Scale Reference Pictures (2 Viewers)

Here are some more pictures of figures in relation to the HB Tiger.

Scale_25_small.jpg


The following two pictures demonstrate how perspective affects the final result. Each picture is taken slightly higher than the previous picture.

Scale_26_small.jpg


Scale_27_small.jpg


This picture features K&C figures which are representative of the majority of WWII TS manufacturers.

Scale_28_small.jpg


The last picture features both FL and K&C figures

Scale_29_small.jpg
 
Frank, thanks for the photos, my two cents are.

1) As you said earlier, the height/angle of the camera can certainly affect the perceived sizes but you provided enough images to allow for that.

2) I do not have that Tiger I model and would need to know if it is exact to 1/30 scale.

3) The base under the Tiger model looks like thin cardboard or similar compressible material. A stiffer plywood base would provide a more accurate match of the Tiger to the figure base height which would of course make figure height comparisons less biased towards smaller figures.

4) The newer First Legion figures you pictured are a bit chunkier looking than the earlier versions and a move in the right direction imho. The difference isn't great as you say, but there is a difference.

5) Assuming the Tiger model is accurate to 1/30 scale the FL figures still appear (to me) a bit undersized, and the K & C figures appear (to me) a bit oversized. That said, there is plenty of figure size variation in the K & C range and no doubt some of their smaller figures would minimize any differences between FL and K & C figures. This is especially true of K & C crew figures issued with their tank and vehicle sets which tend to be a bit smaller than their standard infantry figures.
 
Frank this has been an excellent post and highly informative.

I think showing the respective figures against the tanks are very useful. I think too many of the figures are far too big. It is often difficult to see different makers against different products - even at the toy shows.

When I recently went to Bovington Tank Museum you really appreciate the sheer size of tanks, especially the German King Tigers. They are quite simple huge.

Interestingly against a King Tiger; I am 5ft 9in - the front machine gun was aimed directly at my head (temple area, to be precise).:D:D Now when I put my KC soldiers (I used Brits, US and Germans because apparently some nationalities are taller than others);) - against my KC King Tiger they all stand significantly higher with the machine gun pointing at chest / neck height so they do appear slightly too big.

Cheers

Gazza
 
Well, one thing is evident from all the pictures (both actual wartime photos and current manufacture TS) that have been posted. The actual people and the TS are many different sizes and shapes. Tough to call one TS as too big or too small when compared to wartime photos. With an actual 1/30 scale Tiger, it would seem just about any of the TS made will be in correct proportion. This also makes mixing and matching different manufacturers problematic. In the end, it still boils down to individual taste, ie., what looks right in the eyes of the collector. I personally feel that, with the Tigers being so large, the people should look small compared to the vehicle, but most of my TS look big. It appears that the FL figures are the correct scale, in my eye, to the 1/30 Tiger. I don't collect FL so I have to live with the larger figures of the other makers. That's just the way it goes. -- Al
 
One last picture to add to this thread.

Here is a picture of me next to Tiger 131 at Bovington. I'm 178cm tall.

DSC_0475.jpg
 
Looks like Bovington have got it wrong as well. If your 178cm, I make the Tiger to be 1:09998256 scale. ;)
 
But there is no base under your feet and you are not wearing a helmet, so it's still hard to tell :D:D

That is a well set-up photo. Clearly the deck of the Tiger is at the top of a soldiers head or slightly above it. Subtract the base and headgear from a figure and make an allowance for the typical 5' 7" tanker in WW2, and it is easy to compare figures to Tiger tank models. The top of a tanker figures helmet should be slightly higher than the deck of a model Tiger.

Thanks Frank

PS Did you stand next to any other tanks at Bovington?

Terry
 
Great shot. does the matilda look tiny or what? I think the bases of the figures does quite a lot to affect the height and by the look the new AK figures bases seem to look even bigger.
Mitch
 
Phantom Warrior said:
But there is no base under your feet and you are not wearing a helmet, so it's still hard to tell :D:D

That is a well set-up photo. Clearly the deck of the Tiger is at the top of a soldiers head or slightly above it. Subtract the base and headgear from a figure and make an allowance for the typical 5' 7" tanker in WW2, and it is easy to compare figures to Tiger tank models. The top of a tanker figures helmet should be slightly higher than the deck of a model Tiger.
....
Click to expand...
More like even with the deck if you do the math. If Frank is 5'10" than the base and scant tanker helmet would just about put that 5'7'' tanker at or slightly below the deck as far as I can see.
 
Spitfrnd said:
More like even with the deck if you do the math. If Frank is 5'10" than the base and scant tanker helmet would just about put that 5'7'' tanker at or slightly below the deck as far as I can see.
Click to expand...

Now you're just splitting hairs :D:D

Terry
 
Spitfrnd said:
Well not yet, I didn't account for the difference in hair styles between Frank and the tankers.:D:D
Click to expand...

You just couldn't let that one go by and allow someone else to have the last word :rolleyes::D A cruel jest at Frank's expense :eek::(

To bad Rob isn't here to put you in your place ;):)

Terry
 
Phantom Warrior said:
You just couldn't let that one go by and allow someone else to have the last word :rolleyes::D A cruel jest at Frank's expense :eek::(

To bad Rob isn't here to put you in your place ;):)

Terry
Click to expand...
Whoa now, it was not a cruel jest at Frank at all; just an observation that short hair and long hair may produced different effective heights, even within helmets, even within helmets; especially if we are splitting hairs.;)
 
I did not see any hairs.
:confused:

Thank you very much for all your photos and work, Frank. It is very much appreciated. Even by the accidental observer. :eek:

My conclusion: whatever works for the individual collector.

... And I really liked the HB Tiger. :D
 
Hair is overrated. I step out of the shower and I'm good to go. :D:D

Terry, here are a few more shots

Bovington's Tiger II (Serien Turm)

DSC_0422.jpg


Bovington's Panther

DSC_0468.jpg


Imperial War Museum's Jagdpanther

DSC_0660.jpg
 
I have no doubt Frank.:cool: I think your photos are extremely helpful for anyone who still has scale questions on ATVs and their troops. Maybe Terry can contain himself.:confused:;)
 
Great pics what it does show is how big the panther was. Sure there are still questions to be asked about scale
Mitch
 
Just put my HB Panther next to my CS Panther & there a big difference in size between the two :eek: witch one is right :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top