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.

terribletrygon wrote:

Kirasu wrote:I like the female farseer but I dont really see what makes it a female.. Yeah okay I get that "boob armor" doesnt make any sense but when a lot of people think of female farseers they think of dawn of war.

That farseer was very very easily seen as being a woman.. this one not so much. Boob armor can serve a purpose if no other feature of the model is feminine

To be fair, Dawn of War II's Farseer did not have boob armour, and even they managed to make it look like a woman, even if you put a helmet on her. It is all in the proportions at the end of the day. And I think that Chapterhouse dropped the ball when it came to this. I also do think that the chest piece does slightly mimic the male chest simply due to the design of the upper chest armour, which doesn't help at all.

No offense, but you guys seem to be viewing the past through the gauzy lens of nostalgia; Farseer Taldeer from DoW had some heavy duty "boob armor";


If anything, the sculpt at hand seems more subtle in that regard. Also, when people talk about how successfully they conveyed gender in DoW, it must be remembered that they had at least one advantage CHS will never have, Laara Sadiq doing the V.O. work.

I never was referring to DoW I's farseer.

I've been waiting on a female Farseer/Warlock fig for an age now, the cash in my wallet is waiting to leap at one. Sadly this one has not changed that position and the wallet shall remain closed.

Because I'm looking at it and thinking, 'where's any sign of it being a female'

Not saying it needs HH bweebs here, but some sort of shape, because at the moment without a female head, its looks male.
Either it needs some kind of breasts that stand out to some degree or a obvious this is a female head, with hair hanging down.

Here are three of the better examples of a female farseer I've seen drawn, one being a GW version. Even on the first where the breasts are not overdone, there is a shape to them. The Doomseer's look flat, so to me look like just an overstyled male chest.

Ok to sum up, the minature is poorly proportioned and awkwardly posed. The detail on the legs is lacking in both shape and form, and the failings of the sculpter with respect to the minatures arms only excentuates this. To continue, the basic shape of the helmet is pretty much a direct copy of a GW Eldar warrior which it most definately is not. The only somewhat original parts of the helmet are the 'bunny ears' which are strangely blocky considering the Eldar aesthetic to which the miniature aspires.

With reference to the Eldar race, which the miniature fails to ape, they were designed for the most part by Jez Goodwin. A lot of forum members probably respect Jez as a highly talented sculpter, and this pale shadow of an attempt at a Farseer is insulting, considering it is destined to be offered for sale. I would have been less visceral if the sculpter was just showing the mini as a skills demonstration. There would be less of a problem if the miniature was original in any way shape or form, but it is just an inferior attempt to use the complaint that GW don't so a female Farseer as justification. That justification is moot, as there is no requirement for GW to produce such a minature and indeed nothing preventing people producing such a minature for their own purposes, and not for profit.

Sooo, my position then. I find I am insulted that the minature is to be passed off as something which it is not, and by a company which has not demonstrated any ability to produce any original minatures that haven't come from the 40k universe (not going to go into the legality of it, and I would apreciate that we leave off on that issue as it will be dealt with in a court of law where it should be) which is undeniable. I also find that the manufacturers poor attitude to releases by other parties also further raises my ire and causes me to be more critical of their releases. The contension that it is ok to make money off anothers work (by direct use with no originality, to the untrained eye) is not something that others should aspire too, and indeed after early forays other manufacturers have managed to find their own sci fi setting that parallels the 40k universe without taking directly.

Finally there are many similar issues with previously offered sculpts that have been regularly commented on, and it would appear that nothing is being learned from those failings. This lack of progress in ability further shows a lack of ambition to get anywhere near the standards GW hold. Yes there are GW minatures that people will point to that from a personal aesthetic are not perfect, but that is a far cry from an entire range where the detail is soft, poorly aligned or out of proportion. Hence the use of the word garbage.

I would also like to point out that I no longer work for GW production and haven't for more than a few years, though I do hold companies that I spend my money with to the same standards. I spend my cash freely with Heresy/Hasslefree/Antenicities and many others because of their production values. I am sorry if my values offend anyone, but these offerings are unashamedly poor.

And here i thought it was a hobby...

xcasex wrote:And here i thought it was a hobby...

Yup, it is. Right upto the point that you start charging money for it

No doubt the true success or failure of this piece will only be shown in the sales figures.....I think it's safe to say Cpt. Jack et al. have made their points and opinions well known, perhaps it's time to stop scratching the itch and simply allow cold harsh economics tell the tale from here.

Those are nice pics of lady Farseers farther up the page.

No.1 doesn't have a female head, but her breasts are highlighted to make them appear more prominent, and she has nail varnish. She is wearing a long, double layered skirt.

