1/6 Hot Toys - MMS284 - Avengers: AoU - Ultron Prime Collectible Figure

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
They probably increased prices due to the exchange rate. I don't know what is happening with the Pound over in the UK, but a lot of HT preorders went up in Australia. One supplier upped the DeLorean from $850 to now being $1000!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
From what I understand with IM figures and others that are can use CGI models they start by printing out the model in 1/6 scale then add the joints as you say. But they still end up with the wrong proportions, too slim, long neck etc. it's a problem with all HT releases of the 3D printed origin and before. I just wonder how adding joints would elongate the headsculpt of the MK VII for example, they seem to be getting better with Starboost and the 42 as you also say no doubt, but still arent getting it right. My point is surely they can see they dont look right but dont bother to fix it in the early stages by simply increasing the bulk of the figure or shortening the neck etc. which irritates the hell out of me.

The main annoyance for me atm is HT Thanos head, it's too slim and tall. And this figure, while it looks great is still too slim and tall looking (i know he's 8ft I mean proportion wise of his head etc.) others that annoy me are most HT Iron Man figures, never been a big robocop fan but to me he suffers from this as well although not as badly. I guess it comes down to eye for details, I certainly wouldn't let these get past the first print stage if I saw them but then again I'd miss other details like panel lining etc. :dunno

(nothing directed at you LipSmack, just your post had the right contents for me to explain my points from :yess:)

The problem with the 3d scan is the way they move in the movie is an illusion, the metal plates "clip" into each other, when they add articulation in "reality" theres physical constraints that dont apply in a computer, so to make is function they have to sacrifice some of the look
 
The problem with the 3d scan is the way they move in the movie is an illusion, the metal plates "clip" into each other, when they add articulation in "reality" theres physical constraints that dont apply in a computer, so to make is function they have to sacrifice some of the look

Yep part of what makes this figure look... ehhh not so good is the joints removes some the sleek look of the form.... but short of making a statue its necessary and unavoidable.
 
The problem with the 3d scan is the way they move in the movie is an illusion, the metal plates "clip" into each other, when they add articulation in "reality" theres physical constraints that dont apply in a computer, so to make is function they have to sacrifice some of the look

Exactly!

A cgi design does not take actual real world physics and real world movement into consideritation.

They don't just "add" joints. That would work if the figure where constructed of things like a solid lower leg, a solid upper leg, a solid torso, a solid neck, a solid head, a solid lower arm, and solid uper arm. But becuase of manufacturing, removable pieces, batteries, electrical pathways, switches, and painting they are more like 150-200 individual parts. It will never work or look exactly like the film. Not at our current level of technology. Probably 20-50 years for anything close to perfect 1/6 scale articulated robots.

As u can see...from photo...not just a 3d print with added joints. That's what every single iron man figure has to be broken down to after the prototype is approved. And why they may look different. And why painting is such a time consuming and expensive part. A cgi file is essentially just an animated drawing. Just more advanced. Not trying to take away how skilled and amazing cgi is. But it's still an animated drawing. It has none of the real world constraints. Nor the manufacturing problems and challenges.

image.jpg

And all of that does not take into account the viewer. You say they look elongated, but others say to stubby, or to rounded. Not everyone looks at things the same.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the 3d scan is the way they move in the movie is an illusion, the metal plates "clip" into each other, when they add articulation in "reality" theres physical constraints that dont apply in a computer, so to make is function they have to sacrifice some of the look

:exactly: :goodpost:

Considering that, the figures we are getting are hard to top
 
Exactly!

A cgi design does not take actual real world physics and real world movement into consideritation.

They don't just "add" joints. That would work if the figure where constructed of things like a solid lower leg, a solid upper leg, a solid torso, a solid neck, a solid head, a solid lower arm, and solid uper arm. But becuase of manufacturing, removable pieces, batteries, electrical pathways, switches, and painting they are more like 150-200 individual parts. It will never work or look exactly like the film. Not at our current level of technology. Probably 20-50 years for anything close to perfect 1/6 scale articulated robots.

As u can see...from photo...not just a 3d print with added joints. That's what every single iron man figure has to be broken down to after the prototype is approved. And why they may look different. And why painting is such a time consuming and expensive part. A cgi file is essentially just an animated drawing. Just more advanced. Not trying to take away how skilled and amazing cgi is. But it's still an animated drawing. It has none of the real world constraints. Nor the manufacturing problems and challenges.

View attachment 168437

And all of that does not take into account the viewer. You say they look elongated, but others say to stubby, or to rounded. Not everyone looks at things the same.
Yup explains their lack of total accuracy. But...
No excuse for poor proportions for iron men though! That has nothing to do with cgi or the process. Just bulk up the damn arms at least.
 
Yup explains their lack of total accuracy. But...
No excuse for poor proportions for iron men though! That has nothing to do with cgi or the process. Just bulk up the damn arms at least.

That's all opinion...and the design of the suit is made by marvel studios to not look like a robot. They want it unnaturally thin.

And yes, part of the design and engineering process does explain the size. To bulk it up that means they need to add more sprues. Because only so much plastic fits on one. When these come out of the machines they are on sprues like model kits. So, sorry but it could explain it. Factor that in with the design marvel insists on and that's how we get what we have.
 
That's all opinion...and the design of the suit is made by marvel studios to not look like a robot. They want it unnaturally thin.

And yes, part of the design and engineering process does explain the size. To bulk it up that means they need to add more sprues. Because only so much plastic fits on one. When these come out of the machines they are on sprues like model kits. So, sorry but it could explain it. Factor that in with the design marvel insists on and that's how we get what we have.
And that is all opinion too. [emoji16]
 
I don’t collect Marvel figures so I never had any intentions on buying this figure. That being said, it is pricing like this that has me turned off with 1/6 collecting. Increased prices, needing to pick and choose, knowing that you are not going to get a particular figure because of pricing have detached me of late. My scheduled pick ups for this year are Chewbacca and BD Robocop those two alone is $600. There is my 2015 budget. So anything else I cannot feel excited about…..enter detachment!
 
Back
Top