Why I quit collecting toy soldiers (1 Viewer)

[gettysburgbuff]

I have quite an extensive collection of figures from various manufacturers, mostly Civil War but also from other periods. I have created some encased dioramas and also larger table top displays that have provided me with a creative outlet, making authentic-looking scenery and placing the figures into a correct and appropriate historical setting. I have been frustrated over the past several years because of the unresponsiveness of manufacturers to create a consistent scale-size, not only between companies but also within their own brands. Britains' ambulance wagon is not in scale with its covered supply wagon, including the size of the figures. This is only one example. There is also the issue of historical inaccuracy. For example, Britain's depiction of Pennsylvania Bucktails inspired by Dale Gallon's painting of that unit at Gettysburg is supposed to be the 13th PA Reserves' Bucktail regiment (42nd PA). It correctly shows the figures holding the shorter Sharps' Rifles. Unfortunately, its color bearer figure is holding a flag with the identification of the 149th PA (presented by 149th PA), which were known as the "Bogus Bucktails," a rival group. Such a mistake is preventable if people manufacturing these figures had someone there with a modicum of historical knowledge that went beyond awareness of uniforms and accoutrements. I have struggled with depicting artillery accurately when there is no backup limbers and caissons with tethered horses behind them. To compensate for apparent failure of manufacturers for many years to accommodate collectors of artillery units, I have had to spray the back portion of my large glass display case to create a fog-like mist to give the illusion that those vehicles are somehow obscured by that mist. Otherwise, I have had to depict the cannons on the edge of the display so that one might conclude that the caissons and limbers with horses are off the table. Nearly every one of the figures manufactured today have the soldiers with knapsacks or blanket rolls when we all fully realize that when infantry was in static positions or even in assault mode, those things were removed. The lack of soldiers without these accoutrements limits the use of figures to create a particular scene where they did not have those items when they entered battle. I have brought this last issue to the attention of Britains on several occasions over the past few years without seeing any changes. Therefore, this has impacted my creative energies to make an historically accurate display. One of the things about this hobby, as with model railroading (another one of my hobbies), is that once the hobbyist goes beyond the simple displays, he/she wants to refine his/her techniques and displays in terms of accuracy and realism. It's a constant process to create better and more realistic things as one evolves in the hobby--that's what it is all about, but it seems that manufacturers are holding back those of us who want to progress.

 

[desk11desk12]

Best of luck in your pursuit of perfection

For me, I'll enjoy my collection and add to it.

IMO, The quality of the hobby has never been better.

Carlos

 

[theBaron]

Yeah, those things can be irritating, especially considering the prices manufacturers demand for their work. As price goes up, so does the customer's demand for accuracy, for example, especially considering that today's "toy soldiers" are collector's toys, not children's toys, and the discriminating collector probably knows a lot about the subject he collects.

But for it to be reason to quit collecting? That's a bit hyperbolic. But to each his own. It's a hobby, not a job, and you should enjoy it. If you don't, so be it.

Prost!
Brad

 

[Michael Seemann]

This is why I make the distinction between scale Model Soldiers (or Historical Miniatures, Military Miniatures), and Toy Soldiers. And why I create and collect both. My need for accuracy and fidelity of detail, and maximum artistic sculpting and painting is satiated with the former, and the charm, nostalgia, and collectability by the latter.

It sounds like you need to transition from the toy to the scale model side of the hobby, rather than abandon it altogether.

 

[gettysburgbuff]

One of the sets that Britain's has created with popularity is the Iron Brigade at Gettysburg that features General Reynold's on horseback. The problem is that there should be staff officers riding along with him. In so far as corps flags are concerned, I suggested that while it is great to have a corp flag bearer denoting the 1st corps, why not have a generic mounted corp flag bearer and many different corp flags that could be interchangeably slipped into the figure? This way it provides more flexibility if other mounted officers are created in the future depicting other corps. That suggestion apparently fell on deaf ears. The color company of union infantry not only included the national colors but sometimes also regimental colors (blue field). Have you ever seen one in the miniature soldier line? I haven't. Now, I realize that not all units carried the regimental colors and those who did sometimes were unmarked with the identity of the regiment. Wouldn't it be nice to have at least one generic figure carrying unmarked regimental colors to add to any scene? There are just so many possibilities available to round out what is really a sameness about the figures that are being created, distinguished only by the positions that solders are in.

