InArt: The Lord of the Rings - Aragorn 1:6

[HyperDrive]

I believe this to be true. I just don't think they're as committed to go the whole distance they can, as we'd love them to. Maybe that's not a realistic expectation. They certainly are doing a lot more than Hot Toys does, and they're still cranking out the best quality figures on the market.

But I would love to hold them more to their word. The Joker is one of my favorite figures. But that outfit leaves enough to be desired, that you can't help but think they could have pushed themselves a little further. I feel similarly about some of their other work so far.

I think the reason why certain characters like Joker or Aragorn didn’t/haven’t gotten the “near perfect” treatment is because I hardly saw people share things with them early on for those figures. Nowadays, they’re getting more and more people whom are more willing to share critical feedback. And John with INART did say, that they’d only revise things if there’s a “general consensus, not just an individual here and there.” Yes, we have a fellow collector whom shared pictures with them regarding the Aragorn braces and stitching, etc, and sure enough they fixed it! But there needs to be more people asking for these things to be optimized. Perhaps, for other costuming details, they just don’t see enough or exact feedback to where they just don’t do it.

 

[Yorved]

Okey so they gave us Update without any real updates. Havent even showed us those improvements + No release window Dissapointing...

 

[HyperDrive]

Okey so they gave us Update without any real updates. Havent even showed us those improvements

Yeah, would’ve been nice to see some updated photos of what they said they’ve improved but looks like there will be “several enhancements” to the accessories and optimization to the sculpted hair piece in color and accuracy (I assume in shape and style). Just gotta be patient lol

 

[Antarion]

Speaking for myself, but that’s one of the primary reasons I collect 1/6, is to have an accurate as possible representation of what I love watching on the big screen.

Agree and on the same time disagree a bit lol. I'm all for good accurancy of course, but I wonder sometimes if it is really worth the super long wait because they adjust the color of the belt from medium grass grean to leaf grass green which nobody will look in detail on the shelf - especially with lighting ranging from 2700 to 7000K...rendering all color accurancies void.

And sometimes the screen equipment changes between scenes or between the different movies even. Like in "the two Towers" they said: Oh were is Aragorns costume from the first movie? NEvermind, makee a new one (with slightly changed colors etc)


Just a bit exaggeration on my part here, it is hard to say how I feel about much longer waits about too many details. But in the end, of course accurancy is king and we have enough other figures to spend time with until this one arrives

 

[Scout Trooper]

Like in "the two Towers" they said: Oh were is Aragorns costume from the first movie? NEvermind, makee a new one (with slightly changed colors etc)

Interesting

 

[HyperDrive]

Agree and on the same time disagree a bit lol. I'm all for good accurancy of course, but I wonder sometimes if it is really worth the super long wait because they adjust the color of the belt from medium grass grean to leaf grass green which nobody will look in detail on the shelf - especially with lighting ranging from 2700 to 7000K...rendering all color accurancies void.

And sometimes the screen equipment changes between scenes or between the different movies even. Like in "the two Towers" they said: Oh were is Aragorns costume from the first movie? NEvermind, makee a new one (with slightly changed colors etc)


Just a bit exaggeration on my part here, it is hard to say how I feel about much longer waits about too many details. But in the end, of course accurancy is king and we have enough other figures to spend time with until this one arrives

Well that’s why this Aragorn is based on Fellowship and ideally, should reflect that in 1/6 (given the limitations of it being in 1/6).

I think the wait hasn’t been super long though. It was announced January 2023. It’s been a hair over a year. If they were saying this at the 1.5-2 year mark, then sure, I’d be concerned, but Idk, I’m fairly patient and tame when it comes to this stuff. I don’t fall out of love if a figure is delayed, especially if it’s a character of this magnitude and relevance made by INART. That’s just me though. I think the idea is to hope for the most near accuracy as possible.

 

[Gipetto0812]

I think more people in the 1/6 community ought to realize that INART does seem to care about details and accuracy.

