Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is a Games Workshop Finecast review / comparison by Richard Harris and i have his written permission to post it.
LINK





Can You Tell Finecast from Ordinary Citadel?

I decided to buy the Emperor’s Champion to make a comparison and review the differences between the old metal and the new Finecast resin Citadel miniatures. I chose this miniature partly because I’ve always liked it and wouldn’t mind the chance to paint it again and partly because I already had a metal one waiting for me to explore sky and earth non-metallic metal, which will be the follow up to this article. To give Finecast the best chance possible, I chose the only one of the three Emperor’s Champions in the shop which wasn’t surrounded by a halo of flash and which had the straightest looking sword.



New Finecast and metal blistersThe first difference, we can clearly see, is the price. This has been everyone’s biggest concern (expecially in Australia!) but for someone like me who mostly paints rather than needing hundreds of miniatures to play with, I’m not overly worried as long as the extra money is going somewhere. However, if you collect an army which was, until recently, mostly metal, I can see that any price increase is going to put you off.

The next point to notice is that our new figure comes on a sprue comparable to hard polystyrene miniatures and like the metal figure, it still comes with a polystyrene backpack. I don’t see why either of these things should bother anyone and the Finecast comes off of the sprue very easily, in fact some of the body had either broken away by itself or someone had already clipped it. From this photo the Finecast’s detail seems far superior and in fact the detail is crisper on the resin casting but not as much as it appears, it’s just the reflections on the metal which make it look so much better. It is also worth noting that the feeder points on the metal and the resin moulds are the same but the resin appears to need bigger ones. This is pure supposition but it suggests to me that the Finecast doesn’t flow as well as they’ve said. Not only that but the new enemy of the miniaturist suggests the same thing…

… Air bubbles!



This miniature had large air bubbles on the inside of the left elbow, the bottom of the cloth on the back, the outside of the right foot and smaller ones on the top of the helmet and the bottom of the front cloth. These are definitely too large to fill with super glue and even small ones should be filled with a filler which can be smoothed as super glue will leave a rough edge which will show through the paint. The large bubbles I filled with Duro and the small ones I painted with watered down Vallejo Plastic Putty (an alternative would be watered down Milliput). You will also notice three striations on the back cloth. These cause me even deeper concern as they are not mould lines and it’s not obvious where they came from. Speaking of mould lines, the mould lines were a lot worse on the resin miniature but generally easier to clean. Games workshop have advised not to use files or papers on Finecast resin but I had to in some of the hard to reach areas like the folds of the cloth and I had no problems with burring. The striations were also filed off.



Moving on to the sword, one of the quillons was slightly bent but a little heat from a lamp bulb allowed me to straighten this relatively easily. However, The blade of the sword itself was wobbly on one side (the left side in this photo) and straight on the other, there was nothing I could do about this but the metal one was perfectly straight on both sides. To be fair though, I have seen similar things on metal castings in the past but I fear that this is going to be a lot more common with resin. This is only just visible in the photo but it is noticeable and due to the writing sculpted onto the sword blade, it cannot be filed or sanded flat or built up with putty.

Another worrying thing was that I found a piece of light beige material in the resin figure’s armpit. This, I can only assume, must be part of the mould and adds weight to the idea that the resin moulds wear out faster. I can only hope for other people buying figures cast after this one that this mould was retired after this casting, otherwise people are going to be getting some odd lumps in their armpits (Emporer’s Champions with bubonic plague?)



The joints of the metal figure required more filling than the resin figure and I used a little Duro with my trusty home made needle brush and Colour Shapers to do this. With all the holes filled, and the parts assembled (and yes, I did pin the arms on both miniatures) I then got on with the next problem. Both the metal and the resin figures had a bit of roughness to the armour which I wanted to smooth out so I painted most of the armour with the watered down Plastic Putty and then, when dry, rubbed them lightly with a fine glass paper.

I mixed some Milliput with the left over Duro and inserted some small pieces of cork and slate to make some bases. I imprinted the putty mix with some bigger pieces of cork bark to give it a rough texture. I then cooked these under a lamp to speed up the curing.



