 |
| AB Austrians |
Recent work at the painting desk continues to be dominated by a steady stream of units filing into the ranks of the 1799 project. This tendency continues with the completion of two battalions of thirteen figures each rallying to the Austrian colors.
First up is a battalion of AB Miniatures' Austrians for IR#20 in helmet. Fine figures of which many have crossed the painting desk.
 |
| Battle Honors' Austrians |
How much more slight?
Looking at a side-by-side comparison, the AB figures appear to be about half a head taller than the Battle Honors' figures. Notice how much more robust the AB figures in thickness than the Battle Honors. The Battle Honors figures seem a bit anemic compared to their well-fed brethren.
From my experience with both manufacturers, AB tend to be more robust and larger than Battle Honors in general. Within the Battle Honors Napoleonic range, I see much more variability in size from figure to figure. Some SKUs are larger; others smaller.
Even though size differences are noticeable in close comparisons such as this, on the gaming table, these differences tend to disappear especially when looking down upon the gaming table from three feet above. I may not mix the two within the same unit but I certainly field both on the gaming table.
Two more units to add to the Completed roster.
Post lost - trying again!
ReplyDeleteAgain whites are a great success. I have had a good stare into the photographs which of course is greater scrutiny than ‘on table’ viewing ever gets and I don’t really see an appreciable difference from a viewing pespectibe (not painters). The AB have the nicer heft, though the Battle Honors faces have come out particularly well in this example, so the sense of character is also there.
Mixing brands / styles is probably worthy of an article on its own. We have this variance in the human population, which is probably greater these days than in the time being represented here, but I wonder whether our gamers eyes have been trained to look for a consistency within our scales that does not necessarily reflect real world variance?
Norm, sorry you lost your original work but very glad to see you stuck with it! That shows determination and your effort is much appreciated.
DeleteYou make several good observations as usual. The size difference between the two manufacturers' figures is distinct when viewed close up. The stand of ABs has much more heft than the same size stand of BH figures. When viewed from the side, BH are much more svelte.
As you note so well, humans come in all manner of lengths and girths. One key to helping make different sized figures "fit" into providing a realistically looking variance is if the equipment is on the same scale. In the case of these AB and BH figures, the muskets are the same size even though the BH figures are smaller. That helps trick the eye, I think.
Who is the painting machine now, Jonathan? Your output is really ramping up! I think both units are fantastic.
ReplyDeleteGlad you like both, Mark. Your painting output is in a league of its own!
DeleteLooks like superb work on both.
ReplyDeleteDo you use the two base unit for column/line etc. Something I am experimenting with, for my cheap plastics.
Thank you, much!
DeleteFor this project, each base comprises a single BMU. Formations other than line are denoted by markers.
Both look great but I prefer the AB.
ReplyDeleteChristopher
Thanks, Christopher! I prefer ABs to BH figures too but I had not seen the Battle Honors FRW line of figures so ordered a few bags as samples. Expect to see other figures from BH's FRW range to pop up from the paint table.
DeleteNice comparison, Jonathan. Your superb brushwork ties them together and makes any differences (particularly in size), negligible. That said, I would agree the AB's are nicer overall.
ReplyDeleteDean, you are very kind. I prefer ABs too!
DeleteLovely units Jonathan, they look compatible to me! I actually like a mix of ranges in units for variety.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Mike! On the gaming table the differences are not noticeable. I enjoy a project containing a number manufacturers’ figures too.
DeleteThey both look great. if anything, the proportions on the AB figures are closer to real life, I would say. Oh, and I agree with Cyrus about mixing manufacturers within an army... as I am sure you do as we,ll.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Peter! Yep. I mix many manufacturers within a project. Sometimes, the more the merrier!
DeleteFantastic units Jonathan!
ReplyDeleteThanks!
DeleteLovely looking Austrians! I like a mix of manufacturers,y you fine painting style ties them together well!
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
Iain, you are very kind. Thank you!
DeleteNo one ever notices such slight differences. I know bc my ACW stuff is based on 3mm think bases and 1.5mm thick bases all mixed together and no one really can tell that some guys are taller than others.
ReplyDeleteThese guys all look great together and even the weapons look compatible which is the really important part. Bc while people come in all sizes rifled muskets tended to be about the same. 😀
I agree, Stew! When viewed from above, no one notices differences. I made the same argument about muskets in my response Norm above.
Deletenice work Jonathan. I am sure we all manage different size variations in our collections, I have kept my ACW pretty consistent. But my ancients are quite variable, I asssume food supply in those days meant some people just got bigger. 🍰
ReplyDeleteThanks. You make a good point about variable food supply and human size. Ancient armies may be easier to accept size differences since there are fewer standardized weapon and equipment items on which to compare scale differences.
Delete