Big Discussion: Finecast Bans

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.

**Pacific**

Out of interest MarkyMark how much of your stuff is painted? I find I often don't notice stuff (especially spoiled minor details) until it actually comes to painting, of course the obvious one being mold-lines but sometimes missing detail also.

Taking a look at MajorTom's gallery of miniatures as well,you can see how it's possible to weigh different types of 'anecdotal' evidence from different commentators.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Krellnus wrote:
Yeah I would call every larger than infantry model a common occurrence, wouldn't you?

Erm, no? I can only think of one significant metal miscast in the years I've been collecting and that was an Epic 40k Thunderhawk where the left and right sides of it didn't line up. That seems to be the main miscast you find in metal models, the two halves being misaligned.

Actually, there were some metal Tyranids that I bought 2nd hand that had some odd cracking of the metal in crevices and a couple of spots where the surface texture was randomly rougher (which it shouldn't have been). Those were indeed strange, I have no idea if they were GW miscasts, if the previous owner had done something crazy with them or maybe they were recasts, I really don't know. As I didn't buy them brand new, I can't blame GW as I don't know if the flaws originated from GW casting or something else.

**MarkyMark**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The Shadow wrote:
However, if I knocked a metal infantry model off the table, it would be far more likely to break than its finecast counterpart.

That depends entirely on the model. If the model is large but with small joins, then the joins are more likely to fail on a metal model... though realistically if you're using decent glue it takes a lot to break metal joins on infantry sized models.

If the model has any thin shafts or thin anything, metal is likely to bend where finecast is likely to snap. One of my friends who was very careless with his models was constantly dropping his metal models and the spears just bent and he'd bend them back again. Not great because the paint would come off where it was bent back and forth, but better than completely snapping IMO.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

MarkyMark wrote:
Personnaly I have around 20 finecast models, nearly all characters and I have had to return 1 and have a few issues with another one, and that is it rest have been fine. The one returned (pedro) was missing his arm so mis packaged rather then other issues and belial has the tip of his sword missing.

I prefer finecast to metal, but you know what its my opinion from my experince .
You must have amazing luck or be very good at cherry picking models. I can randomly pick 20 models off the shelves at my local GW and see a significant proportion with serious flaws and pretty much all of them will have small bubbles if nothing else.

Cherry picking nope, all ordered online or in store at 4tk for a few of the models

**cincydooley**

I've had about 3 Finecast problems out of upwards of 60 Finecast models. Every model I own that was designed for Finecast looks great. Worst culprit was a short pour on a Jabberscythe that has less to do with the material and more to do with the pouring.

**Ouze**

cincydooley wrote:
I've had about 3 Finecast problems out of upwards of 60 Finecast models.

I suggest you start a swap shop thread, offering your model picking services to the Dakka community. I suspect quite a few people would be willing to subsidize what is, anecdotally, the best hand in the HHHobby at picking flawless models.

We've got a "2 out of 20 models messed up", now we've got a "3 out of 60 models messed up", do I hear a "4 out of 400"? Going once...

**AllSeeingSkink**

I can only conclude some people are either incredibly lucky or just don't notice the flaws the same way I do.

**blood reaper**

Krellnus wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
V1ND4LOO wrote:
It seems to me the only people who absolutely hate metal are those who don't know how to work with it. Once you become even moderately competent with pinning, and use a decent glue (araldite for me), you'll be coming apart before that model does.

The only thing I'll say finecast has going for it is ironically enough the cleanup time. It can take an age to sand away all the mold lines on a metal mini, with finecast they're usually gone with a couple of scrapes.
I much prefer finecast to metal because I would rather fill a few holes than have to resculpt (attempt to anyway) half the model.

Yes, because that is such a common occurrence in metal...
Yeah I would call every larger than infantry model a common occurrence, wouldn't you?

You've had to resculpt most of any large metal model?

Okay, I'm not saying your a liar, but....

I don't believe you for a second.

Unless you took some time to slam a hammer of said model before you began to assemble it.

