Welcome to the Strelets Forum. Please feel free to discuss any aspect of 1/72 scale plastic figures, not simply Strelets. If you have any questions about our products then we will answer them here.
Re: ponder !! ......(and where is martin macALKA?)
That is an interesting point of defense and I think that you would make a fine lawyer :). I'm not saying it’s a bad set; it's just not in my opinion, a ninety percenter as far as sculpting goes.
In fact, I love the old Airfix sets. Not in spite of their flaws but because of their flaws. But I wouldn't presume to give them a 9 out of 10 score for sculpting, just because I'm partial to them or like the subject. Unless of course I got a big cheque from Airfix.
A flaw can make a set useful. Many have pointed out Hat's biblical sets make good orcs, or that Airfix first edition Germans, with their small stature and oversized helmets, make convincing child-soldiers good for late war Hitler-youth.
What is a fault to a pessimist, can sometimes be a feature to an optimist
Re: ponder !! ......(and where is martin macALKA?)
giorgio
"In fact, I love the old Airfix sets. Not in spite of their flaws but because of their flaws."
me too. I´ve been trying to paint every fig pose of every set Airfix ever put onto the market....so far I have got 36 sets finished in my quest
One of the most versatile sets is the Robinhood set...great for creating extras for medieval armies.
Cheers
Paul
Re: ponder !! ......(and where is martin macALKA?)
I think Auguste Rodin is 10/10 so having established that benchmark then these are about 6/10.
HaT's figures vary a lot in sculptural quality and particularly style (for Napoleonics alone). It is difficult to be objective especially with comparisons as Italeri's Austrians have some plus features and some negative ones. They also get a PSR 9 for sculpting but then the style is very different. Very clean lines almost like little Meissen porcelain figures whereas the HaT figures are a little more irregular(like bronzes) with a lived in look. It is essentially a comparison between the Neoclassical style eg David and the Romantic style eg Delacroix and everything those terms embrace. In the end it depends how they are to be used. For example with a battlefield diorama maybe the HaT figures convey the energy and chaos and the Italeri figures are better for the pageant and spectacle. Obviously purchasers buy the ones that appeal to them and those not worried about style get both sets and mix.
It is hard to judge details from photos but the sole firing figure (HaT set) seems to have a left arm far too low. Sceptics just try the pose and see where your elbow comes. Anatomical mistakes (if this is one) are not to do with style and to my mind just make a figure look shoddy when they are wrong. This figure probably is OK in the round but in the scan/photo it has a Quasimodo shoulder and the same in the painted test shots. Looks better in the master figure.
If a figure or figures have anatomical mistakes then this should affect the sculptural quality rating. Style though is likely to be subjective so the numerical value is in the eye of the beholder.