Sassafras
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 8,340
- Reaction score
- 3,088
The paint thing is for real man. Most people don't get how much the sculpt depends on it. You can take a subpar sculpt and make it stunning with paint and the opposite is true with a good sculpt and bad paint. It is more important then the sculpt on final products. And there is maybe a couple people, maybe, who are as good at scale figure painting as JC. (The head of painting and design at hot toys and the person who usually does all the approval and prototypes paint) his paint on prototypes will always look better then a production figure. But like you, very few people know just how much it effects things. Most people (generally) think that paint matters but it's not a big deal. And that's really just not the case. It's at least as important as the sculpt, but since it's where all the "life" and realism and depth actually comes from I'd say it's more important.
It's what separates hot toys with human head products from others. Even a lot of statue companies. Hot toys paint is so much better. But, like I said, JC can't paint them all so the production figures won't be identical (factor in the other computer/camera stuff too) to the proto..but most the time it's not due to them resculpting the head or parts but because of manufacturing process and paint.
Well, I didn't think it was all the paint, didn't even think it was the same sculpt...
But since all that turned into posts of their own - well, it's not an expert job and the images don't, by default, have the same lighting, tones, res and all that, but since you are aware of paint....these look best zoomed in, don't know if the 96 dpi will get it across...
I mean, using the HT release image - even tho the heads are at different angles - particularly zoomed in - just lining the eyes and some other lightening or darkening - I could "see" the prototype - e.g., the sculpt IS there. I know lining the eye and/or the inner lid is pretty common in figure painting to bring out the eyes - never looked to see if that's something HT routinely does. Because, in a production environment, IMO it would be a nightmare.
It took working w. these images for me to really understand how complex that prototype paint job is. I only really understood at a zoomed-in view and REALLY staring at it, bit by bit. Don't know how much retouching of the photos was done - or even if, the faint sheen of sweat on the face came from a coating or spraying the figure w. water for pictures - but IMO after staring at it zoomed-in, it's remarkable. As you say, a master painter.
But I figured I'd put these up just to show "how I saw" - hope that makes sense. For me the thing was, "had HT actually changed the sculpt for production? And if not, what's up with what I think I'm seeing?" So, I think if I want that proto paint job so badly, I can 1)take some classes and potentially ruin a fig; 2)hire someone (and hope I don't get taken); 3) LOL be happy, because it's not the "Finn thing" and it's a handsome Bucky that doesn't look like Ben Affleck.
Totally agree w. you about the paint - just kind of shocked, that's all. Was more used to all the issues w. the paint on poly figures - the IMO inexcusable "Rogue poly thing", the shifting paint and back tattoos of SSC Queen of the Dead, whether Smaug had the same layered tones as what got shown at SDCC. Just for fun I'll post this link of what seems to be a "master painter" painting Captain Kirk 1/6. The artist Darren Carnall takes 6 vids to get through it all. It fascinated me watching him just detailing the mouth of the figure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGEvORR2Bvk