So Ive done the obligatory first page google search and no info.

What is/was the purpose of metal figures over plastic? Does this hark back to the days where it was easier to produce metal figures that had more detail than plastics.

This also brings me onto my next point. Alot of the stuff that was metal has been released as Fine cast. What is the purpose of this over say, just having it all plastic?

I am unfamiliar with how models are made. I assume the plastic models are made with moulds injected with plastic. Is resin similar, just pour resin into a mould? Is resin cheaper than plastic? Is the infrastructure to maintain the production of plastics just to expensive.

I'm only familiar with games workshop. Do other companies choose resin over plastic or vice versa?

A lot of questions I know but I'm just curious. I didnt really like the metals and I'm quite happy to work on plastic or resin.

I personally avoid plastic because I find resin and metal to be superior in terms of detail. Most companies (all I think) I buy from use resin or metal. The only plastic ones I use are usually historic kits and GW if I have to. But I can only answer that question. So I think its safe to assume resin is fairly cheap to work with.

I know plastic moulds are expensive initially but not much more than that sorry.

The big expense with plastics is the cost of creating the mould - and it's a BIG expense. So plastic historically has been reserved for high-volume sellers, with everything else done in the 'more expensive per model but ridiculously cheap to make a mould' metal.

'Fine'cast was a response to rising metal costs. GW shifted to cheaper resin, cast in spincast silicon moulds (metal is spincast in vulcanised rubber) to cut costs, and passed on the resultant retail price increase that is an unavoidable result of cutting manufacturing expenses to their customers.


The cost of making steel moulds for plastics production has come down dramatically in recent years, though, which is part of the reason for GW slowly expanding more and more of their range into plastic, and also why there are all these 'garage' companies sprining up with plastic minis as well all of a sudden.

Eventually, GW's entire range will be plastic. You lose a little bit of fine detail compared to metal simply because of the limitations of having a steel mould... but they've come a long way from the original RT beakie marines...

So Aesthetically speaking. The resin can have better detail? From pictures it looks very similar to the point I cant really tell the diference. I've never been displeased with the gw plastic kits. I always found the metal stuff (again, gw) to be really restrictive in terms of modelling options. With multi part plastics and resins it seems to me (although i have very little experience here) plastics and resins are easier to chop, change and modify over metal.

I see alot of hate for the gw "fine cast" is this because gw resin is inferior to the resin from other companies? Or are people just set in their ways?

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
So Aesthetically speaking. The resin can have better detail? From pictures it looks very similar to the point I cant really tell the diference. I've never been displeased with the gw plastic kits. I always found the metal stuff (again, gw) to be really restrictive in terms of modelling options. With multi part plastics and resins it seems to me (although i have very little experience here) plastics and resins are easier to chop, change and modify over metal.

I see alot of hate for the gw "fine cast" is this because gw resin is inferior to the resin from other companies? Or are people just set in their ways?

Ahhh, fine cast is like the worst example available for resin products. FW isnt a great example either. They are both awful and unfinished out of the box to a terrible level.

Even then though, FW infantry models made of resin are superior to GW guadsmen made of plastic.

Once you have owned models from a ton of companies you start to notice trends and one trend I noticed is resin has the amazing detail compared to most plastic models.

It's because it was an inferior material that suffered with appalling quality control, resulting in some people requiring numerous replacements in order to get something merely acceptable.

Not the behaviour of the "manufacturer of the best toy solders in the world."

Resin is currently the superior material in terms of ultimate quality, but plastic is making huge steps forward.

Finecast was NOT resin in the conventional sense

Polyurethane and Tin hold a similar level of detail, though resin will generally be higher detail. Both of these are able to have detail in more areas than Polysytrene or Polyvinyl Chloride.

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
I see alot of hate for the gw "fine cast" is this because gw resin is inferior to the resin from other companies? Or are people just set in their ways?

Many of the initial Finecast releases were terribly casted (lots of bubbles and other miscast issues), the current releases have a much bigger Quality Control in place.

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
So Aesthetically speaking. The resin can have better detail? From pictures it looks very similar to the point I cant really tell the diference. I've never been displeased with the gw plastic kits. I always found the metal stuff (again, gw) to be really restrictive in terms of modelling options. With multi part plastics and resins it seems to me (although i have very little experience here) plastics and resins are easier to chop, change and modify over metal.

Yes, good resin can have better detail than metal. 'Fine'cast is not good resin.

I see alot of hate for the gw "fine cast" is this because gw resin is inferior to the resin from other companies? Or are people just set in their ways?

It's an inferior grade of resin, being used in a way that resin isn't really designed to be used, and for the initial release they were rushing it out with little to no quality control. And the results were terrible.

They appear to have largely sorted out the casting issues, but it's still not a good resin for gaming models as it warps when it is warmed or under constant pressure (from sitting in a carry case, for example).

As an example my Finecast Bel'Akor, which was a largely decent cast, suffered substantial curvature of the sword blade because a carrier bag was left resting on it.

It required heating to reform.

 insaniak wrote:
The cost of making steel moulds for plastics production has come down dramatically in recent years, though, which is part of the reason for GW slowly expanding more and more of their range into plastic, and also why there are all these 'garage' companies sprining up with plastic minis as well all of a sudden.

Well, another reason GW can do so much in plastic is it's all in house. So they're not paying the exorbitant cost of tooling a metal mold, they're just paying a tool maker a (rather exhorbitant, if my toolmaker friends wage is any evidence) wage to be on staff and make them. Their plastic production is more down to their own capacity to make the mold and csat the needed inventory, rather than the mold tooling cost itself these days.

I dont see what the obsession with plastic is, resin and metal is fine, and you get some of the best detail, pose's and sculpts in both metal and resin

Metal is fine.

(Most) Resin is fine.

Plastic.. has limitations because of the difficulty of creating undercuts, but when properly designed it is my favorite material. (One of my complaints in regards to 'one pose' or 'mono pose' plastic models is that it is a lot easier to not have problems with undercuts if you have several overlapping pieces - like the old plastic Empire halberdier and swordsmen set, which included tassets.)

Finecast... was just plain terrible - an inferior material with poor QA. The only redeeming virtue was not one that the public enjoyed - it was wicked cheap to produce... yet GW charged more for it.

Mantic, by comparison, doubled the number of models in a box for the same price, when they switched to restic.

Finecast was a fumbled marketing roll following a failed materials engineering roll.

Restic (PVC, usually) can be good, bad, or anywhere in between. I actually like restic, but it is a finicky material, and the parts are often small.

The Auld Grump

 azreal13 wrote:

Resin is currently the superior material in terms of ultimate quality, but plastic is making huge steps forward.

Resin is my favourite material, but what you can mean by 'quality' varies. Resin certainly allows for much more detail and precision in molds, but it's also worth keeping in mind that it's not nearly as rugged as plastic.

 mitch_rifle wrote:
I dont see what the obsession with plastic is, resin and metal is fine, and you get some of the best detail, pose's and sculpts in both metal and resin

Ease of conversion and therefore less effort required to do something half-assed. Cheaper to replace in case you feth it up.

Whereas with metal or resin, you need to do more work to clean it up and prep it before hacking it up for half-assed conversions (and they often cost more, so you are p*ssing more money up against the wall).

I dunno man, I find resin just as easy, if not easier, to convert than plastic. Metal, on the otherhand, is a different beast entirely and I'd prefer metal only on pieces I wouldn't want to convert.

Metal is in a sense a legacy material, having been used for casting wargame figures since Victorian times. It has a few advantages over resin and plastic. It is easier to work with and any failed casts can be recycled immediately. You can cast single figures to order if required without any wastage of materials.

The main drawback with metal is difficulty and expense of mass production, which is where polystyrene wins. Many companies produce fairly small amounts of figures, though, and have no use for polystyrene.

As for detail and conversion potential, the smaller scales -- 15mm and below -- probably work better in metal than plastic or resin, partly due to the greater strength of the material but you would not bother to convert such small figures. Conversely, metal is hopeless for large vehicles.

That said, there are lots of 1/72 scale plastic figures on the market. They are usually monopose. Some of them are moulded in multiple parts requiring assembly, which makes them fiddlier than similar metal castings.

Resin is a half-way house between metal and plastic. The raw materials are not cheap and cannot be recycled. It is good for small production scale. You can make multi-part kits that assemble easily with superglue.

It is worth noting that there are several types of plastic. The most common is polystyrene. ABS and PVC are also used for some models. These have a slightly greasy feel and do not take paint quite so well as polystyrene.

 mitch_rifle wrote:
I dont see what the obsession with plastic is

- More durable. Falling off a table will snap resin and dent/bend metal but likely leave a plastic miniature unharmed.
- Better conversion prospects than metal as cutting metal is much harder.
- Works with plastic glue for solid bonds.
- Plastic is much more frequently multi-part poseable which helps individualise miniatures. Metal and resin are more often static posed or cost substantially more for multi-part.
- Plastic is much cheaper.
- Plastic is easier to work with for large kits if you compare for example a Forgeworld titan to a Dreamforge leviathan. No warping or miscasts to worry about.