Lastly, I pinned them to their bases and primed them making sure to let each thin coat of primer dry before applying the next to keep a slightly grainy texture which will stop my thinned layers of paint from flowing everywhere. It’s worth noting that, like polystyrene, less primer is required to cover the resin than the metal, However, once primed I have to look very hard to see the difference. Games Workshop clearly don’t think there’s much difference either as they are still using the same photos to advertise the new miniatures.



To summarise, Finecast’s detail is slightly sharper and I have seen a few models with bare heads where this is certainly noticeable but it’s a lot more work to repair all the casting problems and I’m not sure that’s fair when we’re paying more for the miniature too. Saying that, it is easier to cut and I was able to improve the cast by cutting away the forearm where it merged with the sword hilt (I was able to do this a bit on the metal but not as easily) and I could easily cut away the section which filled the gap between the head and left shoulder pad which I wasn’t able to do on the metal figure at all so conversions will definitely be easier.

Stay tuned for the next article, which will be a look at sky and earth non-metallic metals (SENMM). In the meantime, please let me know of your experiences of Finecast.

So which model is the Finecast?


LINK TO RICHARDS BLOG


Automatically Appended Next Post:
i bought this model myself and aside from the sword missing its a pretty crisp looking model... i didnt have any air bubbles but i did have some rough spots that where hard to clean/smooth

Interesting.

The camera always is focused on the left model, so details like engravings on the black blade look clearer. This is not reflected in the post, which seems to worry about FC.

Doomthumbs wrote:The camera always is focused on the left model, so details like engravings on the black blade look clearer. This is not reflected in the post, which seems to worry about FC.

not sure i fully understand what your saying, but the focus is on both miniatures as they are both in the center of the picture at equal distance... any difference in lighting perhaps happens because metal needs more primer to cover...

But the focus is MORE on the model on the left. For every detail.
Im not sure if it happened here, but I can specify a center of fucus on my camera. All I'm saying is that that center appears to be on the model on the left.
As well as the lighting conditions and angling of the model so as to take advantage of these.
And the quality of the primer application.

Specifically in the following spots:
Sword, Necklace, right shoulder, bolter holster, boots, basing, helmet, sword grip... Actually I'll stop because in the photos, literally every detail in every picture makes the Finecast model out to be the better detailed of the two.

My point was that this is incongruous with the material in the post, which describes the nightmare problems associated with all the other posts I've read on it. Bent weapons, air pockets, etc.

well thanks for clarifying...

i dont know the conditions of the taken pictures because i didnt take them...

im not sure but it might actually be that the finecast just has that much sharper details then the metal model... i have to say my model looks a lot better then then the metals ive seen of the emperors champion, especially on the spots you just mentioned

making sure to let each thin coat of primer dry before applying the next to keep a slightly grainy texture which will stop my thinned layers of paint from flowing everywhere

Why the hell would you WANT a grainy texture????

I guess it works for him, he's a great painter.

I couldn't tell. I made a half-educated guess based on the way the engraving in the sword looks darker on the one on the left. I didn't know if it's because the engraving was deeper, or if it's because with such a light coat of primer, the recesses didn't get covered and the under material being matte means it makes darker shadows than shiny metal. It turns out I was right, which doesn't so much mean that Finecast is obviously different so much as it means that with a 50/50 guess I have a good chance of getting it right by accident.

I couldn't make out any details on the Finecast that I couldn't also see on the metal, so I'm just not seeing the point. I've spent the past couple of days working with metal models and enjoying how the material is strong enough to take a little abuse. So I think I'm just done with GW. My armies will be unfinished, but that's okay. It's just not worth it to pay that much money for the benefit of my models being easier to break, or spending extra time sifting through racks in store to find the 1 mini out of 3 that doesn't have excessive flash or is miscast.

I guessed the left one, but the right one looked better to me.

Cyporiean wrote:I guessed the left one, but the right one looked better to me.

I would agree. The model on the left look a bit jagged...

I guessed the left one, and I actually find it of better quality. And Doomthumbs, I'm not an an expert with photographs (not one bit), but you're saying the right model is out of focus, although they are the same distance from the camera and in the same light? How's that possible?

you need to know if i paint metal minins i paint like gak.. it just doesnt work so well idon't know why and the paint always chips of.. but i love to paint plastic minis wich i can a lot better than metal so the finecast is like a wet dream for me coming through.. finally i am going to buy calgar an give him a desent paintjob instead of waisting time and money on the metal one but i had guessed the left one there's a clear differnce between the necklaces..

