Sculpting for Injection Molding vs. Casting Resins or 3D Printing - Why Do Our Modern Breyers Have Mold Flaws?
Hi all!
Today's topic is a bit more technical, though since I do not have direct experience with this myself, don't worry, I will not be going into minute detail (though I certainly encourage anyone who is in that space to expand upon this themselves!) I have knowledge about Breyer history and a general understanding about how mold making works based on reading accounts from other hobbyists.
A question that comes up from time to time in the hobby, especially since the inception of the Premier Club, is to ask WHY our modern Breyer molds often have odd anatomical & conformation issues when the sculptors who are creating them are well renowned in the artisan hobby space for achieving an excellent degree of realism in their personal work.
To understand this, we first need to note the differences in the production of models between the commercial and artisan spaces. Breyer, Stone, and any other company using injection molding to create their plastic models, use metal molds for this process (two halves molded separately and later joined together in production). Artisans working with molding resin use silicone molds, and with the addition of the smaller scale production, this allows for a greater focus on detail. (Some artisans - and the current Hartland company - use resin or ABS/PLA plastic style 3D printing for production. Given that this method does not involve molding for production to consumer, that will not be taken into account for this blog's purpose.) Each technique has a different skill set and requires some awareness of its production methods which may need a different approach to prepping the sculpture - and has different limitations of what is possible to produce.
The production methods between injection molding cellulose acetate (Traditional & Classic Scale, some special SM like the SM Club) & ABS (Most Stablemates) and casting resin are radically different. Here is where it is important to note that a major difference in Breyer eras lies in the role of Chris Hess in the early days (50's until his passing in the late 80's). Hess was primarily a mold-maker by trade, and ended up as the main sculptor for the business due to this. His talent for creating horses is certainly remarkable, but the success of the molding technology when applied to toy horses should be attributed to both his artistic talent and his wealth of knowledge to engineer molds that accurately represented that artistic vision.
While some early models still suffer from issues such as mis-aligned sides, this is more a product of the post-molding process rather than the design & function of molds themselves. Full mis-alignment is most likely due to imprecise matching of the workers joining the halves together, or perhaps two halves that cooled at slightly different rates after being molded so they are no longer fully matched. (This is probably still true today!) What we do not see in Hess's work - and this could be a bias given that we have seen very few examples of his finalized clay pieces in pictures - are molding flaws caused by the translation of the original sculpture to the metal molds. I firmly believe that because Hess was both the sculptor and mold-maker, he not only sculpted to the extent he knew the technology could handle, but in the event that he created something that could not withstand mass production at the time (such as the curled eartips on the FAF that were re-tooled to be straight and pointy), he could go in and fix the problem himself, or instruct a co-worker to do so.
Advancements in molding technology after Hess's passing, particularly during the course of the 90's, led to a great new variety of dynamic poses and additional sculptural detail. However, along with this new era came the challenges of working with artists who were not directly familiar with the injection molding process themselves. And for the late 80's and early 90's "Artist series", also provided the additional speed-bump for some artists who had only worked in 2D previously. Ventures with artists who had sculpted for bronze, at least, were a bit more successful (such as Francais Eustis who sculpted Roy the Belgian).
The breakthrough for Breyer in finding a new artistic direction came in part due to the introduction of Kathleen Moody to the Breyer brand in the early 90's. Her first plastic mold, Gem Twist, is a great example of a mold retooling that was necessary. The very first copies of Gem Twist are back-end heavy and will topple backwards rather than standing. GT was re-weighted to fix this issue (though I do not recall if this aligns directly with the painting technique change to the 39 braids version of the mold - going from painting every other braid red to having a small red dot on each, or if the weight correction was done at the same time the braid style was re-tooled to have 20 braids). Previously, Moody had done a couple of sculpts for Breyer released in porcelain, and maybe the weighting for those sculpts may have been different, thus perhaps the difference in weight wasn't accounted for during the development of Gem Twist.
While there have been some "realism" criticisms of Moody sculpts from the 90's and 00's, it's generally been understood that her designs lean into the more artistic, fantastical side and as such, should not be expected to fully meet strict realism standards that began prevailing in the hobby due to the establishment of NAMHSA, the rise of connection between hobbyists via the internet, and the arrival of both artist resins and Peter Stone molds into the hobby sphere. Thus, some folks are more forgiving of mis-aligned faces (that are not a result of production error), small anatomical or conformational flaws, etc. Particularly as the molding technology was making great strides in the 90's and 00's, many of us chalk these "real horse" flaws up to necessary adjustments to make the molds work with the available tech.
