T his weekend, the question of what, precisely, constitutes an "imagination" came up in an online forum of which I am a part. To be fair, the issue originates from further afield in a Facebook group that I am not a member of, but I weighed in with my own view. The following was in response to the question posed yesterday (Sunday) morning by an exasperated member of my own rather more gentlemanly town square, who had been met with a strident response to information he shared about his (admirable) hobby activities on said FB group. Here is, more or less, what I wrote: To my mind, the concept of imagi-nation(s) is a broad one. It can range from historical refights or what-if scenarios/battles/campaigns between armies of a particular era, to completely made up combatants operating in a quasi-historical setting, to the rather generic red and blue forces of the Prussian Kriegspiel that examine a particular tactical problem, task, or exercise. ...
Comments
(and you don't have to deal with the issue of what to do with separate riders and mounts! lol)
I'm up very early (for me) and it seems like we got an unexpected dusting of snow overnight. Should be a nice day today here too.
-- Jeff
Nope, so far as I know these are not miscasts. Spencer Smith figures do not have the high level of detail that we have become used to with modern lines like Old Glory or Foundry for example. They are rather more stylized in form, leaving painters free to add or leave out as much detail as they would like.
What is especially attractive about SSM figures is that their proportions are correct -- no tree stump legs, baseball mit hands, pumpkin-sized heads, or deep, craggy folds in garments. Instead, you have figures that look like miniature people and horses. Frankly, that's what I'm after with this project.
Best Regards,
Stokes