Period inappropriate freehands

You realize brocade's been around for about fifteen hundred years, right?

The problem is that you have Aspergers.

It's not supposed to be period accurate. It's obviously a show piece made specifically to show off neat painting skills. It's probably not even part of anybody's army.

>>48290457
Greatly limited by dyes and you'll be hard pressed to see anything remotely like modern graphic design (beside floral designs inspired by brocade itself) or even complex gradients made from colors that had no equivalent dyes, or dynamic posing and perspective, realistic light theory, etc.

>>48290512
I know that, it's a Game of Thrones baratheon model for display. But it's still a retarded idea even though it's executed brilliantly.

>>48290427
>Am I alone..

Yes. The fact that you feel every single model should conform to what you feel is appropriate - sets you apart.

I get that you justifiy it to yourself by saying:
'I'm correct, no one in the middle ages had the capability to create intricate tapestry'

The fact that you are incorrect will be lost on you, so I will avoid that argument.

It really boils down to your inability to consider the possibility that you're incorrect - your inability to understand that your own personal tastes are just as valid as anyone elses - and your inability to validate something you disagree with.

You may already be aware of this, you may not - but these are traits common to aspergers and autism. Sorry anon, hopefully you can recognize, be self-critical, and overcome.

>>48290714
>Intricate tapestry

The main thing that irks me in this, really, is the fight scene. That sort of composition, posing and lighting could only exist in a post-photography world. It's based in extremely modern cinematic principles. Basically, it's some Saving Private Ryan type shit.

>>48290757
are you literally retarded? Have you ever seen the fucked up awesomeness that michelangelo and their contemporaries produced for scenarios out of the bible?!

What you say is blatant bullshit.
Painters had Models stand in for poses, would arrange them around over and over to composite the image they had in their head.

How can you be this deluded and idiotic, to think that "that sort of composition" could "ONLY exist in a post-photography world."?!

Are you seriously mentally handicapped, familiar?

What the shit.

>>48290915
And they posed theatricaly.

For someone who insults a ton, you really know little about art history.

>>48290427
You went full retard, congrats OP

>>48290757
Bro, stop looking for fault and negativity in what you see. It's a sad way to waste a life, and so many fa/tg/uys seem to fall into this trap. Dont let it happen to you.

>>48291352
That I'm annoyed by this doesn't mean I don't appreciate the craftsmanship. It just leaves me wondering "why?".

The moron who assume I wish it didn't exist can go suck a bag of dicks.

But I'd still appreciate more a piece as skillfully done but more thought thoroughly. There's plenty out there.

>>48291465
>My opinion of what is 'thoroughly thought out' should be shared by everyone
>I'm incapable of grasping the concept of perspective and opinion
>I will look for ways to justify my self-centered thinking until anyone who disagrees or tries to help me just gives up
>I am a moderately functioning adult living in denial of my mild degree of autism

And I do mean 'moderately'. Because based on your thread and replies - I seriously doubt your ability to navigate lifes delicate social interactions to any great degree.

I can't say I'm terribly fond of stuff like that model either, though for em it's more that the mini is being treated like a canvas instead of a miniature. Art like that doesn't work with the shape of the sculpt, it merely finds a suitable undisturbed spot and then does its own thing, which IMO misses the point somewhat. If you want to do a painting, get a canvas, if you want to paint a miniature, then paint the miniature.

Historical accuracy and whatnot, well, if it's supposed to be a historical miniature then any inaccuracy I can spot will be a minus, though I don't think I've seen this specific thing in the wild. The mini you posted would be a fantasy model as far as I can see, going by the illustrations I guess it's supposed to be a not so fat king Baratheon.

>>48290714
That's a lot of straw you wrapped him in.

>>48291858
>That's a lot of straw you wrapped him in.

Let's be honest though, he's more than likely spot on.

>>48291914
I'm only seeing one person ITT who insists everyone should agree with their position, and it's not OP.

File: source.jpg (385KB, 1377x645px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1377x645px

>>48291858
Even worse, it's not even his own original art.

That shit is like, the covers of the books.

>>48291993
I didnt insist anything anon. I did submit a rather harsh analysis of OP based solely on his few posts though.

So if you want to criticize me, thats probably a better route.

>>48290427
How exactly did he do this?
The GoT tapestries seem way too detailed in comparison to the rest of the knight.
Is it a print-out?

>>48293526
It could be a 50mm mini... but if someone told me it was hand painted in 28mm, I wouldn't be too surprised. Some people are really just that good.