|
First Glance: The first thing that struck me about these figures was the pose of the horses. These are dramatic and energetic poses which may be a bit “busy” - I’m not sure I’d like an entire unit comprised of these horses. The second horse actually looks like it is trying to throw the rider! Still, same old Essex. Very cleanly cast, very consistent, no surprises.
Anatomy: The major issue I’ve always had with the Essex ranges is their “gnomish” anatomy. They always seem to have legs that are far too short, and arms that are far too thick for their torsos. This is much harder to determine on a cavalry rider. However, what we can see here is pretty good. Each of these three riders has a well sculpted face, and arms that are in scale to the torso. The horses likewise are of good proportion, and richly muscled.
The Finer Things: Essex are known for what I refer to as high-contrast figures. Detail is moderate, but the detail that is there is very easy to see (and hence to paint). This means that some fine detail is up to the painter - for example, the carbine barrel is not distinguished from the stock - you just have to paint in a straight line with your gunmetal.
Second Chances: The other figures don’t really change my opinion any. If you like other Essex, you’ll like these (I know, I sound like a broken record). If not....
Essex have a lot of proponents and for good reason. They are easy to paint, consistent, and tend to have fairly comprehensive ranges. So once you start in a period you can usually fill out your armies with just Essex figures.
|