 

[gettysburgbuff]

This is why I make the distinction between scale Model Soldiers (or Historical Miniatures, Military Miniatures), and Toy Soldiers. And why I create and collect both. My need for accuracy and fidelity of detail, and maximum artistic sculpting and painting is satiated with the former, and the charm, nostalgia, and collectability by the latter.

It sounds like you need to transition from the toy to the scale model side of the hobby, rather than abandon it altogether.

There is a distinction between what has been traditionally called "toy soldiers"--figures in unnatural poses that are glossy--and the mat finished variety in recent years that are designed to be utilized in dioramas as opposed to decorative figures. I certainly understand that even though I might not have used the correct term in posting my comment. But if a manufacturer is going to make accurate scale model mat figures in various standing or kneeling positions to create a scene, why not have them be consistent with others in scale? Scale is scale.

 

[gettysburgbuff]

Yeah, those things can be irritating, especially considering the prices manufacturers demand for their work. As price goes up, so does the customer's demand for accuracy, for example, especially considering that today's "toy soldiers" are collector's toys, not children's toys, and the discriminating collector probably knows a lot about the subject he collects.

But for it to be reason to quit collecting? That's a bit hyperbolic. But to each his own. It's a hobby, not a job, and you should enjoy it. If you don't, so be it.

Prost!
Brad

It may seem "hyperbolic," but what can one do after collecting so many figures that are similar and not distinctive? If I want to create a scene from Gettysburg, I cannot accurately do a scene depicting Little Round Top, Devil's Den, Peach Orchard, or Wheatfield or even Pickett's Charge. Why? Because all the union soldiers I could use have knapsacks or blanket rolls on them. Can one imagine doing a scene showing the climax of Pickett's Charge and the union soldiers are fighting with heavy knapsacks on? Ridiculous!

 

[gettysburgbuff]

One of the sets that Britain's has created with popularity is the Iron Brigade at Gettysburg that features General Reynold's on horseback. The problem is that there should be staff officers riding along with him. In so far as corps flags are concerned, I suggested that while it is great to have a corp flag bearer denoting the 1st corps, why not have a generic mounted corp flag bearer and many different corp flags that could be interchangeably slipped into the figure? This way it provides more flexibility if other mounted officers are created in the future depicting other corps. That suggestion apparently fell on deaf ears. The color company of union infantry not only included the national colors but sometimes also regimental colors (blue field). Have you ever seen one in the miniature soldier line? I haven't. Now, I realize that not all units carried the regimental colors and those who did sometimes were unmarked with the identity of the regiment. Wouldn't it be nice to have at least one generic figure carrying unmarked regimental colors to add to any scene? There are just so many possibilities available to round out what is really a sameness about the figures that are being created, distinguished only by the positions that solders are in.

Might not have been Britains that created that set...

 

[gettysburgbuff]

One of the sets that Britain's has created with popularity is the Iron Brigade at Gettysburg that features General Reynold's on horseback. The problem is that there should be staff officers riding along with him. In so far as corps flags are concerned, I suggested that while it is great to have a corp flag bearer denoting the 1st corps, why not have a generic mounted corp flag bearer and many different corp flags that could be interchangeably slipped into the figure? This way it provides more flexibility if other mounted officers are created in the future depicting other corps. That suggestion apparently fell on deaf ears. The color company of union infantry not only included the national colors but sometimes also regimental colors (blue field). Have you ever seen one in the miniature soldier line? I haven't. Now, I realize that not all units carried the regimental colors and those who did sometimes were unmarked with the identity of the regiment. Wouldn't it be nice to have at least one generic figure carrying unmarked regimental colors to add to any scene? There are just so many possibilities available to round out what is really a sameness about the figures that are being created, distinguished only by the positions that solders are in.

I stand corrected: there is an Iron Brigade set featuring a regimental color bearer which I noticed...