 Yonan wrote:

- More durable. Falling off a table will snap resin and dent/bend metal but likely leave a plastic miniature unharmed.
- Better conversion prospects than metal as cutting metal is much harder.
- Works with plastic glue for solid bonds.
- Plastic is much more frequently multi-part poseable which helps individualise miniatures. Metal and resin are more often static posed or cost substantially more for multi-part.
- Plastic is much cheaper.
- Plastic is easier to work with for large kits if you compare for example a Forgeworld titan to a Dreamforge leviathan. No warping or miscasts to worry about.

A lot of those benefits of plastic apply to resin too.
- A resin snap will be a clean break, which will superglue back leaving almost no trace of a break. Some resins, the superglued break will be stronger than the rest of the resin.
- Same with resin
- Well, that's what happens when a glue is formulated to melt the material
- Purely a design choice. Forgeworld does plenty good multipart, poseable resin infantry, and GW have shown how great you can make single pose plastics
- So is resin, though plastic edges it out on massive production runs
- This is pretty much the big downfall of resin.

In the same theme as the OP....


Why do other companies aprat from GW have such a problem with mold lines etc? Is it simply a casting issue or is restic really that awful?

I am putting off Deadzone because of my dreadball purchases....

I work in an injection molding factory, mostly making mobile phone parts, and good molds are practically indestructible. And after seeing the imperial knight kit there is only 20p worth of plastic in it and that is being generous

The Division Of Joy wrote:
In the same theme as the OP....


Why do other companies aprat from GW have such a problem with mold lines etc? Is it simply a casting issue or is restic really that awful?

I am putting off Deadzone because of my dreadball purchases....

Huh? GW figures do have mold lines what are you talking about?

GW has mold lines out the wazoo. They're part of the deal when making two-part moulded anything.

FW is famous for it (not just mould slippage lines, but other errors).

Metal has higher detail. Finecast has a higher price.

 heartserenade wrote:

The Division Of Joy wrote:
In the same theme as the OP....


Why do other companies aprat from GW have such a problem with mold lines etc? Is it simply a casting issue or is restic really that awful?

I am putting off Deadzone because of my dreadball purchases....

Huh? GW figures do have mold lines what are you talking about?

Bad ones too.

I think the only model I have ever had that didn't have mold lines was an amazing quality demon I got as part of a very limited run from a small company doing display pieces. It still had *some* cleaning required, but yeah, I don't think it is at all possible to make models without mold lines.

 chromedog wrote:

 mitch_rifle wrote:
I dont see what the obsession with plastic is, resin and metal is fine, and you get some of the best detail, pose's and sculpts in both metal and resin

Ease of conversion and therefore less effort required to do something half-assed. Cheaper to replace in case you feth it up.

Whereas with metal or resin, you need to do more work to clean it up and prep it before hacking it up for half-assed conversions (and they often cost more, so you are p*ssing more money up against the wall).

Ease of conversion is certainly a valid concern with metal. However, it used to be the case that companies would sculpt tons of different models so conversion was less necessary. (This was possible on account of the molds being cheaper than plastic molds) Then GW got lazy/greedy and started to offer only a few sculpts. I personally would much rather have a professionally sculpted figure than a conversion. I miss the days of 50+ different goblin sculpts, and 50+ different forest goblin sculpts, etc.

I fail to see how an £10+ single plastic mini is cheaper to replace if I feth it up, compared to pretty much anything else.

At the risk of triggering another GW Price Moan, that is because GW price their cheap plastic kits at the level of boutique metal and resin figures.

The new trend is for monopose plastic character figures that by the posing and amount of detail on them are difficult to covnert, but cost more than the older more flexible kits.

 spaceelf wrote:

Ease of conversion is certainly a valid concern with metal. However, it used to be the case that companies would sculpt tons of different models so conversion was less necessary. (This was possible on account of the molds being cheaper than plastic molds) Then GW got lazy/greedy and started to offer only a few sculpts. I personally would much rather have a professionally sculpted figure than a conversion. I miss the days of 50+ different goblin sculpts, and 50+ different forest goblin sculpts, etc.

Might've been a slight problem with that, too.

http://life-in-miniature.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/a-gamble.html?m=1

That is an interesting article.

Companies like Essex Miniatures and Dixons still have models in production that I recognise from the 80s and 90s.

Presumably they have preserved their original masters and make new moulds as required.

I am speaking of metal wargame figures.

The Division Of Joy wrote:
In the same theme as the OP....


Why do other companies apart from GW have such a problem with mold lines etc? Is it simply a casting issue or is restic really that awful?

I am putting off Deadzone because of my dreadball purchases....

My Dreadball models had the worst mould lines I have ever seen.
Deadzone was bad, but as bad as the worst GW I've had. Those GW models were Finecast. The Finecast Eldar Autarch's cloak was so thin and badly cast it had holes in it. The same model's hands couldn't hold the weapons properly, and even liquid greenstuff couldn't line it up well.
Finecast's worst flaw I find is that it bends when in storage. I've packed them to hold the weapons and long parts steady, but they still twist and bend.

To all acting like I've said something outragous.

I meant a mold line that has been on a hard to remove area, or on a piece of detail that has ruined it.

I've had rare cases of mold lines in GW (now over 2000 points of Tau, same with DA) but nothing remotely as bad as mantic (2 Dreadball teams)

 spaceelf wrote:


Ease of conversion is certainly a valid concern with metal. However, it used to be the case that companies would sculpt tons of different models so conversion was less necessary. (This was possible on account of the molds being cheaper than plastic molds) Then GW got lazy/greedy and started to offer only a few sculpts. I personally would much rather have a professionally sculpted figure than a conversion. I miss the days of 50+ different goblin sculpts, and 50+ different forest goblin sculpts, etc.

To wit:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
That is an interesting article.

Companies like Essex Miniatures and Dixons still have models in production that I recognise from the 80s and 90s.

Presumably they have preserved their original masters and make new moulds as required.

I am speaking of metal wargame figures.

Generally there are a couple of 'masters' - the sculpt which is used to produce a first generation master (often silver or similar harder-wearing metal). That first generation master is used to produce several second generation masters (sometimes silver) which are used to produce a production mould, which is used to produce the cheap production casts.

The first-generation copy is cast in that hardwearing metal because it's quite likely the original sculpt will be damaged when pulling it from the mould. It's often the sole surviving 'copy' of the model in question, so it needs to last as long as possible.

In general when looking for a material to make masters, you're after something hard-wearing with a melting point lower than the vulcanised rubber used to make it.

So the models you actually get are often third-generation copies.

The Division Of Joy wrote:
To all acting like I've said something outragous.

I meant a mold line that has been on a hard to remove area, or on a piece of detail that has ruined it.

I've had rare cases of mold lines in GW (now over 2000 points of Tau, same with DA) but nothing remotely as bad as mantic (2 Dreadball teams)

Never had problems with Infinity models with mold lines obscuring detail. Same with Shieldwolf miniatures. How you phrased your sentence makes it look like all other companies except GW have mold line problems.

DO fw and gw use the same resin?

At what point does heat start to warp a resin figure? I live in england so heat isnt a problem when they are on display in a case but what happens when I chuck them in the back of a car to take to a games day or friends house?

Personally I like the idea of doing a bit of prep work before assembling. Makes the finished product more satisfying.

With Gw being the vast conglomerate that they are. Will they ever convert the fine cast models to plastic if sales are high enough? or would it be a case of it going oop and chucking the cheap mould away? I'm a bit fethed off that fine cast is cheaper yet the models cost more from gw...not that it would stop me buying them.

Apparently white dwarf did an article about the switch to fine cast. Does anyone know what issue it was?

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
What is/was the purpose of metal figures over plastic? Does this hark back to the days where it was easier to produce metal figures that had more detail than plastics.

Witch elfes from the 80's.


Witch Elves from the 90's.


Current Witch Elves. Sooooo much detail in those hair strands that totally don't look like tentacles.


High Elves from the 90's.


Current Sisters of Avelorn. Again, so much detail in those hair. And that scale mail looks soooo detailed.



Yeah, sure, metal is definitely something that belongs to the past...

No, they don't use the same resin.

The heat needed depends on the resin and the thickness of the piece and the force exerted. This is the reason it's a good idea to replace resin banner poles and lances with brass, and to properly put a core in anything long and thin.
The material used Finecast is pliable at room temperature, with gentle, constant, pressure.
You can't really 'convert' a metal or resin model to plastic (unless it's a very simple shape). Plastic models are made in solid, 2 part moulds (mostly, sometimes 3 or 4 with sliding moulds - but those are REALLY expensive to make).