At the sake of sounding repetitive and beating a dead horse, I would disagree to a certain degree given that they knowingly left out the pattern at the bottom of Gandalf’s pants b/c they said you don’t see it anyway. Sideshow included it on theirs way back when as well as both Asmus releases. I think they like to sound like they care to try to keep up good will with collectors so they don’t end up coming off as other companies do like Hot Toys. But, in the end, they will only change things they deem necessary just as how folks are talking about the coat on Aragorn being inaccurate but we have no proof on if that has been “optimized” or left as is.

 

[HyperDrive]

At the sake of sounding repetitive and beating a dead horse, I would disagree to a certain degree given that they knowingly left out the pattern at the bottom of Gandalf’s pants b/c they said you don’t see it anyway. Sideshow included it on theirs way back when as well as both Asmus releases. I think they like to sound like they care to try to keep up good will with collectors so they don’t end up coming off as other companies do like Hot Toys. But, in the end, they will only change things they deem necessary just as how folks are talking about the coat on Aragorn being inaccurate but we have no proof on if that has been “optimized” or left as is.

I thought this was hashed out. The only “evidence” of it is based on hearsay where people have claimed to see it while in person. But in reality when you reference all source images, there is no clear/apparent view at those embroidered prints along the hems.

I forget who said it here, but they said, it’s actually more inaccurate that Sideshow and Asmus included it because in all actuality it leans more towards it not being there than it actually being there.

Idk why this is always brought up. Is it because there’s a YouTuber who made a huge deal out of it? A YouTuber who when I showed him reference images of a forum back in 2008 asking if Gandalf had prints, that’s where that information came from where they were discussing that it was based on hearsay. A YouTuber who immediately blocked me after I asked him if that’s where they got their information from.

 

[Deinonychus]

The extra wait'll be worth it if they're throwing in bonus fireworks and a mushroom as they did with Gandalf.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Not sure how this can get better... sometimes you can tinker too much. (SEE George Lucas's SE versions)

 

[Gipetto0812]

I thought this was hashed out. The only “evidence” of it is based on hearsay where people have claimed to see it while in person. But in reality when you reference all source images, there is no clear/apparent view at those embroidered prints along the hems.

I forget who said it here, but they said, it’s actually more inaccurate that Sideshow and Asmus included it because in all actuality it leans more towards it not being there than it actually being there.

Idk why this is always brought up. Is it because there’s a YouTuber who made a huge deal out of it? A YouTuber who when I showed him reference images of a forum back in 2008 asking if Gandalf had prints, that’s where that information came from where they were discussing that it was based on hearsay. A YouTuber who immediately blocked me after I asked him if that’s where they got their information from.

It was “hashed out” to prove that you don’t see it in the film, which I would agree that you don’t. It’s pretty much covered the entire time either by his outer robes or by shadow. But we’re also not looking up Gandalf’s robes in the movie either. I submit that there is no current proof that we, ppl on this forum, have on hand that it’s there. However, I say that both Sideshow and Asmus as well as InArt ideally have more access than we do (or at least should have) to props and/or prop information. Sideshow didn’t just decide to put it their b/c oh hey that would be nice to have. One could argue that Asmus put it their b/c sideshow but we don’t know for sure short of asking them directly. That said, I still remember from Sideshow’s 1/6 Legolas behind the scenes video where they explicitly mentioned that putting the print on the upper back of Legolas’ green shirt wasn’t necessary b/c you don’t see it in the movie since it’s covered up by his quiver and/or cloak, but they did it anyway. The guy who used to do their YouTube videos way back then even said they didn’t know it was there until they got the references from Weta if I’m remembering correctly.

We don’t even have to go to Gandalf for reference if that’s too controversial. An even easier one would be on BvS Superman where the Kryptonian print on his arms is too low wrapping his biceps instead of following the curve of his lower delts. It’s clearly that way in every reference shot any of us can find. Even though it was brought up by numerous ppl, no word from InArt about that being “optimized” which should be an easy fix compared to all the other more involved photoshop fixes ppl were doing on that figure.

