Show us yer stuff!

[Ritter]

Nice work there Raffraff!

Ive noticed your work before and have admired your style

Troy

[8ball]

Very nice kitties RiffRaff.

It kills me that these all look better than my 15mm stuff

Hey Von: I think the problem is that GHQ stuff is better sculpted and cast than any 15mms out there. With GHQ you start off with a silk purse. With the 15s you start of with a...well you see where I'm gettin' at.

[jb]

Nice work Sfc29er,and RaffRaff. Thanks for tanking the time to share your work

[Thunder]

Here's a link to a collection of images I gathered from this site last week. I thought you might enjoy browsing through all of the great photos of the GHQ Forum member's work.

http://www.microarmor.com/stuff/images/index.html

[ACWBill]

RaffRaff - Awesome paint job on the Tigers. Makes me want to pull out the old Spearhead Suppliment "Blaze Across the Sands" again.

Thunder - Well done Sir. You captured some really great stuff there for preservations sake.

This is one of my favorite minis sites. The reason being that the folks here truely want to talk miniatures. This is antithesis of TMP, where you're hard-pressed to find a subject not dealing with some political issue. Hallelujah! Lets keep it that way.

[BattlerBritain]

Raffraff - lovely Tigers.

Really good job on those sir!

[raffraff]

thx 4 all, photos is 4 your plesure, next german paint job ...




lovely jagdpanther : )

[ACWBill]

Here is a shot of my Chattanooga Fire & Fury game from Recon 2005. This pic shows Cleburne's Division defending Tunnel Hill against Sherman's flanking attack.






Enjoy!

[ACWBill]

The sun rises while the fighting continues on Lookout.

[1ComOpsCtr]

I do not want to offend anyone on this forum, but there appears to be a real need to establish some guidelines regarding posting pictures.

If you will notice the size of the photo just posted above. While it is a great photograph it is so large that it is almost unviewable (as far as looking at the entire picture).

If those of us who post pictures would make sure they are roughly 8 to 10 inches wide they would fit very nicely within the confines of the space provided by the page and would make the entire picture viewable at one time, which is I think the goal of most of those who post on this forum.

Thanks for your patience and attention,

Will
ComOpsCtr

[Mk 1]

Raffraff:

Man, them's some wonderful tanks! You have a definite "touch" with the shading,
weathering, and detailing!

It appears the pics are on a sand table. Have you assembled that just for picture-taking,
or do you game on it too?


Will (and all):

I also find that oversized pics are a bit of an inconvenience. However, a reference to 8
or 10 inches is not very useful as a guideline. If you have a 24 inch monitor, and I have
a 14 inch notebook LCD, we will have very different ideas of what "size" is right. And
besides, most photo-editing software does not include a ruler in the edit function.

The key to resizing is not the measured size, but the resolution. The key is the pixel
count. Most websites (this one included) are now optimized for viewing at 1024x768
resolution. With the navigation buttons on the side, that means that a picture in a sub-
window should really be no more than 800x600, and may be even better at 640x480.

I try to resize all of the pics I post to a limit of 800 pixels wide, and more recently have
even taking to resizing down to 640 wide. Since my camera is 3.2mega pixels (about
2000 x 1600) I crop down to about 1/6 of the image (1/3 in each dimension) I want a
close-up, or scale down when I want an overview picture.

Bill's pics above would probably look nicer scaled down to 800x600 or even 640x480.
The resolution of the camera, and the limitations of the focal plain, really would make the
pics look nicer, as well as making them easier to take in without scrolling.

In truth, though, I really don't object too much to scrolling across the page to look at a
well focussed, high-res picture. However, one side effect is that the text for all the
other posts on that page no longer auto-wraps once there is an oversized picture, and
so I need to scroll off and back for each line of text in all the other posts. Arrgh.

And so, in my own posts, I also try to put in hard carriage returns if I know that there is an oversized pic on the page. That way my rants are easier for you guys to read.

[tanker]

ACWBill, what scale are you working in? Nice terrain and paint jobs on the minis.

Tanker

[ACWBill]

While I used 10mm figures, all the bases and board sizes are the same as they would be if I were using 15mms. I just like the appearance of the 10mm troops on the larger tables. The Chattanooga board was 6ft wide, 17ft long with an "L" shaped extension on the Lookout Mountain end of the board. Bases size for infantry is the Fire & Fury recommended 1" X 3/4".

[jb]

Nice work raffraff,and ACWbill. It is kind of hard to see the better detail on that large picture,though

[ferret701]

I've been working on Belgian and Dutch vehicles lately -- here are the first of the lot to get finished and put on my website:

Belgian M113A1-B and M113A1-B-MIL



Two Belgian M113A1-Bs



Both are painted in the olive drab that seemed to predominate among Belgian vehicles until after the end of the cold war.

Pat Callahan
www.microarmormayhem.com