3D printed/sculpted miniatures and crowdfundings

[Madsherman]

IMO I think the minis lose a bit of their charm when done in 3D. It might also be because of the sculptors not being proficient enough with all the other parts of sculpting besides the sculpting itself (posing, practicality and general appeal). Tre Manor is THE best miniature sculptor IMO, because he knows where to be subtle and where not to be. When all your figures have highflying stuntlike poses, none of them shine. It feels like now, with 3D printing and all, the credo is "crazier, wilder and more zany".. idunno.. my two cents right there

[charlesanakin]

IMO I think the minis lose a bit of their charm when done in 3D. It might also be because of the sculptors not being proficient enough with all the other parts of sculpting besides the sculpting itself (posing, practicality and general appeal). Kev Ferrera is THE best miniature sculptor IMO, because he knows where to be subtle and where not to be. When all your figures have highflying stuntlike poses, none of them shine. It feels like now, with 3D printing and all, the credo is "crazier, wilder and more zany".. idunno.. my two cents right there

I wholeheartedly disagree my friend. To me this is one of those things people say like they can taste all the tiny subtle differences between wines when the reality is only 1/1000 people can. It's not a criticism of you but I think this is mostly attachment-nostalgia driven. IMHO it simply depends on the artist. Some are great whether the medium is virtual or physical. Virtual is simply more forgiving. As evidence to my thought I offer Greebo. Greebo sculpted (by hand) an amazing set of Nippon Gobbos. They have style, creativity and are extremely well done. Ive never played Goblins and I bought them. Then Greebo did the Hand of Death rats using 3D sculpting and they are no less amazing. Another team I don't play bought. I don't know sculptors by name but I look forward to checking out Kev Ferrera.

[Darkson]

I agree sommewhat with Madsherman - some of the recent "dancing" pose elves have just been ridiculous for example. I wouldn't have minded the odd figure (say Wardancers, Witches and/or Catchers) but when ever player looks like they're an acrobat then I lose interest.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

[charlesanakin]

I agree with you both on that but that style of posing isn't the proprietary to 3d sculpting (though some artists may feel more willing to go a little crazy with the poses in 3d). There is a Wood Elf sculpted team by RollJordan where half the figs are cartwheeling or bent over or arms and legs in all different directions. I feel like artists should ask atheltes who have played rugby or American football about poses. Then they could get some non-static movement that feels genuine. I think the Greebo rats did a great job of mixing some simple poses for some players with more elaborate mid-move poses for others like GR.

[Madsherman]

I think this miniature/pose has way more dynamism and subtle tension than any of the 3D printed models I have seen.

I'm not saying that people can't create that same feel through 3D. I'm just saying what I've seen so far looks as if the sculptor is too inexperienced. Another thing is something I realized when I modeled a figure of my own.. I used to hate the standard standing poses of the gw models, but now I realize they also have a practical purpose: You have to be able to place the miniature flat on its back or flat on its chest.

[connexion]

IMO I think the minis lose a bit of their charm when done in 3D. (...) because he knows where to be subtle and where not to be. When all your figures have highflying stuntlike poses, none of them shine.

I think this miniature/pose has way more dynamism and subtle tension than any of the 3D printed models I have seen.

The subtlety argument is pretty much a valid one and in two aspects: detail and posing.

Quite recently I received material from 3 crowdfunds:
- the Nippon Skaven from Greebo which, despite them saying the whole team was 3D sculpted, I am willing to bet only half of the minis were 3D projected and the rest were good old greens;
- the Impact! elfs, which are fully 3D projected;
- the Willy Amazons which is fully done "the old way".
I also had access to a couple of miniatures from the 3D projected Vampires from Willy.
After finally having hands-on experience with painting 3D projected miniatures, I much prefer greens over 3Ds, by a long margin, unless the sculpts are really awesome and some issues with 3D sculpting are taken into consideration.

One of the issues is the one you mention about posing. Sure, with 3D you can get all sorts of dynamic poses but, if everyone's flying around (so to speak) the miniatures lose some of their appeal.

Second is the intricate detail that 3D sculp allows (or rather, LACK of detail). Taking Willy's vampire cheerleader as an example, if you see the 3D render, it looks awesome in terms of detail all the way to the fangs in her mouth but, when you handle the miniature, you'll find that some of that detail has vanished with the casting (moulding takes its toll as does the final casting with mould wear and metal contraction just to name a couple of effects). And even more detail will vanish when painting. With hand sculpting, details are exagerated (there's a limit to the width of a green stuff thread or pellet that one can handle, no?) but, in the end result, these details (and the miniature) will seem more real-like than if it was 3D projected with all the real proportions to anatomy and detail.