Over the course of the late 90's and 00's, Breyer began to contract with more sculptors who had ties to the hobby community, including Sommer Prosser and Kitty Cantrell. These folks often were producing hobby resins (and some had other sculpting commercial contracts) outside of the work they did for Breyer, and some, like Sommer, also painted and customized. Many new molds started to stretch our (collector) visions of realism throughout the 2000's, but I believe we hit a real turning point in the late 00's with the introduction of Brigitte Eberl. To my knowledge, she was either the first or one of the first sculpting artists for Breyer who made a name for herself in the hobby community sculpting artist resins prior to doing any commercial contract work. Her attention to detail and realism brought into plastic form caused quite the revolution in the Breyer community (partially due to Alborozo, yes, but her other "early" (i.e. pre-Premier Club) Breyer sculpts Salinero, Giselle, Gilen and Weathergirl are still great examples of realism as well.
Another innovation of the late 00's was the introduction of "swappable" pieces on molds. This was (and still is) most often seen in a model having 2 or more options for manes and tails, but the two more extreme examples are the Arabian Mare (09) and Brishen (12) who have interchangeable body parts. The Arabian Mare has two different neck options, in addition to her 3 manes and 3 tails. I believe based on what's been released, that the long flowing mane is only possible with the Head Up version, while the other two - mane swooping left or mane swooping right, are only compatible with the Head Down. Any of the tails can be paired with either neck version. The major issue created by the neck swap is the shoulders. It may be the case that Moody sculpted two separate versions of this horse - or at least the Head Up appears to be the "original", maybe the Head Down neck was done as a bust, I don't know. Either way, not enough care was taken by the mold-makers to properly align the neck with the existing shoulder on Head Up, as the Head Down has a partial shoulder blade of its own that is just layered above the Head Up shoulder. The Arabian Mare may have other issues anatomically & conformation-wise, but the main issue is the "double shoulder" on Head Down variants.
Brishen, the other major swappable mold, came a few years later. He has two manes and tails, but instead of a different neck, he has different legs. As Brishen was first introduced into the Premier Club, we did not see his "alternate" leg version until the next year, when Laredo was released for BreyerFest. Laredo is a full "version B", as he has the opposite legs, mane, and tail from Brishen. Many people were, and some still are skeptical of this mold's ability to represent both a cob with heavy feathers, and an Iberian type.
With the increased emphasis Breyer started placing on pushing technological boundaries, a greater focus on realism by working with more artists popular in the hobby community, and dialing in painting techniques to support a more realistic product, it's not surprising that the community has in turn been more critical since the early 2010's in particular. We see the work that these artists produce in their resins, customs, and other hobby products, so when things fall short when production pieces arrive, it's hard to look at and wonder what went wrong.
The Premier Club Era
Though I've already mentioned Brishen, I'd like to talk about the PC in particular, as the evolution of the club has had a particular impact on the hobby discourse surrounding expectations for new molds.
The Premier Club began in 2012 as a way for Breyer to bring new molds into the lineup, while funding the creation of said molds through club memberships. The marketing touted the club as the way to have exclusive access to brand new molds. I can't recall if they mentioned the experimental painting techniques as well, but that is another aspect - a testing grounds to see which types of paintjobs are feasible on mass production scale (i.e. regular runs, larger SR, etc.) Some folks over the years have misinterpreted the intent of the club as being a replacement for the Connoisseur series which ended in 2011, and that may have caused some of the increased scrutiny at times.
Expectations vs. Reality - while most of the club models in the first two years had complaints here and there (some more due to the paintjobs), the first real shock we had was the advertisement of Carrick, for 2013. This was one of the instances where club members could choose the finish on their model, so the photos were provided ahead of time. However, this was a problem because they shared photos of the painted prototype in resin, NOT the final plastic production pieces. There are quite a number of differences between the prototype and the final version, particularly in the head and the legs. Many folks (myself included) were initially excited to see the new mold, only to be disappointed in the final version. Breyer eventually learned to only market new PC molds based on the final production sample in plastic, rather than the resin prototype.
Carrick is the first time I really recall the community getting into discourse about why the differences happened. Was the sculptor asked to make changes to fit molding complexity or weight balancing? It is possible for sure, but the more I've seen these odd differences over the years, the more I believe it's a product of translation to plastic by the mold designers, and not anything done by the sculptors themselves (or at least, nothing they'd allow to be produced in their personal work). If this sort of thing was isolated to a certain sculptor, then sure, could be on them. But these issues happen across a variety of folks. Particularly, as digital technology has improved, it would be far easier for a mold making team to make tweaks to meet molding specifications without needing edits from a sculptor - or alternately, asking the sculptor to make specific edits in digital form without being able to see those changes in clay before sending back to Breyer (if time frames are short, for example).
Anatomical changes - The most recent example of molding translation mishaps is 2022's Zafirah, but anatomical criticism has also been levied at molds such as the Mangalarga Marchador (not a Premier Club mold, but came out in 2016). These sort of changes that appear to us to go beyond slight alterations for weight or balancing seem clearly on the responsibility of the mold makers or some flavor of decision-makers at Breyer, as the changes done do not align with the precision and perfection in breed representation that these artists strive for in their personal work. In Zafirah's case, the resin she's based on was shared as part of the PC reveal lead-up, and many have noted the clear differences in stance of the legs (especially the forelegs). Placement and thickness/density are called into question. I have also heard the face is somewhat mis-aligned.