 

[Larry Allen]

From your posts, you seem to have chosen the wrong branch in this hobby. As has been stated below, it seems that you would be happier with highly detailed models and one-off sets that strive for accuracy and completeness. There are dozens of model kits that you can purchase and then build them to the highest level of detail that you wish.

This "toy soldier" branch is not the problem ... nor is it the lack of responsiveness by the manufactures to YOUR wants and needs.

The problem is that you are demanding a level of performance and uniqueness that these items were NEVER intended to provide. Further more, you chose a manufacturer (William Britains) that produces wonderful product, but is definitely at a level of the detail and accuracy scale you can't accept. Would you buy a Ford Fiesta and them complain that it doesn't give you the Performance of a Lamborghini Centenario Roadster?

Why didn't you (choose/buy) First Legion, King & Country or John Jenkins, for example?

How can you expect that any manufacturer produce a set or series that fits the "accuracy" criteria of each and every single unit or regiment in the Civil War ( just to choose one)? That would be financial suicide ...!

I see you live in Gettysburg. There is a show on May 4th and 5th (MFCA) close by, that will exhibit figures that are designed, sculpted and painted to a level that you might enjoy. But they will not cost on $30 - $40 a piece like the W.B.

Your thread theme is "Why I quit collecting toy soldiers."

If you are not happy with these offerings ... then by all means quit and enjoy another area. But IMHO, as stated by Carlos, "For me, I'll enjoy my collection and add to it. The quality of the hobby has never been better"

As for me, I can't wait until the next release of JJD DAM series, or the K&C USMC series or the new Corsairs, or ......

Good Luck
---LaRRy

 

[Fitzgibbon]

It may seem "hyperbolic," but what can one do after collecting so many figures that are similar and not distinctive? If I want to create a scene from Gettysburg, I cannot accurately do a scene depicting Little Round Top, Devil's Den, Peach Orchard, or Wheatfield or even Pickett's Charge. Why? Because all the union soldiers I could use have knapsacks or blanket rolls on them. Can one imagine doing a scene showing the climax of Pickett's Charge and the union soldiers are fighting with heavy knapsacks on? Ridiculous!

I'm sure that Diorama makers are hearing you but, if the manufacturers are not making these, it is because they don't believe there is a potential profit; and, after all, that is the sole driver of the commercial world. But this is the 21st Century; the age of DIY. You could make your own specialty figures to meet your own demand. In the past few weeks, I have had the opportunity to view some amazing work from people creating their own dioramas and scratch building all the elements. It's a matter of extending your project over a year or two, but the result becomes truly original - literally your own creation.

 

[theBaron]

It may seem "hyperbolic," but what can one do after collecting so many figures that are similar and not distinctive? If I want to create a scene from Gettysburg, I cannot accurately do a scene depicting Little Round Top, Devil's Den, Peach Orchard, or Wheatfield or even Pickett's Charge. Why? Because all the union soldiers I could use have knapsacks or blanket rolls on them. Can one imagine doing a scene showing the climax of Pickett's Charge and the union soldiers are fighting with heavy knapsacks on? Ridiculous!

Then learn to paint your own.

 

[johnnybach]

Then learn to paint your own.

I would go a bit further Brad. Each to his own method for achieving the Toy Soldiers he wants, though if the hobby is not for you - well, okay - so be it.

I note, in particular, that the author of the this thread wants to have his soldiers without packs, different flags and other modifications etc,.

So....what's the problem? Removal of the offending parts is usually not all that difficult with most figures........fill in the resulting hole in the back of the figure (the usual method of production, I've found).......and retouch (or repaint) the figure. Admittedly, of course - it would help IF the original figures COULD be purchased as unpainted castings before modification - so maybe search for and find a manufacturer that does this. ( There are lots of such smaller scale manufaturers in the UK).

Then you could have the satisfaction of (almost) creating exactly the figure you want yourself. OR - if you can't do it yourself - get someone to do it for you. There are plenty of converters/painters of figures out there who are only to willing to do this for you - some even advertise on this forum.

However - if you can't find the figures you want to fill your requirements - then maybe it is better for you to find fulfillment in some other hobby.