Litcheur wrote:
...

The reason that the more recent GW miniatures look 'better' than the old ones (and to allot of people they don't, the newer GW miniatures while being technically really good, are very unappealing aesthetically, they all look like Barbie dolls), is due to digital sculpting making it extremely simple to add detail to a miniature.

Compare any of those plastic GW minis to a new metal Infinity miniature or even one of the metal Confrontation miniatures (or heck, even the GW Inquisitor miniatures), and you'll quickly realise that plastic is the inferior medium.

PhantomViper wrote:

Litcheur wrote:
...

The reason that the more recent GW miniatures look 'better' than the old ones (and to allot of people they don't, the newer GW miniatures while being technically really good, are very unappealing aesthetically, they all look like Barbie dolls), is due to digital sculpting making it extremely simple to add detail to a miniature.

Compare any of those plastic GW minis to a new metal Infinity miniature or even one of the metal Confrontation miniatures (or heck, even the GW Inquisitor miniatures), and you'll quickly realise that plastic is the inferior medium.

This, so much this.

PhantomViper wrote:
The reason that the more recent GW miniatures look 'better' than the old ones (and to allot of people they don't, the newer GW miniatures while being technically really good, are very unappealing aesthetically, they all look like Barbie dolls), is due to digital sculpting making it extremely simple to add detail to a miniature.

Compare any of those plastic GW minis to a new metal Infinity miniature or even one of the metal Confrontation miniatures (or heck, even the GW Inquisitor miniatures), and you'll quickly realise that plastic is the inferior medium.

I was sarcastic. Edited that one to make things more obvious.

The overall esthetic has changed throught the years. Fine. Like it, don't like it, to each his own.

Chainmail bikinis were silly. But it was chainmail, and that says something about the detail level. When you look at the actual detail level, you realize that current plastic minis from 2013 are light-years behind any metal mini, even 30 years old ones.

Basically, GW hasn't done anything meaningful during the last twelve to fifteen years.

I'm not the biggest fan of latter-day GW, and always ready to point out their shortcomings; but when I compare the quality of old and new witch elves in those pics, the first thing that springs to mind is not the fineness of hair strands or tinyness of abstract chainmail-imitating dimples. Strewth. Yes, it'd probably be nice to have 'metal-quality' details like those on the newer minis, but when the actual metal alternatives you're holding up as 'superior' look more like witch-gibbons or witch-deep-ones, I'd have to say "I'll take some plastic barbie dolls that can't have every hair picked out of their scalp, please." (And I'd never buy the placcy witch elves in the first place!)

I came to the decision some time ago that detail, and praise of same, on a mini (that is, mere presence, quantity, or fineness of detail) is an obfuscating, diversionary thing; a superficial layer and superficial attitude that disguises any shortcomings of the design, structure and shapes of the miniature. After all, the pumbaagor is quite detailed. The FW dread saurian is quite detailed. Those vaguely ork-shaped heaps of scrap labelled 'freebooters' are quite detailed. The Doggerland ice age mammals and Mantic basilean sisters etc. etc. are quite detailed.
Again, yeah, it'd be nice to have well-sculpted, appropriate details on otherwise well-sculpted minis; but when GW actually comes out with a pretty wonderful mini like the IoB griffon (worst bit: forelegs might be a big overlarge) I'm dumbfounded to read posts by people whinging and moaning that every little barbule is not included on every little feather. (Go on, pick 'em out here. I'll wait. In the meantime, look at the lack of detail in this guy's birds. What a noob. ) Similarly, I think the hair on the plastic witch elves could have a bit more definition, but I don't think that's entirely down to the limitations of the medium, and the decision to sculpt and cast the hair in locks that are a bit larger than the locks in metal minis, is not the worst thing about them. (That'd be the sheer must-copy-roginshirozz size of the hair, and of course, the price )

I do agree that, while level of detail could contribute to how good the model looks, it's not the end-all of all things. I'd take a well-sculpted plastic model with less detail than a bad-looking metal/resin model with intricate details any day.

In my eyes those plastic witch elves are an improvement in terms of how they look. At the very least they look like women now, compared to the old sculpts in the photo which look like hermaphrodite trolls.

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
So Ive done the obligatory first page google search and no info.

What is/was the purpose of metal figures over plastic? Does this hark back to the days where it was easier to produce metal figures that had more detail than plastics.

This also brings me onto my next point. Alot of the stuff that was metal has been released as Fine cast. What is the purpose of this over say, just having it all plastic?

I am unfamiliar with how models are made. I assume the plastic models are made with moulds injected with plastic. Is resin similar, just pour resin into a mould? Is resin cheaper than plastic? Is the infrastructure to maintain the production of plastics just to expensive.

I'm only familiar with games workshop. Do other companies choose resin over plastic or vice versa?

A lot of questions I know but I'm just curious. I didnt really like the metals and I'm quite happy to work on plastic or resin.

I'm not sure if your questions regarding production have been answered thoroughly so here goes.

-Metal
Metal casting is the cheapest and most reliable process for smaller production runs. All it takes is a master model, then you make a rubber mold and cast until the mold goes bad, make another mold and continue. It is usually done with a spincaster, which is a fairly straitforward piece of machinery that most folks can learn to use.
Though the raw material of metal is more expensive, any mistakes can simply be recast so there is virtually no loss of material. Metal is also very durable and for many collectors it still has implications of being more collectible and valuable.

Metal is still a material much desired by hobbyists, collectors and others, especially those who are doing less converting and don't require dozens of models in different poses. Companies like Reaper, Corvis Belli and others still use metal as their primary casting material for these reasons and are quite successful in doing so.

-Resin
Resin is cast similarly, but rather than melting metal and pouring it into a mould, resin is usually a 2 part mixture that is mixed together and then poured into a mold. It is a bit more fragile, and as it cannot be reused any mistakes must be thrown away. With resin it may be possible to get better detail than metal, but there is the tradeoff of durability, sensitivity to heat and much less tolerant of stripping and repainting. Resin is however generally a better material for large models as the sheer expense of metal means that large models can become extremely expensive in raw materials. Also, large chunks of resin are not as prone to damage or a susceptible to heat as small friagile resin models.

Thus, resin is mostly seen in high-end "boutique" models, and short production runs. It's also very commonly used for independently produced vehicle kits.

-Plastic
Polystyrene plastic (like what GW uses) is melted and pushed into a mold, but the mold is metal. It is this creation and cutting of a metal mold that makes plastic production much more expensive. You can't just make a mold of the figure, rather the figure has to be scanned (or created digitally) and then a CNC machine has to cut the metal mold. There is a good amount of training usually required for the creation of the mold and companies either have to have such an employee on-staff or hire out the service. Both of which require a large $ outlay. After that, you still have to have a plastic injection machine (a large bit of machinery) and the knowledge to use it or that also must be hired out. There have been reports that many plastic injection molding companies that serve model companies are at capacity so it can be hard to find someone to make the models for you.

Long story short, unless you have in-house plastic production facilities (and sometimes even then) you have to sell ALOT of a given miniature to recoup production costs. However, once you recoup production costs, the meal molds will last nearly forever and the low cost of the raw materials means that further sales will produce a very good profit margin.

-PVC
There is also the Vinyl PVC figures that companies like Mantic like to call "restic" or "spincast plastic". I don't know the exact process -and I think there are actually several different methods- but I do know that it is a cheaper product to produce than polystyrene models. However, it doesn't seem to be suited to large sprues of parts, thus most of these kind of models have far fewer parts than multipart plastic kits.. It also seems to be cheaper for models that are produced in large runs. Manic for example puts many of it's biggest selling sprues in plastic, medium selling sprues in restic and charachters and things that you only need one of per army in metal.

PVC fills a niche between metal or resin and plastic. It's still very much in development as companies find new formulations and was of using the material. It also seems to be a bit of a stopgap for some companies that can't seem to source plastic production all the models they would like to.

I hope this clears up the differences in production methods and some of their advantages and drawbacks.

In short, metal and resin models are still sold by many companies who sell relatively few models compared to the "big guys", but also by the big guys. Metal and Resin are very much alive and allow many small companies, mom-n-pop's and "garage" outfits to greatly expand the number of models available to the hobbyist . On the other hand, large companies are in many circumstances moving to plastic and PVC in an effort to insulate themselves from global metal costs and to produce greater numbers of models more cheaply, and sometimes passing that savings along to the customer.

Edit: One more point.
One additional detail that isn't always mentioned is the superior unity of the scupt that can be achieved with one-part models. A plastic kit with limbs that can be repositioned, positionalble waists and heads, etc will never have the anatomic realism that can be achieved when a model is properly sculpted to reflect musculature and anatomy. The reason is that folks rarely just raise an arm, rather their back will curve a touch, they might slightly couterbalance by shifting their weight onto a foot, etc, etc. Thus, a dynamically posed single-pose model can achieve much higher level of accuracy than multipart models. Most single-pose models are cast in metal and resin and this also contributes to their continued use and popularity.