**SickSix**

Metal survives puppies.

/thread

**cincydooley**

The amount of green stuffing I've had to do with Finecast is significantly less than I've had to do with metals. Additionally, large models like Ork Wyvern were just awful in metal and are significantly easier to deal with in Finecast.

It's not about them being flawless, Ouze, it's about them having the same amount of clean up as a metal mode, only easier to deal with. I expect to have to file mould lines on a model. With Finecast it's much easier, and IMO less prevalent.

I have both longstrike and Dark Strider and both look fantastic.

**SickSix**

I have quite a few Metal infantry models, and I have NEVER had to add greenstuff. It's always the issue of filing down mold and vent lines. But I'd rather do that than try and sculpt back the fine detail of Asmodai's shoulderpad!!!

**TheAuldGrump**

A well cast resin model is at least the equal of a well cast metal model.

It is easier to cut and to customize.

It is easier to glue.

It is a lot lighter, and a lot easier to tote around.

But it would not surprise me to find out that resin models have more miscasts by at least 50% - it needs more QA than metal miniatures do.

I do not think that Finecast is a good resin - soft, and more prone to bubbles, or the casters just don't know how to handle the material.

It is inconsistent in regards to hardness, and maybe melting point.

I do not much like it.

If anything it needs better QA than most other resins, more willingness to toss a bad cast into the dust heap.

Sadly, this does not happen.

More importantly, there are just some Finecast molds that need to be completely retooled, with better gates for resin flow.

There are certain Chaos Space Marines that seem to be missing the same bits over, and over, and over.

If I were relying on a consistent product for purposes of maintaining a painting business? I'd ban Finecast as well - not because it is always bad - it isn't, but because it is bad enough, often enough, to throw my schedule into a wood chipper. Until you see a model you have little idea as to how long it will take to prep the model, before you can even start to paint it.

It is very hard to plan around 'I don't know'.

I used to paint miniatures for money, even now I take some commissions. I am very, very glad that I do not need to depend on painting Finecast to buy my daily bread.

The Auld Grump

**gohkm**

I definitely prefer resin in general over any other material.

That said, having bought a few Finecast items, the quality isn't great. What needs to be said about it, has already been said.

If GW upgraded their Finecast quality/quality control to Forgeworld standards at a minimum, then it might actually be great to work with.

Just look at resin from Kingdom Death, or Studio McVey - that's quality right there.

As for the artists in question, most of them rely on word-of-mouth to 'advertise'. If you haven't heard of them, that's likely because you've not had any cause to look for them, and they aren't hyper famous like Natalya Melnik, or Jennifer Haley, or Victoria Lamb, or anyone of those.

That doesn't mean they're bad. Atacam paints for Bushido, for instance, and that work isn't half bad.

**Krellnus**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
Yeah I would call every larger than infantry model a common occurrence, wouldn't you?
Erm, no? I can only think of one significant metal miscast in the years I've been collecting and that was an Epic 40k Thunderhawk where the left and right sides of it didn't line up. That seems to be the main miscast you find in metal models, the two halves being misaligned.

Actually, there were some metal Tyranids that I bought 2nd hand that had some odd cracking of the metal in crevices and a couple of spots where the surface texture was randomly rougher (which it shouldn't have been). Those were indeed strange, I have no idea if they were GW miscasts, if the previous owner had done something crazy with them or maybe they were recasts, I really don't know. As I didn't buy them brand new, I can't blame GW as I don't know if the flaws originated from GW casting or something else.

Ever had a great eagle? Good luck getting those wings to align.
Got something that comes in two parts? Have fun trying to get them to line up.
Oh that arm isn't a ball joint? Have fun trying to get a flat, even surface to line up the joint.
Oh you wanted a dragon for your army?

Hey you want that joint to hold up under its own weight? Brake out your paperclips.