The reason I thought to reply to you - was that I too couldn't find satisfaction in JUST collecting figures either - and wanted something more from the TS's I collect - and was also considering giving up collecting in my early days as a collector. BUT - by perseverance, I learned to convert and paint - using mostly castings and second-hand figures (in Glossy Toy Soldier style) - and THEN, I had found my hobby.

They may not be as finely produced as some of the manufacturers others mentioned in this thread - BUT - they do fulfill my needs.

Hope my ramblings help you decide - and best of luck in whatever hobbies you choose to pursue . jb

 

[Michael Seemann]

From your posts, you seem to have chosen the wrong branch in this hobby. As has been stated below, it seems that you would be happier with highly detailed models and one-off sets that strive for accuracy and completeness. There are dozens of model kits that you can purchase and then build them to the highest level of detail that you wish.

This "toy soldier" branch is not the problem ... nor is it the lack of responsiveness by the manufactures to YOUR wants and needs.

The problem is that you are demanding a level of performance and uniqueness that these items were NEVER intended to provide. Further more, you chose a manufacturer (William Britains) that produces wonderful product, but is definitely at a level of the detail and accuracy scale you can't accept. Would you buy a Ford Fiesta and them complain that it doesn't give you the Performance of a Lamborghini Centenario Roadster?

Why didn't you (choose/buy) First Legion, King & Country or John Jenkins, for example?

How can you expect that any manufacturer produce a set or series that fits the "accuracy" criteria of each and every single unit or regiment in the Civil War ( just to choose one)? That would be financial suicide ...!

I see you live in Gettysburg. There is a show on May 4th and 5th (MFCA) close by, that will exhibit figures that are designed, sculpted and painted to a level that you might enjoy. But they will not cost on $30 - $40 a piece like the W.B.

Your thread theme is "Why I quit collecting toy soldiers."

If you are not happy with these offerings ... then by all means quit and enjoy another area. But IMHO, as stated by Carlos, "For me, I'll enjoy my collection and add to it. The quality of the hobby has never been better"

As for me, I can't wait until the next release of JJD DAM series, or the K&C USMC series or the new Corsairs, or ......

Good Luck
---LaRRy

Larry,

Your comments are a reiteration of exactly what I said in post #4. Apparently the OP is stuck in diminutive soldier purgatory, and does not concur regarding the obvious (to us) options.

 

[gettysburgbuff]

Larry,

Your comments are a reiteration of exactly what I said in post #4. Apparently the OP is stuck in diminutive soldier purgatory, and does not concur regarding the obvious (to us) options.

The suggestions provided to me are essentially to create my own figures. Of course, I could do anything in that regard if I wanted to and could have done that in the past. I know of a fellow that molds his own or buys blanks and attaches arms and legs and paints them. The point is that I am looking to have my figures ready-made which is why I never got into customizing my own in the first place. I am not asking that manufacturers do more in creating their figures, but rather less. It doesn't require more stuff on a soldier to provide the options that I am requesting. To suggest that I look toward other manufacturers instead of Britains belies the answer to the question--the other manufacturers are the same in terms of their approach to this issue. I happen to think that Britains probably provide more figures and have demonstrated more options than other companies in the past which is why I wondered why they could not be the moving force here. I discussed some of these things with a rep from Britains years ago, including designing union corps insignia flags that could be interchanged with a figure to provide more options. That would be a cost saving approach because the company would not have to create separate figures--just flags to satisfy whatever scene the figure was going to depict. It is true that my request for a horse drawn limber and caisson would be expensive, but think how many limited sets of the mortar crew that were produced are selling. Probably more folks with an artillery bent would buy one or two of the limbers with horses since artillery displays are more common than mortar crews. One of the interesting things that another rep had told me was that the company should have someone grounded in historical accuracy before the molds are created to ensure that no detail is left out that would detract from an authentic appearance. The Bucktail grouping that I referred to is a prime example of how the labeling of the colors confused the 13th PA and the 149th PA. Finally, I think the differences in scale which no one has addressed is another problem. I fully realize that not all soldiers were the same height, but scale of the arms, legs, torso, and head should be consistent instead of some of them looking like midgets. The compatibility of scale with other manufacturers is also problematical when trying to combine them on one display. I've had to position the figures to create an optical illusion just to make them fit well visually. Artillery wheels vary in scale as well. The industry standard should be consistent just so people can purchase the figures from various companies and mix them to make their dioramas encompass the concept they want to depict. I really don't think that is too much to ask. I fully realize that my criticisms of the industry and perhaps Britains in particular (because I expect more from that company because of its reputation) have struck a nerve here, especially folks who are so enamored with the hobby that they are willing to tolerate more of these things than I do and suggest that I find another hobby if I don't like this one. That is not the point at all. My post is captioned "why I no longer collect" rather than why I am no longer engaged in the hobby. My criticism is more akin to constructive criticism rather than being destructive. I guess being content with things they way things are has never been one of my strong points. I might add that I do not live in Gettysburg, contrary to the assumption being made, although I have attended shows there.

