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.

For me I used Brian Clevinger as an example. 8-bit Theater is fantastic, but ultimately a parody of another's work. It deservers all the praise it gets, but there's a reason its a free website. Monetizing it muddies the waters significantly.

Atomic Robo on the other hand, is a lot easier to justify charging for. It's clearly an original work; that same creative energy with its own vision instead of channeled through someone else's. There's a risk involved that needs to be rewarded.

GW are still riding on the momentum of ideas created 40 years ago by folks who’ve longed since moved on. Ownership of IP doesn’t make them any more creative or virtuous than those making not-space marine STLs in my opinion… the more options for the consumer, the better.

Erm….Jes Goodwin is still very much there, and he’s a significant architect of GW’s design language.

You might as well say anyone writing and/or drawing Marvel Comics un creative just because Steve Ditko and Stan Lee came up with many of the original big players and are sadly no longer with us.

Same with Judge Dredd, a series now…erm….47 years old. With a single timeline. Carlos Ezquerra passed away four years ago, more or less to the day, and John Wagner isn’t as actively involved as the early days. Are all the artists and writers contributing to the Galaxy’s Greatest Comic uncreative as well?

That’s not quite what I said. I said I don’t think a company still cycling 40 year old ideas is anymore creative than someone making an STL of a space marine, which seemed to be your point; some CAD sculptor making a space marine STL off his own back is a rip off merchant, but if he’d been employed by GW it’s all good. I don’t draw that distinction, personally. It smacks of corporate bum kissing.

An example that comes to mind is Highland miniatures, with some great options for old world minis, a recent one being some high elf not-silver helms. They are great sculpts of a unit dreamed up yonks ago. Does the sculptor deserve to be given less credit than what ever day labourer GW gets to sculpt the unit if they should decide to rerelease them?

I think we’re somewhat missing each others points.

Direct, 1:1 “I can use a 3D scanner, gizza fiver” is right out in my book. It’s lazy, and driven by pure greed, a determination to make money off the effort of others.

Doing your own take on a unit? That is Going To Depend. You’re still largely making free use of someone else’s concept art, world building and that. But, depending on how unique, my opinion will soften. After all, absolute originality is bloody difficult to achieve. We all have our influences from the media we consider.

Highlander’s unit? I’ve just had a look. Now of course, I’m going in somewhat primed by your words. But yeah, those are someone’s take on Silverhelms, and clearly so. But let’s both be honest? Elf Cavalry. How unique a look can you achieve? But at least they’ve gone to the effort of creating the STL from scratch. So as per my own peculiar opinions on such things, I can absolutely respect their creative effort.

But if we look at the rest of their range? I’m afraid my respect is reduced. They’re going well beyond “Fantasy is hard to find originality in” and are mainly just doing knock-offs. Some are nice (their Tomb Scorpion, with the humanoid torso I particularly like). But they’re still predominantly lifting the efforts of another, to the point of poses and looks (Trolls and Giants are particularly egregious examples). And let’s face it, charging a fairly pretty penny for it.

But remember, Dear Reader. This is just my view and opinion on it. And I’m not presenting as a moral authority, or trying to set any kind of benchmark.

I think Luke82 does raise an interesting point about GW’s design legacy. If a sculptor redoes say, the Space Marine Tactical Squad, how much originality has truly gone into that? It’s the continuation of a design legacy stretching back damn near 40 years now.

But let’s look at relatively modern events. Emphasis on the modern, because time gets weird when you get old.

Primaris aren’t just “oh look, new Marine kits”. Regardless of what you or I might think of their arrival, there’s plenty of New in there.

Age of Sigmar has some excellent design work. Ossirach Bonereapers, Kharadron and Idoneth in particular are very Out There, fresh takes on fantasy tropes dating back even further than GW, and not just in models but background.

Horus Heresy has seen a lot of very cool designs, despite being “oh no, not more Marines”.

And at the end of the day? If you’re employed by GW to make GW models? You just get automatic legitimacy. Because using the IP your paid to use is completely different to just going “hey neat designs other person, I’m going to use them and make profits off your efforts, tatty-boo-boo!”

I think of all companies GW is on shaky ground when it comes to having a go at people for using someone elses ideas.

Their catalogue is full of stuff they ripped off from others. They've got some original stuff too but they're hardly paragons in that regard.

That said I don't think 3D scanning others work is right, obviously not. But anyone can make a new stl inspired by whatever they want. That's the nature of art.

Eh. Clear inspiration isn’t the same as ripping off.