Details often come down to the sculptor's talent, and aesthetic choices. As well as the angles. If you look at the "top" or back of the hair of those '90s Witch Elves, you'll see what essentially amounts to one of reaper's "broccoli bases". On the other hand, the older ones looking like "hermaphrodites" is simply because of the sculptor's level of skill. The final wave of metal Witch Elves, sculpted by Chris Fitzpatrick - which is the best of the metal ranges - also suffer from "trannyface" to an extent, but then again - have a look at the faces of the women around you at home/work/school/etc and take note of just how many of them don't have the slender, high cheekbone, flawless complexion "model" look that we associate with female faces. A lot of female faces could well be male faces with a change of haircut and stubble. Now make those subtle changes on a head 3mm high, but without going to those "model"/"elven" ratios. Hard, eh?

As to the apparent new topic of this debate - "which is better?" - my opinion is that they all do things better than the other materials, and have strenghts and weaknesses. Even Restic, I have to admit.

Tamiya and so on issue detailed plastic kits that satisfy a lot of modellers, but often include photo etched brass parts or similar, or replacement tracks and the like, from 3rd party companies, to satisfy the highest standards of realism for the modeller.

When you want to make an army containing say 96 bowmen as well as many other figures, the amount of fine detail on the individual figure is less important.

The detail provided by plastics has improved substantially imo, with WGF churning out some really good stuff. These are some plastic characters produced by WGF and a resin character produced in-house from the WWX line .


(I need to learn how to take better photos)

I want to add, if it's not been said, that I've seen many competition and high end painters prefer metal miniatures, followed by resin, following by PVC/plastics. The more rigid the material, the less likely it will bow under a brushstroke and also be more durable for crazy aesthetic posing.

 Yonan wrote:
The detail provided by plastics has improved substantially imo, with WGF churning out some really good stuff.

And GW. Keeping with the concept of "credit where credit's due", if you put the price of some of them aside (that Nurgle Herald... good God...), GW's plastics have come a long way. I think insaniak said it already (apologies if I'm wrong), but they've been improving for a while but went into overdrive when the last edition of Space Hulk came out. I don't think anyone expected Terminators to look quite that good, and so visually unique. They've only improved since then.

 Yonan wrote:
(I need to learn how to take better photos)

Compared to the people leaking WD pics you're veritable photography virtuoso!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think insaniak said it already (apologies if I'm wrong), but they've been improving for a while but went into overdrive when the last edition of Space Hulk came out. I don't think anyone expected Terminators ]to look quite that good, and so visually unique. They've only improved since then.

I didn't say it, but I agree. The Space Hulk plastics, and more recently the Dark Vengeance plastics, and more recently again the two special characters in the Stormclaw box have shown that GW can do some pretty darn impressive things in plastic if they put their minds to it.

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
At what point does heat start to warp a resin figure? I live in england so heat isnt a problem when they are on display in a case but what happens when I chuck them in the back of a car to take to a games day or friends house?

Finecast minis have warped pretty badly in the windows of GW Glasgow, the city notorious for sustained high temperatures. Or under any sort of pressure (like a foam travel case).

It'd probably be fine in the back of your car for a few hours though, but I wouldn't leave it anywhere you wouldn't leave a dog.

 Yonan wrote:

(I need to learn how to take better photos)

Careful what you wish for - once down the path to photography forever will it drain your wallet (and if you think GW is expensive you've not seen anything yet! )

 TheKbob wrote:
I want to add, if it's not been said, that I've seen many competition and high end painters prefer metal miniatures, followed by resin, following by PVC/plastics. The more rigid the material, the less likely it will bow under a brushstroke and also be more durable for crazy aesthetic posing.

Although the heat-warping is an issue, a high end job will often involve replacing or coring things that may sag, even on harder resins.

The light weight is actually an advantage for crazy posing. For display, fragility isn't an issue (unless it's a commission job that you need to ship across the world).

The main reason Finecast is often avoided (or at least my major bugbear with it) is that it has appalling cast quality. Due to very rapid mould wear, you're really likely to get rough finishes on things that should really be baby-bum smooth. You also get a lot of bubbles in edges, which are a royal pain to fix. If you have to resculpt and resurface lots of the model, it's not fun to work on, and it's very likely not to turn out as you want it to.

And finally, most high-end modellers are experienced with enough models, modelmaking processes and manufacturers to know that the problems with Finecast are a result of the process, material, and QC. We've worked on better, we know there's better, and we don't buy the line that we're supposed to think these are fantastic. It's simply irritating. I resent having to buy the stuff for work, and I know many other high-end commission guys who feel the same.

Let me illustrate.
This is fairly high-end work, but note the rough finish on armour surfaces. Could have been fixed, but would have meant a surfacing putty over the majority of the model.


And here's some shots of the required fixes to get that finish. Really speaking I should have done more.








Which I think is a fairly graphic explanation of why the higher end painters and modellers think the stuff is crap.

The fact that GW have dropped the "Finecast" brand after only a couple of years is a clear illustration of the rotten reputation it achieved.

From what I can tell, most c omission painters refused to take on Finecast jobs pretty quickly after release. Some mentioned that it was too much hassle to cleanup/fill/ship, others felt bad that someone would spend a fortune to get a mini painted professionally for it to droop weeks later.

Although I love resin, I'm still a fan of metal. Metal also adds the collectors angle. It's much easier to collect and trade metals than other materials as they are so much easier to strip and recondition.

On metal conversion, I will say it requires real dedication to carry out. Saws, drills, pinning, filing, greenstuffing, milliputting, etc. A plastic conversion will take no time, a metal conversion will take days, but the sense of accomplishment is huge! I remember my first metal conversion. I felt like I just conquered Everest.

Converting and working with metals got much harder (literally) after the shift away from lead alloys in order to get CE toy certification. Lead alloys are softer, more malleable material - much easier to convert than today's stuff. For miniatures, I still think it's a better material.

Herzlos wrote:

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
At what point does heat start to warp a resin figure? I live in england so heat isnt a problem when they are on display in a case but what happens when I chuck them in the back of a car to take to a games day or friends house?

Finecast minis have warped pretty badly in the windows of GW Glasgow, the city notorious for sustained high temperatures. Or under any sort of pressure (like a foam travel case).

I've had regular Airfix plastic kits warp in a window - and that was in the tropical conditions of the Arctic Circle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

Finecast... was just plain terrible - an inferior material with poor QA. The only redeeming virtue was not one that the public enjoyed - it was wicked cheap to produce... yet GW charged more for it.

Mantic, by comparison, doubled the number of models in a box for the same price, when they switched to restic.

That is not a fair comparison tho, since "restic" is not resin but plastic. GW kits sometimes have dramatically dropped in price too, when moved to plastic - Killa Kans perhaps the best example, their price was cut by nearly 2/3.

If you want crazy PVC pricing, look at PP.

IMO, Finecast's reputation would be better if GW had not screwed up the introduction: they hyped the material massively, then rushed it out without proper QC with tons of miscasts in the first wave - a textbook PR nightmare! Nobody in my gaming group has complained about Finecast at all. I have only few FC minis though, but mostly they are totally fine. In fact the casting quality is slightly better than in equivalent metal miniatures. One of them has an air bubble in inconsequential place. FW resin is much more troublesome in my experience.

Regarding plastic moulds, they indeed last a long time - whenever a model kit maker goes bankrupt, there is a huge rush from other companies buying off the moulds. I think Airfix still operates moulds from the 1960's.

There are still Frog moulds from the 1950s in use in eastern Europe.

Backfire wrote:
GW kits sometimes have dramatically dropped in price too, when moved to plastic - Killa Kans perhaps the best example, their price was cut by nearly 2/3.

Dire Avengers called, they'd like to speak to you. Cadians are on line two when you're done speaking to them, and Catachans are expecting a return call.

Backfire wrote:
IMO, Finecast's reputation would be better if GW had not screwed up the introduction

Ah right. If only they'd talked about it differently, we would have all accepted it? No. You can't piss on my face and tell me it's raining. A bad product is a bad product no matter how you spin it.

Backfire wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
At what point does heat start to warp a resin figure? I live in england so heat isnt a problem when they are on display in a case but what happens when I chuck them in the back of a car to take to a games day or friends house?

Finecast minis have warped pretty badly in the windows of GW Glasgow, the city notorious for sustained high temperatures. Or under any sort of pressure (like a foam travel case).

I've had regular Airfix plastic kits warp in a window - and that was in the tropical conditions of the Arctic Circle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

Finecast... was just plain terrible - an inferior material with poor QA. The only redeeming virtue was not one that the public enjoyed - it was wicked cheap to produce... yet GW charged more for it.

