Should I put my chess set into production?

@radioarno, you find me interesting as a 'case study in human behavior'  Well I am posting on a message board, so in your 'case study' you have no idea who I am or anything about me, so you aren't controlling any variables.  pretty bad case study.  Don't try to use terms you don't know about lol.  

However, I am glad I was able to amuse you (although I didn't really amuse you, you are just finding a way to be condescending ) and maybe others as well.  From LoveMagnet's latest post he guarantees that the set will be produced for the public.  Well, in that case, good for him.  I, for one don't want to play with creepy-armed chess pieces  but that's just me (maybe it's a Surrealist/avant-garde thing?).

 Peace out.

Thats what I am watching for now.........

I'm hoping LoveMag is feeling better, and excited about his recent post saying the set will be available at some point, even tho I'd never hold him to it. And, yup, I'm continuing my study of that little guy!

please learn what a case study is and how to conduct one.  you are using a very good technique of being condescending though, i am impressed.  'I'm continuing my study' puts you in a position of authority and  'that little guy' was particularly inspired.  good troll, 9/10.

Today's theme is heads. I've done a little bit of modeling on them. King now has sharp edges. The queens head has been made slightly oblong and she now has a little bit of a neck.

If you look closely at a classical Staunton king for example, then you will notice that as a matter of fact it has no head. It is a piece made of three parts: A base, a column and a crown. It is not actually a king. It is a pedestal where a kings crown has been put on display.

By giving the piece arms and a head I have made it a person, or since it still has the base in stead of legs, maybe a bust statue of a person.

The thing is that now the bishop stands out in the way that it is still just a column with a mitre hat on display. So I'm considering giving it a head as well. Problem is just that it may mess up the height and proportions of the piece.

What do you think?

'today's theme is heads?'  this guy doesn't stop, does he?  you are not a professor bro, why don't you just make the set already 

Is there some way of summoning a moderator in this forum?

i think the pieces all look too much like the type of cartoons you get in chess books for kids. all they need is some big googly eyes.

this guy is OTM.

I couldn't agree more, I had this one guy say something very offensive and insulting to me and I felt mildly threatened.  Here is what he wrote:

'Now, go out and kick some babies, or whatever it is you do for entertainment, and leave my thread the fuck alone.'

I forgive the guy though, he probably just has ego problems 

loveMag, no need for a moderator. You're doing great. There are lots of us who are with you on designing this set. Just ignore. Really. Just study this guy, and laugh. 

About the more important thing, the heads. I think the new king head is excellent; it provides more defintion and more distinction from the queen.

Imho you don't need a head on the bishop. You don't need that level of consistency. I think the bishop's hat serves double duty as a head; it works perfectly.

Btw, I think the new king's head makes the moldable crown look better. Even with no change to the moldable crown it ends up looking better with the new angled king head. Congrats.

My only complaint at this point is the king's body is just to curvy. He seems slimmer and cirvier than the queen. Is it an illusion, or is it fact? It could be an illusion. Please check.

the little twerp will respondl that's for sure. Just ignore. Keep your eye on the work. You need no moderator. You just need to ignore. He gets pleasure whenever one of us get's upset. There's no need for upset. Its kust a child having growing pains. Really.

Let's keep desiogning this thing. You're maybe a bit shaken and off balance from your medical experience yesterday. Take a couple of deep brreaths and keep you focus on the work at hand.

Radio. 

I can't say i love the new king. The sharp edges are quite in contrast with the rest of the set, so it gives me a slightly disharmonic feeling. I'm just referring to the face, the rest of the piece is ok. Ilike the new queen

I don't think calling a moderator is in order, his comments may be irritating but stupidity is not a sufficent reason for a ban as long as he avoids openly insulting you. If you really want you can block him so that he won't be able to post in this thread anymore. 

Nice tip. Thank you! Now done. I was getting tired of him constantly trying to derail the conversation.

wow, thank you bresando. thank you LoveMag. He wasn't going to derail me, but the mosquito is now gone. Adieu, little mosquito. 

Bresando, look at the king's head again. Its true its not consistent with round heads, but the queen is the only other piece with a round head. 

LovMag, can you post a pic of the entire set, with the new king head. thanks. 

and congrats to you and LoveMag for utilizing an effective mosquito repellant.

there could be more coming. We'll just apply more mosquito repellant in that  case. :)

Maybe a picture of the whole set would convince me, but i think that all the pieces have a rather curvaceuos (if not round) design now, except the king. 

Your wish is my command. I softened the edges on the kings head a little bit, and made his body a bit wider. Maybe he is becoming a bit top heavy, but fortunately there is still a little bit of room left to widen the base.

Only thing I do not really like is the detail on top of the pawns, very bischop-like. All the major pieces are almost perfect... Any detailed pictures of the knight, it looks like a real work of art.

But Lovemagnet, the Staunton design is a masterpiece of abstraction, a perfect blend of neo-classical tastes with the universally symbolic. Your set -if you'll excuse me- is currently a 'confusion' of figurative and abstract concepts, let's just say that's a very hard one to pull off successfully.

A well designed set is built on a solid foundation, an 'aesthetic compass' if you like. It's easy to fool yourself into a spiral of design tweaks when the core premise is 'off' . . . . e.g: they have arms but no feet, maybe they should have boots?  You see where it all leads......

I do wish you luck, but if you want comments -on what is clearly a lot of work- they should be critical & constructive, I'm not interested in flattery and "hey, nice set" contains no usefull information at all.

"However skillfully a man fawns, he is far surpassed by small dogs"  Ficino

What size(s) are you planning on?

I like the look of the set, but my chess table has 2.5" squares, so anything that doesn't fit that is basically "out".

On the other hand, FIDE practically mandates 5.5cm (less than 2.5") squares. Then you get to the differences between UCSF rules and FIDE rules (if you care).

Bottom line: I encourage you go for it, if you think you can cover your costs, but do think about the boards people may want to use your pieces on.

Bravo, anyway. If the design goes no futher, you've managed twelve pages of discussion, and an attractive set of pieces.

Looking at the whole set you're right, the king is not bad. I also realized i preferred the older bishop arms to the more realistic new ones, but i know most people will not agree.