 

[bradleyl30]

I can relate to your pain. There are lines I would love to collect that I just can’t because of some glaring inaccuracies which are important to me.

I have started doing some modifications and paying for some modifications, but neither is scalable.

I have called out these issues to manufacturers with varying levels of response. I know they are a business and my exacting standards don’t always drive sales. Fortunately, FL hits the mark far more often than not, and JJD integrates collector information well. Working with TGM as a volunteer has been interesting and educational in the business decisions that need to be made. I was happy to see a few of the small details I recommended make their way into figures.

I have to exercise a little acceptance, pick a few battles and then occasionally pay with dollars or sweat for some I dearly care about.

One interesting thing that happened to me was creating a diorama for a particular battle and half way through the project found the reference I was using was inaccurately labeled and the real shots of the area were completely different. I decided to make some small changes but live with many of the inaccuracies because it looked better. A little humble pie

 

[Warrior]

If I learned anything in the past 21 years (actually the past 50 or so years), it's that the hobby is different things to different people.

There are some who collect as it reminds them of their childhood, some who love history, some who appreciate the quality and detail on the figures, some who want to build dioramas of specific battles, some who, well you get the idea.

It seems that since the birth of the forums, there is this strong undercurrent of "We want historically accurate figures and vehicles and we won't stand for anything less", which is fine, have at it. I really can't recall a time in the hobby where there was more scrutiny as to whether the road wheels on this tank are correct, whether the rifle this figure is holding is accurate, whether the flag this figure is holding is the correct color, whether, well you get the idea.

IMO, the hobby is getting an influx of scale modelers who maybe have gotten to the point where building kits is not in their wheelhouse anymore, so they are opting for prebuild and painted vehicles and figures. They want, no demand highly accurate figures and vehicles as that is what they are used to.

I also think the rising costs have something to do with it, ie, "If I'm going to lay out 200.00 for this mounted figure or 350.00 for this tank, it had better be 1000% historically accurate"......................

My hat is off to those of you who know what color and texture the thread was that held the buttons on a frock coat, what the road wheels on every Tiger tank should look like, what the exact shade of green should be on the ammo pouches on a US infantryman's uniform in the ETO, that Marines carried two canteens in combat, where every Union and Confederate regiment were on the field at Gettysburg, who the commander was, what town he lived in and how many children he had, knowledge is a good thing I guess.

As far as myself; been in the hobby for over 50 years, I also love military history; that said, I can tell you "That is a ACW Zouave, that is a French Imperial Guard trooper, that is a Tiger tank, that is a 222 armored car" I can also discuss with some knowledge battles in the ACW, Napoleonic War and WWII, but I am far from a certified expert on any one subject, I have a very broad and somewhat decent grasp of things, my knowledge has been questioned by some, but I could care less what those people think, I have zero use for any of them.

Your comment about you cannot accurately depict in a diorama any of the fighting on LRT, the peach orchard, the wheatfield, Devil's Den or Pickett's charge because Union troops did not wear heavy packs in combat stuck out to me, so I started looking at Troiani and Keith Rocco paintings on those subjects. I noticed that in almost every painting, some troops had packs and blanket rolls, others did not. Since there are no photographs that I know of that were actually taken during a battle while bullets and cannon balls were flying (and I use the caveat "that I know of" as sure as ****, someone, somewhere will whip out a picture of actual combat in the ACW), I'll defer to those two; you know, WORLD FAMOUS ACW artists who do a **** ton of research in their paintings.