**TheAuldGrump**

Krellnus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
Yeah I would call every larger than infantry model a common occurrence, wouldn't you?
Erm, no? I can only think of one significant metal miscast in the years I've been collecting and that was an Epic 40k Thunderhawk where the left and right sides of it didn't line up. That seems to be the main miscast you find in metal models, the two halves being misaligned.

Actually, there were some metal Tyranids that I bought 2nd hand that had some odd cracking of the metal in crevices and a couple of spots where the surface texture was randomly rougher (which it shouldn't have been). Those were indeed strange, I have no idea if they were GW miscasts, if the previous owner had done something crazy with them or maybe they were recasts, I really don't know. As I didn't buy them brand new, I can't blame GW as I don't know if the flaws originated from GW casting or something else.

Ever had a great eagle? Good luck getting those wings to align.

Have one, fit just fine - but I do not know which version of the Great Eagle you are writing about.

Got something that comes in two parts? Have fun trying to get them to line up.

I do - often. Generally no real problem.

Oh that arm isn't a ball joint? Have fun trying to get a flat, even surface to line up the joint.

I do, often, almost never a problem.

Oh you wanted a dragon for your army?

I do, lots, from many companies. Very, very seldom is there a problem.

Hey you want that joint to hold up under its own weight? Brake out your paperclips.

At last! A legitimate complaint! Yes, you do have to pin large metal models. Not exactly hard, but necessary, and does take time. But the time is predictable, since I can look at the number of joins and plan for what joins will need pinning.

After reading your post.... Where are you buying models if they are giving you that much trouble? 'Cause, really... I have painted a lot of models over the years, large and small, and I really can't say that most of any models, resin or metal need that much work in prep.

I can say that there are more resin models where I am more likely to go and send it back rather than try to salvage it, but aside from GW it is neither more nor less of a problem than with metals.

The Auld Grump

**Ehsteve**

For the dozen or so Finecast models I have purchased (and let it be noted my love for metal minis could not be contained within a single Shakespearian sonnet) I have had to return each individual model (several of these kits were units such as the Farseer+Seer Council and Techmarine+Servitors) at least 3 times if not 4. This is for large models (Ogre Maneater Paymaster) all the way to smaller ones such as the Skink Priest with Feathered Cloak.

The material has no heft, sure it bounces like plastic but it also warps under even the smallest amount of pressure if it is in excess of a period of 24 hours. With a metal model, you just bend that into place and if you're smart, to stop the paint chipping you'll have applied some matte coating, with a finecast model you are required to put that in warm water (expanding the surface material and causing further damage to the paint even if overcoated) until it softens up.

It isn't exactly hard for temperatures in even the coastal regions of Australia to reach the point where the models in your case will soften and warp. If I want my character models to hold good detail, it will not be in a finecast medium. If you want all the benefits of plastic for your detailed characters, kitbash for the love of all that is holy. It is better than dealing with a material whose benefits are outweighed by a greater cost whilst maintaining the same number of faults as the more suitable metal medium.

As for cast sliding (where pieces don't line up and such due to the mold's wear over time). That issue is just as prevalent if not more so in finecast than in metal.

When you've put together old metal CD Flamers with their miniscule ball joints via pinning, we can talk about the issues of pinning. Clearing all the excess residue off a Finecast model takes just as long if not longer than the entire process.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Krellnus wrote:
Yeah I would call every larger than infantry model a common occurrence, wouldn't you?
Erm, no? I can only think of one significant metal miscast in the years I've been collecting and that was an Epic 40k Thunderhawk where the left and right sides of it didn't line up. That seems to be the main miscast you find in metal models, the two halves being misaligned.

Actually, there were some metal Tyranids that I bought 2nd hand that had some odd cracking of the metal in crevices and a couple of spots where the surface texture was randomly rougher (which it shouldn't have been). Those were indeed strange, I have no idea if they were GW miscasts, if the previous owner had done something crazy with them or maybe they were recasts, I really don't know. As I didn't buy them brand new, I can't blame GW as I don't know if the flaws originated from GW casting or something else.

