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.

When the paint job goes so far as to have the red reflections on the right boot from the original painting, it is not a poor paint job! I'm not a Sisters uber fan but this model is coooool.

I really like the model apart the face. Good to know that GW is still unable to sculpt female faces. Luckily I happen to have some spare Statuesque heads.

I prefer the art over the model, the model simply looks stubby and less long and lithe like the art. I can see why people don't like Blanches art...but for me IMO its that gritty stylized look that was the genesis of 40k as something unique in the first place as a high tech medieval gothic look. That look has been watered down significantly over the years and a return to that look with this model makes it look very retro compared to the sisters of silence in the prospero set.

It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.

Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...

I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.

Aaaamaaaazzzzinnngggg

I don't really like it. Never been a fan of John Blanche's art, but at least the drawing had some reason 20+ years ago. The model looks way too stubby, with a body too thick for its head and an hideous looking pair of legs.

I understand the nostalgia feeling, but it's terrible, imo.

Meh not to my taste even though I quite like the original artwork. Hopefully its not an indicator of the style of future SoB models and is just intended to ape that particular painting.

 Thargrim wrote:
I prefer the art over the model, the model simply looks stubby and less long and lithe like the art. I can see why people don't like Blanches art...but for me IMO its that gritty stylized look that was the genesis of 40k as something unique in the first place as a high tech medieval gothic look. That look has been watered down significantly over the years and a return to that look with this model makes it look very retro compared to the sisters of silence in the prospero set.

Actually sums up my opinion better than my own post tbh. I've always seen(and I think GW and the man himself have said the same) Blanches stuff as more about 40ks flavour and style then a realistic representation of life in the 41st millennium.

I hope the leaks come soon because the made to order system is a pain.

You get as little as a weekend to order what you want before it disappears and without knowing what's available In the codex or what is actually usable on the tabletop rules wise it will be a pain to figure out what to buy.

Don't like it. in the artwork she seems to be standing taller but i think that's down to the model's proportions. She's too short & too chunky. The feet don't quite work either. The shoulder guards don't flare as much as they should. Her eye-piece is also wonky & slightly not the right shape.
The paint job, especially on the face is, IMO, poor. The lips are too pale & shaded in such a way that's she's lost her pout. The chin looks horrid. Don't know if it's the paint job or the model but it looks lumpy & a fraction too pointed.
Probably still order one if I get up in time though.

Thommy H wrote:
It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.

Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...

I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.

To be fair to everyone involved, it isn't a direct copy. Some of the issues I think have to do with the transition between the tall, skinny stylized form Blanche uses and the heroic scale proportions GW minis use. When adapting the piece from one medium to another it's important to capture the essence of what's being depicted without being slave to the details that don't work in your medium.

The higher contrast between the lights and darks on the model's face turn the subtly scarred cheek into a distracting mangle and age up the face considerably. The pose is equally awkward in both renders, but the title-wave of skulls in the art provides a stylistic context while the little pile in the model looks like some heretical shrine or fetish she's stomping out. (Maybe a staircase scenic base would look good?)

Also, typical of GW's painters, they dotted her eye with a micron laser, which I also find distracting.

Love the model. Really hope I can manage to get my grubby little mitts on one this weekend, fingers toes and everything else crossed.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

Thommy H wrote:
It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.

Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...

I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.

To be fair to everyone involved, it isn't a direct copy. Some of the issues I think have to do with the transition between the tall, skinny stylized form Blanche uses and the heroic scale proportions GW minis use. When adapting the piece from one medium to another it's important to capture the essence of what's being depicted without being slave to the details that don't work in your medium.

The higher contrast between the lights and darks on the model's face turn the subtly scarred cheek into a distracting mangle and age up the face considerably. The pose is equally awkward in both renders, but the title-wave of skulls in the art provides a stylistic context while the little pile in the model looks like some heretical shrine or fetish she's stomping out. (Maybe a staircase scenic base would look good?)

Also, typical of GW's painters, they dotted her eye with a micron laser, which I also find distracting.

Good assessment Capt. Joystick.

Thommy H wrote:
It's literally copied from the artwork, so any criticisms of the design (and paint job, which is also replicated) should really be directed at John Blanche twenty-odd years ago.

Which people are doing plenty of too, but you know...

I'll be trying to get this model anyway, I think. The art is iconic, although I'll paint her to fit in with my army.

False equivalency. That's akin to saying the design faults of a Chinese knock off should be directed against the basis of the knock off. The faults of the model are failures to adapt the design.

Soo you don't like it but are going to buy one anyway.... right.

Right. I actually think it's better than the art, because it does not carry the ugly, "why wear power armor when instead you oculd wear a jumpsuit" style that the art had. I still don't particularly care for it, but IMO the translation from art to mini actually went rather well, and the mini is better than the art.

I think it's a great rendition. I am going to get one just as a collector I think.

So when's this coming available?

 Thargrim wrote:
I prefer the art over the model, the model simply looks stubby and less long and lithe like the art. I can see why people don't like Blanches art...but for me IMO its that gritty stylized look that was the genesis of 40k as something unique in the first place as a high tech medieval gothic look. That look has been watered down significantly over the years and a return to that look with this model makes it look very retro compared to the sisters of silence in the prospero set.

I'm in the opposite camp. In the original she seems scrawny and weak.

Hate the feet on the model, though...does she have Tau hooves under those boots?

So, is this a limited edition, or will I be able to buy one a year from now, when my account recovers?

Limited edition.

I love this model, and I only hope I can get one.

Without wanting to start a fight, all the peaple who dislike the model... what do you want sisters of battle to look like, if not like that iconic John Blanche image. To me... that picture *is* the touchstone for Sisters of Battle....

Not wanting to upset anyone, but given that John Blanche is the art director for the entire setting... if you don't like his style...dosent that spoil your enjoyment of the game?

What do we need to do to acquire one?

Are these M2O or limited run? Will that canoness be available online? I must have one.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
What do we need to do to acquire one?

Be on the GW website when it goes live on Saturday morning and buy one before they sell out?

Failing that, camp outside your local store the following Saturday?

NivlacSupreme wrote:
Are these M2O or limited run? Will that canoness be available online? I must have one.

or take your chance on ebay scalpers.

S.Y.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
What do we need to do to acquire one?

Complain about it in this thread, and then quietly pre-order it from GW.

Commisar wrote:

Not wanting to upset anyone, but given that John Blanche is the art director for the entire setting... if you don't like his style...dosent that spoil your enjoyment of the game?

.

No, because others have taken what he has put forth (and some of it is good) and improved upon it.

If the rumoured plastics are of a similar quality I will be rebuying a sisters army. Always regretted selling my metals. Deffo picking up any made to order inquisition stuff as well.

Can't say I like it. The legs are super-chunky and her raised leg is up so high as to be uncomfortable.

 Melissia wrote:
... but still doesn't impress me.

Literally no one here is surprisd.

How much. I can do £15 on saturday. Any more would require more time than an hour. Also what time does the U.K. webstore update?