If you as a diorama builder insist on having no figures with packs, then my suggestion is not to make your own figures, but buy some unpainted ACW castings and assemble and paint them yourself, this way you get exactly what you want and you can have fun and enjoyment knowing that you painted them yourself.

It's a shame you're at the point where you are no longer collecting, but that is your choice, we all have to do what is best for ourselves.

Best of luck to you.

 

[mikemiller1955]

love it George...very well stated!

 

[gettysburgbuff]

If I learned anything in the past 21 years (actually the past 50 or so years), it's that the hobby is different things to different people.



Your comment about you cannot accurately depict in a diorama any of the fighting on LRT, the peach orchard, the wheatfield, Devil's Den or Pickett's charge because Union troops did not wear heavy packs in combat stuck out to me, so I started looking at Troiani and Keith Rocco paintings on those subjects. I noticed that in almost every painting, some troops had packs and blanket rolls, others did not. Since there are no photographs that I know of that were actually taken during a battle while bullets and cannon balls were flying (and I use the caveat "that I know of" as sure as ****, someone, somewhere will whip out a picture of actual combat in the ACW), I'll defer to those two; you know, WORLD FAMOUS ACW artists who do a **** ton of research in their paintings.

Just to point out about the use of paintings as a source of information, let me state this: I have also collected Civil War prints by Troiani, Rocco, Gallon, Umble, and Kunstler. When you suggest that you have seen blanket rolls, that is usually seen on Confederate troops and not on union soldiers who are in a defensive role in those engagements. One of my prints depicting Barksdale's Charge shows Confederates with union knapsacks which I suspect Troiani depicted to illustrate that that particular regiment had captured those items from the 26th NYSM and utilized them. When Confederates attacked, they did not know where they might wind up and could not depend on getting their personal possessions from the rear. Contrast this with Third Corps union troops who left their packs where they had been encamped before being called to the front to occupy positions from Devil's Den, Wheatfield, and Peach Orchard. Looking at "Barksdale's Charge", you will notice that none of the 114th Pa Zouaves, a Third Corps unit, in the background have blankets or knapsacks. The Troiani print "Don't Give an Inch" depicting Strong Vincent on Little Round Top does not show soldiers with knapsacks or blanket rolls. That was a Fifth Corps unit that was also brought to the front from a static position from which they had been encamped. Yet the attacking Confederates in Troiani's companion piece show rebels attacking up the slope with blanket rolls. Rocco's "Hold the Ground at All Hazards" showing Chamberlain and Strong Vincent also does not show federals with blanket rolls or knapsacks in the background. You will, however, see Troiani's print of the Iron Brigade fighting on July 1 with knapsacks. Why? Because they were right in the fight as soon as they arrived on the field and did not have the opportunity to remove them. Attacking Confederates also didn't have an opportunity to remove theirs because they never expected to meet federal infantry in battle that day in the first place. I have a great deal of respect for Don Troiani's historical research, and I think his portrayals stem from that primary research which is the real source for the accuracy of his paintings. What I find interesting is that people look at his work as if it, itself, becomes the evidence instead of the product of his research. Some of the regimental histories do contain instances where the author notes whether packs were deposited before going into battle. Admittedly, no one knows for sure in every single instance, but we also can use standard practices of the armies to fill in the blanks. As a Civil War reenactor many years ago, I had often found doctrinaire colleagues who made pronouncements on uniforms, etc. that upon further research were found not to be true or were generalizations. The hobby of reenacting is continually being refined as in anything else in keeping with the heightened expectation levels of those who participate in that hobby. Sometimes it can be absurd in terms of whether a uniform has to be hand stitched or not, but everything can be viewed in any extreme depending on the degree of authenticity one desires. In terms of toy soldier figures, it is true that if one is dissatisfied with what is being offered, one can DIY. That, however, only perpetuates mediocracy in the industry. For example, compare early examples of Britain's with its offerings today--they are so much better. I suspect the evolution was due to the competition of the Russian painters in their renditions of Crusade figures that became the standard to be emulated. I cannot compare my skills with those of any manufacturer which is why I want to purchase completed figures. By the same token I think that while many companies do great work today, many times the offerings are the same which limits options for the diorama builder. One of the things that I could suggest to bring the price down is to create sets like some companies do on a limited basis. Consider for a moment that Civil War soldiers fought shoulder to shoulder and often fired simultaneously in volleys. A company could produce a set of figures with very small alterations between some of the figures in that set to portray a firing line which, because there would be just a few molds, would make each figure cheaper to produce in large quantities. Painting would also be simplified once it was performed over and over on the same figure(s). That could be the staple for any depiction of infantry on the field.