Mantic, by comparison, doubled the number of models in a box for the same price, when they switched to restic.

That is not a fair comparison tho, since "restic" is not resin but plastic. GW kits sometimes have dramatically dropped in price too, when moved to plastic - Killa Kans perhaps the best example, their price was cut by nearly 2/3.

No, it is a fair comparison - Mantic switched to a less expensive material, and dropped the price.

GW switched to a less expensive material and raised the price.

One company passed the savings along.

The other one tried to spin it as an improvement, and increased the prices.

I was not comparing restic as resin, I was comparing restic as a less expensive material than metal.

Remember, GW bragged to stockholders that Finecast cost less....

The Auld Grump

Eilif wrote:You can't just make a mold of the figure, rather the figure has to be scanned (or created digitally) and then a CNC machine has to cut the metal mold.

The (slightly) older method, still in use, is to make a mould of the 3-up (sculpts at three times the intended size), then use that mould cavity to mill the shape of the metal mould, using a stylus hooked up to a milling tool via a pantograph. Have a squint at the guy in the bottom right photo, here.

Edit: One more point.
One additional detail that isn't always mentioned is the superior unity of the scupt that can be achieved with one-part models. A plastic kit with limbs that can be repositioned, positionalble waists and heads, etc will never have the anatomic realism that can be achieved when a model is properly sculpted to reflect musculature and anatomy. The reason is that folks rarely just raise an arm, rather their back will curve a touch, they might slightly couterbalance by shifting their weight onto a foot, etc, etc. Thus, a dynamically posed single-pose model can achieve much higher level of accuracy than multipart models. Most single-pose models are cast in metal and resin and this also contributes to their continued use and popularity.

Well said that man! Round of applause. The thing is, arms don't just stop at the upper head of the humerus - a lot of upper body muscles are actually concerned with arm motion - pecs, lats, traps, delts, etc. They all move and contract or slacken depending on just how you move said arm, and they move the clavicle and scapula too. A lot of this muscle contraction can be hidden and disguised by clothes, but see how raising the arm changes not only the angle of the arm itself and the individual surrounding muscles, but the shape of the general deltoid+pectoral mass and the vertical position of the shoulder joint.
Which is why, when I see some examples of the posability of multipart plastics, I wince a little.

Azazelx wrote:The final wave of metal Witch Elves, sculpted by Chris Fitzpatrick - which is the best of the metal ranges - also suffer from "trannyface" to an extent, but then again - have a look at the faces of the women around you at home/work/school/etc and take note of just how many of them don't have the slender, high cheekbone, flawless complexion "model" look that we associate with female faces. A lot of female faces could well be male faces with a change of haircut and stubble.

I've seen an article with cosmetics-free 3D scans of the faces of some of the most attractive female celebs, and they did look surprisingly mannish in some examples. But all the same, witch elves, after a dunk in that there cauldron, are not intended to be the everyday plain-janes you see in the street.

Im fairly satisfied with the responses so far.

One question. Does anyone have a metal and resin figure of a comparable character. E.g a metal grey knight and a resin one? Whenever I see bare metal figures they look much less detailed. I would love a picture from one of the
commission guys to show me a painted metal vs painted resin. Preferably an unbiased one. IE the wors resin figure you have vs the best metal one.

I assume a sculpt is a sculpt weather it be used for metal or resin. Its just loaded up from a pc nowadays and put into a mould.

I thought gw were still using the finecast brand but looking at their site today it looks like they have dropped it to a generic term. I could have swore i saw it called finecast the other day. GW really could have renewed alot of peoples faith in them with the finecast brand. With such a name, were they really stupid enough to cut the corners that they did, I shouldn't read this forum. It makes me lose faith in gw a bit more every day

I can't offer you a side by side comparison, but I can offer an explanation.

The reason bare metal looks less detailed is simply because it is shiny, and on a uniformly coloured surface like an unpainted mini, it is the interaction of light and shadow that allows our brain to figure out what we're looking at. A reflective surface produces less shadows, giving our brain less info to work with.

For this reason, bare metal minis often have an ink wash when being photographed for websites etc. Resin, having a much more matte finish, doesn't need the help.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:
GW kits sometimes have dramatically dropped in price too, when moved to plastic - Killa Kans perhaps the best example, their price was cut by nearly 2/3.

Dire Avengers called, they'd like to speak to you. Cadians are on line two when you're done speaking to them, and Catachans are expecting a return call.

Not to mention the legions of Every. Single. Plastic. LOTR. Infantry. Box.

Vermis wrote:

Eilif wrote:You can't just make a mold of the figure, rather the figure has to be scanned (or created digitally) and then a CNC machine has to cut the metal mold.

The (slightly) older method, still in use, is to make a mould of the 3-up (sculpts at three times the intended size), then use that mould cavity to mill the shape of the metal mould, using a stylus hooked up to a milling tool via a pantograph. Have a squint at the guy in the bottom right photo, here.

Edit: One more point.
One additional detail that isn't always mentioned is the superior unity of the scupt that can be achieved with one-part models. A plastic kit with limbs that can be repositioned, positionalble waists and heads, etc will never have the anatomic realism that can be achieved when a model is properly sculpted to reflect musculature and anatomy. The reason is that folks rarely just raise an arm, rather their back will curve a touch, they might slightly couterbalance by shifting their weight onto a foot, etc, etc. Thus, a dynamically posed single-pose model can achieve much higher level of accuracy than multipart models. Most single-pose models are cast in metal and resin and this also contributes to their continued use and popularity.

Well said that man! Round of applause. The thing is, arms don't just stop at the upper head of the humerus - a lot of upper body muscles are actually concerned with arm motion - pecs, lats, traps, delts, etc. They all move and contract or slacken depending on just how you move said arm, and they move the clavicle and scapula too. A lot of this muscle contraction can be hidden and disguised by clothes, but see how raising the arm changes not only the angle of the arm itself and the individual surrounding muscles, but the shape of the general deltoid+pectoral mass and the vertical position of the shoulder joint.
Which is why, when I see some examples of the posability of multipart plastics, I wince a little.

Thanks for the mention of Pantograph I'd forgotten about that. I'd never seen an actual picture of the machine at work. IIRC, it still takes a fair bit of know-how for the process. I used to love getting sneak peaks of 3ups, but we don't seem to see as much of that anymore. IIRC, Mantic offered cast resin versions of some of it's 3ups early on. I don't know if they're all digital now or not, but it's a neat idea for a promotion.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:
GW kits sometimes have dramatically dropped in price too, when moved to plastic - Killa Kans perhaps the best example, their price was cut by nearly 2/3.

Dire Avengers called, they'd like to speak to you. Cadians are on line two when you're done speaking to them, and Catachans are expecting a return call.

Really, what would they say?
There are no longer metal Cadians or Catachans on sale. However there are some other metal Guard ranges still in sale: Mordians cost £20.50 per ten miniatures, Tallarns cost £25.50. By contrast, plastic Catachans and Cadians are £18 per ten minis. So, it seems to me that most of the time GW indeed lowered the prices when converting from metal to plastic (not always, crazy expensive Space Marine characters are a counterexample). Of course, in some examples, subsesquent price increases have sometimes eroded or reversed the original price drop.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:
IMO, Finecast's reputation would be better if GW had not screwed up the introduction

Ah right. If only they'd talked about it differently, we would have all accepted it? No. You can't piss on my face and tell me it's raining. A bad product is a bad product no matter how you spin it.

No, the big mistake was sloppy QC in initial release: if Finecast had been current quality from the start, it's reputation wouldn't be anywhere as bad. Sure, people would still get occasional miscasts and complain, but it would not have resulted the material becoming a common laughing stock.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

I was not comparing restic as resin, I was comparing restic as a less expensive material than metal.

Remember, GW bragged to stockholders that Finecast cost less....

I remember the opposite: that GW said that while the material is cheaper with FC, the production is more expensive.

Backfire wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Backfire wrote:
GW kits sometimes have dramatically dropped in price too, when moved to plastic - Killa Kans perhaps the best example, their price was cut by nearly 2/3.

Dire Avengers called, they'd like to speak to you. Cadians are on line two when you're done speaking to them, and Catachans are expecting a return call.

Really, what would they say?
There are no longer metal Cadians or Catachans on sale. However there are some other metal Guard ranges still in sale: Mordians cost £20.50 per ten miniatures, Tallarns cost £25.50. By contrast, plastic Catachans and Cadians are £18 per ten minis. So, it seems to me that most of the time GW indeed lowered the prices when converting from metal to plastic (not always, crazy expensive Space Marine characters are a counterexample). Of course, in some examples, subsesquent price increases have sometimes eroded or reversed the original price drop...

...I remember the opposite: that GW said that while the material is cheaper with FC, the production is more expensive.

