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.

The only product I ever got from them was the Kurganova boxset, which came, big surprise, in a box.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


Finally, as we've seen a resin One-Shot Blondie, I thought I would post a close up of the metal version. The gun barrel had just the tiniest bend to it,

Oh dear, I can see the printer layers. These are not going to paint up well :(

Local commission painter was already complaining to about the problems he's been having with 3D printed miniatures. Companies are not doing post-printing clean-up and so you see the layers when you start painting. Was hoping RH would be doing some clean-up before casting.

I'm not seeing what you're seeing mate.

I think he means the various 'wrinkles' on the model, like the bottom right hand corner of the cloak?

Yeah. That really doesn't look good. It will seriously mess with washes, inks and dry brushing.

 Compel wrote:
I think he means the various 'wrinkles' on the model, like the bottom right hand corner of the cloak?

It also feels like the entire model is a bit 'grainy' so to speak.

The resin one, a few pages back, seemed ok though?

 Shandara wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I think he means the various 'wrinkles' on the model, like the bottom right hand corner of the cloak?

It also feels like the entire model is a bit 'grainy' so to speak.

Yours is?

Or just the look? Can Tann weigh in on this since he has model in hand?

 Eggs wrote:
Yeah. That really doesn't look good. It will seriously mess with washes, inks and dry brushing.

Ah but these are the painting techniques used by scrubs and other undesirables who are undeserving of painting these monuments to miniature art.

Glad I am not the only one who spotted that weird stepped pattern on the cloak. I thought it might have been a missed fingerprint in the sculpt, forgetting it was a 3d print.

So how well does that bode for the rest of the 10^24 sculpts that were done on the computer for this line?

Apparently their super secret workflow didn't include a QA/QC step

I fear for my beloved Ilsa now.

I dont know why companies use resin or metal when plastic just seems so much better.

 dan2026 wrote:
I dont know why companies use resin or metal when plastic just seems so much better.

There are multiple threads all over the place that address this, but the easiest answer is initial startup cost.

To get high quality plastics done, your initial tooling cost is between $7000-$10,000, depending on the place.

Resin and Metal are around $300.

 cincydooley wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
I dont know why companies use resin or metal when plastic just seems so much better.

There are multiple threads all over the place that address this, but the easiest answer is initial startup cost.

To get high quality plastics done, your initial tooling cost is between $7000-$10,000, depending on the place.

Resin and Metal are around $300.

Thanks. I assumed it was price related.
Its a damn shame plastic costs them so much. It really is so much better for almost anything.

BrookM: Didn't they also mention in the last update that they have reworked on Ilsa... so you really have no idea what you'll end up with?

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
BrookM: Didn't they also mention in the last update that they have reworked on Ilsa... so you really have no idea what you'll end up with?

Exactly, not cool. But hey, I'm supposed to shut the gaking fething feth up, get down on my knees be grateful that they're even doing this and where so generous to take my money. We're not even sure if this model will be part of wave 2 as their sculptors also (they really do, no sarcasm there) need their vacation time, which will cut into their secret workflow and stuff. Were I paranoid I'd think they were just doing it to get back at me and all the times I raised my voice, but, you know, it's okay, right?

 Wehrkind wrote:
Glad I am not the only one who spotted that weird stepped pattern on the cloak. I thought it might have been a missed fingerprint in the sculpt, forgetting it was a 3d print.

Looks to me like a fingerprint. The curved pattern looks more "fingerprint like" than a 3D stepped pattern. Anyone else see stairstep patterns anywhere else on the model? I don't...

Perhaps the packers or the OP was eating while handling the model

Haljin wrote:
The resin one, a few pages back, seemed ok though?

I think the resin model also has the same problem:



I think I'm seeing the finger print at the same spot as the metal, only a wee bit less popping out.

Come on guys.. that is soooo minimal. No one except the top 5 painters will notice this after priming, 4-10 coats and varnish.

I hate this "company" quite a lot, but this si nothing but looking for the tiniest of all errors.

Or run a file over it?

I'd agree with the above, if it was a run of the mill £2-3 miniature, but when you hype yourself up to be the best of the best of the best of the best, you'd better damned well make sure that lazy mistakes like that don't get through your 50 gazillionty super secret reworkings!

 Eggs wrote:
I'd agree with the above, if it was a run of the mill £2-3 miniature, but when you hype yourself up to be the best of the best of the best of the best, you'd better damned well make sure that lazy mistakes like that don't get through your 50 gazillionty super secret reworkings!

Pretty much, I guess.

Therein lies the danger of too much hype.

Still, they do look pretty nice!

Had my shipping notice.. should have everything coming from the first wave.. so will take some pics when they arrive.

I took a long look at the mini in question (as the guy who took the pic of the metal Blondie). If nobody had mentioned the lines, or where they were (bottom right of cloak), I probably never would have seen them, Running my fingernail over them, they feel no different to any other part of the model.

Someone mentioned a "grainy" aspect to the model. That could just be the rather large scaled picture I took. The real model is, of course, a fraction of the size of that picture. Comparing it to some other metals I have (GW, PP, and Reaper), it looks to me to be about the same.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I took a long look at the mini in question (as the guy who took the pic of the metal Blondie). If nobody had mentioned the lines, or where they were (bottom right of cloak), I probably never would have seen them, Running my fingernail over them, they feel no different to any other part of the model.

Someone mentioned a "grainy" aspect to the model. That could just be the rather large scaled picture I took. The real model is, of course, a fraction of the size of that picture. Comparing it to some other metals I have (GW, PP, and Reaper), it looks to me to be about the same.

Unfortunately the flaws don't show up till you're painting and starting to apply washes. Prepping miniatures with this flaw requires using a fine sand paper, not a file to smooth it out. Hit the miniature with an ink wash and that will make the details pop out.

Worse, looking at the pattern, it looks like the miniature was printed laying on it's back instead of standing. It allows for figures to be printed faster, but the layer lines can be spread out more among the figs. Andrew Rae of Statuesque Miniatures did a write-up of the problems doing it that way. He got some bad prints from Maxmini3D and when they wouldn't resolve the issues, he went public with his dispute.

http://khorosho-productions.blogspot.com/2013/08/digital-miniatures-manufacture-its-not.html

minor clean up is part of every miniature ever. I think at this point that's just looking for thing to be mad about. Lets see it with at least primer first then relight the torches. If after minor clean up and one coat of primer its still there..then sure, lets get the mob ready

Or they could do what Hasslefree does, take a mini fresh from casting, give it a quick scrub and a dark wash, then take a pic of it when dry, it's how they show off their quality as the model comes right out of casting.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I took a long look at the mini in question (as the guy who took the pic of the metal Blondie). If nobody had mentioned the lines, or where they were (bottom right of cloak), I probably never would have seen them, Running my fingernail over them, they feel no different to any other part of the model.

Someone mentioned a "grainy" aspect to the model. That could just be the rather large scaled picture I took. The real model is, of course, a fraction of the size of that picture. Comparing it to some other metals I have (GW, PP, and Reaper), it looks to me to be about the same.

Any chance you could provide us with the one thing every miniature company on the planet seems genetically incapable of; a proper scale shot? ie, the model on a normal 25mm base rather than some two inch high scenic monstrosity, either next to a ruler measuring from the surface of the base, or next to models from other manufacturers on the same bases? Would be most appreciated.

I can do that when I get home from work tonight. I did glue her together last night. Shall I place the ruler vertically or horizontally?