Reply To: [unofficial weekender] Friday again!

[scribbs 14517xp 1]

Managed to get as far as priming my next lot of British line infantry, and then immediately got started on a samurai model by Steelfist Miniatures for a bit of a change in scale and colours. I’ll try and get him painted up this week, although I’m undecided on a basing scheme, so he’ll linger uncompleted for a while. I was wondering about something autumnal considering the current season.

For me, digital and traditional sculpting are just different media for producing the same end product, much in the same way as digital vs physical (pen/paint/paper etc.) art. Those who understand the media to the fullest get the best results, and I don’t think that the highest quality sculpts produced via either method are better than the other.

One thing that I have no experience with is the casting/printing of models, and I do wonder if there is a difference in the realisation of the sculpts in model form. I roughly know the process, and I’m aware that you can have a sculpt that looks fantastic, but is a pain to cast/print. Part of the skill of the sculptor is produce figure that can easy be cast/printed. For my non-existent personal experience of 3D printing, I get the impression that there can be a lot of user input to ensure that you get decent prints. How thoroughly do digital sculptors practice the ease/reliability of their prints? My understanding is that most traditional sculptors will be making a master for a mould which will get a pretty decent testing for repeat results. From a place of large ignorance over these processes, I would suspect that traditional methods might be more effective in getting a repeat result of the end model than a digital sculpt. But as stated, I have pretty much zero experience on which to base that impression.