating a dead horse and spew your sarcastic remarks...Keep the remarks to yourself and let us be, we ae concerned with the betterment of this hobby and we have just as much right as anyone else to voice our opinions.


After all that is what a Forum is for.............. I think a lot of you bring up ridiculous topics and beat dead horses also, but I would never make a remark about it. If it concerns you talk about it and others who are interested in the subject matter will follow.


BSP has tons of projects to do and I need this kind of information so I can do the best job possible. Alex

 

[OzDigger]

The matching of FL figures with say 1/32 FOV and TGM AFV's does make sense as you combine well detailed, albeit expensive figures, with well detail and inexpensive AFV's, and many collectors that have done this are also into the Eastern Front. It will be interesting to see how many collectors are attracted to FL with their recent SS and American Western Front sets.

 

[Firebat]

The matching of FL figures with say 1/32 FOV and TGM AFV's does make sense as you combine well detailed, albeit expensive figures, with well detail and inexpensive AFV's, and many collectors that have done this are also into the Eastern Front. It will be interesting to see how many collectors are attracted to FL with their recent SS and American Western Front sets.

FL has made a bold move in this hobby, and I am sure many are hesitant to dive in ( Me included ) but I am doing a lot of research and as I mentioned I am finding other manufacturers products that seem to fit, which is encouraging. I am moving cautiously, and seeing how or if other manufacturers are responding to the scale issue. This will shape, for me personally, my future colecting habits.


You have to keep an open mind and embrace the ideas of innovative companies, it adds excitement to the hobby. I am thrilled with the newer companies offerings and I support their efforts. Alex

 

[wwiibuff]

Since this is a subject that I believe to be of interest to many collectors, I thought I would show an example of how I determine figure scale. I first establish that maybe the average height of a soldier is 5' 10" (I know that some might have been 6' 8" or 5' 4" and so on, but to me 5' 10" is reasonable for an average). This 5' 10" would be from the bottom of his feet to the top of his head. If he's wearing a helmet or cap, then I estimate where the top of his head would be under the helmet/cap. So if he's on a base, I don't start at the bottom of the base, I start at the bottom of his feet and likewise I don't stop at the top of his helmet/hat, but where I estimate the top of his head would be. Also, I try and find a figure that is standing up straight. It's real easy to figure. 5' 10" is a total of 70". So you just take 70" divided by the height of the figure to get scale. For example, if the soldier measures 2.00" tall then he is exactly 1/35 scale (70/2.00 = 35 or 1/35). If a soldier is 2.50" tall then he is exactly 1/28 scale (70/2.50 = 28 or 1/28 scale).

Here is a line of 11 figures from varying makers going from left to right in the photo.

1.) Tamiya US Infantry measured at 2.00" = 1/35.00 scale

2.) FOV Russian Tanker measured at 2.13" = 1/32.86 scale

3.) Figarti British Desert Tanker (from 1/32 line) measured at 2.19" = 1/31.96 scale

4.) Corgi US Marine Pilot measured at 2.19" = 1/31.96 scale

5.) First Legion tanker measured at 2.31" = 1/30.30 scale

6.) Figarti Farmer (from 1/30 line) measured at 2.41" = 1/29.05 scale

7.) Honour Bound German Tanker measured at 2.44" = 1/28.69 scale

8.) W. Britains US Paratrooper measured at 2.31" = 1/30.30 scale

9.) K&C Luftwaffe Pilot measured at 2.50" = 1/28.00 scale

10.) K&C Afrika Korp measured at 2.53" = 1/27.67 scale

11.) Collector's Showcase US Infantry measured at 2.50" = 1/28.00 scale

These I measured to the best of my ability and I went ahead and showed each out to the nearest hundreth decimal just for info knowing that this is not an exact science but I wanted my estimate to be reflected, they could of course just be rounded off. Of course this is just a small sample of the many thousands of figures out there, but to me does give an indication of where some of the manufacturers are in relation to scale.

Please all who read this post, I am not trying to condem or validate anything or anyone I'm just showing how I consider the way my collection scales out. This is my opinion and experiment and you may or may not agree with it, but I thought it would be of some interest to many of you.

 

[Firebat]

since this is a subject that i believe to be of interest to many collectors, i thought i would show an example of how i determine figure scale. I first establish that maybe the average height of a soldier is 5' 10" (i know that some might have been 6' 8" or 5' 4" and so on, but to me 5' 10" is reasonable for an average). This 5' 10" would be from the bottom of his feet to the top of his head. If he's wearing a helmet or cap, then i estimate where the top of his head would be under the helmet/cap. So if he's on a base, i don't start at the bottom of the base, i start at the bottom of his feet and likewise i don't stop at the top of his helmet/hat, but where i estimate the top of his head would be. Also, i try and find a figure that is standing up straight. It's real easy to figure. 5' 10" is a total of 70". So you just take 70" divided by the height of the figure to get scale. For example, if the soldier measures 2.00" tall then he is exactly 1/35 scale (70/2.00 = 35 or 1/35). If a soldier is 2.50" tall then he is exactly 1/28 scale (70/2.50 = 28 or 1/28 scale).

Here is a line of 11 figures from varying makers going from left to right in the photo.

1.) tamiya us infantry measured at 2.00" = 1/35.00 scale

2.) fov russian tanker measured at 2.13" = 1/32.86 scale

3.) figarti british desert tanker (from 1/32 line) measured at 2.19" = 1/31.96 scale

4.) corgi us marine pilot measured at 2.19" = 1/31.96 scale

5.) first legion tanker measured at 2.31" = 1/30.30 scale

6.) figarti farmer (from 1/30 line) measured at 2.41" = 1/29.05 scale

7.) honour bound german tanker measured at 2.44" = 1/28.69 scale

8.) w. Britains us paratrooper measured at 2.31" = 1/30.30 scale

9.) k&c luftwaffe pilot measured at 2.50" = 1/28.00 scale

10.) k&c afrika korp measured at 2.53" = 1/27.67 scale

11.) collector's showcase us infantry measured at 2.50" = 1/28.00 scale

these i measured to the best of my ability and i went ahead and showed each out to the nearest hundreth decimal just for info knowing that this is not an exact science but i wanted my estimate to be reflected, they could of course just be rounded off. Of course this is just a small sample of the many thousands of figures out there, but to me does give an indication of where some of the manufacturers are in relation to scale.

Please all who read this post, i am not trying to condem or validate anything or anyone i'm just showing how i consider the way my collection scales out. This is my opinion and experiment and you may or may not agree with it, but i thought it would be of some interest to many of you.

thank you !