Joske De Veteraan wrote:you need to know if i paint metal minins i paint like gak.. it just doesnt work so well idon't know why and the paint always chips of.. but i love to paint plastic minis wich i can a lot better than metal so the finecast is like a wet dream for me coming through.. finally i am going to buy calgar an give him a desent paintjob instead of waisting time and money on the metal one but i had guessed the left one there's a clear differnce between the necklaces..

that is a serious plus for me, the fact that paint will stick to the mini better...
im a beginning painter and i dont want to spend a lot of money on varnishes and stuff... and the gloss varnish looks like hell on armor, unless its wet...
but im worried that if its really that flexible (which it is) if the paint wont break and chip off anyway

I fail to see the challenge in this, it's clear the fine cast is the one on the left, aside from some casting issues Finecast clearly has better detail over the metal ones.

deejaybainbridge wrote:I fail to see the challenge in this, it's clear the fine cast is the one on the left, aside from some casting issues Finecast clearly has better detail over the metal ones.

i think you mis understand the meaning of the post... its a comparison, not a challenge to spot the right mini... see it as a review

I think detail wise nobody has a problem with resin/finecast do they? We know it can produce better and more detailed casts.

The point is also though that it is a difficult medium, in that, it miscasts easily in varying ways. Its cheaper to produce yet we are being charged more.

I am not sure what the point being made here is. Are we trying to show that finecast isn't / is better than its metal predecessor or are we having a go at the casting issues??



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The point made earlier about the paint bonding better to a resin than it does to metal has always been something I have liked resin for. Nothing worse than a model just falling over on the table and there is a chip on the paint when you were 99% done

lukewild1982 wrote:I am not sure what the point being made here is. Are we trying to show that finecast isn't / is better than its metal predecessor or are we having a go at the casting issues??

i dont think richard was taking a side, he was just pointing out pro's and cons on both sides

lukewild1982 wrote:
The point made earlier about the paint bonding better to a resin than it does to metal has always been something I have liked resin for. Nothing worse than a model just falling over on the table and there is a chip on the paint when you were 99% done

yeah thats a real pain

Taking into consideration the problems and drama that was had when we changed over to white metal, it's pretty clear that resin is better than metal in the majority of regards, especially fc resin because it simply holds more detail and is less brittle than most other examples of the material.

I didn't see any focus problems - the FC model was obvious in all the pictures because it looked better. A few little air bubbles you can fill with greenstuff. Since they've just switched mediums it's pretty clear that this will only get better. Pointing out issues objectively is good for everyone, but being a sensationalist about it is a bit jerk.

considering your models are 2-4 feet away from you on the table and surrounded by lots of other models, no I can't tell the difference and don't really want to.

if I wanted to I'd just stare at them both for 5 minutes and wait to see which one just melts

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Taking into consideration the problems and drama that was had when we changed over to white metal, it's pretty clear that resin is better than metal in the majority of regards, especially fc resin because it simply holds more detail and is less brittle than most other examples of the material.

It's not clear at all. I prefer metal.

JOHIRA wrote:

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Taking into consideration the problems and drama that was had when we changed over to white metal, it's pretty clear that resin is better than metal in the majority of regards, especially fc resin because it simply holds more detail and is less brittle than most other examples of the material.

It's not clear at all. I prefer metal.

It's clear that your opinion is more important than your comprehension.

I'm talking in practical terms (lighter, easier to manipulate and model, higher detail, superior to other resin products), not familiarity or preference. I don't have a problem with either medium.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:It's clear that your opinion is more important than your comprehension.

I'm talking in practical terms (lighter, easier to manipulate and model, higher detail, superior to other resin products), not familiarity or preference. I don't have a problem with either medium.

Superior to other resin products? Sorry but that's bollocks, I've bought resin miniatures from Rackham, Hasslefree, JMD, Fire Industries etc, etc. None have been as poor quality or had the same kind of quality control issues of finecast.