Sometimes with older metal models (unpainted) which are exposed to consistent handling/poor storage you tend to get something along the lines of acid wear which may explain the rougher surface. Regardless, I don't know if we'll be able to say that any finecast model will have even retained its basic shape after 20 years!

**Grot 6**

Finecrap is still crap.

It hasn't gotten any better, your standards have just grown gak glasses.

And.. to metal? That.... gak is better?

No way. I'm calling you on it and I'd like some pictures of this fine quality gak on a stick.

**Breotan**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
The problem with Finecast is not the material, but...

Oh, but there are problems with the material. It doesn't tolerate heat well at all. I had the 25th Anniversary model in a display case and the sunny summer day was enough to cause the banner pole to droop over so the banner was touching the base. Like all resin casts, it is prone to air bubbles and obliteration of detail. Unlike most resin casts, GW puts a heck of a lot of channels into their molds and this takes a lot of clean up in order to get them all (and not in a fun, Pokemon kind of way). Still, I prefer it to metal when the model isn't as susceptible to disfigurement from from heat .

**-Loki-**

Grot 6 wrote:
Finecrap is still crap.

It hasn't gotten any better, your standards have just grown gak glasses.

Since you've stopped buying GW products altogether, how would you know?

Not trying to start somethig, but when someone is vocal about giving up GW products and then comes and out says Finecast is still crap, I'm curious as to how they're making a claim like that outside of second or third hand information, which... isn't user experience.

**Sean_OBrien**

-Loki- wrote:
Grot 6 wrote:
Finecrap is still crap.

It hasn't gotten any better, your standards have just grown gak glasses.

Since you've stopped buying GW products altogether, how would you know?

Not trying to start somethig, but when someone is vocal about giving up GW products and then comes and out says Finecast is still crap, I'm curious as to how they're making a claim like that outside of second or third hand information, which... isn't user experience.

Not to speak for him, but I actively look at products, even though I don't buy them...and from time to time I still get cornered into fixing finecast miscasts (and Forge World to boot). A lot of the issues could be dealt with, stronger resins that tolerate heat are easy to come by and not much more expensive than regular resins (I use resin for making my masters for making molds from...and those resins withstand the pressure and heat of vulcanizing...and that is the black organic molds, not the newer nicem low temperature rubber). Even regular Hobby Lobby, off the shelf Alumilite can withstand vulcanizing in a Nicem mold...I can only imagine what a Finecast model would look like following that process (something a kin to bubblegum off the bottom of my shoe I would guess).

The first 6 months were horrendous with Finecast...they improved some after that, in no small part due to consumer complaints. However, they are far from being trouble free. For a contract painter who is working with scheduling and possible deadlines, the extra time spent cleaning Finecast versus plastic or metal make it an undesireable material. If you need to exchange one of the many models that are direct only (or just not able to exchange locally for any number of reasons) then you knock a project back by a week or two, which messes with your scheduling even more. I can fully understand why some painters would rather just cut Finecast out. The pay for time for many of them is quite low, and many would rather not have to calculate fees per figure based on how much clean up might need to be done (not to mention the risks of shipping in hot summer months when a package might reach 150+ degrees in the back of a delivery truck).

**Ouze**

Breotan wrote:
Oh, but there are problems with the material. It doesn't tolerate heat well at all. I had the 25th Anniversary model in a display case and the sunny summer day was enough to cause the banner pole to droop over so the banner was touching the base

JFC. That's equal parts outlandish and horrible.

Is it, uh, in an attic or something? I mean, how hot can it get in Seattle?

**-Loki-**

Oh I'm not saying anything about commision painters - what they will and won't work with it entirely up to them.

Just the statement of 'finecast is still crap' from someone who quite proudly claims he doesn't play GW games or buys their products anymore.

As you said, Finecast improved after the first 6 months. Yes, I still see issues with it. I still see issues with other manufacturers as well. My Morgana from McVey studios has a miscast (which is odd considering it's a limited run model - you'd think they'd personally inspect them with such a small amount produced) - not enough that I'd complain about, because miscasts with resin just happen.