Anyway, my point is, I think they like to come off as caring and concerned about accuracy so they don’t come off like say HT; but, in the end, they might change something and they might not no matter the amount of reference they are given. It’s all up to their own discretion. Lots of these things aren’t enough to make ppl cancel anyway. I can almost guarantee most ppl won’t cancel their PO if they don’t change the coat on Aragorn. As a matter of fact, most ppl were more than fine with Aragorn when he first went up for PO, even before any wardrobe changes were announced.

Posts like they just made for Aragorn, and for The Batman a couple weeks ago, appear to be no more than marketing devices. As someone else said, they gave us an update without giving a real update.

 

[HyperDrive]

It was “hashed out” to prove that you don’t see it in the film, which I would agree that you don’t. It’s pretty much covered the entire time either by his outer robes or by shadow. But we’re also not looking up Gandalf’s robes in the movie either. I submit that there is no current proof that we, ppl on this forum, have on hand that it’s there. However, I say that both Sideshow and Asmus as well as InArt ideally have more access than we do (or at least should have) to props and/or prop information. Sideshow didn’t just decide to put it their b/c oh hey that would be nice to have. One could argue that Asmus put it their b/c sideshow but we don’t know for sure short of asking them directly. That said, I still remember from Sideshow’s 1/6 Legolas behind the scenes video where they explicitly mentioned that putting the print on the upper back of Legolas’ green shirt wasn’t necessary b/c you don’t see it in the movie since it’s covered up by his quiver and/or cloak, but they did it anyway. The guy who used to do their YouTube videos way back then even said they didn’t know it was there until they got the references from Weta if I’m remembering correctly.

Anyway, we don’t even have to go to Gandalf for reference if that’s too controversial. An even easier one would be on BvS Superman where the Kryptonian print on his arms is too low wrapping his biceps instead of following the curve of his lower delts. It’s clearly that way in every reference shot any of us can find. Even though it was brought up by numerous ppl, no word from InArt about that being “optimized” which should be an easy fix compared to all the other more involved photoshop fixes ppl were doing on that figure.

Anyway, my point is, I think they like to come off as caring and concerned about accuracy so they don’t come off like say HT; but, in the end, they might change something and they might not no matter the amount of reference they are given. It’s all up to their own discretion. Lots of these things aren’t enough to make ppl cancel anyway. I can almost guarantee most ppl won’t cancel their PO if they don’t change the coat on Aragorn. As a matter of fact, most ppl were more than fine with Aragorn when he first went up for PO, even before any wardrobe changes were announced.

Posts like they just made for Aragorn, and for The Batman a couple weeks ago, appear to be no more than marketing devices than anything. As someone else said, they gave us an update without giving a real update.

Paragraph 1: yeah I don’t think it’s a big deal you don’t see it or that INART omitted it. It’s more accurate with it left out.

P2: yep, sometimes they listen, sometimes they don’t. I’ve been spamming them with Superman inaccuracies. John said there needs to be a “general consensus, not just a lone individual here or there” in order for them to make changes. If more people call it to their attention, the better. At the end of the day, there’s probably a reason as to why they’ve kept quiet regarding that specific figure. Or it’s just a matter of time they’ll make updates.

P3: yeah, no one is saying these are unpurchasable (is that a word?) if they don’t make changes and leave the product as is.

P4: yeah they’re lame *** apology posts in response to people who are impatient, other than that, they did reveal updates. That we will see soon enough. Just gotta be patient.

 

[Gipetto0812]

Paragraph 1: yeah I don’t think it’s a big deal you don’t see it or that INART omitted it. It’s more accurate with it left out.

If this is the line of thinking, then there are numerous details across multiple figures from multiple characters that could be or could have been left out b/c you don’t see them onscreen, and therefore be more accurate if left out

Where does the line get drawn when it comes to how much detail is actually included? Or does the goal post just move depending on how much someone does or doesn’t care?