The humble Genestealer is kind of a go-to there, as it has really clear influence and inspiration from Geiger’s Alien.

But really, the similarities are pretty superficial.

Xenomorphs have an exo-skeleton, a weeny shaped head, pharyngeal jaws, no visible ocular organ, large vents on its back, highly acidic blood and a bladed, prehensile tail, and an otherwise humanoid body plan and stance

Genestealer have bulbous, bestial heads with visible eyes. Six pairs of limbs, two as natural weapons, two humanoid arms and two digitigrade legs, ending in hooves, a thick muscular tongue, a stubby tail. Its typical stance is notably hunched.

What do they have in common? Alien origin, a chitinous exo-skeleton, and a hive mind.

Both do have parasitic reproduction cycles, but in drastically different ways.

And so, yes, it’s obvious Genestealers were inspired. But they have surprisingly little in common design wise.

There’s also the common “40K just ripped off 2000AD”, which I can waffle on about for hours, being a serious fan of both properties. And what people often don’t take into account is that the respective creative teams grew up in the same post-colonial into post-industrial countries, with rapid social and societal change, and consuming much the same media. Are Mega-Cities and Hives similar? Yeah. Both are ultimately satires on High Rise Flats, a failed social housing experiment in the UK. But again, the commonalities are largely superficial, not really stretching beyond “mind bogglingly huge and hellish conurbations”. The social structures are different, the worlds they each inhabit are different.

Inspiration and influence aren’t dirty words. They’re not a lack of creativity.

What 40K got right there was a pinch of everything, from a wide range of sources, and mixed up into a new whole.

You do you, I think my stance is more consistent than yours though, not that it matters.

Doc, I can't say I've seen you complain when it's small british garage metal casters doing it, and we've been seeing anything from blatant not-Space Marines to unlicensed 1:1 Scooby Doo, Predator, Doctor Who, etc. for decades.

I too think 3d scanning modern GW minis is lame af, however I have been convinced by folks who are into it that that scanning classic OOP GW minis is a valid and important way to preserve artistic/cultural heritage or whatever you want to call it, same as abandonware sharing sites.

 Gert wrote:
Maybe it's just because I tend to do a lot of converting and kitbashing but seeing a 3d printed army across the table just disappoints me. Might just also be that the fully 3d armies I have played against were all very poorly painted as well so the whole experience was just "oh you've made like 0 effort here".

But you can invest the same level of effort digitally. These dudes are classic Mk2 shaped but new Mk6 sized, with bitz from like 7 different sculptors, reposed, I converted Nemesis bolters myself by enlarging barrels etc, and added the backpack greeblies. I daresay it's a more polished and WYSIWYG Recce squad than most you've seen?

How would you rate the Ghamak miniatures? Their Space Marines are pretty much inspired by GW, but they're also their own take. And if you do your own Rhino who's to say it's not your take on an M113 .
Personally I'm often not sure what people refer to when talking about copies, because I haven't seen direct GW copies, I guess they're not on official patreons. I know some of the lotr 3rd parties got letters from GW and had to put stuff down, but even those miniatures I usually found distinct or gave alternative poses at least.

But I don’t but knock-offs.

Someone going to the trouble to physically or digitally sculpt their own take? I respect the effort, skill and talent.

But, someone doing 1:1 physical or digital recasts is a no-no for me.

The squad you shared is a decent example of what I mean. It’s clear to anyone with eyes where the inspiration came from. But they’re still an original sculpt, even if the aesthetic is derived. I wouldn’t use them myself, but I still respect the minds behind it went to not inconsiderable effort. “Bonus Points” for covering a squad not currently offered from an official source, too.

And as ever, I’m not gonna have a pop at anyone for not sharing my view and doing whatever.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Crusty old man zone indeed

Printing is another tool to get more better toy soldiers. And you don't have to "cut" resin if you do the conversions before printing. I'm designing a wild west house right now, it's not any less valid than carving one out of foamcore. But hey, I remember when airbrushing and dipping/washing were considered "cheating" by crusty old men

Since I introduced the word "crusty" to this thread, I just wanted to be clear that I don't have an issue with digital sculpting, or see it as less genuine than physical sculpting, although it's certainly different.

Hey hey, kids!

It's all good! And I hate the material too. What I love is that, like in all things digital, the ability to Undo gives folks of very modest skill such as myself a safety net so we can express our creativity and get the models exactly the way we want them just by repeated trial and error and with no danger of ruining parts.