**Bullockist**

I remember a time when metal models were the only way to go that when someone got a miscast they would quite often keep them (because miscasts were so rare - and the ones that were around were quite often hilarious) and use them with a small modification as a more characterful version of the mini.
Sadly the advent of finecast seems to have changed this, but meh, I'm still using and buying 'whitish metal ' minis.

If detail is missing on miniatures due to bubbling , it is an unnaceptable mini. If it is happening on a regular basis it is an unnaceptable manufacturing/design process. It is that simple.

metal minis need pinning people, a small drill and a pin, that's all. (oh and glue

)

If these professionals don't want to work with gak product i don't see why they should. I don't buy a box of tomatoes and find 20% of them are rubbish , i think the same should apply to miniatures.

**jah-joshua**

this was my response to the same topic on CMON:

i've said no Finecast since day 1...
miscasts aside even, the softness of the material and the strange droops and bends make me stay away...
as a painter charging top dollar, there is no way i am going to paint a mini that droops or bends of it's own accord...

i spend a lot of time prepping a mini already, so i don't need a mini looking like Swiss Cheese adding more time to the prep...
seeing all the guys who have heated parts, straightened them, and then had the bend come right back is my biggest issue...

it really sucks to have boycotted Finecast, since some of the sculpts are amazing...
i want the character models that have come out in the last two years, but if it's not plastic or metal GW doesn't get my money...

i've quit taking commissions, but all my minis will still be for sale, so now the issue is even bigger...
obviously, new releases sell well, but almost every cool new sculpt is coming out in Finecast, really limiting my market...
luckily i have 25 years worth of cool metal minis just waiting for paint...

unfortunately, as long as Finecast sells there is no reason for GW to change...

cheers
jah

p.s. both Atacam and Arsies are amazing painters...
check 'em out if you don't know their work...

**-Loki-**

jah-joshua wrote:
unfortunately, as long as Finecast sells there is no reason for GW to change...

There is actually. Finecast has always been a stop gap to a full plastic range. That's why we're now seeing things like generic characters as single pose plastics. Granted, Fantasy is getting the lions share of these, but they're making their way to 40k every release.

**TheAuldGrump**

-Loki- wrote:
Grot 6 wrote:
Finecrap is still crap.

It hasn't gotten any better, your standards have just grown gak glasses.

Since you've stopped buying GW products altogether, how would you know?

Not trying to start somethig, but when someone is vocal about giving up GW products and then comes and out says Finecast is still crap, I'm curious as to how they're making a claim like that outside of second or third hand information, which... isn't user experience.

For me it would be called 'looking into the blister, and seeing that there are still problems'....

This might even be a big portion of why the purchase does not take place....

The Auld Grump

**JWhex**

Well regardless of the individual experience of dakka forumites, some professional painters have decided that finecast simply takes too much time to prepare.

Usually people that hate metal models simply use superglue instead of a good 2 part epoxy or do not have the skill or tools for pinning.

My metal models are going to last a hell of a lot longer than the finecrap versions.

**Pacific**

-Loki- wrote:
jah-joshua wrote:
unfortunately, as long as Finecast sells there is no reason for GW to change...

There is actually. Finecast has always been a stop gap to a full plastic range. That's why we're now seeing things like generic characters as single pose plastics. Granted, Fantasy is getting the lions share of these, but they're making their way to 40k every release.

The downside to this of course is that plastic, for all of its improvement over the years, is still not able to reach the heights of detail presented by resin or metal. I know you collect Infinity Loki and so know about the level of detail on those miniatures, I would say probably at least 50% (possibly bits on every model) wouldn't be possible in plastic. A lot of GW's character models are the same.

As has been mentioned also, there are technical constraints placed on the sculptor by plastic. Metal/resin offers a wider canvas for the sculptor in terms of realising their artistic vision rather than being constrained by the material.