No.2 is rather androgynous except for the way the gold pattern on the breastplate lifts, separates and emphasises the breasts. I sound like a bra advert. Her nails appear to be French polished. Her hips are accentuated by the two heavy belts she is wearing. She is posed with a hand on her left hip -- this is a feminine pose.

The other figure in the background seems to have a thicker waist, but this could be the effect of the heavier armour. The figure is side on and we can't get a good view of the waist and hips. I couldn’t say for sure he is a male elf. This reduces the contrast with the female Farseer.



No.3 has a fantasy female face with eyeliner and a small jaw. Her narrow waist is accentuated by the armour styling with a bare midriff, the breasts also benefit from armour styling which highlights them and partly bares them. She appears to be wearing a long skirt. Her hair is fairly long.

Overall, signs of female identity are in the clothing, styling and accoutrements, not just the body form.

The physical deportment or pose of the figure also has an effect.

All the pics are much larger than a 28mm figurine.

Number two is the one I'd actually like a fig of, also the GW pic of the three. Well sabertooth art if my notes are correct, but some kind of official GW art regardless.

I agree with what you are saying Kilkrazy, but sadly this fig hasn't got anything that marks it out as female. I have seen a few conversions that are miles better on whats offer here.

If I'm honest though,. I would have rather it was over the top, then completely underwhelming like this.

If I want to use a male fig and say its a female under the armour I might as well use Eldrad, not pay for one that doesn't live up to the sales pitch.


edit - here are some examples, the first two are ones I'd consider for myself if I could get a conversion together, but even the third which I think some would dislike heavily, I prefer over the one for sale.

I really like number one, thought the head isn't Elven enough for me. Number two doesn't really do it for me and number three would be good for the odd giggle game like I-munda where you can easily do something a bit looser than normal.

Great finds.

Delephont wrote:No doubt the true success or failure of this piece will only be shown in the sales figures.....I think it's safe to say Cpt. Jack et al. have made their points and opinions well known, perhaps it's time to stop scratching the itch and simply allow cold harsh economics tell the tale from here.

I have to agree with you, no matter how bad a sculpt is in our mind some people will still buy it, let's just see how many persons that is.

I do think the paintjob makes the mini look miles better though and would like a picture of the green to let people see how badly sculpted it is.

I like the posing, arms do seem a bit long but not overtly so. Helmet seems a bit big---and just as an aesthetic I think your character models should always have their helmets off. It will help differentiate the sex (and your brand) from other companies.

Would love to see some 'Not Wraithguard' that didn't cost 150 bucks a unit....

Couldn't you just convert a banshee?

And I actually like the CH version, but don't play space elves.

Not really. The head's totally unusable as Farseers can't take a Banshee mask, and the body doesn't really scream Rune Armor. At best a Banshee would be an expensive modelling blank.

You could make use of the Executioner arms, though - I could see those working pretty well in a Staff conversion.

unheilig wrote:If you are going to ride on the IP of another company, the sculpt should at least be of similar quality.

The figure is woefully two dimensional and thick-limbed. Completely inelegant. It should at least be as elegant and dynamic as GW's male farseers, if not more so.

Such as it is, its quite the failure.

I know it's not like GW would put out anything like that...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440239a&prodId=prod1060055

Behold the Munchkin Farseer!

*sigh*
enough is enough.

With reference to the Eldar race, which the miniature fails to ape

I guess GW "aping" Tolkiens Eldar race is ok?

A free hint just for you:
If you now are trying to sound mature and constructive in order to mask your overly displayed hate and bias, pleeease, at least try to refrain from veiled insults ok, it helps a lot.

and this pale shadow of an attempt at a Farseer is insulting, considering it is destined to be offered for sale.

Its perfectly ok, if you dont like it then dont buy it instead of barging in with your own hate spewing insults in every single thread chapterhouse is mentioned.
The only time you actually manage to sound constructive is after the mods repeatedly tell you to stop spewing your biased crap and even then (now) you STILL cant help yourself when trying to give your unbiased and insult free so called "criticism".
If you really arent a bitter former FW employer who couldnt cut it then act accordingly.

Sooo, my position then. I find I am insulted that the minature is to be passed off as something which it is not

And I am insulted that someone is constantly trying to pass of his biased hate in almost every thread as something which it is not (constructive critique without personal insults).