I could be wrong think that HBMC is referring to the subsequent massive price raises that followed the release of plastic minis. Also, I think he's referring to earlier comments regarding how Mantic switched to restic and doubled the number of minis in a box while keeping the prices mostly the same. This, compared also the various times where GW halved the number of minis in a box and within a few price raises the cost was significantly more than the original plastic kit. (Dire Avengers, and both plastic IG troop boxes had this happen). That $30 box of 10 Catachans used to be $20 and used to have 20 troopers in it. That's a $1 fig that now costs $3!
Ouch!
Inflation is a reality, but how many consumer products cost 3 times as much as they did in 1999?

As to whether finecast is much more expensive on the production line, I don't recall them saying that, and even if they did, I don't believe them. There may be a price increase, but I don't know of anyone else casting in resin where the cost for production is dramatically higher. Especially when a company has the economy of scale that GW does. I just don't see Finecast being more expensive for them overall vs Metal.

Wasn't finecast invented entirely because GW wanted a resin they could pour into their old metal moulds?

I recall being told the spent over a million on R and D for the stuff but actual production should have cost them practically nothing.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Wasn't finecast invented entirely because GW wanted a resin they could pour into their old metal moulds?.

Not exactly. They wanted a resin that they could spin-cast. It uses different moulds - silicon instead of vulcanised rubber.

Backfire wrote:
Really, what would they say?

They'd say "Why am I half as big as I one was for the same if not higher price?". But you knew that already.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Wasn't finecast invented entirely because GW wanted a resin they could pour into their old metal moulds?

I recall being told the spent over a million on R and D for the stuff but actual production should have cost them practically nothing.

If they actually spent over a million on R&D for spincast resin...they are fools far and beyond what I have thought them to be. Companies like Nicem have been selling self mixing, auxiliary heated resin spin cast machines for at least 15 years (priced one out back in 1999).

http://www.nicem.it/eng/prodotti/schedaprodotto.asp?c=58&i=375

Even without a high dollar machine, you can spin cast easily enough using standard machines and fast set resins. The only real limit is that (in my experience) resins do not like natural rubber molds...you really do need to use a synthetic mold. Costs a bit more, but to be perfectly honest, pennies over the life of the mold.

Even with my hand mixing, manual pouring method of spin casting resin - my labor cost per cast has only gone up by about 4 minutes per spin (which ends up being around 16 seconds per miniature on most my molds...). Think that would work out to 50 cents extra per miniature if I paid myself $125 per hour (pretty sure GW's production crews are not making $125 per hour).

 jonolikespie wrote:
Wasn't finecast invented entirely because GW wanted a resin they could pour into their old metal moulds?

I recall being told the spent over a million on R and D for the stuff but actual production should have cost them practically nothing.

When I found out the UK was testing new materials for casting it was "suggested" that we do the same in Memphis to see what we could come up with.

We did use the old molds for testing out spin-casting resin. The first tries weren't very satisfactory, but with some additional cuts to the molds we were able to get them working just fine.

I'm not certain of the reasons the UK went with an entirely new process and spent so much money, but our tests were done around 2007 and much of the moldmaking/casting staff left around that time since GW was cutting staff.

Maybe the results were never relayed to the UK. The manager we had at the time didn't seem interested in anything other than getting his 99% fill rate for Direct Sales.

Given that GW has for five years been on a largely successful crusade to cut costs, it seems extremely unlikely that Finecast was not an attempt to cut costs.

The idea was to replace metal as a casting material without having to replace all the metal masters or cut expensive polystyrene injection moulds.

You can see on some Finecast models how there are traces of a sprue frame, and extra vents compared to the metal original. These presumably are adaptations for the new process, though if the metal originals had them the excess material would have been worth recycling and may have been cut off before packing so we would not have seen them. Personally I think they are traces of the new method. Metal being so much heavier than resin will spin out into the mould void much better without so much venting.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Given that GW has for five years been on a largely successful crusade to cut costs, it seems extremely unlikely that Finecast was not an attempt to cut costs.

Oh, absolutely. Whether it actually worked as they intended is another matter entirely. GW made some nebulous remarks that Finecast release had some "communication problems between departments" or something to that effect. I think they did not really anticipate the high miscast rate.

Someone pretty high up in management decided to launch regardless of the problems with Finecast.

GW manufacturing department must have done trial runs while developing the process. These would have indicated the likely rate of miscasts and so on.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Someone pretty high up in management decided to launch regardless of the problems with Finecast.

GW manufacturing department must have done trial runs while developing the process. These would have indicated the likely rate of miscasts and so on.

As Mr. Miyagi once said "You hit nail on head."

For people interested in such things, the mid 90s plastic skeleton and the Eldar Grav Tanks were made using three-ups from which a pantograph then cut the mould. Production photos are in WD #216 in the UK.

The cost of a model has little to do with the material and mostly to do with the design, art, mould, shipping etc.

I think metal gets a bad rap - sure its hard to convert but wow, is it easy to strip paint! You can always buy some old metal mini's off ebay and strip em and repaint them. doing that with plastic is a crap shoot and resin/finecast - yea right!

Johnson & The Juice Crew wrote:
So Ive done the obligatory first page google search and no info.

What is/was the purpose of metal figures over plastic? Does this hark back to the days where it was easier to produce metal figures that had more detail than plastics.

This also brings me onto my next point. Alot of the stuff that was metal has been released as Fine cast. What is the purpose of this over say, just having it all plastic?

I am unfamiliar with how models are made. I assume the plastic models are made with moulds injected with plastic. Is resin similar, just pour resin into a mould? Is resin cheaper than plastic? Is the infrastructure to maintain the production of plastics just to expensive.

I'm only familiar with games workshop. Do other companies choose resin over plastic or vice versa?

A lot of questions I know but I'm just curious. I didnt really like the metals and I'm quite happy to work on plastic or resin.

You won't find Finecrap on google. GW abolished the term.

Basicly it was a stopgap bean counter decision, based on tin prices world wide. GW was trying to enter the softer restic market, and failed miserably. The stuff was behind the scenes a stop gap until GW could reengineer their figures to plastic specs.

FIGURE companies use resin, or metal. This restic/ finecrap alternative based boardgame piece plastic is spastic-suckfest-tacular at its best and pretty much by now everyone is past the novelty and into the blind rage of trying to work with something this craptastic.

Its a price fix, to cut to the issue. Resin is pretty expensive, and you have to applaud the effort that the companies are trying, even if they didn't work out so well. On the whole, figures are either excellent or crap. no Mr In-between.

Oh.. look.... Where has the Grotster ended up in his drunken cherry popping spree?? Hide your mom!

And yes, everything they say about PR is true.

We wrote:
I think metal gets a bad rap - sure its hard to convert but wow, is it easy to strip paint! You can always buy some old metal mini's off ebay and strip em and repaint them. doing that with plastic is a crap shoot and resin/finecast - yea right!

I use the same stuff (Simple Green) to strip metal and plastic. Stripping the plastic is no harder than metal.

Really? I've found that after a day or so soaking in simple green plastic still requires scrubbing but metal the paint just falls off.

Anyway I think that all the materials have a roll to fill, plastic is for masses of posable line models who will die by the fistfull. Metal is for characters and individual game pieces no bigger than s terminator. Resin is for anything larger than that and for display pieces. Finecast is for those models you really want to buy just so you can enjoy throwing then in the bin.

 Grot 6 wrote:

FIGURE companies use resin, or metal. This restic/ finecrap alternative based boardgame piece plastic is spastic-suckfest-tacular at its best and pretty much by now everyone is past the novelty and into the blind rage of trying to work with something this craptastic.

I think there are alot of folks who would disagree. Some companies are still working out some of the kinks of pvc based figures. However, Reaper -one of the definitive miniature figure companies- is doing alot of good stuff with the material under their 'Bones' brand and if their sales are any indication, gamers seem to be agreeing. Mantic also is producing some very good miniautes (sometimes held back by the concept, but still) and others are doing the same.

Not that there haven't been some missteps, and metal is still my favorite for most things ,but I've got quite a few Bones and Restic figures that are every bit as good as their metal counterparts.

Also, PVC vinyl isn't a new thing. It's been a model kit medium for many years, just mostly (though by no means only) in larger scale models.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Really? I've found that after a day or so soaking in simple green plastic still requires scrubbing but metal the paint just falls off.

Anyway I think that all the materials have a roll to fill, plastic is for masses of posable line models who will die by the fistfull. Metal is for characters and individual game pieces no bigger than s terminator. Resin is for anything larger than that and for display pieces. Finecast is for those models you really want to buy just so you can enjoy throwing then in the bin.

Depends on the primer. Not a materials expert, but certain primers mixed with the more porous surface of plastics can make removal of paint extremely difficult. I have had a wide crap shoot on stripping plastics and resin, but metal is almost always easy except for deep and narrow crevices.

Also, after using both Simple Green and LA's Totally Awesome, I cannot recommend the latter more as it's cheaper by volume and is far more effective at stripping models.