Not to detract from your argument of course that GW might well be taking this route, and it would certainly explain why they have allowed Finecast to remain on sale for so long in its current state, if it is indeed just a stop-gap measure. I can also imagine mass-produced plastic sprues having a far lower production cost (once the sprues have been initially tooled), and the whole lot could just be made in the far East.

**winterdyne**

Pacific wrote:
-Loki- wrote:
jah-joshua wrote:
unfortunately, as long as Finecast sells there is no reason for GW to change...

There is actually. Finecast has always been a stop gap to a full plastic range. That's why we're now seeing things like generic characters as single pose plastics. Granted, Fantasy is getting the lions share of these, but they're making their way to 40k every release.

The downside to this of course is that plastic, for all of its improvement over the years, is still not able to reach the heights of detail presented by resin or metal. I know you collect Infinity Loki and so know about the level of detail on those miniatures, I would say probably at least 50% (possibly bits on every model) wouldn't be possible in plastic. A lot of GW's character models are the same.

As has been mentioned also, there are technical constraints placed on the sculptor by plastic. Metal/resin offers a wider canvas for the sculptor in terms of realising their artistic vision rather than being constrained by the material.

Not to detract from your argument of course that GW might well be taking this route, and it would certainly explain why they have allowed Finecast to remain on sale for so long in its current state, if it is indeed just a stop-gap measure. I can also imagine mass-produced plastic sprues having a far lower production cost (once the sprues have been initially tooled), and the whole lot could just be made in the far East.

In terms of detail retention, yes, plastic is just as good as metal or resin, I have some superb 1/48 Italeri ground crew to back that up. Funny that the corresponding Tamiya kit were pretty bad. This said, you are correct in that there are technical issues (meaning the models have to be cleverly cut) in terms of the design. This is made a lot easier to deal with by modern CAD and CNC machining methods. However, it still takes time and a particular skill set to do. For small run stuff, this sort of work is inefficient compared to meal/resin casting methods, where the sculpt can pretty much go straight to the mould room.

**Riquende**

Pacific wrote:
I can also imagine mass-produced plastic sprues having a far lower production cost (once the sprues have been initially tooled), and the whole lot could just be made in the far East.

At which point prices would go... down?

**Yodhrin**

MajorTom11 wrote:
Yodhrin wrote:
MajorTom11 wrote:
Sigh... I am still in wonder that Finecast has people defending it... what are we? 2 years in? The opinion of both stores and the professional painting community is nearly universal that it adds hours of frustrating prep or returned product for little to no gain.

I am under the impression that people still loving finecast and claiming it is better than metal (barring models that were too heavy as metals to put together easily) have to be either:
A) Insanely, insanely lucky with their purchases
B) Completely and totally immune to evidence
C) The absolutely most amazing marketing audience ever and I should be taking their names down.

Yes you could say the above is condescending but we are well past the point in the evidence cycle in my opinion where the matter was particularly up for debate anymore. Finecast may have been good if it wasn't for the atrocious lack of QC and casting consistency, as it stands, the risk of getting a dud model even if the number is only 20% makes it a giant pain and a big risk to pros and stores, and frankly, if you have standards, the average gamer as well.

Here's a tip mate, if you're about to type out "you could say the above is condescending"(a charitable characterisation, frankly), and you're a mod on a forum on which the number one rule is "be polite", that's probably the point to move your mouse away from the post button and close the tab.

And here is a tip for you sir, you could say the above is condescending. It doesn't mean it is. I need no reminders from you about the rules of this forum thank you very much. The fact that you actually agreed with me, that restic in and of itself is not the problem in principle, it is GW's shoddy quality control, makes me laugh a bit, are you not then condescending yourself? I have a problem with people who 2 years in still think they can seperate the issues, restic and quality control, when it comes to finecast. We can no longer call it phase 1 or growing pains, so the quality control in my opinion must now be taken as an intrinsic, static issue with finecast until something changes. If finecast was well cast, and the models designed/converted to it were made with the material's strength in mind (both aesthetically and structurally) I would have absolutely not problem buying it. In fact it is much easier to convert which is great!