I also find that the manufacturers poor attitude to releases by other parties also further raises my ire

Would you pretend to "care" about other companies poor attitude towards their competitors and customers as well or does you bias only go as far as to chapterhouse?
Here is a nice example taken from a company that also advertises on dakka: ramshackle games, and what kind of attitude they display towards others on other boards:

"
Dude, I wish I had a bunch of anonymous goons. Please note that I have called you a gakker and many other insults, here and on other forums, but always as Ramshackle_Curtis. Why would I use a sock puppet when I can just call you a witch straight out? (to bad dakka censors strong words or else his post quote here would be PG18)
"
Would you like to see what insults ramshackle games spews about hasslefree as well? About un-satisfied customers? No? Care to be a "concerned citizen" about that as well or are you just another simple hypocrite?
Had you even tried to display a resemblance of honestly and non bias I would have taken you seriously.

This lack of progress in ability further shows a lack of ambition to get anywhere near the standards GW hold. Yes there are GW minatures that people will point to that from a personal aesthetic are not perfect, but that is a far cry from an entire range where the detail is soft, poorly aligned or out of proportion.

A lack of ambition, hmm? Far cry compared to the nearly perfect GW miniatures? hmm...

You mean these flawless things for example?
http://www.fast-autos.net/diecast-cars-models/diecast-car-image-large/oop-grey-knight-terminator-gw-40k-space-marine-pewter_260733502261.jpg
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/1910/img0944p.jpg

Please, by all means, I did not know even a gigant like GW started out with perfect minis from their old garage studio but you know what the good part is, you dont have to be bothered by irritating little things like facts when trolling, that´s the good thing about bias, you can just stop when it suits you.

I would also like to point out that I no longer work for GW production and haven't for more than a few years

I so wonder why. With that attitude you display in here I would not hire you even if someone paid me.

I know it's not like GW would put out anything like that...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440239a&prodId=prod1060055

Sssh, dont confuse cpt jack here.

Pyriel-, couldnt even have written it better myself! next time work takes me to gothenburg, let's have beer at kings end. lots of it.

ph34r wrote:Hm. "Not" striking scorpions, and a completely horrible looking female commissar that has a super long neck and boobs on her stomach. The good times keep rollin.

Exactly!
All female miniatures should have super huge boobs with nipples that point at the sky and tiny little waists!
Don't make anything divergent from that. We don't want minis that might resemble real people with saggy boobs or long necks.

Way to call him out on his errors, ph34r!

Eric

I don't think the Doomseer is nearly as bad as you guys are trying to claim.

Taking all of its parts separately, I think it's actually quite good. The only problem is that that those parts don't assemble into a really compelling centerpiece model, which is what a farseer should be. I know they made it that way in order to let you swap different arms/weapons out, but I'd prefer my farseer to look like it was in a more naturalistic pose appropriate for it's weapons, rather just standing there the way it is. That's not enough to make it a bad sculpt, but I would probably only buy it if it was cheap and only to chop it up and make the farseer I really want.

as a Sidenote, will you guys be selling those IG 'eads separately? have an upcoming 20+ IG conversion coming and the specific model i'm using only has 1 head availible.

You know, I don't want to put any more "rounds down the range" at Chapterhouse, but there is something to consider in all this....the argument about start up miniature companies and how "bad" we should reasonably expect their products to be in the beginning.

Now, I'm not implying that Chapterhouses products are bad, I'm more aiming my comments at those examples of GW's original products etc.....

There is something called "development"....and I don't mean a company developing it's own products over time, I mean industry development. Just because companies like GW started out with some (by todays standards) really bad miniatures, does that then mean that any company starting out today can expect to sell miniatures of that same "starting out" quality? I think not.....

In todays miniature markets, with the abundance of talent on the ground offering their services, and with information sources as openly accessible as they are, there is no excuse for a company to produce a "bad" minature, in terms of proportion, pose and detail....yes, a company can produce a bad concept...but not a badly constructed miniature....

Imagine this, I want to start my own car company, so my first car resembles a Model T-Ford, has no airbags, no power steering, and most importantly....no I.C.E how many people would buy it out of sympathy for me being a start up company? or it being my "first" attempt at a car?

Having finally read the last 3 pages and caught up to speed, I've got to say that I find a lot of double-talk in it.

Every time CHS puts out something to accentuate a GW model, they get criticized for 'aping" GW's stuff. Now, they're putting out a model to be used as a farseer, and they're getting criticized that it isn't CLOSE ENOUGH to GW's models.

Geez, people. Come on. Pick an argument. Either you want their stuff to fit perfectly seamlessly with GW's stuff (so you can further claim IP breach) or you want it different (so you can complain that is doesn't mimic GW eough). You can't have it both ways, though. It just makes you a hypocrite... and an annoying one.