In the old days you could dump a metal figure into a pot of paint stripper and dissolve everything off it including any plastic parts, without harming the metal. Unfortunately it is no longer legal to manufacture those sorts of super strong paint strippers.

 TheKbob wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Really? I've found that after a day or so soaking in simple green plastic still requires scrubbing but metal the paint just falls off.

Depends on the primer. Not a materials expert, but certain primers mixed with the more porous surface of plastics can make removal of paint extremely difficult. I have had a wide crap shoot on stripping plastics and resin, but metal is almost always easy except for deep and narrow crevices.

Also, after using both Simple Green and LA's Totally Awesome, I cannot recommend the latter more as it's cheaper by volume and is far more effective at stripping models.

As for Plastics, it's true, some primers just adhere really well to plastic. I think it's because certain spray primers and paints have chemical solvents in them that are so harsh that they fuse to the plastic. Also, some enamel paints stick really well. These can be a bear to get off, and sometimes you just decide to leave a bit of primer residue on and reprime.
Metals are tough enough that for really hard finishes, you can put them in chemicals that would melt plastics (Acetone, MEK, Oven cleaner, etc) to clean away the tough stuff.

As for which cleaner to use, I've tried everything and stripped around 1000 figures (metal, plastic and others) or so in the last few years. I'd recommend Purple Power. It's almost as cheap as LA, but works better than LA or Simple Green. It also has -among others- the 2butoxethanol chemical that green used to have, but dropped from the formulation in 2012. It's available at most any auto parts store or Walmart. Like the other two, it's safe for metal, resin or plastics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In the old days you could dump a metal figure into a pot of paint stripper and dissolve everything off it including any plastic parts, without harming the metal. Unfortunately it is no longer legal to manufacture those sorts of super strong paint strippers.

In the USA, you can still buy Methyl Ethyl Keytone (MEK) . It's what engineers are joking about when they say "Methyl Ethyl Death". Dangerous as heck, but when I have a metal fig with a stubborn finish, nothing else works as well.

Love that stuff!

 Eilif wrote:


Love that stuff!

Sounds fun?

I'll try Purple Power after I work through my LAs. I bought $4 worth which means I can strip all the 40k minis and still have some left.

 insaniak wrote:

We wrote:
I think metal gets a bad rap - sure its hard to convert but wow, is it easy to strip paint! You can always buy some old metal mini's off ebay and strip em and repaint them. doing that with plastic is a crap shoot and resin/finecast - yea right!

I use the same stuff (Simple Green) to strip metal and plastic. Stripping the plastic is no harder than metal.

90% of the time in my experience. The other 10% it won't come off. It depends on what the person primed and painted them with. With metal, worst case scenario I drop them in brake fluid or acetone and boom, bare to the metal and no damage to the metal. You can't do that with plastic.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In the old days you could dump a metal figure into a pot of paint stripper and dissolve everything off it including any plastic parts, without harming the metal. Unfortunately it is no longer legal to manufacture those sorts of super strong paint strippers.

You can get Nitromors in most high streets that will do this. All paints including enamals wil slough of in minutes.

Don't breath in the fumes.

Don't get it on your skin.

Wear rubber not PVC/latex gloves.

Don't work by candle light!

Nitromores isn't what is was, they've changed the formula. It's used to look like wallpaper paste and work a treat. Now it's bright green and I was very disappointed last I used it as the removal was quite poor.

We wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

We wrote:
I think metal gets a bad rap - sure its hard to convert but wow, is it easy to strip paint! You can always buy some old metal mini's off ebay and strip em and repaint them. doing that with plastic is a crap shoot and resin/finecast - yea right!

I use the same stuff (Simple Green) to strip metal and plastic. Stripping the plastic is no harder than metal.

90% of the time in my experience. The other 10% it won't come off. It depends on what the person primed and painted them with. With metal, worst case scenario I drop them in brake fluid or acetone and boom, bare to the metal and no damage to the metal. You can't do that with plastic.

Eh, I've had almost 100% success rate with Super Clean.

 gunslingerpro wrote:


Eh, I've had almost 100% success rate with Super Clean.

Spoiler:

I've tried that also with great results. I'm not sure there's much if any difference between it and purple power. IIRC, I used it first and switched to purple at the suggestion of the auto parts clerk, and b/c purple was just a bit cheaper.

Last time I checked, I think Superclean also has the 2 butoxethanol ingredient that Purple has and Simple Green used to.

 TheKbob wrote:
Depends on the primer. Not a materials expert, but certain primers mixed with the more porous surface of plastics can make removal of paint extremely difficult.

I've had some that the primer didn't want to come off completely, but haven't had any issues with the paint layers. And that's good enough for me... Unless you're painting for Golden Demon, a little bit of primer left over isn't going to affect the paint job enough to matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

We wrote:
With metal, worst case scenario I drop them in brake fluid or acetone and boom, bare to the metal and no damage to the metal. You can't do that with plastic.

I used to use brake fluid for plastics before I found simple green. Some will eat plastic, some won't.

Before that I used oven cleaner... there was one specific brand here in Oz that stripped like a treat without affecting the plastics (every other one I tried either didn't work at all or melted the mini) but they changed the formula and it stopped working... :(

Haven't read all of the thread, but a number of things changed over time.

Resin and metal have been comparable in the past - both allow fine detail and cheaper moulds. So they are great for individual models that need a lot of detail.

Plastic is very expensive to make the mould, but the material is cheaper. So it's a great way of making high volume models that will sell well.

Over time, metal prices have been volatile, whilst GW plastic has improved massively. There seems to be a gradual shift to plastic, with many new characters now being in plastic.

Finecast is a substitute for metal. The "hate" is more than typical anti-GW hate. It really was terrible, required a lot of post-purchase work, had bubbles, mould lines etc. I recall an online retailer refused to stock Finecast for a while, after an in-house QC showed lots of poor quality. I understand it has improved over time.

Personally, I can't stand it. I'm an amateur modeller so prefer forgiving materials. Metal is resilient and doesn't warp in storage. Plastic is similar, and is also easy to cut and reposition. Resin is brittle and warps. I'll moan about GW like anyone else, and then carry on playing, but I haven't bought a F/C model since shortly after they were introduced.

Still terrible.

Also, metal doesn't have the be the domain of figures you might only buy one or two of. You can still get the benefits of mass production to some degree when it comes to spin cast. And there are still quite a few companies making metal miniatures that will be the rank and file guys, especially in historicals. GW grew to be an international company off the sales of mass produced metal models with a smattering of plastic kits. It wasn't until the late 90s that they really developed their plastic technology.

Artizan Designs, for example, still sells 28mm metals for £5.60 for 4 and they're not even necessarily a budget option like Old Glory. I just mention Artizan because their sculpting style fits with GW stuff.

 frozenwastes wrote:
Also, metal doesn't have the be the domain of figures you might only buy one or two of. You can still get the benefits of mass production to some degree when it comes to spin cast. And there are still quite a few companies making metal miniatures that will be the rank and file guys, especially in historicals. GW grew to be an international company off the sales of mass produced metal models with a smattering of plastic kits. It wasn't until the late 90s that they really developed their plastic technology.

Artizan Designs, for example, still sells 28mm metals for £5.60 for 4 and they're not even necessarily a budget option like Old Glory. I just mention Artizan because their sculpting style fits with GW stuff.

Spoiler:

That's very true. There are lots of companies selling metal for large historical armies, and lots of historical players who still prefer metal.

Some of the companies with low cost metal options are benefit from older figures (lack of need to sculpt too many new ones) or smaller figures (25 and not-as-heroic 28mm) but some companies are producing metal 28mm figures and selling them for considerably less than GW plastic boxes.

As an example, Look at the West Wind Dwarf Wars figs that Old Glory sells in the USA. Units of full size heroic 28mm-30mm fantasy figs, with quite a bit of variation of sculpts for less than $2 a fig,(24 for $46)or as low as low as $1.15 each when you sign up for their membership and pay $50 a year for 40% off everything!
http://www.oldgloryminiatures.com/categories.asp?cat=43
If I didn't already have an armies worth of Essex WotRoses miniatures waiting for paint, I'd be buying a Nordvolk army.

Yeah, if I ever did an elf army for fantasy gaming, I'd totally go for their stuff. Old Glory has some solid sculpts and some that are less great, but their stuff that West Wind produced are all solid.

 insaniak wrote:


I used to use brake fluid for plastics before I found simple green. Some will eat plastic, some won't.

I still do use brake fluid (technically 'brake and transmission fluid dot3') on metals or plastics. I don't soak for more than half an hour and I've not noticed ANY damage to styrene plastics (Now resins are a different matter. PU tend to soften permanently. Acrylic resins seem fine, and epoxy resins likewise. ).

