Interview with Gary Morley - and crediting artists

[Petitioner's City]

Some surprising facts about original Dark Eldar (Kruellagh was wearing only tubes!) - but also a serious section about crediting artists, and how there used to be royalties for GW sculptors.

 

 

Another brilliant interview with a brilliant artist, but also a really important theme running through many of the Painting Phase's videos. 

[Emperor Ming]

Loved that interview, so many memories

 

The old nagash as well, so it was gw corporate that was responsible for the silly head

Edited June 13, 2023 by Emperor Ming

[Doghouse]

Makes me want a return to the old days. I love reliving the memories but the more I do the more GW becomes a faceless corporation instead of a group of talented hobbyists. 

[Petitioner's City]

8 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

Loved that interview, so many memories

 

The old nagash as well, so it was gw corporate that was responsible for the silly head

 

Here it is!

 

[Lord_Ikka]

13 hours ago, Doghouse said:

Makes me want a return to the old days. I love reliving the memories but the more I do the more GW becomes a faceless corporation instead of a group of talented hobbyists. 

GW hasn't been a group of talented hobbyists since Livingston and Jackson were bought out by Kirby and Ansell in 91. It's been ruled by corporate policy ever since, for good or ill.

[Petitioner's City]

3 hours ago, Lord_Ikka said:

GW hasn't been a group of talented hobbyists since Livingston and Jackson were bought out by Kirby and Ansell in 91. It's been ruled by corporate policy ever since, for good or ill.

 

Given Morley's experience is from 94, and nevertheless was part of a company very much of talented hobbyists - I think you are just being a bit reductive here :)

[Doghouse]

I personally would say much later than that. There have always been personalities that we all know and recognise, Kirby and Ansell may have started the ball that got GW rolling into corporate territory but the rock stars of GW were always passionate about the hobby and it was clear for all to see. There are lots of recognisable names from the early days still working in gaming in some aspect today whether it's table top, artwork, computer games or board games, having made their own companies or gone freelance.

 

Removing creator names from products was the tipping point that made them completely a faceless IP driven corporation in my opinion, that was the Darth Vader having his helmet put on moment for me. This was when they completely turned to the dark side for me.

[Colman]

Their turn to the dark side was complete when White Dwarf became GW games only. Whenever in the deep mists of time that was.

[Petitioner's City]

Yes there is corporate leadership - making bad decisions (in this example) around attribution. But we know it's awful because the company has multitudes of supremely talented hobbyists and creatives not getting the recognition they deserve. 

 

I get so frustrated when people say there aren't hobbyists at GW or people so passionate about the hobby at the company, or brilliantly creative people. That's clearly not the case. 

 

Hck we are hearing about it because prominent former staff like Peachy are complaining about it, not because it affects them, but because of their former colleagues are not getting the recognition they deserve - be it graphic design for WD, who paints what from which studio armies, sculptors, writers and so on. They have no evidence they did X or Y, and others can take credit for their work too. That's why it matters to people like Morley and Peachy, and they bang the drum - because GW has so many insanely talented hobbyists not getting the professional and artistic recognition they deserve. 

 

I do get why some creatives don't want to be on camera, or attributed, however - but it shouldn't be a mandatory "ban".

[Redcomet]

1 hour ago, Doghouse said:

I personally would say much later than that. There have always been personalities that we all know and recognise, Kirby and Ansell may have started the ball that got GW rolling into corporate territory but the rock stars of GW were always passionate about the hobby and it was clear for all to see. There are lots of recognisable names from the early days still working in gaming in some aspect today whether it's table top, artwork, computer games or board games, having made their own companies or gone freelance.

 

Removing creator names from products was the tipping point that made them completely a faceless IP driven corporation in my opinion, that was the Darth Vader having his helmet put on moment for me. This was when they completely turned to the dark side for me.

They are a company making products. Not some evil entity out to ruin your nostalgia feelings of yesteryear. 

[ZeroWolf]

38 minutes ago, Colman said:

Their turn to the dark side was complete when White Dwarf became GW games only. Whenever in the deep mists of time that was.

You mean the mid-late 80s? I don't blame GW as such for having their own magazines and saw it analogous to specific gaming consoles each having their own "official" magazine.

 

Only way White Dwarf could have kept marketing other games and miniature ranges like the early days would have been for it to be spun off away from GW, but who knows if it would have been successful or not. 

[Doghouse]

10 minutes ago, Redcomet said:

They are a company making products. Not some evil entity out to ruin your nostalgia feelings of yesteryear. 

 

I never said at any point they were not a company trying to make money, in fact I have pointed this out in the past many times that they are first and foremost a business and never said they were out to ruin my feelings of yesteryear.

 

I said the culture has changed. I perceive this change as something negative, if you are ok with it then good for you.

[Lord_Ikka]

There seems to be a disconnect between people's perception of GW as a business entity and the importance of GW's staff- GW has been a purely business entity since the early 90s (both when the original founders were bought out and when ECI Partners acquired them/put them on the London Stock Exchange). This doesn't mean that they didn't/don't have a large group of talented hobbyists, artists, writers, and designers working for them, but those people were not the ones making the decisions about the company's direction or, more importantly, the products that would be made. Corporate sales policies did/do dictate the products that the creative staff work on, rather than the early years where there was a lot more "free-wheeling" style of design.

 

I do agree that not crediting the model design staff seems fairly shortsighted, but I also acknowledge that GW has moved away from a lot of independent design work and moved to a more homogeneous style that fits better with CAD software use to make their models. It makes the models better suited for the type of production that GW does now, but makes each individual designers' work seem less important on the whole.

[Petitioner's City]

Weirdly GW credit in strangest ways, and also display painters in the strangest ways

 

 

Like it's great Emma and Lizzie are interviewed, but the video tries to avoid them. it's so intriguing.

[aa.logan]

Does anyone know when/if this will be added to podcasts streams? I prefer to listen than watch