Then Greebo did the Hand of Death rats using 3D sculpting and they are no less amazing.

Like I said above, unless someone proves otherwise, the HoD set was only partially sculpted in 3D. The "main" team and the ball and chain star player (which, IIRC was a tournament mini for Turncoat 2014) seems to have been done in greens. Only the side-line minis, big guys, star players and the 2 last gutter runners were made in 3D. If you have the full set (I do, except the Oni Rat as I prefered the Eishin design for a Rat Ogre...), I sugest you compare the following: hands of team members with hands of the side-line minis, kneepads and sashes of the various Gutter Runners, the fittings of the pieces of the players and the fittings of the pieces of the side-lines.

Mind you, I'm not saying I'm disapointed with the HoD miniatures, quite the opposite!

[Steam Ball]

Second is the intricate detail that 3D sculp allows (or rather, LACK of detail). Taking Willy's vampire cheerleader as an example, if you see the 3D render, it looks awesome in terms of detail all the way to the fangs in her mouth but, when you handle the miniature, you'll find that some of that detail has vanished with the casting (moulding takes its toll as does the final casting with mould wear and metal contraction just to name a couple of effects). And even more detail will vanish when painting. With hand sculpting, details are exagerated (there's a limit to the width of a green stuff thread or pellet that one can handle, no?) but, in the end result, these details (and the miniature) will seem more real-like than if it was 3D projected with all the real proportions to anatomy and detail.

It's rather funny to read this about detail, and at the same time, somewhere else, that the bigger size gives more detail. Instead of gives, it's more like allows but they opportunity is wasted.

[Madsherman]

Well yes, you HAVE to exaggerate scale in modelling, and that may also be part of why they don't look as good to me. That goes in almost every form of depiction; animated movies, comics, theatre and games. You wouldn't be able to see a miniatures eyes, let alone its teeth if a 28mm figure should be in total proportion. In animation a guy in the background can (and should) get away with more exaggerated movement. So the teeth in this case would be the character in the background. This doesn't mean that I think the poses of the characters should be as exaggerated as they are on the 3D models.. it just looks.. too "posey"

[Deus Magi]

Regards Willy Miniatures and Greebo. I recently bought the Sno Norse by Greebo. I've also got a couple of Willy Undead. Comparing the two, I don't think I will EVER buy Greebo again. Greebo have redone their Ulfwerener miniatures for the Sno Norse, to be released shortly. I did contemplate getting them briefly, as the original Ulfwereners are not wolfie enough for me (although very realistic) but I just couldn't take the chance that they were as badly moulded as the rest of the team that I have.

I didn't think that they had been spun as well as they could be, and had mould damage in various areas, which was annoying to try and see where the damage ended, and the detail began. I understand miniatures and that work is needed to get them to where you want them to be, ready for painting, but it's just become a slog. I think it's taken me about 30 hours thus far to get them all cleaned up and ready (that's for 15) and I've still two more to do. Luckily I've had a week off work, but if I didn't need these, and didn't have the time off, I would have lost interest, left them on my table, started something else, and ended up putting them in a box and not bothered.

I looked around for some time for a Norse team, and from my perspective they are the best looking/posed team out there, but I won't be buying Greebo again. I think I've seen somewhere a Greebo Dark Elf team coming out, very nice drawings of what they are going to look like, great concept,but I'm never going to faff about sorting them to get them ready to paint.

I usually stick with classic Games Workshop miniatures due to quality, but the Willy miniatures mould line was almost indeterminable. They were easily filed due to the material, a softer metal. A couple did appear to be missing slotta, but I'm unsure if they are supposed to come like that? Overall the moulding quality was absolutely excellent. the difference in time really is huge.

Perhaps Greebo could look at their production values in future, taking a little more time, as when they turned up I had the wrong legs to one model, so couldn't assemble it. That caused problems for me, and also for the seller. Because the seller, an intermediary, then has to deal with the issue. The intermediary can't check every part of every item, as they'd be spending all day doing just that. Also I poured out the bag carefully when I got it. Luckily as there were some very small parts, the four wings on the helms, that were just in the bag with everything else, and could be easily lost. they were not on a separate sprue or anything. Personally, if I was manufacturing these, I'd be putting them in a separate Jiffi bag, so that they were clearly visible.

Anyway, I think it will be Willy miniatures for me in future, regards Blood Bowl. I'm not saying that they are the best sculpted product out there, but I think that they are at the top. For reference, not that it's that relevant to Bloodbowl, I collect FreeBooter miniatures. Costly, yes, but the level of detail (for the size of miniature), and the moulding quality are at the top of the game. I've never seen better.