Failcost will, when they get there QC right and learn how to work the machines properly, produce miniatures with 'crisper' detail, there is no 'extra detail' the sculpts are still the same. There will still be ongoing issues with air bubbles, this is inherent with the VERY cheap material they have chosen to use.

GW has just tried to pull the emperors new clothes trick on it's customers, however the customers have seen GW for what it really is and are revolted.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:It's clear that your opinion is more important than your comprehension.

I'm talking in practical terms (lighter, easier to manipulate and model, higher detail, superior to other resin products), not familiarity or preference. I don't have a problem with either medium.

Let's not flame, shall we? Just because I don't share your opinion doesn't mean I don't comprehend it.

I'm talking in practical terms too (less brittle, ability to bend parts of the model into shape, superior durability, less flash, and ATM far fewer missing/malformed parts). We're talking art here, and there is no such thing as an objectively best artistic medium. It all comes down to what the artist prefers. Just because you feel strongly about what you prefer does not make it a universally agreed-upon fact.

In imperial terms finecast is worse quality than other resin manufacturers my JMD resins and the large scale resin tiriel I got from hasslefree had ZERO flashing, virtually NO mould lines and MINIMAL injection points.

These sculpts were designed with resin in mind and therefore had much better detailing, undercuts etc.

Failcost minis ALL have flash, have EXCATLY the same number of mould lines as the previous metal minis and have RIDICULOUS numbers of injection points.

Fail cost minis have only marginally better quality control than forgeworld, it is lurking right down the bottom of the ladder when it comes to resin miniatures.

As I said before, when they sort out the current issues it should be an improvement on metal, but it will never be the "finest quality miniatures ever" as GW wants everyone to believe.

There casting process itself simply isn't good enough to catch up with others already out there.

As for the "flexibility" any thin resin is bendy but will still snap if over flexed, I've seen a failcast azhag have his arm snapped clean in two already. As far as reposing using heat, all resin miniatures currently on the Market are thermo-softening, it's not a miracle material.

well there are pro's and cons to both metal and resin mini's from GW....
i like how the metal models could take a beating, but i also really like (and his outweighs the sturdiness of the metals) that the paint job is much easier now...

i know there are a lot of other companies that have resin models of better quality or with more detail or with a better quality control, but i think that it is a interesting development of GW and i cant wait to see what they will do next, and if they will develop new models with this method

Said it before and I'll say it again:

'Finecast' is just a way for GW to massively cut their production costs by phasing out all their metal figures under the pretext of improving quality while actually increasing their cost to the consumer.

I agree with Daedricbob - I don't want to have to pay double for special characters. As for the paint job issue, I liked the metal minatures because, as long as you washed them before assembly, they were durable and the paint would stick. These finecast miniatures seem to be far too easily thermosoftening - I can forsee many cases of cracked varnish ahead, and that's just not acceptable with minis that cost so much.

feluca wrote:I guessed the left one, and I actually find it of better quality. And Doomthumbs, I'm not an an expert with photographs (not one bit), but you're saying the right model is out of focus, although they are the same distance from the camera and in the same light? How's that possible?

with digital cameras, it picks out what it thinks is focus. There is a picture of my dog burried in about 10 years og photographs, and he is completely out of focus, but the one stray hair that flew off of him while he was running is in sharp focus. Then there is the thing with macro lenses: the distance might be the same overall, but there is a subtle difference in angle of the lens. That sublte difference is HUGE on a macro lens, so a couple of milimetres here or there decides whether something is in focus and what part of it.....

in other news, godzilla suffered a heart attack at 6:35 PM this evening. He was taken to hospital, is in stable condition, and doctors expect him recover soon, but discovered another complication. More on this, after the break.

I figured the left one. Do I get my prize now? I haven't seen any of these models close up yet but it strikes me that if GW were going to the hassle of re-tooling to make models in different moulds and they had two years of knowing they were doing this.... Why didn't they sneak out a couple of new sculpts I mean if they tasked their design staff with recreating one model from the current range with better easy to cast detail each month we would be looking at well an awefull lot of new improved sculpts.... then I wouldn't mind paying more for new figure...

Both look okay to me.