WWI Germans (1 Viewer)

[DavidChristCollection]

Two questions about these guys.

1. Who is the maker?

2. Does the officer appear to come from somewhere else? The paint detail is very similar. But, I notice the arm is either a replacement or from a different maker. The base is also a bit thinner than the rest of the pack.

 

[Mike Niederman]

Two questions about these guys.

1. Who is the maker?

2. Does the officer appear to come from somewhere else? The paint detail is very similar. But, I notice the arm is either a replacement or from a different maker. The base is also a bit thinner than the rest of the pack.

These fellows are converted recastings of figures from Britains set 312, Grenadier Guards in winter overcoats (pic attached). Not sure where the heads originated, but the officer's right arm and the colour bearer's left arm are standard Britains castings or are recasts of these, and weren't used in set 312. And looking closer at the picture, it appears the troopers left arms are replaced, too, that is, not the set 312 arms.

 

[theBaron]

The heads might be from Rose/Russell Gammage. Rose produced figures as kits in 54mm, crisply sculpted and cast, and the parts turn up in a lot of collector & hobbyist conversions. As toy soldiers, those are pretty nicely done.

Prost!
Brad

 

[Mike Niederman]

I realized the initial question went unanswered: who is the maker? I think the answer is in your initial post from last December. The maker was Mr Christ himself.

 

[DavidChristCollection]

That would make sense. Most of the London Bridge figures that I have identified have an LB in cursive script on the base. That maker mark is absent on these. I'm thinking he may have made these, but, not necessarily for LB.

As part of my educational journey, could you explain the term "recast" in a little more detail? I'm assuming they would not have procured the original molds from Britains. Would they have made their own molds using an actual Britains soldier? Or, is there something else in play in this process?

 

[theBaron]

...As part of my educational journey, could you explain the term "recast" in a little more detail? I'm assuming they would not have procured the original molds from Britains. Would they have made their own molds using an actual Britains soldier? Or, is there something else in play in this process?

"Recast" has a negative connotation, as in "unauthorized copy of a copyrighted item." It's synonymous with piracy. Not usually applied in the context of a hobbyist making a copy for himself, though that may violate the original maker's copyright, too. It usually means toy soldiers sold as originals, but which are unauthorized copies. The scale of the copying effort can range from the hobbyist previously mentioned, who might make a mold and cast some items for himself, all the way up to commercial operations that produce hundreds of copies. Red China and Russia are two countries home to such operations, especially Red China. Though recasting isn't restricted to those two.

And today, with 3D printing, piracy is even easier to do. And it's not just toy soldiers or connoisseur toys (eg, King & Country) that are prey. Connoisseur figures are often pirated, and in such cases, the original producer might be a one-man operation, not a large company, and he feels the theft even more acutely.

In the case of figures made with approval, under license, say, such as Ron Ruddell had, "recast" isn't usually used. Rather, we'd say that such figures are reproductions, or licensed or authorized.

It'll never be completely eliminated, though. We can only educate ourselves as best we can, and when we find something we think is a recast, report it to the original maker and to the platform where we spotted it. The original maker is usually in the best position to pursue action, though the platform might take action, too. In my experience, that has most often been eBay, and they've done nothing.

Prost!
Brad