 

[Hologram AI]

Ignorance is bliss in this hobby, that's for damn sure. You're always gonna have some people caring about certain details more than others. Some seem to be fine with the way Hot Toys did Tobey's Spider-Man, enough to spend $300+ on it, while others, like myself, are loving the custom works being done to it. Same for the collar on their Batman figure. It'll always be an endless chase for perfection in this hobby for some more than others.

Which is funny because sometimes those who constantly ask for minor detail changes are also the ones complaining about the delay, when they go hand in hand in this hobby.

 

[hoodonit00]

Going to touch on one more point. Who was complaining about the molded hair? AFAIK everyone was happy with it and saying it was some of the best they’d seen. As someone said. Sounds like an excuse to use to justify it being late.

 

[hoodonit00]

If this is the line of thinking, then there are numerous details across multiple figures from multiple characters that could be or could have been left out b/c you don’t see them onscreen, and therefore be more accurate if left out

Where does the like get drawn when it comes to how much detail is actually included? Or does the goal post just move depending on how much someone does or doesn’t care?

Exactly. 6 months down the road an action figure engineer perfects 1/6 scale seamless hands with individual articulated fingers. In-Art says, in our quest to provide the most accurate Aragorn ever we are going to push shipping out another year so that you the collector get the most accurate product ever. When does it stop? Some of us aren’t getting any younger.

 

[HyperDrive]

If this is the line of thinking, then there are numerous details across multiple figures from multiple characters that could be or could have been left out b/c you don’t see them onscreen, and therefore be more accurate if left out

Where does the line get drawn when it comes to how much detail is actually included? Or does the goal post just move depending on how much someone does or doesn’t care?

But there are no legitimate references and sources of the pant prints being there……. Why don’t you show me? I’ll wait.

 

[HyperDrive]

Going to touch on one more point. Who was complaining about the molded hair? AFAIK everyone was happy with it and saying it was some of the best they’d seen. As someone said. Sounds like an excuse to use to justify it being late.

You on FB? Cause there were definitely people who asked “why is the sculpted hair not the same color as the rooted??”

 

[Gipetto0812]

But there are no legitimate references and sources of the pant prints being there……. Why don’t you show me? I’ll wait.

I've already agreed with you that we normal ppl don't have that reference nor do you see it on screen. What more do you want? Just b/c WE can't find it, doesn't mean it wasn't present. It could very well not be there. My previous argument simply was that just b/c WE, ppl on this forum, don't have the reference doesn't mean that it wasn't there as it seems rather odd that both Asmus and Sideshow well before them would put it on there just because. It's even on the Sideshow Premium Format pants, but much more faint and blends into the weathering; so, unless you're close up, you wouldn't see it even on that at normal viewing distance. Maybe I'm misremembering, but this whole thing really started b/c InArt specifically said they decided not to included it b/c you can't see it. I would say that more than anything lends to them knowing that it's supposed to be there, but decided against it. It's one thing to leave something out b/c you simply don't know as many ppl on this forum said they didn't. But to know (meaning InArt) and say "nah, it's not necessary b/c you can't really see it anyway" is different.

That said, in that reply you just quoted, I wasn't specifically talking about Gandalf's pants. It's a general question of where is the line drawn?

B/c again, if we're going solely based by what's seen on screen rather than what's on the prop, then there are numerous details of other characters that could've been left out b/c we don't see them on screen. Sure, you might find a behind the scenes pic somewhere of a character's wardrobe and point to that to say "it's missing that right there" but if it wasn't on screen, who cares right?

 

[Mogli]

I don't remember InArt stating they chose to not include it because you couldn't see it in the movies, I did see an interview where John was asked about it and he said they could only get approval for things that appeared on-screen, which is a bit different to me. Maybe I missed another interview where it was discussed. I wouldn't be surprised if it was their choice anyway but I just don't remember them being that direct about why it wasn't there.