The difficult part to reconcile with for some folks is knowing how good she *could* be, vs. how she actually is. It is frustrating to feel like the technology should be supporting the art as it's been intended by the artist, particularly when other details are being captured just fine. I believe that is the root of the current criticism we are seeing over the last few years. If the level of detail can accurately depict most details of a sculpture, why are there still apparently some roadblocks? And it is difficult as it doesn't totally seem consistent, some sculpts don't have very many molding issues at all, and others have more than appears reasonable.
The one factor that I think might play a role from the artists' perspective, is the medium they work in for the original sculpts. There are different types of clay that can be used for those who sculpt in a "traditional" way, and some artists have also been delving into 3D digital sculpting in their work for Breyer. I think it's possible that some clays might withstand the mold making process better than others? But the clay chosen depends on the sculptor's preferences along with the level of detail they wish to capture, as I understand. At the very least, this is why some newer sculpts have a greater fidelity of detail than others, beyond just taking into account different artistic styles. I do think that if there are known issues with certain kinds of clay, Breyer should be acknowledging this (if they are not) and giving the artists better guidelines about what mediums will translate well into plastic.
The good news is, most artists working with Breyer lately are not fully newcomers to contracting with the company, or are well-connected with fellow artists who have and may be aware of potential pitfalls already. I do think that in general, we are going in the right direction. Outside of the narrow-shoulders issue, which crops up from time to time (most recent is Fireheart), most issues seem to be corrected and not repeated for future molds.
Our modern artists may not have the technical know how of injection mold making that Chris Hess did, so of course they are likely lacking the skill set that allowed him to sculpt from both perspectives, but I don't think that's necessary for them to have anymore. I doubt that having that skill set would completely eliminate the possibility of issues occurring during the mold-making process. Remember that Hess's molds tended to be on the simple side (we have a LOT of standing vintage molds!) so while he had the skill set to execute those concepts with that level of technology, things have improved practically by light-years in the time since his passing. I wouldn't call it impossible for someone to have both skill sets these days, but to have such specialized skill that our artists do plus also have an active working knowledge of all things injection molding, might be a bit of a long shot. I mean, if anyone already in the hobby wanted to pursue this, I'm sure they could! But someone coming in from a mold-maker perspective with no horse/hobby/art knowledge may not have the incentive to learn the other side. TLDR on that, I doubt we will be lucky enough to have another "Chris Hess" come along, and that's ok!
As much as it looks like I have kind of been throwing shade at the mold making people here, I think any defects in the process come more from a perspective of probably knowing little about our hobby or maybe even real horses, and as long as they have sign-off on any design changes, they won't have the eye to see where a problem could be. I am certain no one is sitting around with thoughts like "ah ha ha I'm going to make these plastic horse people crazy about xyz and there's nothing they can do about it!" Since Breyer is still first and foremost a TOY company, what feels like a major slight to us "how could they let this happen" is ultimately not something they would just go back and fix like Hess used to. They can take the feedback and apply that to future projects, but we're not going to ridicule a mold out of existence. If the public still buys it, that's what matters most to them. Please do not go around bashing any Breyer employees including mold makers. This blog is meant to be my purview of what I think likely happened to cause some of these flaws, but I do not begrudge anyone specifically, especially for issues quite a ways past now that have likely already been addressed and corrected in future molds.
In Closing
As OF plastic sculpts grow closer and closer to being on the same level as artisan work, from a mold detail & realism perspective, I expect we may continue to see scrutiny of new sculpts that focus attention on the translations during the mold making process. Many OF these days only need light prepping to be ready for a coat of paint, and when given a new set of clothes, can hold up well against even artisan sculpts (resin/pewter/etc.) in the show ring. Our bar for expectations keeps rising, and I am not sure where we'll go if there's ever a point where we've achieved "as much realism as possible".
The most important thing to remember, is that we are NOT at a place of perfection, not in OF land, and not in artisan land either. There will always be flaws and drawbacks of any piece. Please do not let the technical side of things influence how you feel about a mold, if that is not an aspect that is important to your opinion! If you want to love a mold that people constantly put down or pick apart, you should just keep loving it! Besides, a less popular mold means lower resale prices, so that is a great thing for your wallet. 😁 Many of us see the models more as artistic pieces, with the realism element having lower importance, and that's awesome! It is great to see the diversity in what each of us finds special.
I have NOT touched on other production/factory flaws here, such as paint flaws, rubs, seams, gouges, etc. ONLY the anatomical/conformation "flaws" that are inherent to the sculpts themselves as produced in plastic. The "other side" of factory defects is a MUCH larger can of worms, that would take a lot more work to discuss and frankly, has been discussed at length many times already by others.
Comments
Post a Comment