 

[Warrior]

Just to point out about the use of paintings as a source of information, let me state this: I have also collected Civil War prints by Troiani, Rocco, Gallon, Umble, and Kunstler. When you suggest that you have seen blanket rolls, that is usually seen on Confederate troops and not on union soldiers who are in a defensive role in those engagements. One of my prints depicting Barksdale's Charge shows Confederates with union knapsacks which I suspect Troiani depicted to illustrate that that particular regiment had captured those items from the 26th NYSM and utilized them. When Confederates attacked, they did not know where they might wind up and could not depend on getting their personal possessions from the rear. Contrast this with Third Corps union troops who left their packs where they had been encamped before being called to the front to occupy positions from Devil's Den, Wheatfield, and Peach Orchard. Looking at "Barksdale's Charge", you will notice that none of the 114th Pa Zouaves, a Third Corps unit, in the background have blankets or knapsacks. The Troiani print "Don't Give an Inch" depicting Strong Vincent on Little Round Top does not show soldiers with knapsacks or blanket rolls. That was a Fifth Corps unit that was also brought to the front from a static position from which they had been encamped. Yet the attacking Confederates in Troiani's companion piece show rebels attacking up the slope with blanket rolls. Rocco's "Hold the Ground at All Hazards" showing Chamberlain and Strong Vincent also does not show federals with blanket rolls or knapsacks in the background. You will, however, see Troiani's print of the Iron Brigade fighting on July 1 with knapsacks. Why? Because they were right in the fight as soon as they arrived on the field and did not have the opportunity to remove them. Attacking Confederates also didn't have an opportunity to remove theirs because they never expected to meet federal infantry in battle that day in the first place. I have a great deal of respect for Don Troiani's historical research, and I think his portrayals stem from that primary research which is the real source for the accuracy of his paintings. What I find interesting is that people look at his work as if it, itself, becomes the evidence instead of the product of his research. Some of the regimental histories do contain instances where the author notes whether packs were deposited before going into battle. Admittedly, no one knows for sure in every single instance, but we also can use standard practices of the armies to fill in the blanks. As a Civil War reenactor many years ago, I had often found doctrinaire colleagues who made pronouncements on uniforms, etc. that upon further research were found not to be true or were generalizations. The hobby of reenacting is continually being refined as in anything else in keeping with the heightened expectation levels of those who participate in that hobby. Sometimes it can be absurd in terms of whether a uniform has to be hand stitched or not, but everything can be viewed in any extreme depending on the degree of authenticity one desires. In terms of toy soldier figures, it is true that if one is dissatisfied with what is being offered, one can DIY. That, however, only perpetuates mediocracy in the industry. For example, compare early examples of Britain's with its offerings today--they are so much better. I suspect the evolution was due to the competition of the Russian painters in their renditions of Crusade figures that became the standard to be emulated. I cannot compare my skills with those of any manufacturer which is why I want to purchase completed figures. By the same token I think that while many companies do great work today, many times the offerings are the same which limits options for the diorama builder. One of the things that I could suggest to bring the price down is to create sets like some companies do on a limited basis. Consider for a moment that Civil War soldiers fought shoulder to shoulder and often fired simultaneously in volleys. A company could produce a set of figures with very small alterations between some of the figures in that set to portray a firing line which, because there would be just a few molds, would make each figure cheaper to produce in large quantities. Painting would also be simplified once it was performed over and over on the same figure(s). That could be the staple for any depiction of infantry on the field.

Keith did a painting of the defense of LRT that shows Union troops in backpacks and blanket rolls.

I appreciate the points you are making, one favor please; more paragraphs would really help.