[connexion]

Regards Willy Miniatures and Greebo.
(SNIP)
Costly, yes, but the level of detail (for the size of miniature), and the moulding quality are at the top of the game. I've never seen better.

TL;DR summary: your reply was totally off-topic.

Perhaps start your own Greebo vs. Willy thread as what is being discussed here is 3D modelling (which, incidentally, both Greebo and Willy use) vs. traditional sculpting (idem)?

[connexion]

It's rather funny to read this about detail, and at the same time, somewhere else, that the bigger size gives more detail. Instead of gives, it's more like allows but they opportunity is wasted.

Spot on.

[charlesanakin]

Two points about 3D sculpting and printing.

The first is that 3D sculpting and printing is in its technological infancy. The software, hardware and materials used will only get better and better. This will eliminate many of the issues which could arise in the process of manufacturing. Casting (especially metal) has many of these issues that haven't improved much over decades. In a decade 95% of this market will 3D sculpted and printed because it will be faster, cheaper and more forgiving as an artistic medium than greens and casting. Even those few who sculpt in greens will manufacture in 3D printing because they will simply be able to scan a finished green into a 3D printer and get better manufacturing.

Secondly like any manufacturing process a less than optimal product isn't always simply a result of poor craftsmanship. It can also be lower quality materials, manufacturing issues or rushed design. Previously Connexion had attributed lower quality of some of the stretch or bonus player of a crowdfunding campaign to the difference between sculpting and 3D generation. It seems odd that you are unwilling to take the manufacturers word for how they produced the mini compared to what your personal assumptive guess is? Let me present another possibility from my experience. When an artist (or manufacturer) uses 3D (or non 3D for that matter) to produce a team (or group of minis) with crowdfunding they invest a lot of time and effort in design of their core figures. They need these to be creative, polished and enticing for investors. They then offers some basic sketches or simplistic designs of stretch goal minis to keep that cash flowing in. The artist doesn't even know if they'll actually become minis. The time and effort put into these secondary figures just doesn't compare at all to the designcraft put into the core minis in a campaign. As a result almost all of the stretch goal or secondary minis simply won't be as high quality as the core ones, and you probably shouldn't expect them to be.
You can have fantastic minis which are sculpted and terrible minis which are sculpted. 3D is no different, except that the 3D process has far more room for upward growth.

[charlesanakin]

I think this miniature/pose has way more dynamism and subtle tension than any of the 3D printed models I have seen.

I'm not saying that people can't create that same feel through 3D. I'm just saying what I've seen so far looks as if the sculptor is too inexperienced. Another thing is something I realized when I modeled a figure of my own.. I used to hate the standard standing poses of the gw models, but now I realize they also have a practical purpose: You have to be able to place the miniature flat on its back or flat on its chest.

It's a lovely miniature no doubt. This isn't an apples to apples comparison. Blood Bowl figures don't have the luxury of using potion bottles, weapons, shields, bedrolls, etc... to enliven them. It's so much more difficult to sculpt a "naked" mini.

[Deus Magi]

See your point, I saw the thread as overall about quality and used those as an example. if they both use the same technology, then perhaps relevant to a small extent due to the variation using the same technology, or lack of it. Anyway, no worries.

[connexion]

The first is that 3D sculpting and printing is in its technological infancy.

Technological infancy or not, amazing results are already possible, especially if you have access to dental/jewelry-grade 3D-printing - we're talking printing layers of 0.020 mm and below.

My problem is not so much with the 3D modelling & printing technique "per se" but some of the results that are obtained (and which some people in the posts above also mention):

a) exagerated poses: when every miniature in a set is in a "über-OMFG-coolness-acrobatic" dynamic pose, the end result is, excuse the hyperbole, a freakin' flying circus. Case in point, Mk1881's "Honos" team may seem amazing but, on the tabletop, it may be a bit too much prancing about. But, admitedly, this is a matter of personal preference and taste.

b) printing allows for an amazing degree of subtle detail to be projected/modelled but, when the end product is cast, the amazing detail will be greatly reduced in the moulding and casting process and can uterly vanish during painting. Case in point, the Willy Vamp Cheerleader with it's cute and sexy fangs (see above and check the "What are you painting now?" for a couple of shots of said miniature painted by yours truly)

I understand what you say that 3D printing may still progress imensely and that one day we may all just print products at home. Sure, that could reduce the detail loss from the moulding&casting process but that level of home printing is still a long way away and it's still more economically viable to do moulds and castings for mass production. So, 3D sculptures should take into account the limitations of 3D modelling and, often, it seems that they don't (see examples above).

