JustinLuck
Super Freak
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2005
- Messages
- 3,949
- Reaction score
- 0
Pix and Josh, both of you see my posts as immature, rude, and presumptuous. I can assure you that is not my intent and I feel misunderstood. I would like nothing more than Sideshow to be outstandingly successful with every product they launch. Any contempt you read in my posts is simply the frustration of buying figures that now routinely cost at least $100+ after shipping/tax with unnecessary design flaws that would not have cost Sideshow a penny more if the details had been worked out before production started.
It is the absence of direct communication that makes it feel like Sideshow could care less about its loyal customers or their suggestions. Maybe members on this board would not react as negatively if there was some active dialog with Sideshow designers so we knew their perspective on the situations in question. You say we should not speculate on the outcome of products. What other choice do we have when Sideshow remains tight lipped on, what are sometimes considered, quite baffling decisions.
You might say that Sideshow does not need to hear any of our suggestions. Then why are they having difficulty selling through their Indy 1:6 merchandise? The same goes for some of their SW figures...or LOTR. We know these product lines have the potential for home runs with every release. And we know Sideshow doesn't enjoy resorting to a low ES like they are now having to do with German Indy. But there are multiple factors preventing their products from being as successful as they should be and these reasons have already been highlighted and explained ad nauseum on this board. The Sideshow could do is acknowledge that there are factors other than simply demand that determine how popular a product is. How will you feel if Sideshow ends the Indy line, citing 'lack of interest'.
Plasmid, if loose joints were the only problem with the Pro, I would not have started this thread. The Pro was first launched with the heavy hitter, Indiana Jones. You would assume that Sideshow would want this to be a flagship product, as it has the potential to bring many new customers who are Indy fans and who will continue to buy Sideshow products upon a good first impression.
There are certain variables that perhaps Sideshow has no control over, such as assembly that might lead to loose joints. But when designing the Pro, they knew how the body proportions would look like. If the Pro is as modular as they say, why hasn't Sideshow taken advantage of this fact from the beginning, with the release of Indy?
One of the biggest factors that hurts the anatomical proportions of the Pro is its short torso length. This is also the reason why Indy is shorter than ANH Han on the Buck. To prevent this, Sideshow just needed to insert a taller mid-piece in the torso to make the torso more proportionate with the limbs. But for whatever reason, Sideshow did not do this for Indy. I cannot comment for the more recent Pro's.
Lerath666, for someone that is well versed in anatomical proportion, I find it surprising that you would state:
"the pro body is one of the most anatomicly accurate bodies in the sense of proportions, and shape", and say "the truetype...is one of the WORST BODIES IN THE ASPECTS OF REALISM".
Doesn't this sound a bit extreme? I wholeheartedly agree that the Truetype's shoulders are too wide. But I think if you saw somebody walking down the street with the same proportions as the Pro body, you would feel something looked a bit odd as well.
The fact is, neither of these bodies has everything right. They both have their pluses and minuses in terms of their portions and fittings. I noted in my original post that the Pro has great proportions between the forearm and upper arm. Many 1/6 bodies have forearms that are too long.
Truth is, there is not single 1/6 body on the market that has all the proportions correct. And I think that is an unrealistic expectation to have them do so. But there is certainly room for improvement. Aspects such as keeping the torso length in relation to limb length and shoulder width in relation to head size should be goals to strive for when creating new designs.
It is the absence of direct communication that makes it feel like Sideshow could care less about its loyal customers or their suggestions. Maybe members on this board would not react as negatively if there was some active dialog with Sideshow designers so we knew their perspective on the situations in question. You say we should not speculate on the outcome of products. What other choice do we have when Sideshow remains tight lipped on, what are sometimes considered, quite baffling decisions.
You might say that Sideshow does not need to hear any of our suggestions. Then why are they having difficulty selling through their Indy 1:6 merchandise? The same goes for some of their SW figures...or LOTR. We know these product lines have the potential for home runs with every release. And we know Sideshow doesn't enjoy resorting to a low ES like they are now having to do with German Indy. But there are multiple factors preventing their products from being as successful as they should be and these reasons have already been highlighted and explained ad nauseum on this board. The Sideshow could do is acknowledge that there are factors other than simply demand that determine how popular a product is. How will you feel if Sideshow ends the Indy line, citing 'lack of interest'.
Plasmid, if loose joints were the only problem with the Pro, I would not have started this thread. The Pro was first launched with the heavy hitter, Indiana Jones. You would assume that Sideshow would want this to be a flagship product, as it has the potential to bring many new customers who are Indy fans and who will continue to buy Sideshow products upon a good first impression.
There are certain variables that perhaps Sideshow has no control over, such as assembly that might lead to loose joints. But when designing the Pro, they knew how the body proportions would look like. If the Pro is as modular as they say, why hasn't Sideshow taken advantage of this fact from the beginning, with the release of Indy?
One of the biggest factors that hurts the anatomical proportions of the Pro is its short torso length. This is also the reason why Indy is shorter than ANH Han on the Buck. To prevent this, Sideshow just needed to insert a taller mid-piece in the torso to make the torso more proportionate with the limbs. But for whatever reason, Sideshow did not do this for Indy. I cannot comment for the more recent Pro's.
Lerath666, for someone that is well versed in anatomical proportion, I find it surprising that you would state:
"the pro body is one of the most anatomicly accurate bodies in the sense of proportions, and shape", and say "the truetype...is one of the WORST BODIES IN THE ASPECTS OF REALISM".
Doesn't this sound a bit extreme? I wholeheartedly agree that the Truetype's shoulders are too wide. But I think if you saw somebody walking down the street with the same proportions as the Pro body, you would feel something looked a bit odd as well.
The fact is, neither of these bodies has everything right. They both have their pluses and minuses in terms of their portions and fittings. I noted in my original post that the Pro has great proportions between the forearm and upper arm. Many 1/6 bodies have forearms that are too long.
Truth is, there is not single 1/6 body on the market that has all the proportions correct. And I think that is an unrealistic expectation to have them do so. But there is certainly room for improvement. Aspects such as keeping the torso length in relation to limb length and shoulder width in relation to head size should be goals to strive for when creating new designs.
Last edited:
).
)