I don't care for the farseer. It's a decent model, but -FOR ME- the price is a bit off-putting. I have no use, really, for the female IG stuff, but I think they look really nice.
The Scorpio arms are really cool. As a non-Eldar player, I have no use for them, but I'm certain that there are a BUNCH of Eldar players out there who are foaming at the mouth, waiting to get their hands on them.
What would be excellent now is a Scorpio helmet, so GW Guardians could be converted to Scorpions with the add-ons.

(Note: "Scorpio" was used by choice and is not a typo)

Eric

Delephont wrote:You know, I don't want to put any more "rounds down the range" at Chapterhouse, but there is something to consider in all this....the argument about start up miniature companies and how "bad" we should reasonably expect their products to be in the beginning.

Now, I'm not implying that Chapterhouses products are bad, I'm more aiming my comments at those examples of GW's original products etc.....

There is something called "development"....and I don't mean a company developing it's own products over time, I mean industry development. Just because companies like GW started out with some (by todays standards) really bad miniatures, does that then mean that any company starting out today can expect to sell miniatures of that same "starting out" quality? I think not.....

In todays miniature markets, with the abundance of talent on the ground offering their services, and with information sources as openly accessible as they are, there is no excuse for a company to produce a "bad" minature, in terms of proportion, pose and detail....yes, a company can produce a bad concept...but not a badly constructed miniature....

Imagine this, I want to start my own car company, so my first car resembles a Model T-Ford, has no airbags, no power steering, and most importantly....no I.C.E how many people would buy it out of sympathy for me being a start up company? or it being my "first" attempt at a car?

My opinion:

Yeah, I think its fair to expect great quality thats on level with GW. Of all the aftermarket bitz companies that post their products on this site, CH is the least skilled. Hands down. Sure they make some decent stuff (I've purchased from them before, to be honest) but the majority of CH product is blown out of the water by what Paulson, Maxmini, Kromlech and most other GW-centric miniature and bitz makers can put out.

A quick perusal of the first page in news and rumours has about a half dozen aftermarket bits companies and none of them get the amount of vitriol that seems to be reserved for CH. Nor do any of them (aside from Paulson) have a lawsuit on their plate, and I think that in both cases, its because their quality is the worst, in terms of sculpting skills. I'm not saying that to demean CH, there's nothing wrong with being the worst team in the minor leagues, as long as it puts food on your plate, more power to you.

Maybe we should add this to all Chapterhouse Studio threads:

xcasex wrote:Pyriel-, couldnt even have written it better myself! next time work takes me to gothenburg, let's have beer at kings end. lots of it.

Great idea man, PM me when that happens, brewskies are on me!

The thread is getting ridiculous ( even for my standards )

We have one side overly rude and sensitive over the design

We have one side desperately covering the bad sculpts by linking GW's bad sculpt as comparison.

If it sells , great. If it doesnt , then im sure ChapterHouse will take that into consideration in the future.

Personal note, the reason im not buying it is due to the bad sculpt , NOT that i dont want a Farseer.

LunaHound wrote:The thread is getting ridiculous ( even for my standards )

We have one side overly rude and sensitive over the design

We have one side desperately covering the bad sculpts by linking GW's bad sculpt as comparison.

If it sells , great. If it doesnt , then im sure ChapterHouse will take that into consideration in the future.

Personal note, the reason im not buying it is due to the bad sculpt , NOT that i dont want a Farseer.

If I ever come across rude, I apologize. I will defend myself by saying that I have always been receptive to negative criticism that is about the products and does not reek of a personal attack. It is when insults and immature remarks arise that I take offense.

I will aspire to release the best products we can with the resources available.

Now I have to finish putting the finishing touches on the female commando models I want to take photos of tomorrow to show more previews of.

Eh no CH , i didnt mention you o_o

I still like your cosmic fox stuff :3

Ok, for naming the female regiment (if this will be heard over the noise):

Dahomey Amazons

Night Witches

Zelenko's Zuaves

Vaguely interesting side note: the Russians had a crap tonne of female pilots, including entire regiments. I had no idea.

MagickalMemories wrote:

ph34r wrote:Hm. "Not" striking scorpions, and a completely horrible looking female commissar that has a super long neck and boobs on her stomach. The good times keep rollin.

Exactly!
All female miniatures should have super huge boobs with nipples that point at the sky and tiny little waists!
Don't make anything divergent from that. We don't want minis that might resemble real people with saggy boobs or long necks.

Way to call him out on his errors, ph34r!

Eric

It's like you read my post, then fell asleep and dreamed up a different post entirely, and then responded angrily to it! Great stuff, top notch.

That model does not look like a human. Unless the human has an abnormally long neck and the largest, saggiest boobs that armor is form fitted for.