|
|
Post by jhonpog on Apr 16, 2019 7:41:13 GMT
Hi all so I am building up a few armies for a Star Wars wargame in 54mm. I am trying to match figures to the 'correct' scale and am finding that there is a wide variation between manufacturers of the figures I like to collect
So I am wondering what the common (agreed upon?) convention is around the scale of figures is in this er, scale. Am I correct in assuming that a figure that is 54mm from the bottom of the foot to the top of the head is the average height of people. Or is this the height limit? If I've got a figure that's 60mm is he or she just pretty tall and a 50mm just a bit short?
And then there's the heft of a figure right? Too tall but the right heft works better than the same height but too thin I think.
There seems to be a few interpretations out there I'm curious to know what the members of this forum think.
Many thanks and fire away
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike Lewis on Apr 16, 2019 8:38:07 GMT
Originally figures were 54mm to the top of the head but there has been scale creep over the years - Britains are 54mm to the eye. Modern "54mm" figures from the like of King and Country are 60mm and often referred to as 1/30th instead of 1/32nd...
There is no real standard.
I prefer the "true" 54mm figures that are 54mm to the top of the head and are slnder in proportions - such as most of the All the Queen's Men ranges. Thye also have the advanctage of fitting into a smaller footprint for wargaming with!
|
|
|
|
Post by spiritofethandune on Apr 16, 2019 14:53:18 GMT
'Thye also have the advanctage of fitting into a smaller footprint for wargaming with!'- which is why I am getting my 54mm Naps and Boer War figures from Mike!
|
|
|
|
Post by leswhite on Apr 16, 2019 20:49:44 GMT
I can't speak for metal makers but in plastic there seems to be no 'actual' scale, many figures are listed as 1/32 but are either too big or too small to fall into that category.
The original concept by Britians Limited states that they have used a average sized man , 5 feet 8 inches tall, that would be average in the UK in the 1950s. Their calculation came out at 54mm from the sole of the foot to the top of the head minus headgear. However in reality they had not stuck to this for any of their plastic ranges the Herald range being on the small side and the Super detail on the large side, with all sizes in between. In the USA MARX was the same having ranges that were as small as 45mm and as tall as 60mm. The Italian makers were all over the place going as big as 75mm.
Also it is important to measure the figure as you would the human body from the sole of the foot to the top of the head, many collectors measure to the eyes which gives a different impression of scale.
So it really is up to you to pick a size you like and make your figures compatible with that.
I think for me body mass, heft, is the key. A figure can be the same height but scale differently based on the body mass. Collectors also seem to forget about the pose of the figure too, a man standing upright could be correctly scaled at 54mm but if a advancing man is the same height in reality he will be taller when standing upright, so either a different scale or simply a taller man.
My prefered height is 56mm calculated as a 6 foot tall man - 1800mm divided by 32 equals 56.25mm. This is not written in stone of course as I just make my figure compatible within a period, so for Star Wars I can go 54mm for the SWC range or 60mm for the unleashed range. For other periods I'll go with AIP compatible.
|
|
|
|
Post by jhonpog on Apr 16, 2019 21:06:02 GMT
Originally figures were 54mm to the top of the head but there has been scale creep over the years - Britains are 54mm to the eye. Modern "54mm" figures from the like of King and Country are 60mm and often referred to as 1/30th instead of 1/32nd... There is no real standard. I prefer the "true" 54mm figures that are 54mm to the top of the head and are slnder in proportions - such as most of the All the Queen's Men ranges. Thye also have the advanctage of fitting into a smaller footprint for wargaming with! Thanks Mike yeah alot of my figures are definitely more like 1/30th as much as possible I am trying to keep below this size; some of my larger ones are 62mm to 65mm so they start looking out of place next to a figure 54mm in height I'm converting a bunch of britains and have some figures from deagostini all of which as you say are 54mm to the eyeline. I don't particularly like this way of measuring scale to the top of the head makes way more sense but these are essentially part of the core of my collection so I guess I'm stuck with it  |
|
|
|
Post by jhonpog on Apr 16, 2019 21:10:42 GMT
So it really is up to you to pick a size you like and make your figures compatible with that. I think for me body mass, heft, is the key. A figure can be the same height but scale differently based on the body mass. Collectors also seem to forget about the pose of the figure too, a man standing upright could be correctly scaled at 54mm but if a advancing man is the same height in reality he will be taller when standing upright, so either a different scale or simply a taller man. My prefered height is 56mm calculated as a 6 foot tall man - 1800mm divided by 32 equals 56.25mm. This is not written in stone of course as I just make my figure compatible within a period, so for Star Wars I can go 54mm for the SWC range or 60mm for the unleashed range. For other periods I'll go with AIP compatible. Hey Les yeah I agree heft is definitely the key for making different brands of figure work together. I think my collection works best if a 6ft man is 57mm or 58mm in height this allows me a bit of head room (no pun intended) for 60mm figures who can be over 6ft. |
|
|
|
Post by Quantrilltoy on Apr 21, 2019 22:45:10 GMT
There is an official scale of 54mm and an official scale of 60mm; the former is 1/32 scale. Tamiya and most tank kit figures are 1/35 which often looks very small next to 1/32. Some makers did two series in different scales; for example, Marx did West Point cadets in around 52mm and also in 60mm. They don't go well together because half the unit would look like little boys, although it might work for the drummer boy. You could have a unit of very youthful boy cadets and one on graduation!
On the other hand, in the real world there is a lot of variation in height so they can be mixed to some extent but, as I said, a unit with half giants and half midgets would look unnatural. I am not a big fan of uniform clones although others like this. My Medieval regiments are especially mixed as I use many makers and mix 54mm and 60mm. Also, as noted by someone else, interpretation of the height varies with some makers apparently measuring from the top of the hat instead of the head. As I like my units a little motley it works to my advantage. In some units too there should be all bigger men - for example grenadiers are taller and traditionally don't include short men. Also some nationalities or races might tend to be taller or shorter. Orientals. for example, are usually shorter. Romans would tend to be a little shorter than Germanic barbarians. You can even take this to extremes if you are representing pygmies, dwarfs and hobbits, which I sometimes do.
|
|
|
|
Post by jhonpog on Apr 22, 2019 20:58:25 GMT
yeah I like the idea of mixing it up a bit I guess so long as their equipment is the same size it would help a unit look cohesive
|
|