However, personally, I prefer metal if I don't plan on converting. Ya it has it's own liabilities but overall, at lest you were pretty much guaranteed to know exactly what you were getting into most of the time. That however of course is up for debate according to personal preference. I however don't think bubbled and misaligned casting are up for debate at all... they suck. Some people, not saying you mind, but some people defend it even with those flaws, and point to liquid GS and other things as if they were some kind of reason not to be annoyed that you have to either make a return or work for an hour or 3 just to get started on the model with a basecoat.

Just because there is a MOD tag next to my name doesn't mean I don't have personal opinions, and nor does it mean I am being extra rude or rude at all for giving a general opinion. There was no name calling, I simply expressed my disbelief that anyone, 2 years into this crap, would still either be pretending the issues don't exist and/or that they don't matter. I think that is a pretty objective observation at this point. Stores don't carry it, either because they got fed-up previously or because GW now wants to avoid sending finecast blisters due to the huge expenses of the multiple returns... Now GW wants to sell the blisters direct as much as possible so they can take a greater profit and absorb the return costs a bit better. A significant portion of the community (gamers) avoid it either by reputation or experience. Pro painters as we see are jumping ship at an astounding rate. All I'm saying is can we at least not pretend there is no issue here, even if you personally like the stuff lol!

For the record, I do use FC myself, usually when I will be hacking the model up for a lot of conversion (blood angels and space marines), if I plan to just do a simple tabletop and leave it at that (my necrons) or if I have no choice (Open day model 2012). So far, I would say about 30% of the 20 models I have were acceptable. 50% had relatively minor issues but took at least half an hour to correct them, and 20% were wtf happend bad. I know what I'm getting into when I make a purchase though, especially online. I can definitely say that I miss metal for the thinner bits like swords etc...

Of course being a mod doesn't mean you can't have a personal opinion, what it does mean is that you should probably put a bit more thought into whether or not to post opinions which are confrontational, because that mod tag does mean that the rest of us have to be extremely wary about how we respond to you in comparison to any other poster. And as for your post, no, you didn't actually flat-out call anyone an idiot for disagreeing with you, you just implied that the only people who can disagree with you are irrational idiots who'd buy a polished turd if it had GW branding on it.

The "evidence" as you put it is still anecdotal, and while a large amount of anecdotal evidence deserves to be taken a bit more seriously, it doesn't change the fundamental nature of it; neither I nor anyone I game with has had significant issues with Finecast in over a year, but in that time I have seen several stuck-in-their-ways old metal-loving grognards march indignantly into the local GW and demand that they get their money back for models with issues so minor they would take minutes to deal with, certainly less time than the same people would be willing to spend scrubbing and filing and pinning and gap-filling the same miniature if it were in metal. So, the only "evidence" that I can actually confirm is A; I prefer restic to metal, even if I would prefer real resin, B; neither I nor anyone who's opinion I can confirm as valid through direct observation has had to return a Finecast model for some time, and C; many of the complaints I have seen about Finecast in situations where I can actually examine the miniature have been completely unreasonable.

Now, is it possible that I and my friends, who collect numerous different races and order Finecast models from both GW and online retailers in substantial numbers, have simply been miraculously untouched by the wave of horrifying blighted "Finecrap" miniatures that GW has been selling everywhere else but where we shop? Perhaps, but is that a more likely scenario than a substantial proportion of the online furor about Finecast being due to a mixture of pre-existing anti-GW sentiment, people viewing their favourite old metal models through rose-tinted glasses despite them being a right pig to assemble and prep, people who've never worked with resin/restic minis before being unwilling to learn new techniques, and people who were burned by Finecast early on and haven't touched it since or who have been inordinately unlucky? Well, you and quite some other have evidently already decided the answer to that question, and that I am a gullible fool if I disagree with you, so I don't suppose there's any point in trying to argue the point really is there.