Please also see above my comments about the exagerated detail that is obtained with manual sculpting and how that exagerated detail actually seems more "realistic".

Secondly like any manufacturing process a less than optimal product isn't always simply a result of poor craftsmanship. It can also be lower quality materials, manufacturing issues or rushed design.

Rushed design or the 3D modeller getting carried away with the "possibilities" and "potential" of 3D modelling and not taking into account the limitations of the fabrication materials. There is always some degree of material contraction in a casting process, it's basic chemistry and physics - a liquid substance contracts when it solidifies - with some substances contracting more (metal) and some contracting less (resins).

Case in point, in jewelry (unlike miniature manufacturing) the cost of the raw materials (gold, platinum) does not allow for any leeway in modelling for a mould & casting process, so the modeller cannot add detail that will be wiped out in the casting or polishing stage. Simple as that.

Previously Connexion had attributed lower quality of some of the stretch or bonus player of a crowdfunding campaign to the difference between sculpting and 3D generation.

Please be so kind as to re-read what I wrote as you misunderstood it entirely.

I did not make any judgement of "lower" or "higher" quality. However, based on:
- what I had/have in hand;
- the 3D renders they made public as the campaign started (none of the base team and all of the "extras");
- the type of detail in the several minis;
I am quite confident of my conclusion that the base team and the ball&chain star player were hand sculpted and "only" the extra figs (big guys, star players, coaching staff and ninja turtles) were 3D modelled.

It seems odd that you are unwilling to take the manufacturers word for how they produced the mini compared to what your personal assumptive guess is?

Apologies for seeming arrogant but I call that "critical reasoning" and not blindly lapping up whatever I am offered. I have been told it's one of my most annoying characteristics.

Anyway, the facts above lead me to the conclusion I posted and I stand by it unless someone proves me wrong (someone at Greebo, mind you, because they are the only ones that can effectively prove me wrong.

And, once more, just so that there is no doubt, I once more state that I am not disappointed with the end result of the HoD miniatures. Quite the opposite, really. And I don't mind in the least if some models are traditional sculpts and the rest are 3D models - in fact, I feel the former have much more character!

Let me present another possibility from my experience. When an artist (or manufacturer) uses 3D (or non 3D for that matter) to produce a team (or group of minis) with crowdfunding they invest a lot of time and effort in design of their core figures. They need these to be creative, polished and enticing for investors. They then offers some basic sketches or simplistic designs of stretch goal minis to keep that cash flowing in. The artist doesn't even know if they'll actually become minis. The time and effort put into these secondary figures just doesn't compare at all to the designcraft put into the core minis in a campaign. As a result almost all of the stretch goal or secondary minis simply won't be as high quality as the core ones, and you probably shouldn't expect them to be.

Excuse me but that's another can of worms entirely and worthy of another separate topic (care to open one for it?). But I'll take the bait anyway and leave it with just a quick reply...

If a crowdfund offers an amazing polished core product and relaxes on the strech goal extras (i.e., not free stuff but extras for which they charge more money), I expect the strech products to have the same quality as the core product - otherwise they don't get my money on the strech (and may even withdraw my pledge as I find the idea of being offered fully-priced sub-standard material somewhat insulting). Anything else is bad service to the public, customers, etc and says something about what the company feels about its customers (saps), how it works (slopily) and how long it may last in a competivite market (hopefully, not long).

Once more, since this bit came about because of Greebo:
- they presented awesome core product;
- said core product seems to be sculpted by hand;
- the expansions were sculpted by 3D modelling (and we were shown the renders);
- the expansion material is also awesome (i.e. as high quality as the rest, not lower quality as you imply in your theory of crowdfund...);
- overal result is awesome with a mix of traditional sculpt and new 3D model;
Q.E.D.

The artist doesn't even know if they'll actually become minis.

Unless a sculptor/modeller has a stake/partnership in a company that is releasing a product, I find it extremely unlikely that he will work for free. Artists I know of that work for this or that company, sell the greens (or 3D models) to the companies for either a flat fee or a fee & royalties... This payment to the artist is the risk that the company takes before the crowdfund.

You can have fantastic minis which are sculpted and terrible minis which are sculpted. 3D is no different, except that the 3D process has far more room for upward growth.

"Upward growth" seems like a buzz word... Of course any medium has the possibility for great results and for crap results with uter mediocrity in the middle. *shrugs*