Gets even etching primer off plastics (except in deep grooves) but you can use fine pointy probes to scrape the crud out.

I tend to end up with really dodgy paints of metal figures when I get 2nd hand stuff. Stuff painted in enamels using a trowel. In my experience, SG struggled with enamels. Brake fluid didn't care - enamel, acrylic, auto lacquer - it ALL comes off.

I've been using it for about 15 years. I tend to buy a bottle every couple of years (about 500ml) and reuse it until it loses efficacy - goes a yellowy-green - by filtering out the paint crud.
The paint crud and filter go into the garbage. The used fluid goes into a local mechanic's waste drum that he gets picked up for disposal.

 chromedog wrote:
I still do use brake fluid (technically 'brake and transmission fluid dot3') on metals or plastics. I don't soak for more than half an hour and I've not noticed ANY damage to styrene plastics (Now resins are a different matter. PU tend to soften permanently. Acrylic resins seem fine, and epoxy resins likewise. ).

The stuff I used to use (also a Dot3), I had a bunch of 2nd ed plastics floating in it for about 3 months with no ill effects.

In my experience, SG struggled with enamels. Brake fluid didn't care - enamel, acrylic, auto lacquer - it ALL comes off..

It did a pretty good job on glue as well.


I only stopped using brake fluid when I started reading about how nasty it was. While I wore gloves and tended not to drink the stuff, Simple Green was still much more pleasant to work with.

I was never impressed by Simple Green. Takes too long to take effect, and didn't even get through primer.

I currently use Easy Off oven cleaner. Doesn't damage plastics, and will strip a model bare in about 3 hours.

No mention of dettol yet? Probably not the best, but it works 100% 80% of the time!

For those in US and Canada: L.A.'s Totally Awesome cleaner

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/365067.page

In Canada, it is carried at Dollar Tree locations.

Metal is nice just plastic gives ability to build larger multi part, and pose sets.

Though I have some old metal, 1980,s stuff. and it was a joy to paint! :-)

 Yonan wrote:
No mention of dettol yet? Probably not the best, but it works 100% 80% of the time!

Lol. I used to use dettol. In fact I just cleared out a tub of minis that've been sitting in dettol for a couple of years. Compared to the other minis I also just tackled, that've been sitting in a half-jar of fairy power spray for a few weeks, FPS still wins.

If you have even a drop of water in Dettol it's paint stripping effects are considerably lessened.

Straight from the bottle and into a clean pot and it will strip paint and primer quite quickly. If you want to reuse it, take the models out and don't be tempted to dip your scrubbing brush in it. Once it is even slightly cloud dispose of it.

When dettol is cloudy it only seems to make paint gummy which will make it stick in recesses and generally foul up your cleaning brush.

I dont actually buy the whole "less detail in plastic" thing me.

My favorite models of the last few years were all in plastic, surely that argument is not sound anymore?

Space Hulk, Chaos chosen, and ltd edition Chaplain from DV surely proved the point? They are fething brilliant models, and they have all the detail you could want.

To be fair those models are twice the size of Infinity models but who cares about detail in wargame figures anyway?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To be fair those models are twice the size of Infinity models but who cares about detail in wargame figures anyway?

I don't play Infinity, but it's 28mm as well right?

Point is GW plastics are fine, I haven't ever noticed any discernible difference in detail between a plastic figure and a resin one regardless of the model, the plastic guardsmen look great as well.

It's 28mm realistic humans not 28mm GW heroic Space Mariens. The bulk size of the models is at least half, with reduced surface area to hold detail but the detail on the Infinity figures is just as good as GW.

But who cares? They are 28mm wargame models, not display pieces.

 mattyrm wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To be fair those models are twice the size of Infinity models but who cares about detail in wargame figures anyway?

I don't play Infinity, but it's 28mm as well right?

Point is GW plastics are fine, I haven't ever noticed any discernible difference in detail between a plastic figure and a resin one regardless of the model, the plastic guardsmen look great as well.

I suppose it depends what you want in a miniature, and also levels of detail suit different styles of game and miniature.

I read one of the Corvus Belli sculptors reckoned that something like 60% of their miniature range wouldn't be possible in plastic. Not just to do with delicacy of the sculpt but also practical considerations of how moulds work, resin and metal can give much more of a blank canvas for the sculptor to work with. The level of detail on some of the miniatures is fething mental, to the point where sometimes my shoulders drop when I come to painting a new miniature, and I look over at my Warlord plastic Romans longingly..

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's 28mm realistic humans not 28mm GW heroic Space Mariens. The bulk size of the models is at least half, with reduced surface area to hold detail but the detail on the Infinity figures is just as good as GW.

But who cares? They are 28mm wargame models, not display pieces.

Yeah like I said, I don't see it being an issue, perhaps it is a relic of older days when metals really were easier to detail and plastic minis were the sort of detail you used to get on those plastic army figures you played with as a kid.

Actually, that might be right, I remember when I was a little kid my mum used to buy me these totally awesome metal soldiers, I think they were actually called "Britain" toys, I remember her telling me to keep them all because they would be worth something in the future. They were like a quid fifty in 1987 so, they were pretty dear. I think I had about 40 or 50 in the end, and my mates used to be amazed at how much better they were than those gakky all green plastic ones we used to get a tub full of for about a pound.

Needless to say, they all got threw out anyway.

But anyway yeah I agree, I don't believe for a second that the difference is discernible at 28mm, even if they are smaller and less bulky than the Chosen for example, even small models are more than adequately rendered in plastic as far as I can tell. I don't know what GWs smallest plastic is, but I cant see it being visibly worse than a resin or metal version. As you say, your eyeballs probably cant tell from more than a foot away anyway.

notprop wrote:If you have even a drop of water in Dettol it's paint stripping effects are considerably lessened.

If you have even a drop of water in fairy power spray it's paint stripping effects... aren't.

mattyrm wrote:I dont actually buy the whole "less detail in plastic" thing me.

My favorite models of the last few years were all in plastic, surely that argument is not sound anymore?

Can't help noticing they're all GW models. Have you seen or handled anything else since the Britains soldiers disappeared?

 mattyrm wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's 28mm realistic humans not 28mm GW heroic Space Mariens. The bulk size of the models is at least half, with reduced surface area to hold detail but the detail on the Infinity figures is just as good as GW.

But who cares? They are 28mm wargame models, not display pieces.

Yeah like I said, I don't see it being an issue, perhaps it is a relic of older days when metals really were easier to detail and plastic minis were the sort of detail you used to get on those plastic army figures you played with as a kid.

Having worked with both GW metal, plastic and FW resin, and then Infinity metals, nothing GW produces either through themselves or Forgeworld is even close to the detail level of an Infinity model. GW stuff is extremely exaggerated, which makes it quite easy to paint. Infinity models frequently have details I find myself dropping to a 000 sized brush for, and then details I have trouble actually seeing (due to an astigmatism). The detail difference between GWs and Corvus Bellis models really are night and day, though it's due mostly to the model scaling (40k is closer to 32mm these days, with very exaggerated features, while Infinity is 25mm realistcally scaled - a Guardsman next to an Infinity model looks like someone suffering from gigantism).

The main problem with GW's 'detail' these days is it's really just clutter. Throw as much needless extras on a model as you possibly can and call it detail, instead of just making a clean sculpt with sharp details.

 mattyrm wrote:
Space Hulk, Chaos chosen, and ltd edition Chaplain from DV surely proved the point? They are fething brilliant models, and they have all the detail you could want.

I agree. Plus who'd want this in metal? Or this?

Slaanesh would have fits of ecstacy at the thought of those in metal.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Space Hulk, Chaos chosen, and ltd edition Chaplain from DV surely proved the point? They are fething brilliant models, and they have all the detail you could want.

I agree. Plus who'd want this in metal? Or this?

I don't think I've seen that first one before, but feth me I don't think it would even go together!

Plus, It would probably weight about 5 stone, you would need arms like Garth to get it to the fething game game store!

To be fair, Infinity models could very well be used as display pieces. And I think the best sculpts in the industry right now would go to them. If they make a Fantasy Range I would pledge my soul to Corvus Belli and they shall have my first born as offering to the Crow of War.

With regards to detail on metal/resin versus plastic, most metals I've wroked with (mainly Infinity ones) holds more detail than the plastics I've worked with (including the ones mentioned by mattrym). But that doesn't mean that they're better models: but they are better at holding tiny details (from the ones I've worked so far). The plastics that holds a lot of detail that I've worked on so far is.... Mantic's Zombies, I think. All those gore and intestines and bones and fingers. Would've been fun to paint if I didn't have to paint 30 of them.

Horses for courses.
Technically, metals can be finer detailed than plastic, but are undoubtedly harder to assemble and unsuitable for certain poses.

However, for a mass battle game, why do you want micron level details on rank and file? It'd just drive you mad painting it. Simple designs work fine en masse.